지속적 규제개혁 추진을 위한 규제관리체계 정비방안 = A Study of How to Improve the Regulatory Management System for Sustainable Reform of Government Regulation

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

I. Research Background and Objective□ Background of the Research○Ineffectiveness and inefficiency of regulatory reform- Although the Korean government has made significant progress, regulatory reform in Korea has been evaluated as ineffective and inefficient.○The urgent need is to improve the regulatory management system for effective and efficient reform of regulation- This study assumes that the main determinant of effectiveness and efficiency of regulatory reform is regulatory management.- Despite the introduction of a regulatory management system, its inappropriate operation has resulted in ineffective and inefficient regulatory reform in Korea.□ Objective of the Research○The objective of this study is to address how to improve the existing system of regulatory management by comparing the regulatory management system of Korea and OECD countries such as USA, UK,Germany, and Japan.- Using MSSD (Most Similar Systems Design) as a methodology for comparative analysis, this study compares the regulatory management system of five countries in light of regulatory institutions, management, tools, and processes.II. Main Research Questions and Analysis Results□ Main Research Questions○This study investigates how regulatory management systems across the five countries have been practically operated in light of regulatory institutions, management, tools, and processes.- On the basis of the analysis, this study will suggest policy implications for improving the regulatory management system in Korea.□ Analysis Results○First, in light of the regulatory institution, all countries except Japan have driven the regulatory policy on a legal foundation.- On the other hand, regulatory authority has been decentralized in Germany and Japan, although other countries have failed to practically decentralize the regulatory authority.○Second, in light of regulatory management, there has been a control tower for regulatory policy in USA and UK.- The educational program for regulatory officials and support for the enactment of regulatory legislation also have been successfully managed in USA and UK.○Third, in light of regulatory tools, regulatory impact analysis (RIA) and administrative simplification have been successfully managed in USA, UK, and Germany.○Fourth, in light of the regulatory process, the USA, UK, and Germany have made regulatory review and the public consultation substantial and systematic.III. Policy Recommendations□ First, the Korean government should encourage collaborative relationships with local governments for improving the effectiveness of regulatory institutions.○The government needs to benchmark decentralization cases of regulatory authority in Germany and Japan for developing collaborative relationships with local governments.□ Second, the Korean government should unify the Regulatory Reform Committee and the Presidential Council on National Competitiveness as a control tower for regulatory management.○The OMB and BRE as a control tower for regulatory policy in USA and UK, respectively, would be good practices for the unification of regulatory institutions.□ Third, the Korean government needs to benchmark the RIA and accomplish administrative burden reduction as in the USA, UK, and Germany.○RIA has been operated by priority and review stage on the basis of economic and scientific analysis in USA, UK, and Germany.□ Fourth, the module of regulatory review in Germany and the practice of public consultation in USA and UK will enable the Korean government to improve the transparency and effectiveness of the regulatory process.○Specifically, public consultation has been institutionalized by the Codes of Practice on Consultation in the UK.