기본연구과제
지방자치제도 전반에 대한 이론적・학문적・정책적 기반을 제공하는 중장기 기초연구입니다.
menu
- 지방자치>집행기관
기본보고서
지방자치단체의 국가정책 집행 실효성 확보를 위한 사례연구
visibility 46,329 file_download 4,979
영문제목 | A Case Study on the Relationships Between Policy Decision and Policy Implementation |
---|---|
연구자 | 김필두 류영아 |
발간연도 | 2009 |
다운로드 | 지방자치단체의 국가정책 집행 실효성 확보를 위한 사례연구 file_download |
국문요약expand_more
영문요약expand_more
본 연구는 전국적으로 통일된 행정서비스를 제공하는 것으로 중앙에서 결정한 정책들이 실제 지방에서는 각기 다르게 집행되는 문제에 주목하면서 시작하였다. 정책이 본래의 의도대로 집행되지 못하고 왜곡되는 현상은 국민생활에 불편을 줄 뿐만 아니라 국가와 지방자치단체에게 행・재정적인 피해를 줄 수 있고 의도한 정책 효과를 달성하지 못한다는 점에서 낭비와 비효율성이 야기될 수 있다. 따라서 국가정책이 당초 의도했던 정책 목표를 효과적으로 달성하기 위한 전략의 모색이 필요하게 되었다. 이에, 본 연구는 중앙에서 결정한 정책이 지방에서 집행되는 실태를 분석하여 중앙의 정책이 지방에서 일관성있게 집행될 수 있는 방안을 모색하였다.
본 연구의 이론적 측면은 정책집행과 관련한 국내외 문헌분석, 정부간 관계, 갈등관리, 순응과 불응 등 다양하게 이루어졌다. 이러한 기존의 문헌들을 검토하여 불완전한 국가정책 집행을 분석하는 분석틀을 구상하였다. 본 연구의 실제적 측면은 중앙의 의도대로 집행되고 있지 않는 정책사례들을 심층분석하여 각 사례가 가지고 있는 개별적 문제점과 공통적 문제점을 도출하고, 중앙정부 공무원과 지방자치단체 공무원을 대상으로 설문조사와 심층면담을 실시하여 향후 바람직한 국가정책 집행의 실효성 확보방안을 제시하였다는데 있다.
실태 분석과 설문조사 분석을 통해 도출된 본 연구의 연구 결과를 제시하면 다음과 같다. 첫째, 중앙정부와 지방자치단체의 의사소통과 협력이 선행되어 불필요한 갈등과 자원 낭비를 막아야 한다. 즉, 거버넌스 차원에서 중앙정부와 지방자치단체가 수평적인 정책파트너로서의 긴밀한 관계를 구축하는 것이 필요하다. 이를 위해서는 협력에 대한 제도적 유인장치를 마련하거나 행정의 분권화를 추진하는 전략이 선행되어야 한다. 또한, 중앙정부와 지방자치단체 간의 지속적인 정보의 교류 활동과 중앙과 지방 간 연계 시스템(협력 시스템)을 구축하는 전략이 필요하다.
둘째, 중앙정부 차원에서 정책의 정당성을 확보해야 한다. 정책이 정당성을 인정받기 위해서는 정책목표가 명확하게 설정되어야 하고, 정책의 개념정의나 관련 용어가 분명해야 하며, 정책에 대한 합리적인 근거가 필요하다. 또한, 정책의 합법성을 확보해야 한다. 정책의 합법성을 확보하기 위해서는 정책과 관련된 법규들을 일관성있게 조정하고 수정, 보완하여 관련 법률 간의 중복・상치가 없도록 해야 한다. 또한 전체적인 정책과정에 대한 표준 매뉴얼을 작성・보급하는 방안도 제안할 수 있다. 표준 매뉴얼에는 정책의 목표, 각 용어설명, 정책집행시 지방자치단체가 가질 수 있는 재량의 정도 및 범위 등을 한정하여 중앙과 지방 간의 불필요한 대립이 발생하지 않도록 해야 한다. 중앙정부는 결정된 정책을 집행하는 지방자치단체에 대한 특성・실정을 파악하는 작업이 필요하고 지방자치단체의 정책추진 역량을 분석하는 작업이 필요하다.
셋째, 지방자치단체 차원에서는 중앙정부의 정책지침이나 표준 매뉴얼을 바탕으로 하여 그 지역의 특수한 여건 등을 반영한 자체적인 정책집행 계획을 수립하는 작업이 필요하다. 또한 집행에 필요한 인적・물적 자원을 확보하는 작업 또한 중요하다. 설문조사와 심층면담 결과 모두 지방자치단체의 인적・물적 자원 부족을 지적하고 있는데, 집행에 필요한 자원을 확보하는 것이 정책의 성공적인 집행에 반드시 필요한 요소라는 점을 간과해서는 안될 것이다. 또한, 중앙정부가 결정한 정책이 원래의 의도대로 집행될 수 있기 위해서는 정책을 실제로 집행하는 지방자치단체가 집행 상의 재량을 확보하여 정책에 대한 지방자치단체의 순응과 지지를 확보하는 것이 필요하다고 할 수 있다.
Key Word: 국가정책, 정책결정, 정책집행, 정부간 협력, 거버넌스
본 연구의 이론적 측면은 정책집행과 관련한 국내외 문헌분석, 정부간 관계, 갈등관리, 순응과 불응 등 다양하게 이루어졌다. 이러한 기존의 문헌들을 검토하여 불완전한 국가정책 집행을 분석하는 분석틀을 구상하였다. 본 연구의 실제적 측면은 중앙의 의도대로 집행되고 있지 않는 정책사례들을 심층분석하여 각 사례가 가지고 있는 개별적 문제점과 공통적 문제점을 도출하고, 중앙정부 공무원과 지방자치단체 공무원을 대상으로 설문조사와 심층면담을 실시하여 향후 바람직한 국가정책 집행의 실효성 확보방안을 제시하였다는데 있다.
실태 분석과 설문조사 분석을 통해 도출된 본 연구의 연구 결과를 제시하면 다음과 같다. 첫째, 중앙정부와 지방자치단체의 의사소통과 협력이 선행되어 불필요한 갈등과 자원 낭비를 막아야 한다. 즉, 거버넌스 차원에서 중앙정부와 지방자치단체가 수평적인 정책파트너로서의 긴밀한 관계를 구축하는 것이 필요하다. 이를 위해서는 협력에 대한 제도적 유인장치를 마련하거나 행정의 분권화를 추진하는 전략이 선행되어야 한다. 또한, 중앙정부와 지방자치단체 간의 지속적인 정보의 교류 활동과 중앙과 지방 간 연계 시스템(협력 시스템)을 구축하는 전략이 필요하다.
둘째, 중앙정부 차원에서 정책의 정당성을 확보해야 한다. 정책이 정당성을 인정받기 위해서는 정책목표가 명확하게 설정되어야 하고, 정책의 개념정의나 관련 용어가 분명해야 하며, 정책에 대한 합리적인 근거가 필요하다. 또한, 정책의 합법성을 확보해야 한다. 정책의 합법성을 확보하기 위해서는 정책과 관련된 법규들을 일관성있게 조정하고 수정, 보완하여 관련 법률 간의 중복・상치가 없도록 해야 한다. 또한 전체적인 정책과정에 대한 표준 매뉴얼을 작성・보급하는 방안도 제안할 수 있다. 표준 매뉴얼에는 정책의 목표, 각 용어설명, 정책집행시 지방자치단체가 가질 수 있는 재량의 정도 및 범위 등을 한정하여 중앙과 지방 간의 불필요한 대립이 발생하지 않도록 해야 한다. 중앙정부는 결정된 정책을 집행하는 지방자치단체에 대한 특성・실정을 파악하는 작업이 필요하고 지방자치단체의 정책추진 역량을 분석하는 작업이 필요하다.
셋째, 지방자치단체 차원에서는 중앙정부의 정책지침이나 표준 매뉴얼을 바탕으로 하여 그 지역의 특수한 여건 등을 반영한 자체적인 정책집행 계획을 수립하는 작업이 필요하다. 또한 집행에 필요한 인적・물적 자원을 확보하는 작업 또한 중요하다. 설문조사와 심층면담 결과 모두 지방자치단체의 인적・물적 자원 부족을 지적하고 있는데, 집행에 필요한 자원을 확보하는 것이 정책의 성공적인 집행에 반드시 필요한 요소라는 점을 간과해서는 안될 것이다. 또한, 중앙정부가 결정한 정책이 원래의 의도대로 집행될 수 있기 위해서는 정책을 실제로 집행하는 지방자치단체가 집행 상의 재량을 확보하여 정책에 대한 지방자치단체의 순응과 지지를 확보하는 것이 필요하다고 할 수 있다.
Key Word: 국가정책, 정책결정, 정책집행, 정부간 협력, 거버넌스
PURPOSEMany policies for achieving national objectives for instance the promotion the welfare of the people, the activity of local economics, and improvement of the quality of life are being made every year. However, these national policies have a big problem when local governments implement, these national policies are different from the original intention that central government determine. In other words, though central government decide a nationally uniform policies, these national policies are implemented differently in reality. In particular, since the advent of popularly elected local government heads and the heads of local government autonomy has been strengthened, the symptoms of national policy distortion are often found. Distortion of national policies are caused the inconvenience to people's lives as well as the administrative and financial damage to central government and local governments. Also, as the national policies do not achieve the intended policy effects, the waste and inefficiency can be caused. Therefore, there need to explore a strategy how national policy achieve its originally intended policy objectives effectively. However, there is likely to cause centralization if we require local governments which have variety of environments and situations of uniform policy implementation. In other words, national policy implementation at the local government level needs the essence of the local autonomy and the effective national policy implementation. In addition, local governments should not implement every policies decided in central government uniformly. Some policies required unity and national interests are asked to enforce a consistent position. The uniform policy implementation could cause the problem that we disregarded the attributes of various local governments and violated the fundamental principles of local autonomy. In other words, we face with a moment to develop the policy implementation principle of coexistent with both the central and local governments. This study analyze the actual conditions of policy implementation in local governments and seek for plans how national policy implement consistently across the local governments. The purpose of this study states that find out various barriers and other distorting factors occurred during the policy implementation, and seek for some solutions. To achieve the purpose of this study, we search for domestic and international policy theory, analyze the actual conditions and current problems of the policy implementation, and propose the future development device. This study focuse on policy making of central government and policy implementation of local governments. Despite the importance of the connection between policy making of the central government and policy implementation of the local governments, the in-depth discussion has not currently being began to emphasize. We expect that this study is a scientific contributions through a variety of academic concepts and theoretical approaches related policy implementation. In addition, we analyze the actual conditions, status, causes, issues, and problems of policy implementation in local governments, and provide informations what local governments want to have when they implement national policy without distortion. In other words, this study has political implications that national policy can be carried out as intended. SCOPEThe contents scope of this study are as follows. First, we examine the concepts and significance of the policy making and implementation and analyze domestic and international theories regarding policy. Second, we constitute the policy implementation framework based on the analysis elements, variables, and indicators derived from theories. Third, we analyze the actual conditions and problems of the national policy implementation and national policy distortion. Fourth, we propose the future development device what the central and local governments want to, when they are faced the problems. The object scope of this study are as follows. First, we search the national policy which is needed the unity but actually is implemented separately by regions, and analyze it deeply.Second, if the policy has its problems when central government makes that policy, we find out what the problem is. Third, we analyze the central government and local government officials, and in-depth interview survey was conducted to investigate. This will be complementary materials for current level of the case. METHODSWe use a case study analysis methods, a survey targeting stakeholders and experts, and a depth interviews targeting stakeholders and experts. First, the cases analyzed in this study were selected from the Auditor's ‘Audit Report’, the ‘Public Satisfaction Surveys’ about government's major policy challenges, ‘Quality Improvement Practices’ of state policy coordination, the ‘Joint Assessment Report’ of the Ministry of Public Administration and Security. National policies which is not intended implemented were selected.Case study examples of this study were selected from the principle of selection cases, chosen according to the brainstorming process for experts and officials of local governments, and fixed finally four cases. Second, in surveys we compared the recognition of the central government officials and local government officials. The Central government officials targets of the survey were the Ministry of Knowledge Economy(plant-related regulations), the Ministry of Environment(diesel vehicle emissions reduction projects), the National Emergency Management Agency(flood damage prevention and repair projects), the Ministry of Public Administration and Security and the Committee and the regional balance(local government fiscal assistance business).The Local government officials targets of the survey were the metropolitan area(Seoul, Incheon), Chungcheong area(Chungcheongnam Province), Jeolla area (Jeollabuk Province), Gyeongsang area(Gyeongsangnam Province). In particular, we executed the quantitative analysis utilized the SPSS 14.0K to compare the perception of the central and local government officials, Third, in-depth interviews was conducted to government officials who belongs to the Metropolitan area, Chungcheong area, Jeolla area, Gyeongsang area. The in-depth interviews gave some informations what local governments want to get when they should implement national policy uniformly. THEORETICAL STUDYWe analyzed the meaning and location of policy implementation in the whole policy process by collecting literature. We listed the theory related to the policy implementation, because we explained the success of policy implementation and the achievement of policy objectives. In addition, we included the inter-governmental relations theory, conflict management theories, and the host agent theory, because we analyzed the relationships between central and local governments. As you confirm in the theoretical analysis in this study, policy making and policy implementation influence each other so they have the mutual relationship. In addition, as the central and local governments have horizontal and comparable relationship rather than vertical relationship, they could amplify the conflict. FRAMEWORKWe included the theories of the policy implementation and past researches of the leading scholars, and divided several factors into the policy itself factors and the factors associated with policy implementation. We made the framework by Policy variables, Environment variables, Central government variables, Local government variables from two factors. We selected the obscurity of policy, the lack of validity of causal theory, the conflict of interest about the results of the policy indicators as the Policy variables. We selected the change of environment, the obscurity of business separation, the differences in political vision, the discrimination of resource distribution indicators as the Environment variables. We selected the constraints of policy-making technologies, a central sticking vested interests, the weak central government control indicators as the Central government variables. We selected the discretion of local authorities, the local self-seeking, the lack of capacity of local governments indicators as the Local governments variables. <Policy Implementation Framework> CASE STUDYWe Analyzed the cases of the ‘Plant-related regulations’, ‘Diesel vehicle emissions reduction projects’, ‘Flood damage prevention and repair projects’, and ‘Local government fiscal assistance projects’. ‘Plant-related regulations’ have green standards disagreed with laws. There is a problem to management. In addition, the standards require citizens too many documents to establish a plant. So few citizens utilize it. This case is an example of the lack of central government's regulatory, so policy itself is unclear. ‘Diesel vehicle emissions reduction projects’ have problems that there are no sanctions against no measurement of previous state. In other words, management is not enough. This case is an example of the business distinction between the Ministry of the Environment Agency and Local Environment is unclear. ‘Flood damage prevention and repair projects’ have problems of the site map and site investigations are not thoroughgoing enough. This case is an example of the weak central government control. ‘Local government fiscal assistance projects’ have problems that different local governments were subsidized by the central government unlike true. This case is an example of the excessive discretion of local governments. SURVEY RESULTSAs a result of empirical study, we found that we need to analyze the policy implementation steps because survey respondents responded that the policy implementation was insufficient in all stages of policy. First, we could emphasize the problems of the policy environment is bigger than those of policy itself, the central government, and the local governments. In other words, survey respondents responded that the policy(business) could not achieve its objectives because of the problems of the policy environment rather than other problems. In the future, we need to preview the change of the policy environment and prepare a scenario about some changes before policy implementation. Second, survey respondents responded that the lack of logical connection between policy making and implementation, the differences in political vision between the central and local governments, the constraints of policy-making technologies, the local self-seeking, and the lack of capacity of local governments were pointed out as obstacles. It proves the point that several indicators of the framework suggested obstacles of the implementation of the policy. Third, survey respondents responded that the interests between central and local governments are conflicted and the work classification was unclear between central and local governments. We recognize the role separation and function allocation between the central and local governments are necessarily needed. Fourth, central government survey respondents responded that the local self- seeking and the local government's abuse of discretion are the major obstacles of the implementation of the policy. Local government survey respondents responded that a central sticking vested interests, the strong control power of the central government are the major obstacles of the implementation of the policy. In other words, a difference of opinion between response groups could be seen. This means cooperation and coordination between the central and local governments should be built into the system. Fifth, survey respondents most commonly responded that the lack of validity of causal theory indicators among the Policy variables. This expose as the policy itself lacked causality and logical connection between policy making and implementation, so policy making and implementation were not connected consistently. Sixth, survey respondents most commonly responded that the differences in political vision between the central and local governments indicators among the Environment variables. This expose as the differences in political vision between the central and local governments occurred in the process of the national policy making and implementation, the national policy didn't implement intendedly. Seventh, survey respondents most commonly responded that a central sticking vested interests indicators among the Central government variables. This expose as the central government emphasized their vested interests while the central government made the national policy decisions, so the national policy rather didn't implement smoothly. Eighth, survey respondents most commonly responded that the local self-seeking indicators among the Local governments variables. This expose as the local governments emphasized their region rather than the entire countries, so the local governments are interested in the development of their region and the national policy didn't implement smoothly. DEPTH INTERVIEW RESULTSWe examine the depth interview to government officials who belongs to the Metropolitan area, Chungcheong area, Jeolla area, Gyeongsang area. First, interviewee pointed out that the policy made by the central government had the complexity and vagueness of the concept and content, so the policy itself was unclear. Second, the contents of laws were unrealistic and duplicated. Each laws were incompatible with other laws. So, interviewee pointed out that policy making and implementation are a separate form. Third, the law provided a large frame. And as practical details were ambiguous, the implementation of the policy itself is difficult. Fourth, as the human and material resources for policy implementation were insufficient, the implementation of the policy was difficult. In other words, as the number of civil servants responsible for policy implementation was short, and the budget support of central government was lack, the policy implementation has not made as the original intent. RECOMMENDATIONSFinally, we suggest some policy recommendations. Following recommendations would be important considerations to develop national policies implementation. We need a relations establish between the nature of local autonomy and effective implementation of national policy, because national policy should be implemented uniformly at the level of local governments. Of course, all the policies made by central government should not implemented uniformly. This means that if we require unity of policy implementation and national interests, local governments should implemented uniformly the national policy. In fact, so that we apply the results of this study, the consideration of several factors should be involved. In particular, the central and local governments communicate and cooperate each other, and they should prevent unnecessary conflict and waste of resources. In other words, the central and local governments need to make a close relationship as a horizontal policy partners in the governance dimension. To accomplish this, the institutional lure of cooperation and the strategy of administrative decentralization should be followed. In addition, the continued flow of information over the central and local governments is needed. A strategy to build the cooperative systems between the central and local governments is needed. In addition, we can suggest various detailed plan which each actors should be achieved. First, the central government should ensure the legitimacy of the policy. Policy can be admitted its' legitimacy that policy objectives are clearly set. And the definition of concepts and related terms should be obvious. Reasonable basis for the policy is needed. And we should ensure the legality of the policy. So that we ensure the legality of the policy, we control and modify the regulations related to the policy. In other words, overlap and conflict between laws should not be existed. In addition, we need the central government's policy guidelines and standards manual in the overall policy. The central government would make and distribute the central government's policy guidelines and standards manual. In guidelines and standards manual have the policy objectives, description of each term, and must be limited some discretions the local government can have. In other words, unnecessary conflict between the central and the local governments should avoid. The central government needs to figure out the attributes and actual conditions of local governments. And the central government needs to analyze the operation abilities of the local governments. Second, the local governments required their own plans of the policy implementation reflected their special conditions and circumstances. Their own plans of the policy implementation are underneath the central government's policy guidelines and standards manual. It is also important to secure the human and material resources what is needed for policy implementation. Results of surveys and in-depth interviews all pointed out the human and material resources are insufficient. It is necessary we secure the requisite resources for successful implementation of the policy. In addition, the local governments would have some discretions and implement the national policy subjectively. Key Word: public policy, policy decision, policy implementation, inter-local government collaboration, governance
expand_less 이전글
지방자치단체의 기초생활질서 확립방안 - 주차질서를 중심으로
expand_more 다음글
지방자치단체장의 리더십과 조직성과 및 행정발전의 관계에 관한 연구
같은 분류 보고서
연구자의 다른 보고서