http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
손재식 한국지방행정연구원 1995 地方行政硏究 Vol.9 No.4
The term $quot;globalization$quot; is frequently used recently. Seen from a philosophic point of view, globalization, along with regionalism, may well be a phenomenon typical of the world trend. True to the expression $quot;global village$quot;, the world is becoming more compact and contiguous due to the development of transportation and communication means, a drastic increase in personal and material exchanges, the advent of highly advanced information society and the universalization of democracy. In particular, every countries in the world are faced with growing common problems such as ozone deplation, the green house effect, environmental deterioration, resource shortage, national and global inequalities which they should cope with jointly. Despite such remarkable tides of globalization, however, the value of local government has not been diminished in most countries. Rather, the role of local government in the continent is seen as becoming increasingly important in spite of emergence of supranational organizations like the EU, the NAFTA and the APEC. Many Western European countries have in recent years undertaken decentralization measures, while Eastern European countries, in general, have been taking steps toward the establishment of viable and effective local government as an essential part of democratic process. Thus, it is important to note that globalization does not mean the end of local governments just as nationalism does not mean the end of families. Turning to the Korean situation, it is conspicuous that localization is emphasized in parallel with globalization on the occasion of extensive execution of local self -government for the first time since may 16, 1961. Even though there have been wide ranging advancement in the improvement of allocation of functions and financial resources between central and local governments, strengthening of the role of local councils and local election system, there are still several defects to be ameliorated to enhance the quality of local government in Korea to the level of that in advanced countries. First, it is desirable for deputy chief executives of lower tier authorities to be selected as local of ficials by each local authority concerned not from four years later but from this year to secure genuine local autonomy. Second, it is suggested that civic servants working at local government agencies including teachers of public schools appointed by the central government be replaced with locally employed officials and teachers in not too distant future to expand local self-government. Third, to further clarify and sectionalize the allocation of functions between central and local governments and between upper and lower tier authorities, overall rearrangement and amendment of various laws and regulations concerned with functions is needed. Fourth, to avoid overcommit and guarantee optimum supervision over local authorities, the current system of parliamentary inspection and administrative inspection of the Board of Audit and Inspection over local government administration should be abolished by entrusting this work to central government ministries concerned and each local council. Fifth, to strengthen local financial autonomy and to narrow disparities in financial ability and the quality of local government services between local authorities, it is so necessary to increase the legal proportion of the local share tax and transfer of many of national subsidies to general grant.