• STI Policy Review
• /
• v.7 no.1
• /
• pp.1-16
• /
• 2016

Technology supply has been the main thrust of the Korean government's science & technology policy, focusing on the development and acquisition of new technology in line with the catching-up strategy of economic growth and industrial development. However, new social or societal problems have become major government policy issues, heralding new innovation policy aimed to address them. Such new policy initiatives for social problem-solving present a niche where the existing system of government innovation policy process is challenged, including such processes as goal-setting, planning, implementation, project management, and evaluation. The rigidity of the existing institution of government innovation policy, however, still shapes the content and progression of innovation policy for social problem-solving. This study reviews Korean innovation policy for social problem-solving as a policy niche, and aims to clarify its challenges and opportunities. It uses a system transition framework to explain the emergence and evolution of the innovation policy niche in Korea. The main research question is to what extent and in what aspect the existing innovation policy regime shaped innovation policy for social problem-solving. The study examines the inertia of the current paradigm of innovation policies and R&D programs, and sheds light on the search for a distinctive identity for innovation policies that tackles social problems.

• Journal of Science and Technology Studies
• /
• v.15 no.2
• /
• pp.135-162
• /
• 2015

The purpose of this article is to reinterpret the existing innovation policy with 'the societal innovation policy' framework. It is looking into characteristics of societal innovation policy and the prospects for socio-technical systems transition and citizen participation are discussed. After the discussion, new interpretation of innovation policy elements will be dealt with lenses of societal innovation policy. It sheds new light on the key elements of innovation policy, such as Innovation policy governance, industrial innovation policy, regional innovation policy, and infrastructure policy and suggests direction of policy improvements from societal innovation policy perspectives. This will be an opportunity to reinterpret the existing innovation policy measures and to approach to science technology innovation policy for system transition with participatory perspective.

• STI Policy Review
• /
• v.4 no.2
• /
• pp.96-112
• /
• 2013

The need for designing and implementing integrated policy was further emphasized in tandem with the increase in interest concerning policy coordination and interactions. An active discussion is taking place in the field of innovation policy concerning "integrated innovation policy," which considers innovation along with financial, regional development, social, and environmental policies together in a holistic manner. In Korea since the beginning of the 2000s, there were many attempts at implementing integrated innovation policy through the restructuring of the overall S&T administration system. For the purposes of taking an integrated approach to S&T policies as well as to S&T-related human resources, industrial, and regional development policies, the Roh Administration (February 2003~February 2008) elevated the S&T Minister to the level of Deputy Prime Minister as well as launching the Office of Science, Technology, and Innovation (OSTI) (October 2004 ~ February 2008) under the Ministry of Science and Technology. This study investigates the policy coordination activities of the OSTI from the perspective of policy integration. It deals with the background of the OSTI, its roles and responsibilities, the coordination process, and its achievements and limitations while discussing the important implications for developing effective policy measures with the hope of contributing to the development of theories of integrated innovation policy.

• World Technopolis Review
• /
• v.4 no.2
• /
• pp.46-61
• /
• 2015

There is an implicit assumption in most regional innovation policy studies that once a policy has been made the policy will be implemented. This assumption is not valid for regional innovation policies formulated in many countries. This assumption rests upon certain political and organization conditions. It is frequently said that regional innovation system in Korea is one of the successful cases because of properly established institution for the implementation of innovation policies. The components of institution for innovation are defined in this article. For the analysis of institution for regional innovation system in Korea, three aspects such as organization, policies & programs, and governance structure were taken into account. Institution for regional innovation system in Korea is analyzed with three aspects: (1) organization for policy implementation, (2) innovation policy, and (3) governance structure. Firstly, organizations for innovation in Korea are composed of three categories such as organizations for policy formulation, organizations for policy implementation and agencies for coordination. Secondly, there are two categories of policies for innovation: (1) policies for the enhancement of national competitiveness and policies for the regional innovation capacity building, and (2) policies for fostering manpower and policy for regulatory reform. Thirdly, innovation governance in Korea is composed of three layer structure: (1) top level governance which is composed of two committee, three ministries and two agencies, (2) local level governance such as one innovation related offices and one center for regulatory reform, and (3) one category of agency for coordination as a regional platform.

• Asian Journal of Innovation and Policy
• /
• v.10 no.3
• /
• pp.316-329
• /
• 2021

This study explores the role of the think tank as an intermediary organization in the open innovation system. Think tank has contributed to the policy process as a mediator between government and public and as a symbolic entity of intellectual innovation to produce knowledge to the public. As the innovation system matures, one of the major challenges in research and practice is the openness and collaboration in the science, technology, and innovation system. While previous literature highlighted the think tank as the knowledge arbitrager transforming ideas into policy issues, few studies address the research questions: Is the conventional role of the think tank still persistent in the open innovation system? What are the demanding roles? This paper tackles these questions by reviewing the current role of the South Korean think tank in the science & technology sector. Based on the open innovation framework, we suggest that think tanks need to play a bigger role as policy entrepreneurs, crossing policy borders and interacting with other partners.

• Asian Journal of Innovation and Policy
• /
• v.9 no.2
• /
• pp.145-163
• /
• 2020

The COVID-19 is a pandemic that affects all facets of our life and will change many patterns in science technology and innovation. A qualitative study was conducted using Focus Group Interview involving ten industry-academia-research experts with the objective of identifying changes in Korea's national innovation system and science & technology policy after the COVID-19. Eight questions were designed, based on the major components of the national innovation system, such as companies, universities, and research institutes, to discuss the changes in the national innovation system and science & technology policy. Also, keyword analysis and cluster analysis were performed using the network analysis program VOSviewer. It is predicted that, in the wake of the COVID-19, Korea's national innovation system will shift to a new paradigm that is more decentralized, responsive, and autonomous. Furthermore, several policy agendas that can turn these changes into positive momentum of change in science & technology policy are presented.

• Asian Journal of Innovation and Policy
• /
• v.2 no.1
• /
• pp.1-19
• /
• 2013

As the catch-up innovation system was exposed to a new competition environment in which second-tier catch-up countries reduced the gap with Korea and advanced Korean firms entered into the frontier product market, it is experiencing system delay in terms of organizational and policy change. Therefore, innovation policy needs to be reorganized from a dynamic perspective to analyze the problems in the transition period and enable the system to overcome organizational and institutional delays. This article investigates the characteristics of transition periods in terms of external environment changes and internal socio-economic pressures. Based on the analysis of environment changes and catch-up system characteristics, it suggests the framework for policy intervention, direction, and practical principles for post catch-up innovation policy. In particular, it suggests the network-based developmental state and policy implementation in order to overcome the limitation of centralized developmental state of catch-up periods.

• Journal of Science and Technology Studies
• /
• v.10 no.2
• /
• pp.1-35
• /
• 2010

This study analyzes the necessity of integrated innovation policy for post catch-up innovation. The integrated innovation policy solidifies its position as an infrastructure innovation policy which forms the foundation of all kinds of policies. The Korean government is currently under the pressure of planning technologies and policies that do not allow any easy imitation or copy of other advanced countries, which in turn reveals various limits of the existing policy framework. Integrated innovation policy for post catch-up innovation involves a continual process demanding changes in political, organizational and procedural activities. To ensure long-term and cross-sectoral innovation policy, overall changes and improvements in policy and its implementation are needed in terms of political commitments, governance systems, policy instruments and monitoring, and evaluation systems.

• Journal of Science and Technology Studies
• /
• v.19 no.2
• /
• pp.85-116
• /
• 2019

This research examines the characteristics of the newly emerging 'transformative innovation policy' and discusses the current status and issues of the Korean social problem solving R & D policy. Transformative innovation policy is a new paradigm that aims to transform socio-technical systems to address societal challenges. In this study, we analyzed 'the policy plan for solving social problems based on science and technology'. In the "Policy Plan", efforts are being made to establish new direction of science and technological innovation activities such as emphasis on social values, network formation of innovation actors, and spreading of social impact. But in this "Policy Plan", the perspective of transformative innovation policy is weakly reflected. The Policy Plan refers to system improvement that adds new elements to existing system, but it is not discussing system transformation. In order to develop social problem solving R & D policy from the viewpoint of the transformative innovation policy, it is necessary to construct the innovation platform deliberating vision and prospect for the socio-technical transformation.

• STI Policy Review
• /
• v.6 no.2
• /
• pp.87-104
• /
• 2015

Public procurement for innovation is used as one of the major policy tools to stimulate innovation and promote growth of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in Korea. However, it is evaluated that this policy has not been so effective in promoting technological innovation among SMEs largely because it heavily depends on price competitiveness of SMEs products and services. In order to draw some policy implications, this study examines the PPI policies of selected countries as comparative references and conducts an empirical analysis on Korean Public Procurement Services (PPS) data for identifying challenges of the current policy in Korea. We conclude that in order to enhance technological innovations of SMEs, PPI policy in Korea should 1) focus more on the potential competitiveness of SMEs, 2) enlarge public demands especially on R&D services, 3) encourage private sector participation in the public procurement market, 4) improve the assessment criteria for public procurement market registration, and 5) restructure the responsible organizations.