시스템 설계전제의 변화와 공공부문 과학기술발전관리시스템 구조의 개혁 (The Changes of System Design Premises and the Structural Reforms of Korean Government S&T Development Management System)
- 노화준
-
- 기술혁신연구
- /
- 제5권2호
- /
- pp.1-21
- /
- 1997
-
The objective of this paper is to think about what structural reforms of the Korean government S&T development management system might be. Korean society is currently experiencing a drastic socio-economic transformation. The results of this transformation should be reflected on the determining process of the directions and breadths of structural reforms of government S&T development management system. Because the government system design will be based on the premises of socio-economic conditions under which administrative activities perform and also this socio-economic changes can influence on changes of the premises of government management system design. Moreover, S&T development management system is a subsystem of government system so that the directions of structural reform of those subsystems should be considered in the broad framework changes in the development management system of the government. For the last forty years, the Korean government S&T development management system has been based on the premises including transformation from an agrarian society to an industrial society, authoritarianism and centrally controlled institutions, and exteremely small portions of private investments for science and thechonology R & D of the total. Recently, however, the premises of Korean government S&T development management system have rapidly changed. the characteristics of these changes are including tranformation from an industrial society to a knowledge and information intensive society, globalization, localization, and relatively large portion of private investments for science and technology R & C of the total. The basis of government reforms in Korea was the realization of the performances and values through the enhancement of national competitive capacity, attainment of lean government, decentralization and autonomy. However, the Korean government has attached a symbolic value of strategic organizations representing strong policy intentions of government for the science and technology based development. Most problems associated with the Korean government S&T development management system have grown worse during 1990s. Many people perceive that considerable part of this problem was generated because the government could not properly adapt itself to new administrative environment and the paradigm shift in its role. First of all, the Korean government S&T development management system as a whole failed to develop an integrated vision under which processes in formulating science and thechology development goals and developing consistent government plans concerning science and technology development are guided. Second, most of the local governments have little organizational capacity and manpowers to handle localized activities to promote science and technology in their regions. Third, the measure to coordinate and set priorities to invest resources for the development of science and technology was not effective. Fourth, the Most has been losing its reputation as the symbol of ideological commitment of the top policy maker to promote science and technology. Various ideas to reform government S&T development management system have been suggested recently. Most frequently cited ideas are as follow : (ⅰ)strengthen the functions of MoST by supplementing the strong incentive and regulatory measures; (ⅱ)create a new Ministry of Education, Science & Technology and Research by merging the Ministry of Education and the MoST; (ⅲ)create a new Ministry of Science & Technology and Industry ; and(ⅳ)create a National Science and Technology Policy Council under the chairmanship of the President. Four alternatives suggested have been widely discussed among the interested parties and they each have merits as well as weaknesses. The first alternative could be seen as an alternative which cannot resolve current conflicts among various ministries concerning priority setting and resource allocation. However, this alternatives can be seen as a way of showing the top policymaker's strong intention to emphasize science and technology based development. Second alternative is giving a strategic to emphasize on the training and supplying qualified manpower to meet knowledge and information intensive future society. This alternative is considered to be consistent with the new administrative paradigm emphasizing lean government and decentralization. However, opponents are worrying about the linkages and cooperative research between university and industry could be weakening. The third alternative has been adopted mostly in nations which have strong basic science research but weak industrial innovation traditions. Main weakness of this alternative for Korea is that Korean science and technology development system has no strong basic science and technology research traditions. The fourth alternative is consistent with new administrative paradigms and government reform bases. However, opponents to this alternative are worried that the intensive development of science and technology because of Korea's low potential research capabilities in science and technology development. Considerning the present Korean socio-economic situation which demands highly qualified human resources and development strategies which emphasizes the accumulations of knowledge-based stocks, I would like to suggest the route of creating a new Ministry of Education, Science & Technology and Research by intergrating education administration functions and science & technology development function into one ministry.