NIS개편방안 연구I: 국가과학기술혁신정책 조정체계의 구조적 재설계

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

Study on NIS Reform Plan I
: Structural Redesign of National S&T Innovation Policy Coordination System

·Project Leader: Hyeok Lee · Ungkyu Han
·Participants: Eunjung Shin · Jieun Jeon · Minji Kang · Hyejin Lee · Hanbyeol Kim · Sooah Son · Kibeom Park · Sungjoo Hong

As the global landscape of innovation continues to evolve, there is a growing need to develop and implement national strategies to respond to this change. While Korea has achieved national growth through innovation to catch up to advanced countries, it is now faced with the need to explore transitioning to a country that leads in innovation. In order for a country to escape from the pressures of languishing between existing and emerging technological powerhouses and grow further beyond merely surviving at this point, policy changes centering on science and technology (S&T) innovation are essential.
To address this, Korea has made efforts to establish and operate diverse organizations to coordinate S&T innovation policies. The National Science & Technology Commission, the Presidential Advisory Council on Science & Technology (PACST)’s Deliberative Council, the Science, Technology and Innovation Office, the S&T-Related Ministers’ Meeting, the Ministry of Economy and Finance (MOEF), and other ministries are prime examples. Among them, the PACST’s Deliberative Council, the Science, Technology and Innovation Office, and the MOEF are the major organizations that are currently involved in coordination.
It is not easy to identify and verify whether a change in the coordination system is well-suited to the landscape of S&T innovation and can work efficiently within the national innovation system (NIS). This is because it is difficult to define an appropriate coordination system academically or politically, it is impossible to forecast what issues will need to be addressed, and the criteria for ex post evaluation of phenomena are unclear depending on the perspective. Nevertheless, it is critical to examine the structure and functions of coordination and explore alternatives to implement policies to promote national S&T innovation within the national innovation system.
Therefore, this study specifies the purpose, main actors, roles, and functions of the national S&T innovation policy coordination system. This system is defined as a “system in which the highest decision-making body coordinates the entire process of S&T innovation policy directions based on policies and budgets to achieve national growth and policy goals through national S&T innovation policies, which is the role of the government within the NIS.” Under this definition, this study aims to identify the structure of existing coordination systems at home and abroad centered on the main actors, review the functions and roles carried out by using the primary means, and derive an ideal plan for restructuring the coordination system by focusing on the main functions of the highest decision-making body.
This study frames a theoretical hypothesis, examines the relationship between the NIS theory and policy coordination system, and attempts to verify the hypothesis. It also analyzes the domestic and foreign coordination systems to prove the empirical hypothesis. Based on this, this study identifies existing problems and criteria for making modifications and proposes a plan for restructuring the coordination system. The literature survey and experts are utilized to this end.
The following characteristics of the changes in the Korean S&T coordination system are identified after review. First, the purpose of enhancing the efficiency of the national R&D policy was prominent. To make this happen, each government attempted to reorganize and coordinate policies to enhance the efficiency of science and technology R&D policies with the aim of setting priorities for national R&D investment, reducing duplication, and allocating budgets efficiently. Second, they intended to secure new growth opportunities based on science and technology. Each government strengthened the national R&D system for scientific and technological advancements and economic growth and selected science and technology as a key factor for industrial innovation. At the same time, these governments intended to respond to social issues with technology-based approaches. They responded to the global economic crisis, COVID-19, Japan’s export restrictions, and other issues by focusing on national R&D policies. Removing barriers between ministries was recognized as an important feature as well. Continuous efforts were made to change the coordination system to avoid conflicts between ministries over budget allocation and execution authority and operation of duplicating projects, as well as strengthening cooperation across ministries. Lastly, the private sector engagement was expanded in consideration of its expertise in science and technology. The participation of experts from the private sector in S&T policies encompassing the coordination and allocation of national R&D budget was expanded in an attempt to prevent policy gaps caused by advanced scientific and technological development.
The main implications of this are as follows. First, there is a need to strike a balance between centralization and strengthening expertise. In addition, issues regarding the budget allocation authority and policy implementation capacity are continuously raised, and cooperation across ministries and removal of barriers between ministries are repeatedly emphasized as well. Moreover, it is important to maintain policy consistency across changes in regimes and further participation in the private sector, and enhanced public-private partnership (PPP) and greater flexibility and responsiveness in S&T policies are required.
This study examined various global cases, including the Department for Science, Innovation and Technology (DSIT) in the UK, individual committees of the National Science and Technology Council (NSTC) in the U.S., the Council for Science, Technology and Innovation (CSTI) in Japan, and the Chief Scientists Forum in Israel. The implications derived from the review are as follows.
Considering that S&T innovation plays a pivotal role in leadership not only in academia but also in the economy, society, the environment, foreign affairs, trade, and defense, it is necessary to maintain and strengthen leadership as a scientifically and technologically advanced country in the global community and advance the national S&T innovation strategy. As the role and influence of science and technology to drive innovation and problem-solving capabilities in society are expanding, it is also crucial to expedite challenging and innovative research and development to accelerate it further. This requires adjusting the direction and approaches regarding the implementation of government policies in order to sustain, expand, and develop competitiveness in research and innovation in the private sector. Meanwhile, there is a need to strengthen research security and economic security measures to address emerging geopolitical uncertainties, such as the competition for technological hegemony, trade conflicts, worsening relations between the U.S. and China, the Russia-Ukraine War, and the Israel-Palestine War by linking S&T innovation with security issues. Lastly, it is important to improve the effectiveness of public policies across ministries and enhance the operational efficiency of government organizations. For instance, the UK has laid the foundation for expanding R&D investment and consistent implementation of policies after Brexit. The U.S. has developed an efficient and flexible response system for pending S&T issues, and Japan has strengthened the foundation for policy implementation across ministries to realize its Society 5.0 initiative. In addition, it was confirmed that Israel has enhanced the inter-ministerial policy consultation and learning support function of experts from the private sector (Chief Scientists Forum) responding to the global innovation ecosystem.
Next, criteria for redesigning the coordination system were established. As for the S&T innovation policy coordination system, it is difficult to formulate criteria due to complications arising from forecasting problematic issues in advance and conducting ex post evaluations. Another hurdle is that such a system could be constrained by various interests. Thus, this study attempted to identify the criteria according to the final goals of the policy revision by referring to the analysis of domestic and foreign cases. To this end, the case analysis results were categorized as either structural or functional, and the ultimate goals were derived based on the modified contents, detailed responses, and background of each item. In addition, the ultimate goals were reorganized and grouped to identify the criteria for modifying policy. Finally, common characteristics of future issues were derived and used as filters for the response coordination system.
The results of analyses of domestic and foreign coordination systems can be summarized as follows. First, there are the structural changes largely related to the operation, reorganization, and strengthening of functions of science and technology-related ministries and organizations. The ultimate goals of such changes are the long-term operation of S&T policy coordination bodies and dedicated ministries, the operation and integrated coordination of the highest-level body for policy coordination, the establishment of a dedicated organization in charge of strategy development and innovation, and the division of roles and specialized fields of each ministry. Next, functional changes took place on two levels, including strengthening strategic functions and cooperation. The ultimate goals to be achieved through such changes are to establish a long-term strategy for science and technology, expand R&D investment and the decision-making role of experts, strengthen cooperation and learning between ministries, and encourage the participation of experts from the private sector.
Based on the criteria for redesigning the coordination system identified earlier, the factors to consider for restructuring are as follows. First, it is necessary to check whether the structure and functions exist as the major considerations for redesigning the coordination system. As for the functional aspect, it is confirmed that the function of coordinating the entire process of S&T innovation policy direction has precedents. However, some functions are found in several organizations in similar forms. Second, the structure refers to the coordination system itself and the decision-making body that conducts its function by utilizing tools (such as policies and budgets) to achieve national growth and policy goals through the national S&T innovation policy. As for its structure, it was confirmed that the organizations and bodies that make up the coordination system were somewhat less organized while being more multilayered and and fragmented. In other words, the coordination system had a structure that made it difficult to conduct its vertical and horizontal coordination functions accordingly.
After reviewing the existence and adequacy of the structure and function of the coordination system, the directions for improving the coordination system and the factors to consider for each case are identified as follows.
The first step is to simplify the structure. Unifying the coordination body and creating a permanent support group can be considered as approaches to achieve this. Next, appropriate levels of authority and responsibility should be delegated to the coordination system. With regard to this point, there is a need to consider the presidential policy advisory function, planning for S&T policy directions, coordination among ministries, and the establishment of a decision-making structure, among other areas. Third, efforts should be made to enhance expertise. Approaches to achieve this goal include improving the R&D expertise of each ministry (such as through the Chief Scientist System), operating a permanent support group, including experts from the private sector in the operating committee by ministry, and incorporating civilian members and ministerial representatives in the subcommittees. Fourth, the horizontal coordination function should be enhanced. Factors to consider to strengthen the horizontal coordination function include the need to establish a dedicated R&D division for working-level meetings with the highest decision-making authority in each ministry and support group. Lastly, it is necessary to respond to future issues, and separate budget allocations and the establishment of a discussion system by ministry to respond to convergent characteristics can be considered to achieve this.
Based on the directions for improvement and considerations mentioned above, approaches to restructure the national S&T innovation policy coordination system are proposed as follows.
First, a unified permanent organization (or committee) should be established. This organization is designed to simplify the existing coordination systems as a single permanent structure. The PACST (including the Advisory Council and Deliberative Council), the Science, Technology and Innovation Office, and the PACST Secretariat need to be operated as a single permanent support organization. In addition, an appropriate levels of authority and responsibility should be delegated to the unified coordination system.
Next, creating a chief scientist position at the vice-ministerial level in the major R&D ministries is necessary. Specifically, experts from the public or private sector with a strong understanding of ministerial R&D activities should be appointed by ministry to serve as members of the council’s core meetings, steering committees, and related subcommittees. They are expected to coordinate ministries’ interests in planning and executing high-level policies and provide momentum for the implementation of S&T policies at the individual ministry level.
There is also a need to strengthen expertise and vertical and horizontal coordination functions through experts from the public and private sectors. It is necessary to secure the expertise and resource pool by maintaining positions of the chairperson and members of the committees as experts from the private sector. In addition, allocating R&D organizations of each ministry within the committee and rotating the personnel with their original position can reflect the opinions of each ministry while using the expertise of related ministries.
Lastly, a separate budget allocation is required to respond to urgent and complex issues. Based on the characteristics of future issues that are mission-oriented, more challenging, and that require prompt responses, setting aside a small portion (within 5%) of the S&T policy budget to be held in reserve can be considered. If this issue is resolved, the budget may not be allocated in the future, and the regular budget or supplementary budget can be used instead.

국문 초록 (Abstract)

[연구목적]
□ 글로벌 혁신지형 대응을 위한 국가 차원의 전략 마련 및 실행 필요성 제기
○ 다변화된 국가 간 경쟁구도와 기술·산업 자국주의 심화
- 기존 추격형 혁신에서 혁신 선도형 국가로의 전환 요구
- 해외 주요국의 경우 국가과학기술정책 조정체계 개편으로 혁신 역량 강화
○ 국내에도 과학기술혁신정책 조정체계와 관련한 다양한 정책적 노력 진행
- 현정부에서도 국가과학기술혁신정책 조정을 위한 다양한 노력 경주
- 「과학기술기본법」에 국가과학기술혁신체제에서 정부의 역할 정의
○ 따라서 본 연구를 통해 국가혁신체제 내에 국가혁신 역량을 강화하기 위해 정부의 과학기술혁신정책 조정이 중요함을 확인하고 이를 달성하기 위한 조정체계 재구조화 방안을 제시

[주요내용]
□ 국가혁신시스템 및 정책 조정체계 고찰
○ 국가혁신시스템下에서 정부는 유효성, 다양성, 국가별 특성 반영 차원에서 조정 역할 중요
□ 국내외 국가과학기술혁신정책 조정체계 분석
○ (국내) 국가R&D 정책의 효율성 강화, 과학기술 기반 새로운 성장 기회 확보, 기술기반 사회적 이슈 대응, 부처 간 칸막이 해소, 과학기술 분야 전문성을 고려한 민간 참여 확대 등의 방향으로 조정체계 변화
○ (해외) 과학기술국가로서의 리더십을 유지·강화, 도전적·혁신적 연구개발 활성화, 민군부문 연구·혁신 경쟁력 유지, 과학기술혁신-안보 이슈 연계 대응을 위한 범부처 공공정책 실효성 개선 및 정부 조직 운영 효율성 개선 노력
□ 조정체계 재설계 기준 발굴 및 재구조화(안) 제시
○ 조정체계의 재설계 기준은 조정체계 변화를 통해 달성하고자 하는 궁극적 목표로부터 도출
○ 국내외 분석결과 종합정리, 변화 기준, 개선방향, 고려요소 도출을 통한 정책제언
○ 조정체계 재구조화 관련 법·제도 검토를 통한 실효성 있는 정책대안 도출

[정책대안]
□ 국가과학기술혁신정책 조정체계 재구조화(안)
○ 일원화된 상시적인 조직(위원회) 설치
- 단순화되고, 일원화된 조정체계 조직을 구성하고 적합한 책임과 권한을 부여
○ 주요 R&D 부처에 차관급 수석과학관을 신설
- 부처 수행 R&D에 대한 높은 이해도를 바탕으로 수직·수평 조정과 개별 부처 차원 역량 강화에 역할
○ 공공·민간 전문가를 통한 전문성 및 수직·수평적 조정 기능을 강화
○ 긴급하고 복합적인 이슈 대응을 위한 별도 예산 편성 필요

목차 (Table of Contents)

• ｜목 차｜
• 국문 요약 i
• 영문 요약 I
• 제1장 서론 1
• 제1절 연구배경 및 문제의식 1
• 1. 연구배경 1
• 2. 국가과학기술혁신정책 조정체계란 4
• 3. 본 연구의 문제의식 10
• 제2절 연구방법론 및 주요내용 12
• 1. 연구의 관점 12
• 2. 연구방법론 14
• 3. 연구의 구성 15
• 제2장 NIS와 과학기술혁신정책 조정체계 고찰 17
• 제1절 국가혁신시스템 개념 고찰 17
• 1. 이론의 태동과 발전 과정 17
• 2. 개념과 이론에 관한 주요 연구 20
• 제2절 국가혁신시스템에서 정부정책과 조정체계의 역할 25
• 1. 정부역할의 유효성 25
• 2. 정부역할의 다양성 26
• 3. 국가별 조정의 특성 반영 강조 27
• 제3절 소결 31
• 제3장 국내 과학기술혁신정책 조정체계 분석 32
• 제1절 과학기술조정체계 주요 기구의 변화 32
• 1. 국가과학기술위원회 및 과학기술혁신본부 33
• 2. 기획재정부 40
• 3. 국가과학기술자문회의 45
• 4. 과학기술정보통신부 등 관계 부처 50
• 5. 과학기술관계장관회의 58
• 제2절 구조 변화에 따른 조정 기능 분석 62
• 1. 과학기술정책의 일원화된 조정기능 강화 62
• 2. 기획 및 집행단계의 조정기능 세분화 64
• 3. 다양한 이해관계를 포함한 조정기능 변화 68
• 제3절 소결 74
• 1. 과학기술조정체계 변화의 특징 74
• 2. 시사점 80
• 제4장 과기혁신정책 조정체계 글로벌 사례연구 83
• 제1절 영국 과학혁신기술부(DSIT) 사례 83
• 1. 추진 배경 및 논거 83
• 2. 변화의 양상 89
• 3. 요악 및 시사점 97
• 제2절 미국 국가과학기술위원회(NSTC) 산하 개별 위원회 사례 100
• 1. 추진 배경 및 논거 100
• 2. 변화의 양상 110
• 3. 요약 및 시사점 118
• 제3절 일본 종합과학기술혁신회의(CSTI) 사례 121
• 1. 추진 배경 및 논거 121
• 2. 변화의 양상 126
• 3. 요약 및 시사점 132
• 제4절 소결 139
• 1. 주요내용 요약 139
• 2. 시사점 141
• 제5장 조정체계 재설계 기준 발굴 144
• 제1절 조정체계 재설계 기준 발굴 및 적용 방법 144
• 1. 재설계 기준 발굴 방법론 144
• 2. 재설계 기준 적용 147
• 제2절 조정체계 재설계 기준 149
• 1. 국내외 분석결과 종합정리 149
• 2. 국가과학기술혁신정책 조정체계 재설계를 위한 기준 도출 158
• 제3절 미래 이슈의 특성 161
• 1. 개요 161
• 2. 주요 내용 163
• 3. 시사점 170
• 제6장 결론: 조정체계 재구조화(안) 178
• 제1절 조정체계 재구조화 고려요소 178
• 1. 조정체계 재설계를 위한 주요 쟁점: 구조, 기능 확인 178
• 2. 개선방향 및 재구조화 고려요소 179
• 제2절 조정체계 재구조화 관련 법·제도 검토 184
• 1. ‘위원회 구조 개선(안)’ 관련 법령 184
• 2. ‘부처별 수석과학관 신설(안)’ 관련 법령 189
• 3. ‘위원장·위원의 직위’ 관련 법령 190
• 4. ‘기획-조정-집행 연계를 위한 행정조직’ 관련 법령 190
• 5. ‘미래 이슈 특성 대응’ 관련 법령 194
• 제3절 국가과학기술혁신정책 조정체계 재구조화(안) 195
• 제4절 요약 및 향후 연구 199
• 참고문헌 201
• 부록1. 주요 연구수행 활동 내역 219
• 부록2. 전문가 의견 조사서 양식 222