• 제목/요약/키워드: the level of economic security

검색결과 238건 처리시간 0.027초

북한의 제4세대전쟁 위협전망과 극복방안 연구: 향토예비군 운용 개선을 중심으로 (A study on overcoming the prospect of North Korea's fourth-generation war threats : Focusing on the Homeland Defense Reservists)

  • 김연준
    • 융합보안논문지
    • /
    • 제16권6_1호
    • /
    • pp.3-13
    • /
    • 2016
  • 우리는 전쟁에서 당연히 강한 자가 약한 자에게 승리한다고 생각한다. 그러나 현대전쟁에서 약한 자가 강한 자를 상대로 승리한 사례들이 많음을 알 수 있다. 이는 제4세대전쟁 이론을 통해 논리적으로 이해할 수 있다. 북한은 열세한 국력임에도 한반도 무력통일 정책을 포기하지 않고 있다. 그들은 국제사회와 남한을 상대로 다양한 정치 사회 군사적 수준의 도발을 계속하고 있다. 최근에 북한은 5차례의 핵실험, 대륙간탄도미사일 시험발사와, DMZ 도발 등을 자행하였으며, 앞으로도 제4세대전쟁 차원의 도발을 계속할 것으로 예상된다. 이에 점증하고 있는 북한의 제4세대전쟁 위협과 도발에 대한 본질을 이해해야 한다. 이를 통해 그들의 제4세대전쟁 위협에 대한 근본적인 대책중 하나인 향토예비군제도에 대한 가치를 재인식하고 관련 제도를 보완해야 한다. 우리는 개선된 향토예비군제도를 통해 한반도에 세력균형 변화와 힘의 전환점으로 이행을 단호 거부할 수 있다. 즉 예상되는 북한의 제4세대전쟁 위협에 대하여, 우리의 향토예비군제도는 우리의 단호한 전쟁 수행을 위한 의지(意志)이자, 정치 사회 경제 군사적인 수단이며, 최적의 대안으로 기능발휘가 가능하다.

이어도 쟁점과 중국 해군전략의 변화 (Ieodo Issue and the evolution of People's Liberation Army Navy Strategy)

  • 강병철
    • Strategy21
    • /
    • 통권31호
    • /
    • pp.142-163
    • /
    • 2013
  • Ieodo is a submerged rock within a Korea's Exclusive Economic Zone(EEZ) in the East China Sea with its most shallow part about 4.6m below the sea level which has no specific rights for the EEZ delimitation. The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) stipulates that any coastal state has the rights to claim an EEZ that stretches up to 200 nautical miles from its shore, except where there is an overlap with a neighboring country's claims. Korea claims that Ieodo is within its EEZ as it sits on the Korean side of the equidistant line and the reef is located on the Korea section of the continental shelf. China does not recognize Korea's application of the equidistance principle and insists that Ieodo lies on its continental shelf. According to UNCLOS, Ieodo is located in international waters, rather than one country's EEZ as the two countries have failed to reach a final agreement over the delimitation of the maritime border. This study seeks to understand the evolution of the People's Liberation Army Navy(PLAN) strategy as main obstacles for the EEZ delimitation between Korea and China. PLAN's Strategy evolves from "coastal defense" to "offshore defence", since the late 1980s from a "coastal defence" strategy to an "offshore defence" strategy which would extend the perimeter of defence to between 200 nm and 400 nm from the coast. China's economic power has increased It's dependence on open trade routes for energy supplies and for its own imports and exports. China want secure Sea Lane. PLAN's "offshore defence" strategy combines the concept of active defence with the deployment of its military forces beyond its borders. China's navy try to forward base its units and to achieve an ocean going capability. China's navy expects to have a 'Blue Water' capability by 2050. China insists that coastal states do have a right under UNCLOS to regulate the activities of foreign military forces in their EEZs. China protests several times against US military forces operating within It's EEZ. The U.S. position is that EEZs should be consistent with customary international law of the sea, as reflected in UNCLOS. U.S. has a national interest in the preservation of freedom of navigation as recognized in customary international law of the sea and reflected in UNCLOS. U.S. insists that coastal states under UNCLOS do not have the right to regulate foreign military activities in their EEZs. To be consistent with its demand that the U.S. cease performing military operations in china's EEZ, China would not be able to undertake any military operations in the waters of South Korea's EEZ. As such, to preserve its own security interests, China prefers a status quo policy and used strategic ambiguity on the Ieodo issue. PLAN's strategy of coastal defence has been transformed into offensive defence, Korea's EEZ can be a serious limitation to PLAN's operational plan of activities. Considering China'a view of EEZs, China do not want make EEZ delimitation agreement between Korea and China. China argues that the overlapping areas between EEZs should be handled through negotiations and neither side can take unilateral actions before an agreement is reached. China would prefer Ieodo sea zone as a international waters, rather than one country's EEZ.

  • PDF

축산분뇨의 발생현황과 처리방안 (Situation of Livestock Waste and Strategies for Waste Treatment)

  • 김철호
    • 유기물자원화
    • /
    • 제2권1호
    • /
    • pp.31-40
    • /
    • 1994
  • 축산물소비량(畜産物消費量)이 지속적(持續的)으로 증가(增加)하면서 1980년대 후반(後半)에 와서 가축분뇨(家畜糞尿)의 관리문제(管理問題)가 주요과제(主要課題)로 등장(登場)하였다. 이는 그동안 지속적(持續的)으로 추진된 경제발전(經濟發展)의 결과 국민의 전반적(全般的)인 생활수준(生活水準)이 향상(向上)되면서 경제요인(經濟要因) 이외(以外)에 환경(環境)의 질(質)에 대한 국민적 요청(要請)이 증대(增大)된 까닭으로 초기에는 농촌환경문제(農村環境問題)로만 논의(論議)되던 것이 도시지역(都市地域)의 상수원오양문제(上水原汚梁問題)와 연결(連結)되면서 가축분뇨관리(家畜糞尿管理)의 필요성이 더욱 중요(重要)해지고 있다. 가축분뇨(家畜糞尿)는 고농도(高農度)의 유기물(有機物)로 구성(構成)되어 있어 적절히 관리(管理)되지 않을 경우 지표수(地表水) 오염(汚染), 지하수(地下水) 오염(汚染), 악취(惡臭) 문제(問題) 등을 일으켜 민원(民願)의 대상이 되고 있다. 따라서 본 논문에서는 축산분뇨(畜産糞尿)의 발생(發生) 및 처리현황(處理現況)을 살펴보고 분뇨처리(糞尿處理)에 대한 정부(政府)의 규제와 지원상황(支援狀況)을 검토하여 합리적인 축산분뇨(畜産糞尿)의 자원화방안(字源化方案)을 모색하고자 하였다.

  • PDF

남북관계와 대북협상전략 (A System Dynamics Model for Negotiation strategy Analysis with North Korea)

  • 곽상만
    • 한국시스템다이내믹스연구
    • /
    • 제1권2호
    • /
    • pp.5-31
    • /
    • 2000
  • The summit meeting of the South North Korean leaders was a turning point in the relationships between the two countries. It was followed by the Red-Cross Meeting, Minister-Level Meeting, economic agreements, which have increased the relationship more colorful in both quantities and qualities. However, the half-century period for separation was too long to overcome all the problems by only one event. The two countries have quite different social systems; one politically strong person is governing the North, while many interest groups are involved in political decision making processes in the South. In short, it would take a long time to settle down all the problems residing between the two countries. A system dynamics model is developed to describe the long term dynamics of the relations between the South and North Koreas. As a first attempt, the model focuses only on the diplomatic meeting issues between the South and North. The model aggregates diplomatic issues into 5 categories; economic issues, security issues, infrastructure, cultural issues, and past problems. It assumes that there would not be any dramatic changes between the two countries. It is a conceptual model composed of around 200 variables, and should not be used as a forecast tool. However, it captures most of the logics discussed in the papers and conferences concerning the South and North Korea relations. Many sensitivity studies and Monte Carlo simulations have shown that the simulation results matches with mental models of experts; that is the model can be used as a learning tool or as a secondary opinion until the data required by the model is collected. In order to analyze the current situation, five scenarios are simulated and analyzed; the functional approach, the conditional approach, the balanced approach, the circumstantial approach, and the strategic approach. The functional approach represents that the South makes efforts in the area where the possibility of agreement is high for the next 10 years. The conditional approach is a scenario where the South impose all difficult issues as conditions for resolving other diplomatic issues. The balanced approach is resolving the five issues with the same priorities, while the circumstantial approach is resolving issues which seem to be resolved easily. Finally, another optimum approach has been seek using the system dynamics model developed. The optimum strategy (it is named as the strategic approach) was strikingly different from other four approaches. The optimum strategy is so complicated that no one could find it with mental model(or by just insights). Considering that the system dynamic model used to find the optimum is a simplifind (maybe over simplified) version of the reality, it is concluded that a well designed system dynamics model would be of great help to resolving the complicated diplomatic problems in any kind.

  • PDF

이전소득의 독거노인가구 빈곤경감 효과 비교 (Comparative Analysis of the Poverty-Mitigating Effects Originated from Transfer Income Systems among Single-Elderly-Households)

  • 김수영;이강훈
    • 한국노년학
    • /
    • 제29권4호
    • /
    • pp.1559-1575
    • /
    • 2009
  • 2008년 기초노령연금제도가 시행되면서 공적 노후소득보장의 근거가 마련되었다. 하지만 아직 기초노령연금은 보조수당의 범위를 벗어나지 못하고 있어 소득보장제도로서의 핵심적인 역할을 하기에는 미흡한 수준이며, 경제적 자립이 어려운 노인들은 총소득 중 여전히 사적이전소득 의존율이 높을 것으로 예상된다. 따라서 경제활동이 원활하지 못하거나 공적소득보장제도의 적용을 제대로 받지 못하는 노인가구의 빈곤율은 노인이 아닌 가구에 비해 더 높을 것이다. 본 연구에서는 공적이전소득이 노후 생활보장의 핵심적인 수단이 되어야 한다는 전제에서 공적이전소득과 사적이전소득이 노인가구의 빈곤을 어느 정도 경감시키는가를 비교해 보았다. 특히 노인인구 중에서도 상대적으로 더 취약한 독거노인가구를 대상으로 하여 공적 및 사적 이전소득의 빈곤경감 효과를 비교분석함으로써 공적 소득보장제도의 중요성을 검증하였다. 연구대상은 65세 이상 혼자 사는 독거노인가구이며, 분석자료는 통계청의 가계조사 중 2006년-2008년의 자료를 활용하였다. 독거노인가구의 빈곤정도와 이전소득의 빈곤경감 정도를 상대적으로 파악하기 위해 우리나라 전체인구 및 전체 노인가구의 빈곤율과 비교하였고, 독거노인가구에 속한 하위집단의 빈곤정도와 이전소득의 빈곤경감 효과를 살펴보기 위해 성별, 연령, 경제활동 여부 등 인구사회학적인 특성별로 구분하여 분석하였다. 분석결과는 다음과 같다. 첫째, 노인가구 전체의 빈곤율은 기초노령연금 및 장기요양보험제도가 시행된 2008년 이후에도 전년대비 감소하지 않았다. 둘째, 독거노인가구를 포함한 노인가구에서 두 가구 중 한 가구는 절대빈곤상태에 놓여 있으며, 특히 독거노인가구 중 여성, 비근로, 저학력, 고령, 농어촌 노인가구의 빈곤율이 상대적으로 더 높았다. 셋째, 독거노인가구의 빈곤감소에서 공적이전에 의한 빈곤감소효과가 조금씩 증가하는 추세이지만, 여전히 사적이전에 의한 빈곤감소가 공적이전에 의한 빈곤감소보다 더 크게 기여하였다. 넷째, 공적이전효과 중에서는 생계비 지원 등의 사회보장 수혜효과가 공적연금효과보다 더 큰 것으로 나타났다.

한국전쟁의 교훈과 대비 -병력수(兵力數) 및 부대수(部隊數)를 중심으로- (The lesson From Korean War)

  • 윤일영
    • 안보군사학연구
    • /
    • 통권8호
    • /
    • pp.49-168
    • /
    • 2010
  • Just before the Korean War, the total number of the North Korean troops was 198,380, while that of the ROK(Republic of Korea) army troops 105,752. That is, the total number of the ROK army troops at that time was 53.3% of the total number of the North Korean army. As of December 2008, the total number of the North Korean troops is estimated to be 1,190,000, while that of the ROK troops is 655,000, so the ROK army maintains 55.04% of the total number of the North Korean troops. If the ROK army continues to reduce its troops according to [Military Reform Plan 2020], the total number of its troops will be 517,000 m 2020. If North Korea maintains the current status(l,190,000 troops), the number of the ROK troops will be 43.4% of the North Korean army. In terms of units, just before the Korean War, the number of the ROK army divisions and regiments was 80% and 44.8% of North Korean army. As of December 2008, North Korea maintains 86 divisions and 69 regiments. Compared to the North Korean army, the ROK army maintains 46 Divisions (53.4% of North Korean army) and 15 regiments (21.3% of North Korean army). If the ROK army continue to reduce the military units according to [Military Reform Plan 2020], the number of ROK army divisions will be 28(13 Active Division, 4 Mobilization Divisions and 11 Local Reserve Divisions), while that of the North Korean army will be 86 in 2020. In that case, the number of divisions of the ROK army will be 32.5% of North Korean army. During the Korean war, North Korea suddenly invaded the Republic of Korea and occupied its capital 3 days after the war began. At that time, the ROK army maintained 80% of army divisions, compared to the North Korean army. The lesson to be learned from this is that, if the ROK army is forced to disperse its divisions because of the simultaneous invasion of North Korea and attack of guerrillas in home front areas, the Republic of Korea can be in a serious military danger, even though it maintains 80% of military divisions of North Korea. If the ROK army promotes the plans in [Military Reform Plan 2020], the number of military units of the ROK army will be 32.5% of that of the North Korean army. This ratio is 2.4 times lower than that of the time when the Korean war began, and in this case, 90% of total military power should be placed in the DMZ area. If 90% of military power is placed in the DMZ area, few troops will be left for the defense of home front. In addition, if the ROK army continues to reduce the troops, it can allow North Korea to have asymmetrical superiority in military force and it will eventually exert negative influence on the stability and peace of the Korean peninsular. On the other hand, it should be reminded that, during the Korean War, the Republic of Korea was attacked by North Korea, though it kept 53.3% of troops, compared to North Korea. It should also be reminded that, as of 2008, the ROK army is defending its territory with the troops 55.04% of North Korea. Moreover, the national defense is assisted by 25,120 troops of the US Forces in Korea. In case the total number of the ROK troops falls below 43.4% of the North Korean army, it may cause social unrest about the national security and may lead North Korea's misjudgement. Besides, according to Lanchester strategy, the party with weaker military power (60% compared to the party with stronger military power) has the 4.1% of winning possibility. Therefore, if we consider the fact that the total number of the ROK army troops is 55.04% of that of the North Korean army, the winning possibility of the ROK army is not higher than 4.1%. If the total number of ROK troops is reduced to 43.4% of that of North Korea, the winning possibility will be lower and the military operations will be in critically difficult situation. [Military Reform Plan 2020] rums at the reduction of troops and units of the ground forces under the policy of 'select few'. However, the problem is that the financial support to achieve this goal is not secured. Therefore, the promotion of [Military Reform Plan 2020] may cause the weakening of military defence power in 2020. Some advanced countries such as Japan, UK, Germany, and France have promoted the policy of 'select few'. However, what is to be noted is that the national security situation of those countries is much different from that of Korea. With the collapse of the Soviet Unions and European communist countries, the military threat of those European advanced countries has almost disappeared. In addition, the threats those advanced countries are facing are not wars in national level, but terrorism in international level. To cope with the threats like terrorism, large scaled army trops would not be necessary. So those advanced European countries can promote the policy of 'select few'. In line with this, those European countries put their focuses on the development of military sections that deal with non-military operations and protection from unspecified enemies. That is, those countries are promoting the policy of 'select few', because they found that the policy is suitable for their national security environment. Moreover, since they are pursuing common interest under the European Union(EU) and they can form an allied force under NATO, it is natural that they are pursing the 'select few' policy. At present, NATO maintains the larger number of troops(2,446,000) than Russia(l,027,000) to prepare for the potential threat of Russia. The situation of japan is also much different from that of Korea. As a country composed of islands, its prime military focus is put on the maritime defense. Accordingly, the development of ground force is given secondary focus. The japanese government promotes the policy to develop technology-concentrated small size navy and air-forces, instead of maintaining large-scaled ground force. In addition, because of the 'Peace Constitution' that was enacted just after the end of World War II, japan cannot maintain troops more than 240,000. With the limited number of troops (240,000), japan has no choice but to promote the policy of 'select few'. However, the situation of Korea is much different from the situations of those countries. The Republic of Korea is facing the threat of the North Korean Army that aims at keeping a large-scale military force. In addition, the countries surrounding Korea are also super powers containing strong military forces. Therefore, to cope with the actual threat of present and unspecified threat of future, the importance of maintaining a carefully calculated large-scale military force cannot be denied. Furthermore, when considering the fact that Korea is in a peninsular, the Republic of Korea must take it into consideration the tradition of continental countries' to maintain large-scale military powers. Since the Korean War, the ROK army has developed the technology-force combined military system, maintaining proper number of troops and units and pursuing 'select few' policy at the same time. This has been promoted with the consideration of military situation in the Koran peninsular and the cooperation of ROK-US combined forces. This kind of unique military system that cannot be found in other countries can be said to be an insightful one for the preparation for the actual threat of North Korea and the conflicts between continental countries and maritime countries. In addition, this kind of technology-force combined military system has enabled us to keep peace in Korea. Therefore, it would be desirable to maintain this technology-force combined military system until the reunification of the Korean peninsular. Furthermore, it is to be pointed out that blindly following the 'select few' policy of advanced countries is not a good option, because it is ignoring the military strategic situation of the Korean peninsular. If the Republic of Korea pursues the reduction of troops and units radically without consideration of the threat of North Korea and surrounding countries, it could be a significant strategic mistake. In addition, the ROK army should keep an eye on the fact the European advanced countries and Japan that are not facing direct military threats are spending more defense expenditures than Korea. If the ROK army reduces military power without proper alternatives, it would exert a negative effect on the stable economic development of Korea and peaceful reunification of the Korean peninsular. Therefore, the desirable option would be to focus on the development of quality of forces, maintaining proper size and number of troops and units under the technology-force combined military system. The tableau above shows that the advanced countries like the UK, Germany, Italy, and Austria spend more defense expenditure per person than the Republic of Korea, although they do not face actual military threats, and that they keep achieving better economic progress than the countries that spend less defense expenditure. Therefore, it would be necessary to adopt the merits of the defense systems of those advanced countries. As we have examined, it would be desirable to maintain the current size and number of troops and units, to promote 'select few' policy with increased defense expenditure, and to strengthen the technology-force combined military system. On the basis of firm national security, the Republic of Korea can develop efficient policies for reunification and prosperity, and jump into the status of advanced countries. Therefore, the plans to reduce troops and units in [Military Reform Plan 2020] should be reexamined. If it is difficult for the ROK army to maintain its size of 655,000 troops because of low birth rate, the plans to establish the prompt mobilization force or to adopt drafting system should be considered for the maintenance of proper number of troops and units. From now on, the Republic of Korean government should develop plans to keep peace as well as to prepare unexpected changes in the Korean peninsular. For the achievement of these missions, some options can be considered. The first one is to maintain the same size of military troops and units as North Korea. The second one is to maintain the same level of military power as North Korea in terms of military force index. The third one is to maintain the same level of military power as North Korea, with the combination of the prompt mobilization force and the troops in active service under the system of technology-force combined military system. At present, it would be not possible for the ROK army to maintain such a large-size military force as North Korea (1,190,000 troops and 86 units). So it would be rational to maintain almost the same level of military force as North Korea with the combination of the troops on the active list and the prompt mobilization forces. In other words, with the combination of the troops in active service (60%) and the prompt mobilization force (40%), the ROK army should develop the strategies to harmonize technology and forces. The Korean government should also be prepared for the strategic flexibility of USFK, the possibility of American policy change about the location of foreign army, radical unexpected changes in North Korea, the emergence of potential threat, surrounding countries' demand for Korean force for the maintenance of regional stability, and demand for international cooperation against terrorism. For this, it is necessary to develop new approaches toward the proper number and size of troops and units. For instance, to prepare for radical unexpected political or military changes in North Korea, the Republic of Korea should have plans to protect a large number of refugees, to control arms and people, to maintain social security, and to keep orders in North Korea. From the experiences of other countries, it is estimated that 115,000 to 230,000 troops, plus ten thousands of police are required to stabilize the North Korean society, in the case radical unexpected military or political change happens in North Korea. In addition, if the Republic of Korea should perform the release of hostages, control of mass destruction weapons, and suppress the internal wars in North Korea, it should send 460,000 troops to North Korea. Moreover, if the Republic of Korea wants to stop the attack of North Korea and flow of refugees in DMZ area, at least 600,000 troops would be required. In sum, even if the ROK army maintains 600,000 troops, it may need additional 460,000 troops to prepare for unexpected radical changes in North Korea. For this, it is necessary to establish the prompt mobilization force whose size and number are almost the same as the troops in active service. In case the ROK army keeps 650,000 troops, the proper number of the prompt mobilization force would be 460,000 to 500,000.

  • PDF

신재생 대안 에너지로서의 셀룰로스 에탄올 (Cellulosic Ethanol as Renewable Alternative Fuel)

  • 조우석;정유희;김보경;서수정;고완수;최성화
    • Journal of Plant Biotechnology
    • /
    • 제34권2호
    • /
    • pp.111-118
    • /
    • 2007
  • 가속도가 붙은 지구온난화 문제와 수 십년 이내로 예상되는 화석연료의 고갈은 지속가능하면서도 환경친화적인 새로운 형태의 에너지 출현을 필요로 하고 있다. 이러한 추세에 맞추어 태양광, 조력, 지열, 풍력, 수소 에너지와 더불어 바이오에너지가 대체에너지로서 주목받고 있다. 바이오에너지는 태양에너지를 유기물로 변환하는 식물을 재료로 하여 바이오 에탄올이나 바이오디젤 등을 생산하여 사용하는 것으로 대체 에너지가 갖춰야 할 조건을 두루 갖춘 최적의 신재생에너지로 고려되고 있다. 하지만 바이오에너지가 진정한 의미에서의 환경친화적이면서 지속가능성을 갖추기 위해서는 아직 기술적으로 해결해야할 문제점들이 많다. 최근 미국에서 바이오에탄올 생산을 위한 옥수수 소비량이 늘어 곡물 및 사료 가격의 급등 현상으로 이어지고 있다. 또한 이러한 현상은 개발도상국 식량자원의 선진국 유입 등으로 빈곤의 심화 등이 새로운 문제점으로 지적되고 있다. 따라서 곡물이 아닌 비식용 부위를 이용한 에탄올 생산이 대안으로 여겨지고 있는 바 셀룰로스 에탄올은 이러한 문제점을 극복할 수 있는 대체에너지로서 자리매김하고 있다. 셀룰로스 바이오에탄올은 사람 등의 동물이 소화하지 못하는 바이오매스의 대부분을 차지하는 식물 세포벽을 곰팡이 등에서 분리한 효소로 분해한 후 여기서 생성되는 당을 발효과정을 통해 생산되는 에탄올로서 전술한 바와 같은 문제점을 해결할 수 있는 유망한 대안 에너지로 고려되고 있다.

한반도 평화통일 기반구축을 위한 군비통제 추진방향 (Direction of Arms Control to Establish Foundation for Peaceful Reunification in Korean Peninsula)

  • 김재철
    • 융합보안논문지
    • /
    • 제15권6_1호
    • /
    • pp.79-92
    • /
    • 2015
  • 한반도에서 평화통일의 기반을 구축하기 위해서는 비군사분야에 머물고 있는 남북교류협력 영역을 군사분야로 확대하여 군비통제를 적극 추진해야 할 것이다. 그동안 남북 간에 군비통제가 추진되지 못한 이유는 (1)남북 간 신뢰구축의 한계, (2)군비통제 자체의 기능적 한계, (3)남북 간 제도 구조적 한계, (4)국내 외 환경적 한계 등 태생적 요인이 자리 잡고 있기 때문이다. 첫째, 군비통제를 추진하기 위해 남북 고위급회담 수준의 정치적 대화가 선행되어야 하며, 협상 및 추진과정에서 '전략적 유연성'을 발휘해야 한다. 이를 위해 상황과 여건에 부합한 '신축적 상호주의'를 적용해야 한다. 둘째, 기존의 '선 신뢰구축, 후 군축' 원칙에서 탈피하여 새로운 절충적 방법으로 '신뢰구축 및 군축의 동시추진' 원칙을 모색해 나가야 한다. 즉, 군비통제의 낮은 수준이라 할 수 있는 군사적 신뢰구축과 합리적 충분성에 입각한 제한된 군축을 병행하는 방안을 추진할 필요가 있다. 셋째, 국무총리실 직속으로 군비통제 전담기구를 설치하여 국가정책 전략 차원에서 군비통제 문제를 적극적으로 추진해야 한다. 또한 남북 고위급회담이 성사되면 '남북 군비통제 공동추진위원회(가칭)'을 구성 운영할 필요가 있다. 넷째, 평화통일을 위한 군비통제의 필요성에 대한 국민적 공감 형성과 유리한 국제적 환경조성을 위하여 보다 능동적인 외교역량을 발휘해야 할 것이다. 특히 국제사회와 함께 북한의 핵문제를 해결해 나가고, 한미동맹과 한중협력관계의 균형을 어떻게 유지해 나갈 것인가를 더욱 고민해야 할 것이다.

코로나19 팬데믹 위기 대응 역량의 국가별 비교분석 (Comparative Analysis of COVID-19 Pandemic Crisis Response Capacities by Countries)

  • 이윤현
    • 한국학교ㆍ지역보건교육학회지
    • /
    • 제25권2호
    • /
    • pp.59-70
    • /
    • 2024
  • 목적: 국가별 감염병 대응 역량을 분석하여 이를 바탕으로 우리나라의 감염병 관리 대응에 대한 개선점을 찾아보고자 한다. 방법: 본 연구에서는 첫 번째로 2022년 WHO가 공개한 전 세계 96개국 SPAR 점수로 코로나19 감염병 대응 역량을 국가별로 분석하였다. 둘째, Our World in Data와 글로벌보건안보지수(GHSI)를 활용하여 각국의 구체적인 코로나19 방역 성과를 분석하였다. 결과: 첫째, 2021년 1월 24일의 방역강도 지수는 동남아시아 지부 방역이 67.6으로 가장 높아 강한 방역대책을 가지고 있었고, 아프리카 지부는 44.5로 가장 낮았다. 2022년 12월 31일의 방역강도 지수는 유럽이 11.6으로 대폭 낮아졌다. 둘째, SPAR 지표가 인구 백만명당 총환자수에 미친 영향 요인은 국가 실험실(C4)로 p=.027이고, 인구 백만명당 총사망수에 미친 영향 요인은 감염 예방과 관리(C9) p=.005, 위험 의사소통 및 지역사회 참여(C10) p=.040이었다. 1인당 GDP의 영향 요인은 감염 예방과 관리(C9) p=.009이고, GHSI에 미친 영향 요인은 감염 예방과 관리(C9) p=.002이었다. 결론: 이상의 연구결과로 감염병 역량 정도를 각 국가가 자체평가한 결과인 SPAR가 코로나19의 누적 환자수를 낮추거나 방역강도를 결정하는 것과 연관성을 발견하기 어려웠지만 사망율과 GHSI, 국민소득 등과는 일정 부분 영향을 받은 것으로 판단이 된다. 향후 우리나라의 감염병 관리 대응에 대한 개선점은 향후 미지의 신종감염병이 발생했을 때를 대비하여 JEE 혹은 GHSI 등과 같은 보다 과학적이고 신뢰성 높은 데이터를 중심으로 대응역량을 분석하여 사회·경제적 비용 감소 효과를 절감할 수 있는 방역대책 수립이 필요하다. 이를 기초로 공중보건학적 국가 위기에 대응하여 전문가 그룹을 중심으로 한 콘트롤타워의 주도적인 의사결정과 효과적 보건 의사소통도 요구된다.

국민건강보험 발전방향 (Future Direction of National Health Insurance)

  • 박은철
    • 보건행정학회지
    • /
    • 제27권4호
    • /
    • pp.273-275
    • /
    • 2017
  • It has been forty years since the implementation of National Health Insurance (NHI) in South Korea. Following the 1977 legislature mandating medical insurance for employees and dependents in firms with more than 500 employees, South Korea expanded its health insurance to urban residents in 1989. Resultantly, total expenses of the National Health Insurance Service (NHIS) have greatly increased from 4.5 billion won in 1977 to 50.89 trillion won in 2016. With multiple insurers merging into the NHI system in 2000, a single-payer healthcare system emerged, along with separation policy of prescribing and dispensing. Following such reform, an emerging financial crisis required injections from the National Health Promotion Fund. Forty years following the introduction of the NHI system, both praise and criticism have been drawn. In just 12 years, the NHI achieved the fastest health population coverage in the world. Current medical expenditure is not high relative to the rest of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. The quality of acute care in Korea is one of the best in the world. There is no sign of delayed diagnosis and/or treatment for most diseases. However, the NHI has been under-insured, requiring high-levels of out-of-pocket money from patients and often causing catastrophic medical expenses. Furthermore, the current environmental circumstances of the NHI are threatening its sustainability. Low birth rate decline, as well as slow economic growth, will make sustainment of the current healthcare system difficult in the near future. An aging population will increase the amount of medical expenditure required, especially with the baby-boomer generation of those born between 1955 and 1965. Meanwhile, there is always the problem of unification for the Korean Peninsula, and what role the health insurance system will have to play when it occurs. In the presidential election, health insurance is a main issue; however, there is greater focus on expansion and expenditure than revenue. Many aspects of Korea's NHI system (1977) were modeled after the German (1883) and Japanese (1922) systems. Such systems were created during an era where infections disease control was most urgent and thus, in the current non-communicable disease (NCD) era, must be redesigned. The Korean system, which is already forty years old, must be redesigned completely. Although health insurance benefit expansion is necessary, financial measures, as well as moral hazard control measures, must also be considered. Ultimately, there are three aspects that we must consider when attempting redesign of the system. First, the health security system must be reformed. NHI and Medical Aid must be amalgamated into one system for increased effectiveness and efficiency of the system. Within the single insurer system of the NHI must be an internal market for maximum efficiency. The NHIS must be separated into regions so that regional organizers have greater responsibility over their actions. Although insurance must continue to be imposed nationally, risk-adjustment must be distributed regionally and assessed by different regional systems. Second, as a solution for the decreasing flow of insurance revenue, low premium level must be increased to an appropriate level. Likewise, the national reserve fund (No. 36, National Health Insurance Act) must be enlarged for re-unification preparation. Third, there must be revolutionary reform of benefit package. The current system built a focus on communicable diseases which is inappropriate in this NCD era. Medical benefits must not be one-time events but provide chronic disease management. Chronic care models, accountable care organization, patient-centered medical homes, and other systems that introduce various benefit packages for beneficiaries must be implemented. The reimbursement system of medical costs should be introduced to various systems for different types of care, as is the case with part C (Medicare Advantage Program) of America's Medicare system that substitutes part A and part B. Pay for performance must be expanded so that there is not only improvement in quality of care but also medical costs. Moreover, beneficiaries of the NHI system must be aware of the amount of their expenditure through a deductible payment system so that spending can be profiled and monitored. The Moon Jae-in Government has announced its plans to expand the NHI system; however, it is important that a discussion forum is created so that more accurate analysis of the NHI, its environments, and current status of health care system, can take place for reforming NHI.