거버넌스 지수의 실효성에 대한 소고 -정치성·실용성·규범성을 중심으로-

김한창 ( Hanchang Kim ) 한국행정학회 2013 한국행정학회 학술발표논문집 Vol.2013 No.-

거버넌스는 가치지향적인 개념이다. 동시에 생활지향적이라고 할 수 있다. 국내적으로 거버넌스는 박근혜정부가 지향하는 정부3.0과 매우 밀접하고 거버넌스 개념을 제외하고 논하 기 어렵다. 환원하면 거버넌스는 시대적 흐름이고 거부할 수 있는 생활방식이라고 할 수 있다. 따라서 거버넌스를 확산하고 활용하기 위해서는 거버넌스 지수 구성의 필요성이 대 두되고 이러한 지수구성에 있어서 거버넌스 가치와 생활지향적인 특성을 고려하여 현실적 이고 용이성을 극대화할 때 일반국민들이 거버넌스에 대한 이해도 높이고 수용성도 높아질 것이다. 본 논문은 이러한 차원에서 정치적인 측면도 고려하고 일반인들의 입장에서 최대 한의 손쉬운 지수 구성방안에 대한 논의를 한 결과 거버넌스의 절차적 단계 즉 거버넌스 인식, 형성, 성과 측면에서 활용가능한 지표들로 구성안을 제작해보았다. 키워드: 거버넌스, 지수, 사회적 자본, 정부3.0 Governance is a value-oriented concept. At the same time that life-oriented concept. Domestically Park Geun-hye government advocate Government 3.0 is very close also governance concept. in other words, governance is stream of times. it will be life style and ways. it can`t deny. Thus, the spread of governance and the need to take advantage of the emerging governance index. it should consider value oriented concept and life oriented concept. when it is maximize, people can be understood concept of governance and take acceptance of governance ways. This paper considers the easiest ways to the make governance index. finally, governance index can be made it that governance cognition step, governance formation step, governance performance step.

한국 시민사회의 정치사회적 거버넌스와 정부-NGO 관계- ‘민족화해협력범국민협의회’의 사례를 중심으로 -

홍성태 한국사회조사연구소 2007 사회연구 Vol.8 No.1

Governance as a concept in social science is not new, but currently it is being treated as new mode of government, and this theme might be expected to continue. But Korean social science did not develop the principal studies of governance, and then they were only exceedingly abstract and also did not coincide with our reality. Therefore we have to evolve discussion of governance in terms of empirical suitability. This paper empirically analyzes the level for governance in the dimension of civil society, and examines the relationship of government-KCRC in terms of the socio-political governance. Organized in 1998, the KCRC is evaluated as the first experimental case of governance that can be seen not only as a possibility for governance of civil society but also a potentially cooperative relation of government-NGO in Korea. Therefore, this paper gives attention to the limit and possibility of socio-political governance in Korea. To reify these discussions, this paper addresses the following: Section 2 examines theoretically the relationship government-NGO and socio-political construction of governance; Section 3 considers the social background and issues of KCRC's organization. This part also treats the problem of the former president Dea-jung Kim's the policy toward North Korea and his hegemonic strategy, and the social issues of KCRC's organization. Section 4 analyzes the constructive level of KCRC's governance in terms of the organizational unit, decision-making, and issues of activity. Finally, in conclusion, this paper emphasizes the dilemma of governance and institutional extension of the participatory democracy, and equipment of public discourse through autonomous democratization of civil society. 새로운 통치양식으로 거버넌스가 주목받고 있다. 이 논문은 시민사회의 통일운동 상설협의체로 구성된 ‘민족화해협력범국민협의회’(이하 민화협)의 사례를 중심으로 시민사회 차원의 거버넌스 수준을 분석하고, 정부-민화협의 관계에서 발견되는 부문 간 거버넌스의 가능성과 한계를 규명한다. 민화협의 사례는 정부-NGO의 관계뿐만 아니라 한국적 수준에서 시민사회를 하나의 분석단위로 하는 거버넌스의 구성수준과 동학을 이해하는 데 중요한 함의를 제공한다. 김대중정부의 출범과 함께 결성된 민화협은 조직구성의 측면에서 진보와 보수, 친정부-반정부의 융합을 특징적으로 보여준다. 또한 민화협은 정책과정의 개방성과 활동이슈의 다양성이 두드러지게 나타나고 있다. 하지만 민화협은 시민사회의 협치적 가능성을 함축하고 있음에도, 정부와의 관계에서는 부문 간 협치관계의 제한적 성격을 드러내고 있다. 그럼에도 이념적이며 정치적인 갈등이 상존하며 구조적인 제약이 뒤따르는 통일운동이 시민사회의 협치적 조직화를 부분적으로 구현했다는 점에서, 민화협은 환경, 여성, 평화, 교육 등과 같은 또 다른 사회적 이슈들을 협치적 공론장치를 통해 해결할 수 있다는 가능성을 보여주었다.

Governance and Leadership

Seung-Yong Rho(노승용) 한국공공정책학회 2010 공공정책연구 Vol.17 No.1

그 동안의 리더십에 대한 연구는 리더의 자질과 행태 혹은 상황적 요소들에 대한 이슈에 그 초점을 맞추어 왔다. 리더십은 이러한 미시적 차원의 요소 뿐만 아니라 제도나 문화와 같은 거시적 차원의 요소에 의해서도 영향을 받는다. 그럼에도 불구하고 거시적 차원의 연구는 많이 부족한 실정이다. 이러한 상황에서 이 연구는 제도로서의 거버넌스와 리더십의 관계를 분석하고 있다. 특히, 학교장의 리더십에 초점을 맞추어 계층제 거버넌스와 네트워크 거버넌스 상황에서 학교 장의 리더십이 어떻게 차이가 있는지에 대해 분석하고 있다. 이 연구는 거버넌스의 차이가 분석에 뚜렷하게 반영될 수 있도록 하기 위하여 연구의 시간적 범위를 1990년대 초로 한정하였으며, 그 시기의 한국과 미국의 학교 거버넌스가 학교장 리더십에 어떤 영향을 미치는지를 분석하였다. 1990년대 초 한국에서의 계층제적 거버넌스는 학교장이 리더로서의 역할을 수행하는데 제한적 요소가 되는 반면, 미국의 네트워크 거버넌스는 학교장이 리더로서의 다양한 역할을 수행하는 데 긍정적 영향을 미치고 있는 것으로 분석되었다. 2010년의 상황에서 한국은 계층제 거버넌스에서 네트워크 거버넌스로 변화하고 있다. 이 연구에서의 분석이 앞으로 한국의 변화된 거버넌스 하에서 학교장 리더십의 방향을 제시하는데 기여한다고 하겠다. Institutions as well as personal traits and behaviors have a strong influence on school leadership. Principal leadership is totally different in distinct governance. This paper discusses how the governance affects principal leadership, what relatively better school governance is, and what the principal leadership in the governance is. In the hierarchy like Korean school governance, principals have no autonomy to lead and manage school. They are not leaders but followers of the Department of Education in the central government. In the network like the U.S. school governance, however, principals have creative, visionary, and instructional leadership with strong autonomy in comparison with those in Korea. The network than the hierarchy as school governance is relatively better because of collaboration and learning among participants, improving social capital, and increasing trust on the government. Without improving school governance, the exemplary principals could not exist. As a broker in the network school governance, the principal should be visionary and transformative to manage the school.

거버넌스 신드롬?: 한국 거버넌스 연구의 경향과 한계

이명석 ( Myungsuk Lee ) 성균관대학교 국정전문대학원 2021 국정관리연구 Vol.16 No.3

이 논문은 6개 한국 행정학 학술지에 게재된 거버넌스 연구논문을 조사하여 한국 행정학 거버넌스 연구의 추세와 한계를 분석하였다. 한국 행정학의 경우, (i) 전통적인 정부와 관련된 관리개혁과 전통적 거버넌스 개혁을 강조하는 거버넌스 연구논문의 비중이 전체 거버넌스 연구논문의 50%를 상회하고, (ii) 거버넌스를 아무 설명 없이 사용한 연구논문의 비중 또한 15%로 무시할 만한 수준이 아니었다는 점에서, 거버넌스에 관한 관심과 인기는 높았지만 네트워크 거버넌스의 유용성과 필요성에 관한 관심은 다소 제한적이었다고 할 수 있다. 그러나 정부가 사회문제 해결의 만병통치약이 아닌 것과 마찬가지로, 네트워크 거버넌스도 만병통치약이 아니다. 정부의 시대가 지나고 (네트워크) 거버넌스의 시대가 도래한 것도 아니며, 그러한 변화가 필요하거나 바람직한 것도 아니다. 필요한 것은 “정부에서 ‘정부와 거버넌스’로”의 변화이다. 한국 행정학에서의 거버넌스 인기가 병리적인 거버넌스 신드롬이라고 진단할만한 근거는 아직 뚜렷하지 않다. 계층제 거버넌스뿐만 아니라 네트워크 거버넌스에 관한 지속적인 학문적 관심이 요구된다. This paper analyzes the trends and limitations of governance research in Korea by examining governance research papers published in six Korean Public Administration journals. In the case of Public Administration in Korea, (i) the proportion of governance research papers emphasizing traditional government-related management reforms and traditional governance reforms exceeded 50% of all governance research papers, and (ii) the proportion of research papers using governance just as a rhetoric concept was not negligible at 15%. This implies that although interest and popularity in governance were high, but interest in the usefulness and necessity of network governance was somewhat limited. Just as the government is not a panacea for solving social problems, however, network governance is not a panacea as well. It is not true that the era of government has passed and the era of (network) governance has arrived. Such changes are, more importantly, neither necessary nor desirable. What is needed is a change “from government to ‘government and governance’”. There is still no clear evidence to diagnose the popularity of governance in Korean Public Administration as a pathological governance syndrome. Continuing academic interest in network governance as well as hierarchical governance is required.

Governance in World Taekwondo Federation (WTF): Evaluation of the WTF Governance System Before and After 2004

( Hichem Ayouni ),( Kihan Kim ) 국제태권도학회 2017 International Symposium for Taekwondo Studies Vol.2017 No.-

Purpose: This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of the governance system of the World Taekwondo Federation (WTF) before and after 2004, to illustrate the impact of that governance system on Taekwondo as an Olympic Sport, and to examine the similarities and differences in the two WTF governance systems. Methods: We investigated the achievements of both governing bodies during the last 42 years. A questionnaire based on Basic Indicators for Better Governance in International Sports (BIBGIS), interviews, and organizational documents were analyzed to compare the two WTF governance systems and analyze their impact on Taekwondo as an Olympic sport. Results: The results of good governance in the WTF before 2004 showed that all the dimensions were under the medium score except for solidarity and organization transparency. The highest score was for solidarity with 21 out of 36. The mean value was 2.33 out of 4 and the percentage was 58.33%. The lowest score was for the stakeholder’s representation with only a score of 8 out of 36. The mean value was 0.88 out of 4 and the percentage was 22.22%. The results of good governance in the WTF after 2004 showed all the dimensions were over the medium score except for transparency. The highest scores were for organization transparency and solidarity with 27.5 and 27 out of 36, respectively. The mean values were 3.05 and 3, respectively. The percentages were 76.38% and 75%, respectively. The lowest score was for the stakeholder’s representation, which was only 15 out of 36. The mean value was 1.66 and the percentage was 41.66%. Conclusions : The results of the present study indicate that the WTF before 2004 played a considerable role in spreading Taekwondo worldwide. It also played the major role in making Taekwondo an Olympic sport. Meanwhile, it indicated that the WTF gave priority to certain dimensions like solidarity and disdain in others. The results of the present study also illustrates that the WTF after 2004 succeeded in the betterment of most dimensions of governance. Almost every score doubled in the seven dimensions, the exceptions being solidarity and organization transparency where the increased scores were not as high. This was because the solidarity dimension has already high before 2004. We conclude that despite the betterment in the WTF’s good governance, some dimensions can still be improved.

정책과정의 관점에서 바라본 Governance에 관한 연구

고경훈(高敬勳) 한국지방자치학회 2012 韓國地方自治學會報 Vol.24 No.2

In the 1970s, as coming to crisis of welfare state, efforts to cure government failure were spread worldwide. This tendency brought conversion of new rule way with globalization, localization of administration environment change of and so on, and as result Governance was appeared. But, it may be desirable that Governance is undergoing the conceptional confusion and try ripening about concept through system that is operated in actuality to help comprehension in reply. Therefore, the purpose of this research is to understand about Governance through introduction for Best-Value. There are 3 kinds of governance element in Best-Value. First, it is partnership governance that emphasizes participation and cooperation at decision process. Second, it is hierarchy governance that emphasizes control at implementation process. Third, it is market governance that emphasize competition and customer satisfaction at assessment process. The Best-Value system is supplying much suggestion points at real of our country. The points are promotion of local government responsibility through election, offering opportunity that civic society can be activate, construction policy network, and capacity building of local government.

거버넌스: 신드롬 또는 새로운 행정학 이론?

이명석 ( Myungsuk Lee ) 성균관대학교 국정관리대학원 2016 국정관리연구 Vol.11 No.3

정부에 대한 뿌리 깊은 불신으로 거버넌스라는 개념이 유행하게 되었음에도 불구하고, 관료제 패러다임이 여전히 행정학 주류 이론의 위치를 지키고 있다. 이것이 바로 거버넌스 신드롬이다. 거버넌스 신드롬의 가장 큰 부작용은 충분하지 못한 공공부문의 개혁과 이로 인한 사회문제의 악화이다. 만일 거버넌스가 관료제 패러다임과 차별화되지 못하고 관료제 패러다임의 단점을 보완하는 수단으로만 이해된다면 거버넌스는 기각된 또 하나의 대안이 될 수밖에 없다. 거버넌스 신드롬을 극복하기 위해서 거버넌스는 계층제적 통제와는 본질적으로 차별화되는 새로운 사회문제 해결 양식으로 이해되어야 한다. 사회적 조정 양식으로서의 네트워크의 논리에 근거하는 거버넌스는 집합행동의 문제에 취약할 수밖에 없다. 그러므로 거버넌스의 출현과 성공의 조건을 설명할 수 있는 제2세대 거버넌스 이론이 요구된다. 계층제 중독 극복방안과 다양한 사회문제 해결방식의 적용조건을 다루는 제2세대 거버넌스 이론의 구축이 새로운 행정학 이론으로서의 거버넌스 이론의 핵심 과제이다. A deep distrust of the government has ignited popularity to the term “governance.” However, the bureaucratic paradigm still remains at the core of the mainstream Public Administration theory. It is the so-called “governance syndrome.” The most serious side effects of the governance syndrome are insufficient reforms in the public sector and the consequent exacerbation of social issues. If governance cannot be differentiated from the bureaucratic paradigm and is only understood as its complement, governance may be another rejected alternative. Governance should be understood as a new mode of social coordination that is completely differentiated from hierarchical direction, the traditional mode of social coordination. Governance, based on the logic of network mode of social coordination, is vulnerable to the collective action problems. The second generation of governance theories needs to explain and predict when and how governance is possible. The key task of governance theory as a new Public Administration theory is to construct the second generation governance theory, which focuses on the conditions of the new mode of social coordination and the solutions to overcome the addiction to hierarchy.

Dual-governance Mechanism of Contractual and Relational Governance of PPP Infrastructure Projects

( Yingjiang ) 한국행정학회 2016 한국행정학회 학술발표논문집 Vol.2016 No.-

Along with the rapid demand of infrastructure and the application of PPP(Public-private partnership) mode in China infrastructure construction, serious dilemma appears in both cognition and application in China. However, the current governance mechanism of PPPinfrastructure project cannot provide effective solutions for the dilemma. Inaddition, the current research in the academic field also lacks a deepunderstanding about PPP infrastructure project governance. Therefore, this paperproposes an integrated model, pointing out that the dual-governance of contractualand relational governance interacts with PPP infrastructure project governanceperformance,and then providing policy implications. This papermainly explores the dual-governance mechanism of contractual and relational governance and its effects on PPP infrastructureprojects performance. Through discussing the relationsamong influential factors, dual-governance mechanism and PPPinfrastructure project governance performance, this paper tries to depictthe evolutionarypathways of PPP infrastructure project governance and giving correspondingmeta-government policy suggestions.

Nongovernmental Organizational Governance and Corporate Governance: A Comparative Analysis

김준기 서울대학교행정대학원 2007 Journal of Policy Studies Vol.22 No.1

In an organizational setting, the board members are the persons in whom power is entrusted by the principals to act as fiduciaries and to guide the organization. A main cause of concern originates from the classical problem of the separation of ownership and control. Although agency theory, the dominant approach to research on corporate governance in particular, holds that the separation of ownership and control constitutes an efficient division of labor, there is widespread awareness that managers and boards may take actions that hurt principals or constituencies they are meant to serve. An agency problem can manifest in several ways. First, managers and boards exert insufficient effort while overcommitting themselves to external activities. Second, they might reap private benefits in the form of perks. Last, they may take unnecessary risks by committing to mature projects. This basic agency problem suggests a possible definition of corporate governance and nongovernmental (organizational) governance as addressing both an adverse selection and a moral hazard problem. A good governance structure is then one that selects the most able managers and makes them accountable to relevant constituents. Moreover, strengthening board performance in NGOs and thus their governance structure is widely recognized as being a major requisite for the improvement of community services that NGOs provide. This paper seeks to address the following recurring questions: 1. What are the fundamental similarities and differences between corporate governance and nongovernmental governance? 2. What lessons can these forms of governance draw from each other in terms of recent governance reform efforts in both sectors? 3. What constitutes an efficient NGO accountability structure? 4. Should institutional constituents such as large donors interfere with management? Clearly, such questions lead observers to examine the comparative merits of various legal, fiscal, and regulatory environments. In this paper, I examine recent advances in both agency theory and stakeholder theory in the organizational governance context. This is because many have advocated moving from traditional principal value to the broader concept of the stakeholder society, in which the interests of various community groups would be better represented. This paper suggests that the traditional agency theories of organizational governance are fundamentally inadequate to build trust. We propose an alternative theory and approach based on stakeholders and managerial stewardship. We briefly compare agency theory, stakeholder theory, and stewardship theory as models of organizational governance. We conclude by providing insights into the key implementation steps that are important in implementing an ethically consistent stakeholder model—key steps for restoring and rebuilding public trust.

민주적 거버넌스와 시민사회 ; 국제이주의 글로벌 거버넌스: 민주화를 위한 차원 간 균형의 함의를 중심으로

이선미 ( Seon Mi Lee ) 한양대학교 제3섹터연구소 2008 시민사회와 NGO Vol.6 No.1

본 연구는 글로벌 거버넌스에 대한 비판적 관점 중에서, 특히 전지구적 차원과 국민국가 차원 간의 균형을 소홀히 함으로써 글로벌 차원에서의 참여 확대만을 일방적으로 강조하는 것의 이론적, 실천적 문제점에 주목하였다. 이러한 관점에서 최근 이주법 개정을 통과시킨 독일의 사례를 통해, 글로벌 차원의 국제이주 거버넌스 제도의 형성과 활동이 국민국가 차원의 거버넌스 제도에 어떤 영향을 가져왔는지를 경험적으로 고찰하였다. 독일의 사례연구는 글로벌 거버넌스 제도의 형성과 활성화가 국민국가 차원에서 지속되어 왔던 거버넌스 제도의 역사적 단절을 가져왔음을 잘 보여주고 있다. 이러한 경험적 연구 결과는 글로벌 거버넌스의 민주화 논의가 글로벌 거버넌스 제도 자체의 민주적 형성에 지나치게 집착함으로써, 그것이 국민국가 차원의 민주주의에 가져오는 부정적 효과에 대해서는 자칫 소홀할 수 있다는 것을 잘 보여준다. 후자에 관한한, 글로벌 거버넌스 제도의 형성과정이 어느 정도의 민주적인가는 별로 중요하지 않다. 글로벌 거버넌스 제도 자체가 충분히 민주적이라 할지라도, 그것이 국민국가와의 불균형 속에서 가져올 수밖에 없는 부정적 효과에 대해서는 아무 말도 할 수 없기 때문이다. 결국 글로벌 거버넌스의 민주화의 핵심적인 한 축은 글로벌 차원과 지역적 차원을 매개해 주는 "민주적인" 국민국가의 역할에 주어져야 한다. Theoretically, this study starts with the assumption that more participation in, and more transparency of global governance institutions are not the only solution for democratizing global governance. Special consideration should be given to the balance between the Levels when trying to promote `democratic` global governance. This study aims to reveal the reality of unbalance between the global and the national Levels and its implication for the theoretical assumption, studying the case of international migration governance in particular. The research question is as follows: what is impact of Launching global migration governance institution upon the governance institution at the national Level? The empirical research focuses on the German immigration Law reform process. The results show that the efforts to promote global migration governance institutions since 2000 at the global Level resulted in the unexpected demise of the German typical corporative governance institutions in the policy process around the immigration Law reform: it was conditioned by political calculations, not by institutionalized democratic policy process. It implies that you are Likely to neglect the negative impacts of promoting global governance institutions upon the `democratic` governance institution which has been working, while focusing mainly on democratizing the global governance institutions itself, not the balance between the two Levels. In conclusion, the one axis of democratizing global governance should be given to the "democratic" nationstate which mediates between the global and the Local.