혁신과 민주주의의 조화로서 정부혁신의 비판적 담론

이해영 한국동북아학회 2006 한국동북아논총 Vol.11 No.4

Government Innovation To Be Harmonized Between Innovation and Democracy at Critical Discourses: Lee, Hae Young This paper raised a research question on why government innovations in Korea have initiated by political causations rather than economic needs and/or technological advancement for industrial and national development. The historical analysis of Korean government innovations and reforms has always unveiled this fact of political, not economic and socio-technological perspectives. Innovation and its rooted philosophies are seeking something new with speedy diffusions of innovative objectives in both governmental and non-governmental sectors. The Korean cases of innovation, even they have been departed by policy innovations, have criticized on newness, development process, and implementation stage. The outcomes of those innovations consequently have minimized on impacts to the society and the government. Also Korean innovations have been carried by governmental bureaucrats who have charged the responsibility of delivering the goals of innovation to the citizen, even though they have been cynical and indifferent to the political ruling parties' innovative ideas. The Korean bureaucracy has not welcomed these politically justified and consolidated innovation goals and programs, and the success and/or failure of major innovation policies has been destined to this cynical bureaucracy. Even the citizen have been dumb to every innovation to each ruling regime because Koreans have experienced the failure of politically-oriented innovations. This is not fitted to the ideas of democracy and it cannot be harmonized to the democracy. The current ruling regime of Roh Moo-hyun government's innovation has found fault with these discoursed judgment and evidences, thus the Rho's innovation policy has little impacts to the Korean society as well as the Korean government. 경제적이고 기술적이며 사회적 동인(動因)에 의하여 민복(民福)과 국부(國富)를 증장시키고자 하는 목적보다도 정치적 권력게임에서 유리한 위치를 차지하고자 하는 통치세력과 여기서 중심적 역할을 차지하고자 하는 소수의 이상적 혁신자에 의하여 한국의 정부혁신이 진행되었다. 때문에 그 결과는 대체로 실패했다. 그럼에도 불구하고 왜 계속적으로 정권이 변화될 때마다 다양한 이름으로 혁신을 추진하였는가 하는 의문을 제기하면서, 이 논문은 정부혁신의 사상과 이념을 비판적으로 담론하여 혁신과 민주주의 조화가 정부혁신의 성공적 확산의 주요 변수임을 강조하였다. 한국에서의 혁신은 위로부터 아래로 시행되면서 다양한 혁신사업을 실질적으로 집행하고 실천하는 공무원들은 혁신에 냉소적이고 비동조적이었다. 때문에 혁신집행이 성공적으로 진행되지 못했다. 이념적이고 철학적 관점에서 혁신은 이상적이었지만 현실에서의 성과는 미미했거나 아니면 실패한 경우가 많았다. 왜냐하면, 정부혁신은 민주주의 이상과 조화되지 못했기 때문이었다. 혁신사업은 경제성과 기술적 가능성이나 정치적 실현가능성과 행정적 집행가능성 등을 가지고 있어야 한다. 그러나 혁신의 실천과 성과가 얼마만큼 국민들에게 확산될 것인가 하는 점은 민주주의와의 조화에서 판단되어야 한다. 왜냐하면, 모든 혁신의 성과는 시민들에게 귀결될 수 있어야 하고 이에 따라서 일반 시민들이 정부혁신을 찬성하고 수용할 수 있어야 하기 때문이다. 혁신정책도 본질적으로 국가정책의 한 분야이다. 국가정책은 민주주의 이상과 인간존재의 본질을 실현하는 것이 목적이다. 그렇기 때문에 혁신정책도 민주주의를 실현하고 인간존엄성을 실천하는 수단으로서의 정당성을 확보해야 한다. 이것이 혁신과 민주주의와의 조화이다. 특히 노무현정권의 정부혁신과 이것을 국가혁신으로 승화하고 확대하려는 혁신의 이상과 프로그램은 본질적으로 정치적이고 비경제적이다. 때문에 정권의 시작으로 혁신이 시작되고 정권이 끝나면 혁신도 종결될 가능성이 많다. 이것은 진정한 의미의 혁신이 아닌 통치권자의 통치에의 이상향을 현실정치에서 한풀이 하는 ‘혁신한마당’이 될 가능성이 크다. 그러나 이 논문은 비판적 담론에 초점을 두었기 때문에 정부혁신의 성과를 실증적으로 평가하고 그 결과에 따라서 구체적 혁신사업의 성공정도를 제시하면서 정부혁신의 이상을 논의하지 못한 한계가 있을 수 있다.

Tensions in Law, Regulation and Technological Innovation

Karen Yeung 서울대학교 공익산업법센터 2016 경제규제와 법 Vol.9 No.2

The relationship between technological innovation and regulation is frequently portrayed as an unhappy one in which regulation is portrayed as ‘getting in the way’ of scientific and human progress. Despite recognition of the need and value of regulation in order to safeguard against various risks posed by scientific and technological developments, regulation is typically understood as slowing the pace and hindering the potential for socio-economic development. Drawing on three cases from recent UK experience of technological innovation, this paper challenges this conventional narrative in three ways. First, it suggests that legislative authorization which permits technological innovation is a necessary but not sufficient condition for its successful reception into society. This is vividly illustrated by the recent failed attempt to introduce a national patient record database in England called care. data, demonstrating that the process through which technological innovations is introduced is a matter of considerable importance, particularly when the innovation is driven and undertaken by the state itself. Affected stakeholders and the general community must have meaningful opportunities to determine the scope and content of the proposed technological innovation, particularly when it affects many people in ways that they care deeply about (such as the sharing and use of their medical records), so that transparency, openness and public participation in their development and implementation are vital and indispensible. Secondly, the conventional narrative is based on an assumption that legislative reform is too slow, cumbersome and politically difficult to achieve in order to pave the way for technological innovation. But the recent decision of the British Parliament to introduce legislation to allow human germline genetic modification in the form of mitochondrial transfer aimed at preventing the transmission of serious mitochondrial diseases demonstrates that legislative reform is achievable, even for technological innovations that are ethically sensitive, at least for new techniques which offer the prospect of ameliorating serious and debilitating medical conditions. This case also underlines the importance of openness and transparency to facilitate informed public reflection and debate prior to legislative reform, and suggests that piecemeal incremental reform is more likely to garner public support compared with more ambitious reform that might be more likely to raise public suspicion and mistrust. Thirdly, rather than obstructing technological innovation, legal regulation and the activities of regulators might actively foster innovation and investment, evidenced by on-going efforts by UK financial regulators, particularly those of the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), to establish the UK as the global leader in FinTech. Recent initiatives by the UK government and UK financial regulators adopt a pro-active, strategic role, seeking to position regulation and regulators as supporters of innovation. This departs from the traditional, reactive approach of regulators that characterizes traditional enforcement work which responds to suspected violations of regulatory standards after they occur. Hence the FCA’s Project Innovate involves attempts by the financial regulator to operate in a pro-active non-conventional, flexible and agile way rather than through conventional, established legal protection regimes to allow for experimentation in tech innovation and new business models. What remains to be seen, of course, is how successful this strategy will be and – in particular – whether such a strategy can be maintained as the industry develops and consumer harm invariably occurs.

정부혁신의 국제적 수준 비교

황혜신 ( Hie Shin Hwang ),고길곤 ( Ko Kilkon ),김용훈,박상철,박용성,서정욱,홍준현 한국행정연구원 2007 기본연구과제 Vol.2007 No.-

한국은 지속적으로 정부 및 공공부문의 혁신을 위하여 노력하여 왔다. 특히 현 참여정부는 이전의 다른 어떤 정부보다도 지속적인 정부혁신을 강조해왔다. 여기에서 과연 그러한 노력들은 결실을 맺고 있는지, 혁신의 결과로 우리나라는 어느 정도 선진국에 접근하였는지를 질문할 수 있다. 본 연구는 바로 이러한 질문에 대한 답을 찾고자 수행하였다. OECD 국가들과 추가적으로 BRICs 국가들과 비교하여 한국의 정부혁신 수준을 진단하고자 하였다. 본 보고서에서는 정부혁신의 의의를 다른 국가들에서 사용되는 행정개혁이나 정부개혁, 근대화 등의 개념을 포함한 넓은 의미로 사용하였다. 정부혁신을 `공공부문의 의도적인 변화`로 이해하여, 정부가 `어떤 목적과 방향성`을 가지고 공공부문의 변화를 의식적으로 시도하는 `다양한 활동과 노력`을 정부혁신으로 보았다. 국제비교를 위하여 행정이 추구하는 보편적인 이념과 가치인 효율성, 효과성, 책임성, 민주성 등과 관련된 성과변수들을 정부혁신의 `목적과 방향성`으로 보았다. 한편 개혁과정이나 제도 등과 관련된 투입 및 과정변수들을 `다양한 활동과 노력`으로 보아 고찰하였다. 우선 제3장에서 정부혁신 분야별로 다양한 개별지표들의 국제 비교를 수행하였다. 크게 투입 및 과정지표와 성과지표의 두 가지 분야로 대별하여 분석하였다. 지표의 성격이 허용하는 경우에는 주성분분석과 클러스터 분석을 시행하고 비교 대상 국가들 중 한국이 어느 국가와 유사한지를 판별하였다. 투입과 과정지표 면에서는 한국은 다양한 선진 제도들을 도입하여 많은 영역에서 선진국에 근접한 모습을 보였다. 하지만 성과관리 부문과 회계 및 재정관리 부문, 규제개혁 등 일부 분야에서는 대부분의 선진국들과 달리 별로 진보적인 정책이나 제도들을 채택하고 있지 않은 것으로 나타났다. 성과지표의 경우에는 회귀분석을 통한 국가별 상대적 개선의 추정치 및 개선 순위를 도출하고 이를 절대적 수준과 함께 데이터로 사용하여 다차원 분석과 군집 분석을 수행하였다. 제4장 제1절에서 앞서 분야별로 개별적으로 고찰한 지표들 중 일부 성과지표들을 한 번에 종합적으로 클러스터 분석하여 한국의 정부혁신 수준을 진단하였다. 구체적으로 사용한 군집분석은 3가지이다. 우선 혁신이 추구하는 가치에 따라 `효율성 및 효과성` 관련 지표들 3개와 `민주성 및 책임성` 관련 지표들 4개로 나누어 각기 군집분석을 시행하였다. 그 다음으로 7개의 지표를 모두 사용하여 종합분석하여 한국은 종합적으로 어떤 국가들과 유사한 것으로 판단되는가를 분석하였다. 군집분석 후 형성된 군집의 중간값과 한국의 지표값을 다시금 비교 하였다. 제4장 제2절에서 비교대상국가들 중 일부 국가를 선정하여 국가비교도 수행하였다. OECD 국가들 중 일본, 아일랜드, 미국, 덴마크와 BRICs 4개국의 지표들을 한국과 비교하였다. 성과지표들을 종합적으로 볼 경우 한국은 전반적으로는 절대적 수준은 선진국보다 낮지만 BRICs 4개국보다는 상당히 우월하며, 지난 2000년대 이후 상대적인 개선도는 우수한 국가로 분류되었다. 다만 개선의 정도는 부문별로 차이를 보여 선진국으로의 진입을 위해서는 책임성과 민주성을 지향한 노력들이 필요하고, 무엇보다 규제개혁과 특히 부패 척결에 노력하여 할 것이 정책적 과제로 제시되었다. 다양한 분석의 결과, 선진국과 선진국이 아닌 국가들로 구분되는 큰 기준은 책임성과 민주성에서의 차이라고 판단할 수 있었다. 효율성과 효과성 부문에서는 선진국과 후진국간의 확연한 양극화가 나타나지 않고 오히려 전자정부 등에서는 선진국을 추월하는 모습도 보여주지만, 책임성과 민주성 영역에서는 선진국과 그 외 국가들간의 양극화가 명확하게 드러난다. 한국의 경우를 보더라도 종합적인 지표 분석에서 효율성과 효과성 측면에서는 2000년 이후 상당히 개선된 것으로 나타나고 최근년도의 절대점수도 선진국에 미치지는 못하지만 갭을 좁혀가는 양상을 보인다. 하지만 책임성과 민주성영역에서는 하위지표별로 여전히 선진국들과 큰 격차를 보이고 있는 영역들이 있다. 아직도 한국은 여전히 효율성과 효과성을 지향하는 개혁을 추진하여야 하는 것으로 분석되기는 하나 더욱 절실히 필요한 것은 책임성과 민주성을 지향하는 개혁이라고 할 수 있다. 책임성과 민주성의 지향 측면에서는 근본적으로 다른 제도나 입장을 추구하여야 할 필요성들이 제기된다. 차기정부도 효율성과 효과성, 책임성과 민주성이란 두 마리 토끼를 잡는 어려운 개혁을 해야 할 것으로 보이나 보다 책임성과 민주성 증진에의 노력을 하여야 할 것으로 보인다. 특히 한국의 경우에는 책임성과 민주성을 지향하는 과정에서 다른 어떠한 하위 영역보다 특히 부패통제에 주력하여야 할 것이다. 한국이 가장 취약한 것으로 드러난 것은 부패통제로 절대적인 수준에서도 열악할뿐더러 오히려 상황이 악화되는 것으로 나타났다. 그 외에 개선은 되고 있지만 상대적으로 다른 부문에 비해서는 개선의 정도가 적은 것으로 나타난 혁신영역들은 규제개혁, 책임성과 참여 부문이었다. 이들 세 분야는 서로 연관성을 강하게 가지는 분야라는 특징도 가진다. 한국은 앞으로 정부혁신 과정에서 부패통제를 우선순위로 설정하고 부패문제에 단호하게 대처하면서 각종 연관된 개혁들을 추진하여야 할 것이다. Korea has made continued efforts toward government reform and innovation. The Participatory Government, in particular, has put more emphasis on government innovation than any other previous administration. This study has two purposes. First, it aims to confirm the current status of Korea`s government innovation, and second, to find out what is needed in order for Korea to join the ranks of developed nations. All OECD countries and BRICs(Brazil, Russia, India, China) nations were selected as countries for comparison. This research uses the term “government innovation” as a comprehensive concept that encompasses other similar concepts such as administrative or government reform and modernisation. This study defines the concept of government innovation as “various activities and efforts” consciously carried out by the government with certain “purposes and directions”. As this study aims to compare government innovations in different countries, the specific details for “purposes and directions” include universal public values of administration rather than a certain country`s reform goals or reform trends of the times. Among the variety of public values, this study identified “efficiency and effectiveness”, and “accountability and democratization” as the two major areas of public values that the government needs to focus on. In chapter 3 this study conducted an inquiry into the numerous variables individually. It first explored “process and input variables” as they are the “various activities and efforts” carried out for government innovation. Next it explored “output and performance variables” to measure how much the nations have achieved the “purposes and directions” of governmental reform. In chapter 4 a comprehensive analysis using several indexes at once were conducted. Cluster analysis was carried out upon all of the 34 countries three times. First, indexes related to efficiency and effectiveness were analysed, and second, indexes related to democratization and accountability were analysed. The purpose was to examine which countries Korea shared similarities with in terms of efficiency and effectiveness and to which group Korea belonged to in terms of democratization and accountability. Finally, all the indexes were used for the third cluster analysis to find out which countries Korea shared similarities with in general. In chapter 4, comparison with some selected nations were also conducted as a supplementary analysis. 4 countries among the advanced OECD nations(Japan, Ireland, Denmark and United States) and all 4 BRICs countries (Brazil, Russia, India and China) were selected for comparison. The results are as follows. First of all, in checking how the values of efficiency and effectiveness were applied and improved, the Korean government showed that although its absolute level still lagged behind most advanced countries, Korea has improved rapidly during the last few years. And in the case of e-government, Korea showed excellence in both absolute levels and relative improvement degrees. Government accountability and embodiment of democratic values and improvement had more complicated aspects. Polarization was found between advanced countries and non-advanced countries. Korea had improved a lot during the last few years, but still a huge gap was found between Korea and the advanced countries. Especially Korea`s corruption control showed not only a low absolute level, but also bad results in improvement degrees. Overall, Korea`s absolute level of government innovation is still lagging behind those of advanced nations, but relative improvements since 2000 has been outstanding. However, the degree of improvement differed among areas. The results show that Korea still has to achieve more, especially in the area of accountability and democratization to become an advanced nation. Korea has to continue efforts in regulatory reform and especially, crack down on corruption in order to become a better nation.

혁신학교의 수업혁신 과정과 과제

노상우 교육종합연구원 2015 교육종합연구 Vol.13 No.1

The purpose of this study is to research the Processes and Tasks of ‘classroom lesson reform’ in the ‘innovation school’ movements that have been carried out by some progressive superintendents in local governments. For it, to clarify the problems of present school curriculums providing the very backgrounds of school innovation and to estimate the process of classroom lesson reform through a successful case of a middle school(tentatively named ‘Kongdan Middle School’) located at Jeonbuk area are to be done. The desirable ways for better innovation classes are also investigated. The conclusions are as follows:Firstly, current issues depriving students’ self-governing rights in the class situations like the loss of learning interest in the lessons, the lack of synthetic view of knowledge and ethics of cooperation must be improved seriously. Secondly, creative reconstruction of school curriculum for ‘classroom lesson reform’, the cultivation of learning community provoking learning and growth between students mutually, new subject-based cooperative learning methods have been practiced more frequently in Kongdan Middle School than before. Thirdly, intensified training of practical knowledge coped organically and actively, the reinforcement of theme-based learning with subject-linking that integrates each separate knowledge and connects it with the learner’s life, the generalization of multidimensional cooperative teaching methods of teacher-student, teacher-teacher are all essential for the successful ‘classroom lesson reform’. Those suggestions have to be the most fundamental factors in ‘classroom lesson reform’ and make their ways to increase the cultivation of the learner’s knowledge.

혁신학교의 쟁점 탐색

이병환,심현 한국교육철학회 2017 교육철학 Vol.65 No.-

This study seeks to explore the major issues of innovation schools. Innovation schools are one of the policies pursued for the normalization of public education and school renovation. Innovation schools focus on performance-centric, team-centric education, not team-centric education. The school has been designated by about 400 schools nationwide as of 2017, when it was first implemented by the Gyeonggi Provincial Office of Education in 2009. There are many issues surrounding innovation schools, but this research has led to issues related to relationships related to innovation schools. Schools reform, school innovation, reform of schools, relations with general schools, and relationships with charter schools in the United States discussed the effectiveness of school reform. In the future, schools have a task to show new things for a healthy school culture based on the voluntary and participatory nature of education bodies to successfully fulfill the responsibilities of improving public education.

Models of innovation scaling in Singapore schools: process objects as multi-level role clusters and outcomes—a multiple case study approach

Mei Ying Tan,David Wei Loong Hung 서울대학교 교육연구소 2020 Asia Pacific Education Review Vol.21 No.4

Studying the processes involved in scaling technologically-mediated pedagogical innovations has moved into understanding how wider contexts relate to qualitative outcomes (depth, shift in reform ownership and spread). Understanding patterns in this relationship has been complicated by the diverse outcomes for a single innovation. This study examined the processes involved in scaling innovations, using the Cultural-Historical Activity Theory to view process as object, relating outcomes with the roles played by stakeholders in multiple layers of the school ecosystem (teachers, school leaders and cross-school personnel). The idea of multiple meanings in language facilitated the conceptualization of qualitatively different roles and outcomes. Multiple school cases (from different innovations) underwent cross-case comparison to create a typology of approaches to scaling. Three scaling models—sets of role combinations and related outcomes, were described: (1) Tech-Tools and Artifacts En Masse focused on across-the-board adoption of technology. (2) Deep Roots selected a core team to overhaul teaching approaches, with accompanying structural changes (in schedule, personnel involvement and professional learning communities). (3) Networks established partnerships among schools from the onset. The roles for each ecosystem level, for each model, were further explicated to relate roles and outcomes. This study emphasizes the importance of foregrounding the process objects—the meta-level—of scaling, articulating the processes that affect outcomes. The models offer school leaders and those involved in innovation implementation (e.g., innovation designers, academic consultants, teacher educators working across schools) a framework to dialog, evaluate existing implementation strategies, and articulate next steps in school innovation trajectories.

신정부의 국가균형발전과 규제개혁 과제

최우용 한국법제연구원 2022 법제연구 Vol.- No.63

[1] For efficiently implementing the balanced national development, revolutionary regulatory reform should be carried out on a nation-wide scale going far beyond the regulatory reform for the individual duties of the office, thereby accomplishing the full-scale reform for the national administrative system. With the regulatory reform alone affecting the individual duties of the office, it is impossible to respond innovatively to such discourse of times discussing balanced national development. Beginning with drastically transferring the central government’s authority to the local entity as well as abolishing unnecessary regulation, central government should give priority to the follow-up supervising of the local entity’s illegal, unfair practices. [2] Nurturing the base cities covering metropolitan cities is required for regional development. Special local entity newly introduced based on the Local Autonomy Act can be utilized as the main body for the purpose of achieving this goal. Once the main bodies of the regional bases or those dealing with the metropolitan duties of the office are established efforts should be made ensuring balanced national development based on regional development accomplished through the drastic transfer of the central government’s authority and regulatory reform. In this regard, it would be meaningful to look into the recently introduced ‘Bu-Ul-Gyung Special Local Entity’ which is a megacity covering Busan, Ulsan and Gyeongnam If such special unions, i.e. for Daegyeong, Chungcheong and Honam regions are also established at a later date, they will emerge as key regional economies capable of competing with greater Seoul. However, considering the recent discord between people arising in advance of its official launch of ‘Bu-Ul-Gyung Special Local Entity’, it seems imperative to make thorough preparation ensuring the residents properly informed on such special local entity from the early stage of its development. [3] Also, innovating the nurturing system of a required person of talent is required. It is also required to introduce a pilot system for nurturing a creative person of talent, enabling the nurturing of such persons freely without restriction from their childhood by establishing ‘Special Education Zone’. Once local colleges and universities are capable of supplying the persons of talent required in the region this will invite a business making the most of regional advantages and causing the local colleges and universities to nurture such persons of talent. This will, in turn, eliminate the concentration of young people to seek a job in greater Seoul. In particular, it should be wise to eliminate all sorts of regulation in relation to higher education policy. Any regulation absolutely necessary should be provided for in the law, and all indirect regulation to be implemented through evaluation or through paying the subsidy should be abolished. [4] One of the core part of the balanced national development is to create a new job. Regional global innovation special zone such as Pangyo Techno Valley in greater Seoul should be created in the region. And those various existing innovation special zone should be further innovated up to the level of recreation. Such ‘innovation special zone’ should include colleges/universities and research institutes for nurturing the required persons of talent, not to mention regulatory reform. Also, they should be able to provide the nurturing of venture businesses allowing young people to set up a business as well as venture finance for a venture business. Silicon Valley in the United States can serve as a good example. [5] Streamlining the entire legal system is required for the advancement of balanced national development. Our constitution stipulates the balanced national development suggesting it as a constitutional task, and duties of the state and the local entity are provided for in the constitution for the purpose. For this reason...

과학기술 혁신과 시장진입규제 - 신산업 분야 규제개선 논의의 비판적 수용론을 겸하여

김태호 서울대학교 법학연구소 2017 경제규제와 법 Vol.10 No.2

This study analyzes the strained relationship between technological innovation and regulation, while it seeks to resolutions that makes a virtuous cycle between the two. The author mainly focuses on the ex ante market entry regulations that are taking place in the field of Information and Communications Technology (ICT). Generally speaking, the ex ante market entry regulation contains several conundrums required to be resolved relating to technological innovation. The ex ante regulation not only restrains individual’s creative desire with regards to technological innovations but also blocks possibilities of another chain reaction which might be triggered by the technological innovation. Being allowed to enter the market without any regulations from the beginning, unrecoverable and/or irreversible risks may be realized so that the society can be enormously harmed being revealed to the dangers as it is. The process of finding resolutions for the above-mentioned issues are referred to as regulatory reform. First of all, the author suggests to further promote the current discussions on ‘smarter regulations’ and/or ‘better regulations.’ Then, the author especially criticizes on a recent discourse on ‘negative regulation’ not only being ambiguous but also having not much use in legal practice that this concept should be no more than considered as a guideline to make the regulatory legislation. In order to legitimize regulation in convergence area, it is necessary to dissolve time lag, secure flexibility of regulations, distribute the powers among multiple administrative offices and to maintain ex post regulatory accountability system as a whole. Regarding to the ICT, the “Special ICT Act” provides both quick processing and temporary permission system. The systems aim to promptly provide new convergence technologies and services in the market, enabling quick processing of the services but preventing the cases where the services are not allowed be released because of an absence of a regulatory system which would result from the services not being in line with the existing permission system or uncertainties over the application of the existing system. On the other hand, the “Industrial Convergence Promotion Act” allows the Industrial Convergence Development Committee to suggest improvement plans for the new products of industrial convergences – the activities for innovating existing industries or creating new industries with societal and market values through creative combination and convergence between industries, between technologies and industries, and between technologies. This articles encompasses the two above-mentioned systems and the other relating bills currently pending in the National Assembly. In conclusion, for improving the market entry regulation through regulatory reform, the author argues to clarify regulatory responsibility system plus to maintain ex post regulatory system throughout the whole regulatory span. 과학기술의 혁신과 제도규범의 변화는 상호작용 관계에있다. 이 글은 과학기술의 혁신과 규제 간의 긴장관계를 분석하면서 규제와 혁신 간의 선순환의 구조를 만들 수는 없을 것인지를 모색한다. 이 글이 다룬 핵심적인 규제 문제의소재는 정보통신기술의 융합에 따라 신기술이 사용되는 시장에서의 진입규제이다. 시장진입규제를 살펴보고자 하는것은 시장진입규제는 시장 진입 자체를 차단하는 결과를 초래함으로써 대표적인 기술혁신의 장애물로 지적되고 있어서규제원칙 자체를 바꿔야 한다는 논의가 있고, 이 영역에서주로 시장진입규제를 탄력적으로 운영하는 제도적 대안들이법제화되고 있기 때문이다. 먼저 이 글은 시장진입규제의 탄력적 규제를 위한 원칙으로서 최근에 등장한 포괄적 네거티브 담론의 의미와 문제점을 지적한다. 그리고 융합분야의 규제합리화를 위해서 규제지체를 해소하고 불확실성에 대비하기 위한 규제의 유연성을 확보하며, 복수의 관할 행정청 간의 권한을분배하고, 사후적인 규제책임의 체계를 정비하는 방향의구체적인 제도 개선이 필요함을 강조한다. 이에 따라 정보통신융합법의 신속처리 및 임시허가 제도, 산업융합촉진법의 인증제도, 규제프리존법안으로 대표되는 규제 샌드박스와 테스트베드 사업의 법적인 쟁점과 구체적인 법안의 개선방안을 검토하고 그 한계를 밝힌다. 이를 통해 규제개선 제도의 성공을 위하여 필요한 제도 설계의 방향을행정법이론적 관점에서 검토하고 규제 시스템 전반적 차원에서는 조직법의 정비, 손해구제 제도의 정비 등의 과제를 제시한다.

자율주행과 주행보조 기술혁신을 위한 규제개혁의 방향

배관표,김영지 한국규제학회 2017 규제연구 Vol.26 No.2

This study forecasts future of regulatory reform for promoting innovation in the fields of autonomous driving and Advanced Driver Assistance System (ADAS). Christensen(1997) argues that progress of disruptive and sustaining technologies goes together until the disruptive technology finally reorganizes industrial structure - the process is called disruptive innovation. Since it needs more time for the autonomous driving to be fully implemented in the market through the disruptive innovation, ADAS will continue to support human drivers at least for decades. This study reviews the regulatory framework of the United States, as the country is leading the advancement in autonomous driving and provides recommendations on how the government should reform its regulatory scheme to promote technological innovations; it suggests regulatory reinforcement to spread sustaining technology, such as ADAS, and argues for deregulation to stimulate the innovation of disruptive technology, i.e. autonomous driving technology. 본 연구의 목적은 자동차 자율주행과 주행보조 분야에서 기술혁신을 촉진할 수 있는 규제개혁의 방향을 논의하는 데에 있다. Christensen(1997)에 따르면, 파괴적(disruptive) 기술은존속적(sustaining) 기술과 병행 발전하다 일정 조건이 갖춰지면 산업을 재편한다. 그는 이를파괴적 혁신이라 부른다. 그런데 정부는 파괴적 기술에 대한 규제개혁만큼이나 존속적 기술에 대한 규제개혁을 고민해야 한다. 대표적 파괴적 기술인 자율주행 기술과 관련해서도 마찬가지이다. 자율주행 기술은 주행보조 기술과 병행 발전하고 있다. 일정 조건이 갖춰지면자율주행 자동차의 상용화는 시작될 것이다. 그러나 자율주행 자동차는 가격 등의 문제로상용화되는 데까지 상당한 시간이 소요될 것이며, 설령 상용화되어도 몇 십년간은 자율주행자동차와 주행보조 자동차가 함께 달릴 수밖에 없다. 따라서 자율주행 기술에 대한 규제개혁 논의만큼이나 주행보조 기술에 대한 규제개혁 논의도 중요하다. 본 연구는 미국의 규제들을 소개하며, 정부가 취해야 할 규제개혁의 방향에 대하여 논의해보고자 한다. 결론적으로 본 연구는 주행보조 기술과 관련해서는 기술 확산을 독려하기 위한 규제 강화가, 자율주행 기술과 관련해서는 기술 개발을 촉진하기 위한 규제 완화가 필요하다고 주장한다.

한⋅일의 혁신관련 규제개혁 비교: 규제 샌드박스를 중심으로

김윤경 한일경상학회 2020 韓日經商論集 Vol.88 No.-

This study analyzes Regulatory sandboxes in Korea and Japan, regulatory reforms in response to the 4th Industrial Revolution. Regulatory sandbox allows firms to test innovative products and services in a controlled environment. While a regulatory sandbox was initially introduced to encourage innovation in the FinTech industry, Korea and Japan expanded this reform to cover all sectors and regional innovation. This presents the regulation paradigm shift that attempts to overcome the limitations of current regulations. However, their regulatory sandboxes differ upon the following factors. First, Japan implements two types, region- and project-based, however, Korea operates in categories with ICT convergence, industry convergence, financial innovation and regional innovation. In addition, Korea offers three regulatory measures while Japan focuses on substantiation. However, Korea excludes metropolitan area in the regional regulatory sandbox unlike Japan. Thirdly, Japan’s regulatory reforms are pursued in accordance with the national growth strategies of Abe administration while such growth strategy is absent in Korea. Finally, a direction for accumulatedinformation through regulatory sandbox exists in Japan in terms of the 4th industrial revolution. These strategies of Japan highlight the importance of establishing regulatory reform structure and long-term vision for Korea. 본 연구는 4차 산업혁명 시대에 대응한 규제개혁으로서 한국과 일본의 규제 샌드박스를 검토하였다. 규제 샌드박스는 제한된 환경에서 자유로운 혁신활동을 허용하는 제도이다. 한국과 일본은 규제 패러다임을 선 허용 후 규제 방식으로 전환하여 기존 규제로 불가능한 혁신활동을 가능하게 하였다. 합리적 규제의 추구와 수요자 친화적 제도로서 의의가 존재한다. 금융산업의 혁신에만 적용한 다른 국가와 달리 전 산업 및 지역혁신으로 확장하여 규제 샌드박스의 의미를 확대한 공통점을 가진다. 동일한 문제의식을 공유한 양국 규제 샌드박스의 비교는 한국 규제개혁의 발전방향에 대한 시사점을 제시한다. 먼저 산업 대상 규제 샌드박스는 일본에서 하나의 법률로 규율하나 한국은 세 개의 법률로 존재해 각기 다른 부처에서 담당하고 있다. 승인결과의 일관성과 제도의 안정성을 위해 제도의 일원화가 이루어져야 할 것이다. 또한 일본은 실증을 강조한 데 비해 한국은 규제혁신 3종 세트를 제공하였으며 일본에 비해 높은 활용도를 보였다. 이는 성과이기도 하지만 기존 규제의 제약을 반증한다. 지역혁신을 위한 규제 샌드박스의 경우 한국은 비수도권만을 대상으로 하나 일본과 같이 수도권의 혁신 특수성에 대한 고려가 필요하다. 특히 일본은 규제 샌드박스 도입 이전부터 국가전략에 따라 지속적인 규제개혁을 추진해 규제개혁의 체계를 개선해 왔다. 그러므로 이번 규제혁신을 계기로 한국의 규제개혁 체계를 정립해야 할 것이다. 마지막으로 일본과 마찬가지로 규제 샌드박스의 경험이 4차 산업혁명을 대비 하는 자료로 이용되도록 정보의 활용에 대한 논의가 동반되어야 할 것이다.