Evaluating U.S. Presidential Foreign Policy

이휘인 충북대학교 일반대학원 2025 국내박사

본 논문은 미국 대통령의 외교정책 수행능력을 평가하기 위한 포괄적 분석틀을 제시하며, 정책결정 과정(process)과 정책성과(outcome)의 평가를 체계적으로 구분하는 이중 구조의 모형을 발전시킨다. 제 1 부에서는 대통령의 의사결정 과정의 효과성을 정책 방향 및 설계, 관리 및 감독, 조직 및 인력 운용, 합의 형성, 민주적 책무성 등 다섯 가지 핵심 기준을 중심으로 평가한다. 이 중 '민주적 책무성'의 추가는 대통령 수행평가에 있어 규범적 요소를 제도적으로 통합한 개념적 혁신이라 할 수 있다. 제 2 부는 정책 성과의 평가로 전환되나, 이는 단순한 성공과 실패의 판단이 아니라, 대통령이 직면한 제약조건에 비추어 핵심 목표가 어느 정도 달성되었는지를 맥락적으로 분석하는 데 중점을 둔다. 과정과 성과를 구분하는 본 접근은 양자의 독립성을 주장하기 위한 것이 아니라, 양자 간 상호작용을 보다 명확하게 분석하기 위한 것이다. 이 분석틀은 네 가지 엄선된 사례에 적용된다: 조지 H. W. 부시 대통령의 쿠웨이트 침공 대응(1990–91), 빌 클린턴 대통령의 코소보 위기 개입(1998–99), 조지 W. 부시 대통령의 아프가니스탄 개입 결정(2001), 그리고 같은 대통령의 시리아 정책 전환(2005)이다. 이 사례들은 서로 다른 행정부, 제도적 맥락, 외교정책 도전을 포괄함으로써 대통령 리더십의 반복적 패턴과 뚜렷한 차이점을 비교분석할 수 있는 기회를 제공한다. 정교한 실증 분석을 통해 본 연구는 효과적인 정책과정이 단순히 바람직한 것이 아니라, 성공적인 성과가 가능해지는 제도적 조건을 형성함을 보여준다. 반대로, 과정상의 결함은 조정력, 정당성, 전략적 일관성을 약화시킴으로써 정책 실패에 기여할 수 있다. 궁극적으로 본 논문은 세 가지 주요 기여를 한다. 첫째, 제도적 절충과 리더십 간 경쟁 요구를 고려한 다차원적, 과정지향적 외교정책 수행 평가 틀을 확립하였다. 둘째, 민주적 책무성을 외교정책 리더십 평가의 형식적 기준으로 정교하게 작동시킬 수 있는 가능성을 제시하였다. 셋째, 정책 성과를 평가함에 있어 결정론적 해석을 지양하고, 맥락과 대통령의 주체성을 강조하는 분석모형을 구축하였다. 이를 통해 본 논문은 대통령의 효과성을 평가하는 방식에 대한 근본적인 재고를 제안하며, 민주적 거버넌스 및 외교정책 리더십에 대한 학문적 이론과 실천적 접근 모두에 기여하고자 한다. 주요어: 대통령 수행평가, 미국 외교정책, 의사결정 과정, 평가 기준, 성과 평가, 민주적 책무성 This dissertation advances a comprehensive framework for evaluating presidential performance in U.S. foreign policy by developing a two-part model that systematically separates the assessment of decision-making processes from the evaluation of policy outcomes. Part 1 focuses on the effectiveness of presidential process across five key criteria: policy direction and design, management and oversight, organization and staffing, consensus-building, and democratic accountability. The addition of democratic accountability represents a conceptual innovation that formalizes normative concerns within the evaluation of presidential performance. Part 2 shifts to outcome evaluation, not as a simplistic assessment of policy success or failure, but as a contextual analysis of whether key objectives were achieved relative to the constraints presidents faced. Importantly, this separation is not intended to suggest that process * A Thesis for the degree of Doctor in August 2025 and outcome are independent, but rather to allow for greater analytical clarity in exploring how they interact. The framework is applied to four carefully selected case studies: President George H.W. Bush's handling of the Kuwait invasion (1990–91), President Clinton’s response to the Kosovo (1998–99), President George W. Bush’s decision-making during the Afghanistan intervention (2001), and his policy shift regarding Syria (2005). These cases span different administrations, institutional contexts, and foreign policy challenges, enabling a comparative analysis that highlights recurring patterns and distinct variations in presidential leadership. Through detailed empirical analysis, the study demonstrates that sound processes are not just desirable—they construct the conditions in which successful outcomes become possible. Conversely, procedural deficiencies often contribute to policy failure by undermining coordination, legitimacy, and the strategic coherence of presidential action. Ultimately, this dissertation makes three key contributions. First, it establishes a multidimensional, process-oriented framework for evaluating presidential foreign policy performance that accounts for institutional trade-offs and competing leadership demands. Second, it offers a nuanced account of how democratic accountability can be operationalized as a formal evaluative criterion in foreign policy leadership. Third, it presents a model for assessing outcomes that resists deterministic interpretations, instead emphasizing context and presidential agency. In doing so, this thesis offers a significant rethinking of how we judge presidential effectiveness and aims to enhance both academic theory and practical approaches to democratic governance and foreign policy leadership. Keywords: Presidential Performance, U.S. Foreign Policy, Decision-making Processes, Evaluation Criteria, Outcome Evaluation, Democratic Accountability

Do Voters Still Care? The Effect of Polarization on Scandal Tolerance

Guo, Chin The University of Texas at Austin ProQuest Dissert 2025 해외박사(DDOD)

This project argues that the rise of affective polarization in the United States has eroded democratic accountability by increasing voter tolerance for political scandals. As negative partisanship intensifies, voters increasingly make tradeoff decisions that prioritize party loyalty and electoral victory over candidate integrity or ethical behavior. Focusing on incumbents in the U.S. House of Representatives from 1980 to 2016, this project combines case studies and quantitative analysis to examine how scandal consequences have shifted over time. The case studies illustrate that politicians facing less severe scandals in earlier decades were often pushed out of office, while more recent, serious scandals are frequently met with indifference or partisan defense. The quantitative analysis uses both primary and general election vote shares to assess the electoral impact of scandals, incorporating variables for scandal type, party affiliation, and polarization. The findings show that while scandals still exert a negative effect on vote share, this effect is increasingly mitigated in highly polarized contexts. This project also finds vote share outcomes after incumbents are involved in scandals differ by party and scandal type, with notable asymmetries in how incumbents from the two parties are sanctioned. The broader pattern remains that rising polarization protects incumbents from electoral sanction, even in cases of clear misconduct. These results suggest that polarization is not merely reshaping elite behavior but is also changing how voters enforce, or fail to enforce, ethical standards. As scandal consequences weaken, the foundation of democratic accountability is undermined, signaling the need to update expectations of voter behavior and political accountability.

국가최고감사기구 및 제도의 비교연구 : 독립성과 전문성을 중심으로

전희정 연세대학교 행정대학원 2023 국내석사

<국문 초록> 지금까지 국가최고감사기구가 반독립적인 정부기관으로서 대통령 또는 내각을 중심으로 한 집행부 권력을 견제한다는데 이론의 여지는 없었다. 그리고 대다수 학자는 국가최고감사기구가 그 역할을 충실히 수행하기 위하여 반드시 독립성과 전문성을 확보하여야 한다고 주장한다. 그렇지만 현대사회에서 국가최고감사기구가 권력에 대한 민주적 통제의 한 축으로서 역할을 하게 된 연원을 분석하고 민주주의 제도운영과 국가최고감사기구의 역할과 기능을 연관 지어 연구한 사례는 많지 않았다. 또한 독립성과 전문성 관점에서 국가최고감사기구 및 제도를 비교・분석한 사례도 거의 찾아볼 수 없었다. 이에 따라 본 연구는 민주주의 정부형태의 전형이라고 할 수 있는 의원내각제나 대통령제를 채택하여 안정적으로 운영하는 서구 4개 국가와 이웃 나라인 일본을 연구대상으로 선정하여 그 나라의 최고감사기구 운영현황을 독립성과 전문성의 관점에서 살펴보았다. 이를 위해 최고감사기구를 두 개의 가치가 동시에 약한 case(Ⅰ유형), 독립성만 강한 case(Ⅱ유형), 전문성만 강한 case(Ⅲ유형), 두 가지 다 강한 case(Ⅳ유형) 등 4개 유형으로 예시하고 각 국가의 정부형태, 정치・행정제도, 정치문화와 최고감사기구의 형태・지위・임무・권한을 비교・분석하여 유형별로 분류하였다. 그 결과 집행부의 권력이 비정상적으로 강력하거나, 민주적 정당성을 갖지 못한 관료와 비공식적인 파벌이 권력을 분점하여 수평적 책임성(horizontal accountability)에 문제가 있는 국가의 최고감사기구는 독립성과 전문성이 미약하였다. 반면, 엄격한 권력분립에 따라 견제와 균형의 원리가 정상적으로 작동하고 의회가 집행부 견제 활동을 활발하게 하는 대통령제 국가의 최고감사기구는 전문성과 독립성이 강한 경향을 드러냈다. 한편, 의회와 내각의 권력이 융합된 의원내각제 국가의 최고감사기구는 의회와 대등한 협력관계를 유지하지 못하고 의회의 감독을 받는 종속적인 관계를 맺어 독립성이 약하나 오랜 전통에 의해 회계감사에 대한 전문성을 유지하고 있었다. 마지막으로 행정 우위의 전통이 확립되어 행정부의 자율성을 중시하는 국가의 최고감사기구는 행정부와 엄격히 거리를 두고 있으므로 독립성은 강하나 감사의 범위를 제한받고 있어 전문성 향상에는 한계를 보였다. 이상 각국의 최고감사기구를 비교・분석한 결과를 통해 얻을 수 있는 함의는 독립성이 강화되면 전문성도 동시에 강화되고, 반대로 독립성이 약화되면 전문성도 동시에 약화되는 상관관계가 존재한다는 것이다. 물론 둘 중 하나만 강한 case도 있으나 일시적 현상일 뿐이고 종국에는 두 가지 핵심 가치는 같은 방향으로 향한다고 할 수 있다. 주제어: 최고감사기구, 감사원, 독립성, 전문성, 민주적 책임성, 정치적 중립성 Until today, there have been no arguments about the fact that the nation's supreme audit institution (SAI), as a semi-independent government body, checks the power of the executive branch, which is centered on the president or cabinet. The majority of scholars are of the opinion that the SAI must maintain independence and expertise in order to fulfill its responsibilities faithfully and with integrity. However, there haven't been many studies that look at the relationship between democratic institutional operation and the role and function of the nation's supreme audit institution in modern society or that analyze the source of the supreme audit institution acting as an axis of democratic control over power. Furthermore, there were hardly any cases in which the nation's supreme audit institutions and systems were compared and analyzed in terms of independence and competency. This study therefore analyzed the current state of operation of the supreme audit institution from the perspectives of independence and expertise in four Western countries and Japan, a neighboring country, all of which have chosen and stably run the parliamentary cabinet system or the presidential system, the typical form of democratic governance. To achieve this objective, the supreme audit institution was divided into four types: cases in which both values were weak (Type I), cases in which only independence was strong (Type II), cases in which only expertise was strong (Type III), and cases in which both values were strong (Type IV). And, further, the SAI was classified by comparing and analyzing the government type, political and administrative system, political culture, and the form, position, mission, and authority of the supreme audit institution. As a consequence, it was determined that in nations with an abnormally overpowering executive branch or problems with horizontal accountability due to bureaucrats or informal factions lacking democratic legitimacy, the SAI was assessed to be lacking in independence and expertise. On the other hand, the SAI in the presidential system, where the notion of checks and balances functions normally based on the strict division of powers, and where the parliament actively checks the executive, has shown high levels of competence and independence. In contrast, the SAI in the parliamentary cabinet system, in which the powers of the cabinet and parliament were merged, did not maintain an equal cooperative relationship with the parliament, but rather formed a submissive relationship that was supervised by the parliament, resulting in a lack of independence. However, as a result of the lengthy history that has been followed, the expertise in accounting auditing has been maintained. Lastly, in a country with a long-standing tradition of administrative dominance, where the independence of the executive branch is held in high esteem, the SAI was kept well apart from the administration to ensure its independence, but its mandate was constrained, resulting in a modest enhancement of competence. The conclusion that can be drawn from the comparison and analysis of the SAI in each country is that when independence is strengthened, expertise is enhanced concurrently, and when independence is weakened, expertise is undermined correspondingly. There are times when only one of the two core values stands out, but this is only temporary, so it's safe to say that both core values are moving in the same direction.

Articulating, Learning, and Enacting Democratic Science Pedagogy

Gonzalez, Casandra Boston College ProQuest Dissertations & Theses 2023 해외박사(DDOD)

Many stakeholders emphasize the importance of diverse populations' participation in the sciences, though the motivations for this vary. Some reference an economic standpoint by emphasizing the importance of either recruiting more science workers to compete in a global economy, or of individual financial success for people from historically marginalized groups. However, a growing body of researchers and educators has emphasized the importance of increasing representation from historically marginalized communities in science because their exclusion from discussions about science funding, research, and implications has resulted in widespread harm to communities. The goal of this research is to broaden science participation for the purposes of democracy and strong equity. This work expands on the Democratic Science Teaching (DST) framework, articulated by Basu & Calabrese Barton in 2010. While the original work articulated a theory by identifying goals and practices in existing science classrooms, this work explores the possibilities of using DST as a framework for teacher learning.This dissertation consists of three papers. Paper 1 details the development of an instrument to measure teaching practices aligned with democratic science teaching. The instrument could be used and built on by researchers, teacher educators, and school leaders who wish to use tools to develop democratic accountability in their systems. Paper 2 is a case study exploring how teacher beliefs and actions are activated through interaction with the DST framework. The study follows one novice physics teacher who participated in a DST-aligned professional learning fellowship for one academic year. Paper 3 is a practitioner-facing piece that functions as a starting point for teachers who are interested in developing democratic teaching practices in their own classrooms. The paper outlines the DST framework for teachers, explores how a photo-journal project supported students in making connections between their personal lives and science content, and presents other strategies used by teachers to bolster student voice, shared authority, and critical science literacy. Altogether, these papers offer understanding of teachers' experiences as they work with the DST framework as learners, and provide tools for science teachers, teacher educators, and other education leaders to develop DST-aligned programming, and more broadly consider democratic and holistic systems of accountability for teachers.

Politics of Belonging: Families and Communities Building Power to Transform Schools

Casanova, Cassandra Diana University of California, Berkeley ProQuest Disser 2023 해외박사(DDOD)

The past decade of California's education policy landscape has been shaped by two significant events and the interaction between them. First, the Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF), signed into law in 2013, shifted the way that the state distributes money to local school districts and implemented mandatory stakeholder engagement in allocating the funds. Second, the COVID-19 pandemic was a shock to the public school system, and though there is ample research underscoring how difficult it is to change institutions, this crisis may have created the necessary conditions for enacting consequential change. The LCFF created the potential to restructure relationships between multiple stakeholders-district leadership, school site-level administrators, families, and communities-and we can examine how groups navigated a landscape of nascent education finance reform and implemented a new process of state-mandated stakeholder engagement. The COVID-19 crisis represented a much deeper and more destabilizing shock to the relationships between families and schools. During the initial onset of emergency stay-at-home orders, the global pandemic blurred the division between home and school-living rooms became classrooms with many parents and caregivers acting as de facto teaching assistants and school coordinators. These two events offer the opportunity to study ways that the relationships between families and educators may have changed and to evaluate the extent to which these changes have allowed families to influence local education policy discussions and share in decision-making.This dissertation project consists of three substantive chapters and uses qualitative methods to examine how, if at all, a process of state-mandated stakeholder engagement in district-wide decision-making builds power for families to influence local education policy. Additionally, I illustrate how engaging in this process impacts both the micro-level experience of the individual and the organizational level of the district. Drawing on theories that examine institutional stability and change, collective action, and the role of families in schools, the overarching questions guiding my research are the following: (a) In what ways, if any, have school finance and accountability reform changed the balance of power between families and district administrators?; (b) In what ways, if any, has state-mandated stakeholder engagement expanded participation in decision-making and the process by which decisions are made?; and (c) How has participating in mandatory stakeholder engagement during various crises and shocks shifted the role and influence of families and communities in district-wide planning and decision-making?In Chapter 1, I conduct a research synthesis that analyzes the literature on family and community engagement, with a focus on the policies and practices that empower diverse stakeholders to participate in discussions and decision-making related to education policy. The synthesis is guided by a framework used to map school-community literature along two dimensions-social stance and power and control. These dimensions help identify the extent to which families claim ownership of physical or symbolic spaces of engagement, author and control the agenda for engagement, and co-construct or shift the norms and beliefs of the education system. Based on a review of the literature, I conclude that conflict, not collaboration, is the status quo and that rather than mitigating conflict, family engagement may create structures and support venues for open negotiation of power. Additionally, although when families own engagement spaces and author agendas, they build political power to challenge status quo policies, there is minimal evidence to suggest they shift the norms and values of the existing education system.The case study in Chapter 2 is a micro-level analysis of the parents who participated in a district-wide advisory committee; the chapter presents the motivations that drove parents to act collectively as they sought to impact the planning process. Drawing from interview data and parents' reports, I investigate how parents conceptualized and framed what it means to build power to influence change and to engage in the process and how this framing contributed to the collective identity and shared understandings of the parent members of the advisory committee. Based on participant observation and semi-structured interviews conducted in a diverse urban school district in California, this study shows how families engage in local-level decision-making and build power to influence the policies and institutions that structure their lives; the findings speak to the limitations and affordances of state-mandated stakeholder engagement.Finally, in Chapter 3, I conduct a field-level analysis of a diverse urban school district in California to explore the implementation of school finance and accountability reform and the influence of democratic participation in expanding inclusion within policy discussions and to identify potential shifts in the balance of power between stakeholder groups seeking to impact district-wide planning. Based on participant observations, semi-structured interviews, and document analysis, my findings describe how school reform created and protected a relatively vague structure and process of mandated stakeholder engagement. It is because this engagement was codified into law that when conditions were ripe, the community could push and exert force. Therefore, while the law did not guarantee community power, it codified a process and created potential for collective action to push back against the status quo.

Malaysia Stumbles In Its Path to the First World : An Analysis from the Perspective of Theories of Development

줄리우이 부산대학교 대학원 2024 국내박사

In 1991, Malaysia had embarked on a 30-year development plan called Vision 2020, aspiring to become a developed country by Year 2020. The aim of this research is to find out why Malaysia has failed to get into the First World by identifying some of the major development gaps and to explain its failure to become a developed country from the perspective of three selected theories of development, from analyzing available data and literature on the various components of development. This research confirms that Malaysia is stuck in the middle-income trap, unable to transition to the high-income level enjoyed in the First World. Firstly, using Douglas North’s theory of institutional changes and economic development, this research identifies two ideologies that are inimical to the economic wellbeing of Malaysia - Ketuanan Melayu (Malay supremacy) ideology and Ketuanan Islam (Islamic supremacy) ideology. Both these two ideologies condone racism, disregard meritocracy and promote inefficient allocation of scare resources, just to favor the bumiputeras (mainly Malays). The institutions driven by these two ideologies do not create wealth maximizing environment for the country to prosper but cause wastage, corruption and social division. Secondly, from the perspective of Fukuyama’s theory of development, the Malaysian government became too strong during the era of Mahathir Mohamad. He removed the checks and balances vital for good governance. As a result, the civil service has been compromised and unable to provide the necessary public services needed to help Malaysia achieve the socio-economic development level of the First World. Rule of law is weak. Corruption is a norm now. The never-ending ethnocentric policies have resulted in a moderate economic performance over time, in which high economic growth rates are not sustainable. The education system is unable to produce the high-quality human capital and technological innovation needed to get to the First World. Property rights may not be secure and the environment is often neglected. Civil society was rather weak before the advent of BERSIH. With low democratic accountability, no capable leader can rise to lead the country to First World. Thirdly, by analyzing the past development of Malaysia with Acemoglu and Robinson’s theory of development, I found that Vision 2020 was launched in 1991 with extractive political institutions and extractive economic institutions in place, and thus Vision 2020 was destined to fail from the start. Both extractive political institutions and extractive economic institutions reinforce each other in a vicious cycle. Over the decades, reform programs have failed to turn them into inclusive institutions. Today, the nature of both its political and economic institutions are still extractive, which means positive change and reform will be difficult. Making matters worse, the religion of Muslims who make up majority of the citizenry, is exclusive in its doctrine and tends to make them uncompetitive. Islamization of the institutions in a multi-ethnic and multi-religious Malaysia can only result in a fragmented nation. Malaysia must reform its institutions to be inclusive if it ever wants to get to the First World. It needs to abandon the two insidious ideologies of Malay supremacy and Islamic supremacy, and adopt true meritocracy so that scarce resources in the country can be efficiently used and not wasted, and national productivity can be increased. All the other necessary reforms will fall into place once inclusive ideologies are adopted. The findings of this research are subject to the limitation of available data and literature that were read and analyzed within the limited duration of this project. 1991년 말레이시아는 2020년까지 선진국 진입을 목표로 ‘비전 2020’이라는 30개년 개발 계획에 착수했다. 본 연구의 목적은 세 가지 이론에 근거하여 말레이시아의 주요 발전 격차를 파악하고, 말레이시아가 선진국 진입에 실패한 원인을 살펴보는 것이다. 이를 위해 발전의 다양한 구성요소에 대한 가용한 데이터와 문헌을 분석하였다. 그 결과 본 연구는 말레이시아는 중진국 함정에 갇혀 있음을 확인했고, 이에 이른바 선진국과 같은 고소득 국가로 진입할 수 없는 상황임을 확인했다. 첫 번째로 더글라스 노스(Douglas North)의 제도 변화와 경제 발전 이론을 이용하여 두 가지 이념, 즉 케투아난 멜라유(말레이 우월주의) 이념과 케투아난 이슬람(이슬람 우월주의) 이념이 말레이시아의 경제적 복지에 도움이 되지 않는다는 것을 확인하였다. 이 두 이념은 인종차별을 용인하고 능력주의를 무시하고, 부미푸트라(주로 말레이인)를 선호하며, 부족한 자원의 비효율적인 할당을 조장하기도 한다. 또한, 이 두 이념에 의해 추진되는 제도는 국가가 번영할 수 있는 환경을 조성하는 것이 아니라 낭비와 부패, 사회 분열을 초래한다. 두 번째로 후쿠야마의 발전이론으로 볼 때, 마하티르 모하마드 시대에 말레이시아 정부는 너무 강력 해져서 통치에 필수적인 견제와 균형을 잃었다. 그 결과, 공무원은 위태로워지고 말레이시아가 선진국의 사회 경제적 발전 수준을 달성하는 데 필요한 공공 서비스를 제공할 수 없었다. 법치주의는 약해지고 부패는 일상화되었다. 끊임없는 민족 중심적인 정책으로 인해 시간이 흐름에 따라 경제성과가 둔화되어 높은 경제 성장률은 지속될 수 없었다. 교육 시스템은 선진국에 도달하는 데 필요한 고품질 인적 자본과 기술 혁신을 생산하기 어려웠다. 재산권이 보장되지 않고 환경 역시 방치되는 경우가 많았다. BERSIH의 출현 이전에 시민사회는 다소 취약했다. 민주적 책임성이 낮았기 때문에 말레이시아를 일류 국가로 이끌 유능한 지도자가 등장할 수 없었다. 세 번째로 아세모글루와 로빈슨의 발전이론을 바탕으로 말레이시아의 과거 발전과정을 분석해 본 결과, 착취적 정치제도와 경제제도를 갖춘 채로 1991년에 ‘비전 2020’이 출범했기 때문에 ‘비전 2020’은 애초부터 실패할 수밖에 없었다. 착취적인 정치제도와 경제제도의 악순환으로 수십 년 동안 추진한 개혁 프로그램은 실패하였다. 오랜 세월 동안, 개혁 프로그램은 정치제도와 경제제도를 포용적 제도로 전환하는 데 실패하였다. 오늘날, 여전히 정치적-경제적 제도들은 착취적이며 긍정적 변화와 개혁을 어렵게 하고 있다. 더욱 심각한 문제는 시민들의 대다수를 차지하는 무슬림이라는 종교는 교리가 배타적이며 경쟁력을 잃게 만드는 경향이 있다. 다 인종, 다종교 국가인 말레이시아에서의 이슬람화는 국가의 분열을 야기할 수 있다. 말레이시아가 선진국에 도달하려면 제도를 포용적으로 개혁해야 한다. 말레이 우월주의와 이슬람 우월주의라는 두 가지 이념을 버리고 진정한 능력주의를 채택하여 국가의 부족한 자원을 낭비하지 않고 효율적으로 활용하고 국가 생산성을 높일 수 있어야 한다. 포용적 이념이 채택되면 다른 모든 필요한 개혁이 시행될 것이다. 본 연구의 한계점은 가용할 수 있는 데이터와 문헌의 제약으로 한정된 기간에 분석되었음을 밝힌다.

한국의 복지재정 지출구조 변화 연구

한유성 연세대학교 대학원 2007 국내석사

한 나라의 복지재정지출은 그 범위와 수준을 어디까지로 하느냐에 따라 복지재정지출의 다양한 분석 결과가 발생하기 때문에 다차원적 접근이 필요하다. 본 연구에서는 일반회계기준 외에 IMF와 OECD 기준을 토대로 GDP, 통합재정, 일반회계 대비 우리나라의 복지지출의 특징을 시기별로 살펴보고 그 변화 원인을 분석해보고자 한다.IMF는 통합재정 대비 복지재정을 국가간 비교 기준은 국가간 국가재정의 건전성, 국가 정책의 우선순위, 재정정책의 방향을 살펴보는데 유용하며 OECD의 GDP대비 통합재정 복지재정지출을 국가간 비교 기준은 사회적 위험에 대한 국가의 보장 노력을 살펴보는데 적절하기 때문이다.먼저 복지국가의 발전 요인에 대한 이론적 접근방법을 살펴본 후 최근 우리나라의 GDP 대비 복지재정지출 비중이 여러 OECD국가와 비교해 볼 때 어느 수준인지 살펴보았다. 우리나라의 경우 같은 해 기준으로 GDP 대비 복지지출 비중이 OECD1/3 정도로 최하위이며 1인당 GDP기준으로 볼 때에도 1/3수준에 불과하다. 또한 보건을 제외한 복지서비스비중 또한 최하위 수준이다.그리고 이런 문제점이 시기별로 어떻게 보다 정확하게 나타나는지를 알아보기 위하여 우리나라의 복지재정지출 구조의 특징을 다양한 각도로 살펴보고 그 원인을 분석해보았다.박정희 정권, 전두환 정권 때에는 모든 면에서 복지지출 비중이 부족하였고 GDP대비 복지지출은 박정희 정권 초기와 전두환 정권 후반의 차이가 거의 없었다. 이는 국가의 정치적 정당성 확보차원에서 복지제도가 형성되고 산업화가 시작되어 복지욕구가 늘어났지만 복지지출의 자원은 턱없이 부족했으며 사회가 다원화되지도 않았고 노동자계층의 영향력도 매우 적었기 때문이다. 복지지출도 보건 분야에 1/2이상 할당되어 매우 불균형적인 구조를 갖고 있었다.노태우, 김영삼 정권 때에는 여러 측면에서 복지지출비중이 꾸준히 상승하다 김영삼 정부 중․후반부에는 감소하기 시작했다. 이는 이 시기에 사회가 다원화되고 사회민주주의 관점에 따라 노동자계층의 정책 영향력이 향상되지만 세계화의 신자유주의에 따른 국가의 정책이념과 후기산업화가 큰 제한 요소로 작용했기 때문이다.하지만 21세기 김대중, 노무현 정권에 와서는 OECD국가와 비교해 볼 때 통합재정 대비 복지지출비중은 2/3수준까지 이르렀음을 비롯하여 여러 면에서 복지지출 비중이 급상승하게 된다. 이는 세계화와 후기산업화의 영향에도 불구하고 다원화 , 노동자계층의 영향력 증대, 국가의 정책이념 등이 제한 요인을 상쇄했기 때문 이다. 특히 우리나라의 민간 복지재정지출 비중은 OECD 평균보다 높아 민간 수준에서는 복지재정지출이 상대적으로 의욕적으로 이루어지고 있음을 알 수 있다. 이는 곧 우리나라의 경우 정부차원에서 복지재정지출에 좀더 적극적으로 나서야 함을 의미한다. 뿐만 아니라 이들 국가 중 가장 빠르게 사회가 고령화 되가고 있음에도 불구하고 그 지출을 OECD국가와 비교해볼 때 1/4수준이며 저출산 관련해서는 1/18수준에 불과하였다. 건강부분에 집중되 있어 노령과 가족부분은 OECD국가와 비교해 볼 때 매우 협소하다. 즉 우리나라의 복지재정은 그 GDP대비 비중이 매우 적기도 하지만 그 내부 구성항목의 구조 또한 매우 불균형적이다.이와 같은 분석을 종합해 볼 때 우리나라의 복지지출은 여러 수준에서 살펴봐야 함을 알 수 있다. 그리고 민간보다는 정부차원에서 복지재정지출 증대를 위해서 노력해야 하며 저출산-고령화사회에 대비하기 위해서 복지재정지출구조를 개선시키는 문제도 고려해야 할 것이다. 또한 정권의 성격이 변할 수록 여러 수준의 복지재정 지출 비중이 빠르게 증가하고 있는 추세를 볼 때 우리나라의 복지재정 지출의 미래는 긍정적으로 예측해 볼 수 있다. This research analyze structural changes in Korean welfare expenditures from 1961 to 2005 by various dimensions and the cause of welfare expenditure change by some theoretical approaches.These criteria include welfare expenditures as a proportion of GDP that OECD has calculated, welfare expenditures as a proportion of united budget that IMF has presented and general account standard. The change's time span is composed of three periods, including six political regimes: the Park, Chung-hee(1961-79)regime; the Chun, Doo-hwan(1980-7)regime; the Rho Tae-woo(1988-92)regime; the Kim Young-sam(1993-1997)regime; the Kim Dae-jung(1988-2002)regime; the Rho-Moo hun(2003-present)regime. First period is from 1961 to 1987, second period is from 1988 to 1997 and third period is 1998 from to 2005. This research applies the logic of industrialism, pluralism social democratism, state-centered approach, post-industrialism and neoliberal-globalization to analyze the cause.First, the theoretical approaches are presented. At the next chapter, the problem of Korean welfare expenditures is shown by GDP criterion through comparison of OECD nations. Welfare expenditures in Korea as a proportion of GDP and per capita in comparison with the OECD average is about 1/3 at the present time and the lowest rank. Welfare services except health, all were at the lowest level. In the main chapter, periodical characters and cause of korean welfare expenditure are indicated.The first period's welfare expenditures were very insufficient in all levels. The welfare expenditure levels of the early years of this period and latter term's are almost same. It was because despite greater need for welfare due to the beginning of industrialization, welfare resources were inadequate, society was not pluralistic and labors's power was little.The second period's welfare expenditure rose in all levels except during latter term of the Kim Young-sam regime. It is because of the ruler's neo-liberal policy by globalization and post-industrialization though welfare resources by industrialization was ensured to some degree, society had been gradually pluralistic and labors's power had been a little enhanced.The third period's welfare expenditures climbed steeply in all dimensions despite the 1998 IMF's influence, globalization and post-industrialization. In particular private welfare expenditure is high. It is basically because larger welfare resources from industrialization were guaranteed, society has been continually pluralistic and labors's power has been largely enhanced. Above all, it is the result of ruler's favoring welfare ideology in spite of neo-liberalism by globalization. But Welfare services in particular expenditures for low-childbirth and ageing society were as ever at the lowest level.In conclusion, Korean welfare expenditure will continually improve at all levels, but change the structure of expenditure to prepare in the future.