Allison모형에 의한 우리나라 원자력 기술정책 결정과정 분석 : 원자로계통설계사업 사례=

김연종 忠南大學校 국가정책대학원 2016 국내석사

1. Introduction The purpose of this paper is to analyze the 1980's reactor system design projects in the Allison model which highlights the importance of nuclear energy and technology policy and draw the national development direction of nuclear technology policy based on the results. Aiming at technological development of the reactor system design, the Primary System, which determines the performance and lifespan of nuclear power plants and controls the safety, the reactor system design project had been propelled to the direction of the joint design by adopting unique participating development method different from other existing domestic strategic policies. As a result, the maximum participation of domestic capital and manpower could be accomplished in this joint design project. Consequently 95% of technological development goal of the Project was achieved during about 10 business years from 1985 to 1995. In policy, this achievement has formed foundation of national nuclear technological policy for the last 30 years and was a driving force in leading the country into a Power of Nuclear Technology. Then, how was the path-dependent nature of the policy overcome and who made the goals and the alternatives for this project? And what was the background of this decision? In order to get an answer to these questions, this thesis analyzes Reactor System Design Project on a basis of the three models of Allison; rational actor model(Ⅰ), organization behavior model(Ⅱ), governmental politics model(Ⅲ), using the key question to shift the focus on ‘What, How, and Who's’; rational actor model(Ⅰ), organization behavior model(Ⅱ), governmental politics model(Ⅲ). The range of the temporal scope and the policy process is the course of the decision-making process for about 10 months, from September 18, 1984, nuclear power policy consultation, to July 1985 to 29th, the 214th Atomic Energy Commission. 2. Analysis of Nuclear Steam Supply System(NSSS) Design Project by Allison Model The first analysis of rational actor model(Ⅰ) provides facts about the goals and the means described the above with respect to the reactor system design in terms of ‘selection of government’. Also the success of the project demonstrates the adoption of different approach from other existing business practices was a reasonable decision-making. New technology development approach has been expanded its range of technology from reactor itself to the entire reactor system in the adoption process. Finally it was possible to obtain the result that three different policy options in the aspect of capital, human resources and technical factors for the project has been presented though, the final decision is developing our own technology rather than buying it. However, we cannot specifically understand the flow of policy-making with only analysis according to the model, and Allison's remaining two models; organizational behavior model(Ⅱ) and government political models(Ⅲ), make possible the interpretation of the question; “How are the policy decisions made? by whom?”, arisen through the process, while going through the process of looking at the subject carefully, through actor model(Ⅰ). The second analysis by organization behavior model(Ⅱ) describes the three policy alternatives to the reactor system design project in terms of ‘choice of organization.’ The Ministry of Power and Energy and the Ministry of Science and Technology emphasize the importance of developing its own technology, but no position may not consider the economics. The Korea Electric Power Corporation and Korea Electric Power Technology Co., Ltd. as public agencies and Korea Heavy Industries took up the position of purchasing foreign technology first and then developing own technology gradually because the result of technology development is opaque. Those of the organizations are concerned the result is opaque in a position to oversee the No. 11&12 nuclear power plant construction and this may bring about entire nuclear power plant construction and this delayed process can cause economic loss. On the other hand Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute as a research institute maintains joint design method(Joint Design) which our technical personnel who had already ensured our own design technology based on accumulated technology development for the CANDU nuclear localization, we could establish the technology while learning the design technology from the technical personnel of foreign companies. These three alternatives are adjusted through regular workshops of the Council of ‘power groups Cooperation’, the information on the reactor system design technology is provided in the consultation process between about 10 months for a nuclear power plant and shared the technical and political importance of the technology in nuclear power plants. “If so, would this change have any effect on the final decision-making?” To find the answer, let us look at the terms in a different point of view as follows: The Analysis by third government political model (Ⅲ) is the process to resolve dispute and interests of each party in the process of decision-making, that is ‘choice of politics’. It overlooks the reactor system design from the point of view of ‘games of politics’, borrowing from Allison(1999)'s expression. Since the importance of their own technological independence had been shared through regular workshops of Power Cooperation Group, It is tailored for related government ministries, public institutions, members of the research institutes to think of alternatives focused on ‘technology independent’ which is the core of technological development rather than the organization's interests or personal interests. However, lack of time, manpower and capital were still the obstacles of its own technology development. Though Joint Design unprecedented way until then was presented as an alternative to overcome them, no one could guarantee its success or failure In other words, although this proposal is ideal, nobody knows whether it is realistic or not. “If so, how would it be adjusted, and by what or whom?” The analysis of The government political model(III) shows that Key figures involved in the policy decision-making are the heads or practitioners of each of these organizations and a human network among them is affected in two ways in the opinion adjust. First it increases understanding of their differences on the positive side. On the other hand, ‘request and refusal’ via the social network functioned as a cause of heightened disagreement on the final decision. “So how did the latter, the negative aspects, are resolved?” This was solved a clue by finding the Minister of Ministry of Communications, the third social network. The Minister connects participants who have direct impact on policy decisions on Reactor system design project. Taken the result together that is very complicated than the analysis by a single model in this paper, the core of nuclear technology development 30 years ago is “Will buy a technology or development itself?”, and changed policy environment such as different from previous level of technology and domestic and abroad affairs were reflected on a final decision. Flipping such descriptions becomes predictions(Allison, 1999). This is the reason why Allison models are selected to recognize the need for the correct analysis for prescription(forecast) on nuclear policy issues in this paper. The awareness has shown the key of technology development policy decisions related to the nuclear fuel management and nuclear plant closure issue is exactly the same as 30 years before whether to buy a technology or develop itself. This research started out of curiosity which the current situation does not find a solution of the problem despite the repeated pattern; the core of decision is still technology itself. 3. Policy Implementation of the Nuclear Steam Supply System(NSSS) Design Project “Now that 30 years have passed, what are the policy implications of the results obtained from analyzing past cases?” This study, in accordance with the three concepts applied in the original analysis, derived the following conclusions in response to the questions of what will be decided, by what means, and by whom. First, in response to the question of what will be decided, this study seeks to reestablish the goals of nuclear technology policies. It is necessary to implement nuclear technology policies which aim to overcome social problems through technology development, taking into account environmental changes such as Korea's improvements in nuclear technology and the expanded scope of policy makers amidst the global non-proliferation regime, in contrast to past policies that were centered on the construction of nuclear power plants. To resolve pending issues such as the management of spent nuclear fuel and nuclear decommissioning, technology development for the construction of nuclear power plants, as was the case thirty years ago, must be accompanied by discussions on ways to overcome related social problems. Next, how can we achieve nuclear technology policies aimed at overcoming social problems through nuclear technology development? At present, technology development is prioritized when making decisions pertaining to nuclear technology policies. This imposes limitations on developing policies to improve Korea's nuclear technology, which is based on the premise of “big science over big technology” and in addressing current issues. To develop policies that support the use of technology in resolving challenges faced by society, the dispersed roles in nuclear technology policy-making should be integrated in the short term. In addition, an organization dedicated to nuclear technology policies should be established in the long term. Finally, in response to the question of who will decide, this study has two suggestions. First, experts familiar with nuclear technology in relation to policy-making should assume a primary role. Nuclear power, which falls under big science and technology, tends to use terms that are unfamiliar and difficult. Nuclear technology cannot be fully understood by the general public, policy makers or even nuclear specialists. This is a factor that inhibits rational judgment in determining the goals and intentions of nuclear policies. Experts in the field should make an effort to give policy makers a better understanding of nuclear technology. Second, the nation should foster experts in nuclear technology policies with knowledge about both policies and technology. To date, Korea's nuclear technology policies have been developed through a process of trial and error by experts in science and engineering. This was possible because the scope of technology development, as in the past, was concentrated on nuclear power. However, given that current issues cannot be resolved by technology alone, today's policy environment calls for decision-making by experts who possess sound theoretical knowledge of policy-making. 4. Conclusion To establish the aforementioned development directions for nuclear technology policies, this study analyzed past practices that affect the current decision-making process. The significance of this study lies in how it expands the scope of the Allison model in general to nuclear policy and its focus on nuclear technology among the various types of nuclear-related policies. A few limitations of this study are its lack of in-depth analysis due to the extensive amount of data, dating back 30 years, and the qualitative differences in materials acquired through interviews depending on the availability of policy makers, some of whom have passed away. Further research may be possible when undisclosed data is made public in the future. This study was unable systematically to organize an interactive process of analysis based on the Allison's three models. These models will be easier to apply if a generalization can be made.

공저자 네트워크 분석을 활용한 국내 BT 분야 공동연구 활성화 정책 방향

전은혜 충남대학교 국가정책대학원 2016 국내석사

As science and technology have been more sophisticated and enlarged recently, the importance of collaborative researches has been getting more increased. The collaboration between industry and basic research also has been emphasized due to the management of high-quality human resources in universities or research institutes, and technological commercialization of basic sciences. Especially, in biotechnology (BT) field, the needs of collaborative research are more stressed in that not only the quality of research outcomes but also quantitative scale of those are growing rapidly with large-scale data such as human genome project. In addition, in terms of proliferation of biotech R&D outcomes, collaborative research of BT have to be stressed. For example, if a low level technology like a new drug candidate, is successfully applied to pharmaceutical companies and related industries, it will give rises to an enormous economic benefits. Thus, national policy to promote collaborative research in BT field is needed. To do so, it is required to diagnose and analyze the current status of collaboration regarding BT primarily and thoroughly. In this study, I will present co-author network analyses, by which collaborative research are widely analyzed, on Korean BT researches, and further investigations of features of the network. Then, I will finally suggest desirable policy directions. Most of research papers in Korean BT field, are known to be published in international journals rather than Korean domestic journals. However, previous researches with respect to co-author network used only the data from domestic journals. To overcome this limit, this work retrieved all the literature information including authors’ names and affiliation from 2004 to 2013 from PubMed database which is maintained by U.S. National Library of Medicine at the National Institutes of Health. The retrieved data were filtered so that at least one of authors has the affiliation in Korean. Then based on the data, the co-author network of Korean BT were finally constructed. As a result of the construction, the network was composed of 21,416 nodes, which represents researchers, and 73,512 links, which represents co-authorship between nodes. After the construction, the further analyses were carried out in terms of network structure analysis, centrality analysis, and link analysis. As a result of structural analysis, it was found that the co-author network of Korean BT was significantly separated into a number of components. The largest component included only 6,814 nodes, which is just 31.8 percent of all nodes. The rest 68.2 percent of nodes were distributed in other 2,053 components. Although there existed some extent of links between those separated nodes, it was observed that most cooperative relationships were not expanded but stayed in limited scales. The most evident quantitative features of the network were the diameter and average path length, both of which represent the efficiency of information transport on a network. The diameter and average path length were 26 and 10, respectively, which were quite larger than those of other previous co-author networks analyzed. In other words, two researchers need 10 steps on average to be linked. This implies Korean researchers related to BT do not have close relationships with each other relatively. Centrality analyses were carried out in terms of degree centrality, betweenness centrality, and closeness centrality. Those analyses showed centrality values had positive correlation, but there were also exceptional cases. Thus it was suggested that multiple uses of several kinds of centrality values are need to identify the importance of a certain researchers in the network. Link analysis, here, means to investigate that each link in the network has what features. It was shown that the 94.8 percent of collaborations involves researchers belonged to universities, most of which were the relationships between university and university. On the other hand, collaborative researches involving industry were quite rare. In comparison of the number of Korean domestic collaborations with that of international ones, it was observed that domestic collaborations had the majority of relationships. Links of domestic collaboration were further classified by the locations of affiliations. As a result, collaborations involving researchers in Seoul were shown to dominate other cases. Eventually, four detailed policy directions were suggested based on the analyses of the co-author network of BT: (i) implementation of policy projects supporting collaborative research to reinforce the network, (ii) accumulation of data with respect to co-author networks and continuous monitoring thereof, (iii) from the beginning stage support of collaborative research involving industry aiming application and commercialization of basic research, and (iv) policy efforts to induce desirable culture of research to implement above suggestions successfully. The significance of this work can be found from the fact that this study is the first work regarding collaboration in Korean BT fields, including more than 20 thousands of researches of ten years, and suggesting the policy direction based on the result of network analyses. It is expected that more expansion and application of this kind of study will provide the foundation for further planning and evaluation of science policy.

과학기술 연구회제도의 정책변동 분석 및 발전방향 연구

장문영 忠南大學校 大學院 2018 국내박사

This study is a case-driven study of a research council system established as an organization to support and promote Government-funded Research Institutes (GRIs) in the field of science and technology (S&T). The GRIs play a pivotal role carrying out research and development works within the National Innovation System (NIS), and have a significant share in the implementation of Korea's S&T policy. The research council system was established to support and promote the GRIs, and has been in operation for two decades. The purpose of this study was to identify the characteristics of policy changes made by each regime since the establishment of the research council system, and to suggest desirable directions of advancement of the system in order to accomplish the goals of the policies, which is to secure the excellence of the GRIs. This study was conducted by employing two analytical methods. As the first analytical method, literature survey was conducted to examine the process of changing the policies for research council system and the types of the policy outputs from the system in each regime. The analysis performed by using the Paradigm Changes Framework (PCF), the Multiple Streams Framework (MSF), and the theory of policy change types showed that the political stream was the major one among the policy streams (multiple streams), and that a window of policy change was opened by the changes in the environmental factors, the basic trend of state affairs, and the S&T policy paradigms triggered by the regime changes, resulting in policy outputs. The policies prepared as the output of the policy changes were examined according to the types of policy changes. The policy changes of the research council system were analyzed in terms of macroscopic policy environment and policy paradigm change. As the policy environment at the beginning of each regime, domestic and international factors, such as IMF economic crisis, accelerated technological advancement, global economic crisis, and demand for job opportunities, influenced the governmental policy trend of individual regimes. The government paradigms, such as "national prosperity based on S&T", "construction of a center for S&T", "a leap for national advancement", and "realization of creative economy," were reflected in the policies in the field of S&T. Under the influence of these S&T policy paradigms, the research council system was established as a means of making S&T policies, and the system has been changed with the reorganization of the government ministries. Kingdon's claims about policy changes were also verified. First, Kingdon asserted that the biggest influence on policy -making is policy streams consisting of a policy problem stream, a policy alternative stream, and a political stream, among which a political stream triggers the opening of the window of policy change. The analysis performed in the present study also showed that a political stream is the main cause of changes in the research council system and results in policy changes. Second, the claim that a political stream resulting from a regime change often becomes a trigger was also confirmed. Third, the importance of leading policy entrepreneurs in policy formation processes was also verified. The anal ysis of the actual cases showed that the standing of the visible participants having public offices, such as the Planning and Budget Committee (the Chairman of the Administrative Reform Committee), the President, the Presidential Acquisition Committee, and the National Assembly members, played a critical role in each regime. It is notable that, in the government of former President Kim Dae-jung, not only the visible participants but also the chairman of the Administrative Reform Committee, who was regarded as an invisible participant, played a significant role as a policy entrepreneurs. On the one hand, the factors to policy changes suggested by Hogwood & Peters were identified in terms of the basic characteristics of policy as well as the changes of the laws, organizations, and budget, which represent the degree of government intervention. The types of policy change identified in the present analysis included policy innovation, policy maintenance, and policy succession. As a second analytical method, a survey was conducted with the employees of the GRIs, who are the subjects of the policies, to find out desirable advancement directions of the research council system for policy change management. The following results were obtained from the survey: First, as a direction of change in the research council system, a considerable ratio of the respondents wanted a new supporting system for the GRIs, including the transition to "direct government assistance" or “(tentative name) the National Research and Development Institute.” However, from the perspective of policy consistency or settlement of the system, it may be appropriate to observe the maintenance of the integrated research council for a certain period of time. Meanwhile, the means for implementing policies or the functions of the research council, as a lower-level means, may be adjusted for supplementation. Second, with regard to the method of coordinating policy measures to achieve policy goals, it was pointed out that GRIs may hardly secure the excellence by their autonomy alone. It is necessary to pursue excellence by combining research autonomy and responsibility together and by establishing policy network connected with external institutions. The result of the survey indicated that the policy goals are hardly achieved with the current operating system of GRIs, which has stressed only the responsibilities over past two decades. Third, with respect to the method of redesigning the functions of the research council as a sub-policy means, the respondents appreciated the support for the cooperative research (convergence research) works between the GRIs, and the functions of research planning and policy proposal. Among the responsibility items, the respondents significantly appreciated the accomplishment-based evaluation, accomplishment transfer, and management goal approval. With regard to the connectivity items, the respondents significantly appreciated the connectivity with the relevant ministries, with budget-related ministries, and with the industry.

국방획득체계의 조직 정합성 분석 : 무기체계 연구개발을 중심으로

배윤정 忠南大學校 大學院 2019 국내석사

The Ministry of National Defense (MND) had played a central role in the defense acquisition system of Korea since Agency for Defense Development (ADD) was established in 1970 until 2005. However, in 2006, the government changed its organizational structure by establishing the Defense Acquisition Program Administration (DAPA), an organization that oversees overall acquisition activities in order to increase transparency, efficiency and expertise in defense acquisition tasks. Nevertheless, the defense acquisition system will have to be continuously improved and developed, because the policy goal cannot be achieved immediately by simply improving the organizational structure. Therefore, this study analyzes how the defense acquisition system, which has been maintained for more than 10 years since the change in 2006, operates at the present time, and suggests the direction of development for the defense acquisition system. To analyze the defense acquisition system, I reorganize the process of the defense acquisition system into a five-step research management process: technology planning, research planning, performance management, performance evaluation, and performance diffusion. In addition, various organizations participating in the defense acquisition system were divided into two part: decision-making organizations composed of government ministries and militaries; execution organizations, government-funded research institutes. I defined the organizational conformity of the defense acquisition system as mutual compatibility among the organizations that make up the defense acquisition system. Considering the characteristics of the defense acquisition system and the awareness of the problem, the items of measurement for organizational conformity were selected as 1) rationality of function allocation, 2) expertise in function implementation, and 3) cooperation and connectivity. The organizational conformity of the defense acquisition system was analyzed in each stage of research management. Common issues with organizational conformity at each stage of research management were denied as follows. First, there were some irrational elements with regards to the allocation of functions among organizations; the overlap of tasks and procedures was a factor that hampered the efficiency of the tasks. Second, the level of expertise in function implementation was generally low. because the decision-making organizations, the government ministries and the military, do not have a lot of experienced personnel. Third, although the formal foundation for inter-organizational cooperation and the linkage of procedures has been partly established, it is difficult to say that there is substantive cooperation and interaction among organizations. Based on the above results of the analysis, this study proposes ways to increase organizational conformity in the defense acquisition system. First, the functions and procedures of each organization should be redefined to enhance the efficiency of their work. In particular, the final decision-making function of the Ministry of National Defense, the top decision-making organization in the defense sector, should be distinguished from the decision-making function of each organization. To increase the expertise of personnel belonging to decision-making organizations, the scope of defense acquisition personnel should be clearly set up; personnel management system and education and training system should be improved. In addition, various specialized agencies and civilian experts, as well as government-funded research institutes in defense sector, should be encouraged to participate to complement the expertise of decision-making organizations. The design of institutional incentives is required for participants to actively cooperate in the entire research management process, and information should be shared seamlessly between organizations. More fundamentally, various R&D systems should be internalized to ensure flexibility and connectivity in the defense acquisition process. Three perspectives do not affect the defense acquisition system independently, but rather interact with each other. Therefore, it is necessary to balance the organizational conformity of the defense acquisition system by considering all three aspects. The Ministry of National Defense (MND) had played a central role in the defense acquisition system of Korea since Agency for Defense Development (ADD) was established in 1970 until 2005. However, in 2006, the government changed its organizational structure by establishing the Defense Acquisition Program Administration (DAPA), an organization that oversees overall acquisition activities in order to increase transparency, efficiency and expertise in defense acquisition tasks. Nevertheless, the defense acquisition system will have to be continuously improved and developed, because the policy goal cannot be achieved immediately by simply improving the organizational structure. Therefore, this study analyzes how the defense acquisition system, which has been maintained for more than 10 years since the change in 2006, operates at the present time, and suggests the direction of development for the defense acquisition system. To analyze the defense acquisition system, I reorganize the process of the defense acquisition system into a five-step research management process: technology planning, research planning, performance management, performance evaluation, and performance diffusion. In addition, various organizations participating in the defense acquisition system were divided into two part: decision-making organizations composed of government ministries and militaries; execution organizations, government-funded research institutes. I defined the organizational conformity of the defense acquisition system as mutual compatibility among the organizations that make up the defense acquisition system. Considering the characteristics of the defense acquisition system and the awareness of the problem, the items of measurement for organizational conformity were selected as 1) rationality of function allocation, 2) expertise in function implementation, and 3) cooperation and connectivity. The organizational conformity of the defense acquisition system was analyzed in each stage of research management. Common issues with organizational conformity at each stage of research management were denied as follows. First, there were some irrational elements with regards to the allocation of functions among organizations; the overlap of tasks and procedures was a factor that hampered the efficiency of the tasks. Second, the level of expertise in function implementation was generally low. because the decision-making organizations, the government ministries and the military, do not have a lot of experienced personnel. Third, although the formal foundation for inter-organizational cooperation and the linkage of procedures has been partly established, it is difficult to say that there is substantive cooperation and interaction among organizations. Based on the above results of the analysis, this study proposes ways to increase organizational conformity in the defense acquisition system. First, the functions and procedures of each organization should be redefined to enhance the efficiency of their work. In particular, the final decision-making function of the Ministry of National Defense, the top decision-making organization in the defense sector, should be distinguished from the decision-making function of each organization. To increase the expertise of personnel belonging to decision-making organizations, the scope of defense acquisition personnel should be clearly set up; personnel management system and education and training system should be improved. In addition, various specialized agencies and civilian experts, as well as government-funded research institutes in defense sector, should be encouraged to participate to complement the expertise of decision-making organizations. The design of institutional incentives is required for participants to actively cooperate in the entire research management process, and information should be shared seamlessly between organizations. More fundamentally, various R&D systems should be internalized to ensure flexibility and connectivity in the defense acquisition process. Three perspectives do not affect the defense acquisition system independently, but rather interact with each other. Therefore, it is necessary to balance the organizational conformity of the defense acquisition system by considering all three aspects.

국제과학비즈니스벨트 정책결정 과정에 대한 연구

이승현 忠南大學校 大學院 2019 국내박사

This research is motivated to investigate how the International Science Business Belt(hereinafter referred to as "Science Belt") project, which was promoted in order to strengthen the support of basic science, was decided as a governmental policy. The basic science was not sufficiently supported due to the governmental drive for the applied and developmental research until then. The purpose of this study was to clarify why and why the Science Belt was promoted to government agenda and formed as a policy. The author also tried to make suggestions to improve not only the Science Belt but also the overall basic science policy in the future. The period covered by this study was from 2004, when the policy ideas were presented, to July 2013, when the enforcement policy of the Science Belt began. I have dealt with the overall aspects of science belts, including Institute for Basic science (hereinafter IBS), heavy ion accelerator construction project, and business incubation centered on functional districts of Science Belt. The research methods were based on the literature study and intended to increase the credibility through in-depth interviews with the experts who participated in the policy process or government officials. In order to solidify the foundation of the theory used in the analysis of the Science Belt, I tried to make clear the definition of basic science and big basic science and to provide a basic concept to analyze the Science Belt as a basic science policy. In this thesis, I focused on the core aspects of Kingdon's multiple stream model, which is the basis of the analysis framework in this study. I summarized the mechanism of the three streams, the opening of the policy window, the coupling of the three streams, and the policy entrepreneurs and made it the basis of the analysis of the Science Belt. And I finialized the analysis framework of the whole processes by considering the theory of Howlett and others for the periods of agenda decision and enforcement polkicy when the Kingdon's model of agenda setting is not sufficient for the analysis. In addition, I reviewed the prior research on Kingdon 's multiple stream model and basic science policy separately and applied to the policy decision process of Science Belt project. The Science Belt Project is an extension of Korea's science and technology policies, especially the basic science policies that has been growing since 1990. The essence of Science Belt is the IBS construction, which is the policy taken from the policy soup where the two ideas, supporting the university based basic research and the establishment of a dedicated research institute, have been in contradiction. The Science Belt project can be divided into three periods: agenda setting period (2004-2008.3), policy decision period (2008.4-2011.5), and enforcement policy period (2011.6-2013.7). At the time of the agenda setting, the Rencontre meeting, which presented the initial idea of ​​the Science Belt, was extended to the Galaxy City Forum after the meeting with Mayor Lee Myung-Bak. The policy window was opened in conjunction with the nomination of Lee Myung-bak as the presidential candidate of Hanara Party. Since then, policy entrepreneurs such as Min-Dong Pil and Lee Myung-Bak have coupled the streams of problems, policies, and politics so that the Science Belt becomes the government's agenda. In the later policy decision period, as indicated by the preparations for the establishment of IBS and the discussion surrounding the organization, government bureaucrats have been leading the way, while the process of policy softening has been lacking, such as voluntary policy alternatives by scientific experts. President Lee Myung-Bak failed to change his Science Belt project following Sejong City amendment proposal due to the opposition inside the Party. As a result, the passing of the special law for the Science Belt was delayed until the special law passed hastily without a thorough review of the basic plan of the Science Belt. During the enforcement policy period, IBS and the Center for Accelerator Construction were established. IBS was established as a basic science research institute with a new way of selections and evaluations for the research centers and a new organization form. Therefore the initial policy goals of the Science Belt were reflected in the establishment of IBS. In the stream of politics, the location of IBS changed into the city of Daejeon due to the contradiction between the central government and the local government. In this period, the strategic and functional districts for the combination of basic science and business were embodied.. The policy basis of the Science Belt was to establish a research institute dedicated to basic science centered on large research facilities such as accelerators, to promote the basic science, and to build a self-sufficient scientific city. In addition, the policy goal of establishing the basis for the development of world-class science-based innovation clusters was also proposed. As policy measures to achieve these policy goals, the government sought to establish IBS, build a heavy-ion accelerator facilities, and build SB Plaza. The suggestions for the IBS and basic science policy obtained as a result of this studies were divided into suggestion for basic science policy and suggestions for Science Belt. First, basic science research requires long-term investment. Therefore, long-term policy discussions of scientists should be conducted in policy soup, and it is necessary for scientists to directly participate in the policy process. And, as a scientist, it is necessary to take a job in the government science policy field to discuss in detail the support of research between scientists and government bureaucrats. Policy measures related to Science Belt should ensure autonomy and independence of the institute, which requires the budget to be implemented on a lunp-sum basis. And it is necessary to revise the current special laws for Science Belt in order to ensure the independence. In order to combine basic science and business, it is necessary to deepen the technology forecasts that can be derived from basic science research, and to establish concrete plans for support, technology derivation, and original technology development accordingly. It is also necessary to introduce research projects jointly conducted by IBS research centers and the companies.

한국 과학기술정책 연구의 지적구조 분석 : <기술혁신연구>와 <기술혁신학회지>를 중심으로

오현정 忠南大學校 大學院 2021 국내박사

1. 서론 본 연구는 대한민국에서 실행적 측면을 바탕으로 성장해온 한국 과학기술정책 연구가 여전히 독자적 논리의 형성이 미흡하여 학문적 이론체계를 구축하지 못하고 있다는 문제의식에서 출발한다. 사회과학을 배경으로 응용학문이며 융합학문으로 성장한 과학기술정책학이 대한민국이라는 사회현실의 특수성을 반영한 연구분야로 성장하지 못한다면 자신이 응용한 기초학문으로 환원될 가능성이 있기 때문이다. 따라서 본 논문의 목적은 한국 과학기술정책 연구의 지적구조를 탐색하고 학문 정체성 확립 정도를 추정해 보는 것이다. 분석결과를 바탕으로 이론적·제도적 발전 방향을 제시함으로써 앞으로 한국 과학기술정책 연구의 지속적인 발전에 시사점을 제공하고자 한다. 2. 지적구조 분석을 위현 연구설계 본 연구는 한국 과학기술정책 연구의 학문 정체성 확립 정도를 탐색하는 방법으로 혼합연구방법론(mixed methods research)의 접근을 시도한다. 연구문제를 보다 포괄적이며 완전하게 설명하려는 실용주의(pragmatism) 시도로써 양적연구로 계량서지학의 인용분석과 질적연구로 전문가 심층면담을 ’설명 설계(explanatory design)’ 방식에 따라 상호보완적으로 혼합하여 적용한다. 분석의 첫 번째 단계는 Kuhn의 정상과학 이론에 기반하여 계량서지학 방법론인 저자서지결합분석과 저자동시인용분석을 수행하여 한국 과학기술정책 연구의 주요 연구범위와 이론적 기반을 제공하는 학문분야를 탐색한다. 두 번째는, 학문 공동체의 주요 연구자를 대상으로 실증분석한 결과를 바탕으로 심층면담을 수행한다. 한국 과학기술정책 연구의 발전 과정에 대한 맥락적 이해를 기반으로 주요 연구 분야 및 관련 학문분야를 검토함으로써, 현상을 기술하는 분석 결과를 해석하고 전문가 집단의 통찰을 바탕으로 향후 연구방향의 도출이 가능하다. 3. 한국 과학기술정책 연구의 지적구조 연구결과는 연구질문에 따라 다음과 같이 요약할 수 있다. 첫째, 지식의 내용적 측면에서 한국 과학기술정책 연구는 기술혁신과 연구관리 분야를 가장 많이 연구하고 있는 것으로 밝혀졌다. 그리고 과학기술 정책과정과 과학기술 공공관리 분야도 일부 연구되고 있기는 하지만, 그 비중이 매우 낮은 것을 알 수 있었다. 각 연구범위 내에서는 세부 연구범위별로 연구의 편향성이 높게 나타났다. 기술혁신은 기술혁신의 개념이나 유형에 관한 이론적 연구는 일부에 불과했고, 주로 사례 연구가 높은 비중을 차지하고 있었다. 연구관리와 과학기술 정책과정은 평가에 관한 연구가 많았다. 마지막으로 과학기술 공공관리 분야에서는 전통적인 공공관리 영역을 중심으로 연구되고 있었다. 즉 한국 과학기술정책 연구가 특정 연구범위를 중심으로 발달해 왔으며, 하위 연구범위도 특정 분야에 편향되어 거의 연구되지 않는 분야가 있음을 알 수 있었다. 둘째, 지식의 생산활동 측면에서 한국 과학기술정책 연구의 연구범위별로 연구를 주도하는 모학문이 존재하는가를 분석한 결과, 전체 연구범위에 걸쳐 경영학, 경제학, 정책학이 주도하는 것으로 나타났다. 기술혁신과 연구관리 분야는 경영학과 경제학이 주도하고 있으며, 과학기술정책과정 분야는 정책학이 주도하고 있는 것으로 볼 수 있었다. 셋째, 지식의 생산활동측면에서 한국 과학기술정책 연구의 연구범위별로 가장 영향을 미치며 이론적 기반을 제공하는 인접학문 분야는 무엇인가를 분석하였다. 분석 결과에 따르면 한국 과학기술정책 연구에 이론적 기반을 제공하는 인접 학문분야는 연구를 주도하는 학문분야와 크게 다르지 않은 것으로 나타났다. 따라서, 지식의 생산활동 측면에서 경영학, 경제학 및 정책학 같은 특정 학문 분야가 한국 과학기술정책 연구 전반을 주도하는 경향을 보인다고 할 수 있다. 경영학과 경제학은 정책 수립의 이론적 근거를 제시해 주었고, 정책학은 이를 활용하여 정책으로 수립하기 위한 절차적 지식을 제공했을 것이다. 그러나 기술혁신연구가 경영학에서 출발했다는 점과 우리나라에서 과학기술정책이 국가의 경제발전을 위한 도구로써 발전한 배경이 작용하여 정책학에 비해서 경영학과 경제학을 전공한 학자들이 더 중심이 되는 것으로 추론할 수 있다. 4. 결론 분석결과를 종합하면 한국 과학기술정책 연구는 연구자 각각이 자신의 모학문을 배경으로 연구를 수행한 결과가 모여있는 수준의 다학문적 연구에 머물고 있다고 판단할 수 있다. 특히 대부분의 연구범위를 경영학과 경제학이 주도하고 있어, 연구내용 및 연구방법의 다양한 융합은 일어나지 않고 있는 것으로 보인다. 결론적으로 한국 과학기술정책 연구는 경제학, 경영학, 정책학 중심의 다학문적(multidisciplinary) 학제성에 머물러 있어 현재 상태에서 분과학문으로 발전 가능성은 낮은 것으로 판단하였다. 이에 앞으로 한국 과학기술정책 연구가 제도화 수준에 맞는 이론적 성장을 통해 지속적으로 발전하기 위한 방안을 제안하였다. 본 연구는 한국 과학기술정책 연구의 학제적 구조를 밝힘으로써 앞으로 학제적 학문으로 발전하기 위한 여러 시사점을 도출했음에도 불구하고 몇 가지 한계점을 지니고 있다. 향후 연구범위를 확대하여 한국 과학기술정책 연구 전체를 설명하려는 시도가 필요하고, 더 나아가 국내외 과학기술정책학 전체를 조망할 수 있는 연구로까지 확대되어야 할 것이다. 이러한 한계에도 불구하고 본 연구는 한국 과학기술정책 연구의 학제적 구조 중심으로 지적구조 규명한 첫 번째 시도라는데 의미를 부여할 수 있다. 앞으로 한국 과학기술정책 연구가 학문 정체성을 확립해 나가기 위한 기틀을 마련하는 시발점이 되는 연구라고 생각한다. 1. Introduction The present study started with the recognition that the science and technology (S&T) policy studies in Korea, which has long been developed by focusing on the practical aspects, has failed to establish its academic theoretical systems due to the lack of an independent intelligent structure. The S&T policy studies has grown into an applied science and an interdisciplinary field with social sciences in the background. Therefore, if the S&T policy studies in Korea fails to develop into a research field that reflects the distinct characteristics of the Korean society, the studies may return to one of the basic sciences that have been employed by the studies itself for application. The purpose of this study is to explore the intellectual structure of the S&T policy studies in Korea and estimate the degree of establishment of its academic identity. The findings will provide theoretical and institutional implications for the continuous development of the S&T policy studies in Korea as an independent academic discipline. 2. Research design for analyzing the intellectual structure This study was designed as a mixed methods research to explore the academic identity of the S&T policy studies in Korea, as a pragmatic attempt to explain research questions more comprehensively and completely. Citation analysis based on a bibliometric approach was performed as a quantitative research, and it was complementarily combined with in-depth interviews conducted as a qualitative research according to the explanatory design. The first step of the analysis was to perform author bibliography coupling analysis (ABCA) and author co-citation analysis (ACCA), which are bibliometric methodologies based on Kuhn's discussion of normal sciences, to explore the main research areas of the S&T policy studies in Korea and identify the academic disciplines that provide theoretical background to the S&T policy studies. In the second step, in-depth interviews were conducted with key researchers in the academic community based on the results from the empirical analysis performed in the first stage. Since the experts in this field understand the context of the development process of the S&T policy studies in Korea, the interviews allowed for analytically interpreting the results obtained from the analysis in the first stage that explained merely the current state. In addition, this also allowed for drawing the implications for the future development of the S&T policy studies in Korea. 3. Intellectual Structure of the Science and Technology Policy Studies in Korea The analytical results can be summarized as follows according to the research questions. First, in terms of the contents of the knowledge, the most intensively studied research areas of the studies were found to be ‘technology innovation’ and ‘R&D management.’ Although the other two areas, ‘policy process of S&T’ and ‘public management of S&T,' are studied, their proportions were relatively small. Even within each research area, the proportions were significantly different among the sub-categories. For example, in the research area of ‘technology innovation,’ the proportion of the theoretical research on the concept or types of technology innovation was low, while the proportion of case studies was high. The research areas of ‘R&D management’ and ‘policy process of S&T’ were centered on the evaluation. Finally, the research area of ‘public management of S&T’ was focused on the traditional public management. Therefore, the analytical results showed that the growth of the S&T policy studies in Korea has been centered on a few particular research areas, and the studies in the sub-categories have been severely biased so that some of the sub-categories have been rarely studied. Second, in terms of knowledge production, an analysis was performed to identify disciplinary backgrounds that take the lead in each research area of the S&T policy studies in Korea. The analytical results showed that business administration, economics and policy sciences have led the studies throughout the research areas. In particular, the studies in 'technology innovation' and ‘R&D management’ have been led by business administration and economics, while the ‘policy process of S&T’ by policy sciences. Third, in terms of knowledge production, an analysis was performed to identify the related academic disciplines that most affect each research area of the S&T policy studies in Korea and provide the theoretical basis. According to the analysis results, it turned out that there is no significant difference between the related disciplines that provide the theoretical basis to the S&T policy studies in Korea and the background disciplines that lead studies in the research areas. Therefore, the results showed that a few specific academic disciplines such as business administration, economics, and policy sciences tend to lead the overall research on the S&T policy studies in Korea. Business administration and economics may have provided the theoretical basis for policy establishment, and policy sciences may have provided the procedural knowledge to make policies by using the theories. However, the S&T policy studies in Korea has been affected more by business administration and economics than policy sciences, probably because the research on technology innovation started from business administration, and the science and technology policies have been developed as a tool for the national economic development in Korea. 4. Conclusions These findings showed that the S&T policy studies in Korea is simply a multidisciplinary collection of academic results produced by researchers from various disciplinary backgrounds. It was also found that convergence of various research contents and methodologies is not occurring, because business administration and economics have been playing the leading roles in most of the research areas. Therefore, the S&T policy studies in Korea is still considered as a multidisciplinary research focused on economics, business administration, and policy sciences, not a substantial interdisciplinary research, and its academic identity as an independent discipline would hardly be established under the current conditions. Hence, this research provided suggestions to make continuous growth in the S&T policy studies in Korea according to its level of institutional development. Various implications were derived from the present study for the future development of the S&T policy studies in Korea as an interdisciplinary academic field, but this study has several limitations. Further studies may need to be conducted by broadening the research scope and subject to explore the entire range of the S&T policy studies in Korea or to develop a general theory that can include the S&T policy studies in both Korea and other countries. Despite these limitations, this study is significant as the first attempt to identify the intellectual structure of the S&T policy studies in Korea from the perspective of interdisciplinarity. This study could be expected to be the starting point for establishing the academic identity of the S&T policy studies in Korea as an independent discipline.

한국 연구시설장비정책의 변동요인 분석 : 역사적 제도주의 관점

고병현 忠南大學校 大學院 2022 국내석사

1. 서론 우리나라는 약 20년 전부터 국가연구개발사업을 통해 구축된 연구시설장비와 관련된 정책이 시행되고 있다. 지금까지 4번의 정권이 바뀌는 동안 연구시설장비정책은 다양한 변화의 과정을 거쳐왔다. 하지만 아직까지 해당 정책이 형성된 배경, 변화 요인 등에 대해 체계적으로 분석한 연구는 미비한 상황이다. 따라서 본 연구는‘지난 시간 동안, 우리나라 연구시설장비정책은 어떤 변동요인에 의해 정책이 변화되었고, 적절하게 잘 변화하였는가?’와 같은 의문점에서 시작되었고, 각 시기별로 정책 변동요인을 분석하여 향후 바람직한 발전방향을 제공하고자 한다. 이를 위해 각종 보고서 및 논문, 언론보도 등의 문헌자료를 검토하였다. 또한 문헌연구의 한계를 극복하기 위해 연구시설장비정책에 실질적으로 참여했던 전・현직 관련 담당자도 인터뷰 하였다. 2. 정책변동 분석 이론 및 분석틀 본 연구는 여러가지 정책변동론 중 연구시설장비정책의 변동요인과 그에 따른 변동 결과를 분석하기 위해 정책변동을‘역사’와‘맥락(제도)’관점에서 설명하는 역사적 제도주의 이론과 Hogwood and Peters의 정책변동유형 이론을 함께 활용하여 적용 가능한 분석요소를 도출하였다. 먼저 역사적 제도주의 이론은 거시적 안목에서 해석하고, 통찰을 준다는 점에서 오랜 기간 지속되어온 연구시설장비정책을 이해하는데 유용하다. 그리고 역사적 제도주의 접근방법은 기존의 사회과학적 분석틀에 역사적인 해석과 문화적인 접근 방법을 더하고 있어 개인과 사회의 관계에 대한 이해의 깊이를 더해준다. 역사적 제도주의에 관련된 연구는 크게 두 부류로 분류될 수 있는데 전자는 역사적 제도주의의 이론 및 경향에 대한 연구이고, 후자는 역사적 제도주의 관점을 정책사례에 적용한 연구이다. 본 연구는 후자 형태의 연구로 연구시설장비정책 관련 역사적 제도주의의 제도변화 요인을 환경적 요인, 상위제도 요인, 행위자 요인 세 가지 수준에서 분석하였다. 두 번째 정책변동 유형은 변동의 정도와 형태에 따라 여러 가지 유형으로 구분할 수 있는데, 정부개입의 정도에 따라 정책변동의 유형을 분류하는 Hogwood와 Peters(1983)의 정책변동유형 이론이 본 연구에 부합된다고 판단하여 이를 적용하였다. Hogwood와 Peters는 정책내용의 변화의 정도에 따라 정책의 변동유형을 정책의 기본성격, 법률, 조직 및 예산 측면에 따라 정책혁신, 정책유지, 정책승계, 정책종결 등 4가지로 구분하고 있다. 이에 덧붙여 본 연구에서는 황병상(2020)의 연구와 같이 기존의 이론만으로 현대의 다원화된 정책변동을 적절하게 설명하기 어렵다고 보고‘정책목표’와‘정책수단’에 대한 변수를 더 추가하였다. 3. 연구시설장비정책 변동요인 분석 1) 환경적 요인 분석결과 환경요인의 변화는 연구시설장비정책에 거시적 측면에서 직간접적 영향을 주고 있다. 이는 정권이 바뀌는 시기와 맞물려 연구시설장비정책도 국내외 환경에 따라 변화를 보이고 있었다. 또한 주요 선진국들의 연구시설장비정책은 우리나라에도 일정 부분 영향을 끼쳤다고 볼 수 있다. 2) 상위제도 요인 다음으로 상위제도 요인을 살펴보면, 과학기술기본계획, 연구성과 관리·활용 기본계획, 연구산업 혁신성장전략과 같은 시기별 과학기술정책 관련 최상위 계획들이‘과학기술 하부구조 선진화’,‘연구장비 효율화 방안’,‘연구장비비 풀링제 도입’,‘연구장비산업 육성 방안’등 연구시설장비정책에 직접적인 영향을 주고 있었다. 3) 행위자 요인 마지막으로 연구시설장비정책에 참여한 핵심행위자와 주변행위자 간의 상호작용 역시 연구시설장비정책 변동에 있어 중요한 요인으로 볼 수 있다. 범부처 관점이 아닌 개별 부처 간 연구장비 관리를 하려고 하는 여러 행위자의 전략적 선택과 행동은 연구장비별 관리기준 조정, 도입심의 기준‘중복성’에서‘활용성’중심으로의 전환 등과 같은 정책변동의 요인이 되었음을 확인하였다. 4. 결론 시기별 연구시설장비정책 변동결과를 살펴보면, 먼저 공동활용 촉진기와 전주기 관리기의 정책변동 유형은‘정책혁신’으로 분석되었다. 이 시기의 정책변동은 연구시설장비정책의 효과적인 정착을 위한‘정책변동의 과도기’과정이라고 볼 수 있다. 두 번째 범부처 종합계획 수립기의 정책변동 유형은‘정책승계’로 분석되었고, 해당 시기는‘정책변동의 안정기’라고 할 수 있다. 세 번째 패러다임 전환기의 정책변동 유형은‘정책승계’로 분석되었고, 이 시기는‘정책변동의 유지기’라고 할 수 있다. 따라서 각 시기별 정책변동유형의 흐름을 살펴보면 정책혁신→정책혁신→정책승계→정책승계 순으로 진행되어, 일반적인 흐름(정책혁신→정책유지→정책승계→정책유지)과 다름을 알 수 있었다. 또한 본 논문은 우리나라 연구시설장비정책 변동의 요인에 대한 통시적이고 맥락적 관점에서의 종합적 연구라는 점에 의의가 있다. 먼저 이론적 시사점으로는 역사적 제도주의 이론의 거시적 측면(환경적 요인), 중범위 측면(상위제도 요인), 미시적 측면(행위자 요인)의 개념을 적용하여 연구시설장비정책 변화요인을 설명함에 따라 해당 이론의 실제 적용가능성을 확인하였다. 그리고 Hogwood와 Peters(1983)의 정책변동유형론을 확대・발전시켜 정책변동 연구의 이론적 지평을 넓히는데 기여했다고 할 수 있다. 마지막으로 연구시설장비정책 변동요인과 그에 따른 정책변동 결과에 대해 최초로 분석을 시도하였다는 점에서 의의가 있다. 두 번째 정책적 시사점으로는 연구장비와 대형연구시설을 구분하여 연구장비 정책에 있어서는‘규제’에서‘자율’로, 대형연구시설정책에 있어서는 지속적인‘관리’관점의 정책이 필요하다는 것을 제안하였다. 또한 국산 연구장비산업 정책의 활성화를 위한 정부의 마중물 역할이 제안하기도 하였다. 마지막으로 기존에 시행된 정책들의 객관적인 평가를 통한 과감한 종결 및 부분혁신이 필요하고 더 나아가 범부처 협의체 등을 지속적으로 운영하여 연구현장에 도움이 되는 연구시설장비정책을 만들어 나갈 필요가 있음을 제안하였다. 1. Introduction * A thesis submitted to the committee of Graduate School of National Public Policy, Chungnam National University in a partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Policy Sciences conferred in February 2022. Since 20 years ago, Korean government has implemented a policy related to the research facilities and equipment constructed through the national research and development projects. The policy on the research facilities and equipment has undergone a lot of changes during past 4 administrations. However, there have not been sufficient studies on why the policy was formed and how it changed. So, this study started with the questions such as “what has changed the policies on research facilities and equipment in Korea and has it changed in a proper way?” So, in this study, the changes in the policies depending on the period would be analyzed to suggest the desirable future development direction. For this study, the report, paper, press articles were researched. In addition, the interviews were made to the former and current personnel in charge, who actually participated in the planning of research facilities and equipment to make up for the literary review. 2. Theory and Analysis framework This study adopts the historical institutionalism which explains the policy changes in terms of history and context (institution) along with Hogwood and Peter’s policy change type theory among several policy changes theories in order to analyze the change elements in the research facilities and equipment and the resulting change results and get the applicable analysis elements. First, the historical institutionalism is useful in understanding the research facilities and equipment policy which has been kept for long as it makes possible the interpretation from the macro perspective and gives the insight. In addition, as the historical institutionalism adds the historical interpretation and cultural approach to the existing social and scientific analysis framework, it helps people to better understand the relation between individuals and communities. The researches on the historical institutionalism may be divided into two types; One is the research on the theories and trends of historical institutionalism and the other is the research on the viewpoint of historical institutionalism applied to the policy cases. This study is the one focusing on the latter and analyzed the change elements in the historical institutionalism related to the research facilities and equipment in terms of three levels of environmental elements, upper institutional elements and actor’s elements. Second, the type of policy change can be classified into many types depending on degree and form of the changes. Hogwood and Peters’ policy change type theory was considered as a good standard for this study and was adopted in this study as it classifies the type of policy changes depending on how much a government gets involved in the policy changes. Hogwood와 Peters는 Hogwood and Peters classify the policy changes into four sections such as policy innovation, policy keeping, policy succession and policy termination according to the degree of policy contents change as well as the basic features, law, organization and budget. In addition, this study added the variables of policy goals and policy means because it would be hard to properly explain the contemporary pluralized policy changes by using the existing theories such as Hwang Byeong San’s research (2020) only. 3. Findings 1) Environmental elements The analysis results show that the environmental elements changes make the direct and indirect effect on the research facilities and equipment policy from the macroscopic viewpoint. This shows that the research facilities and equipment policy is affected by the domestic and foreign environment during the period of administration changes. In addition, it is likely that the research facilities and equipment policy adopted by advanced countries also affect that of Korea to a certain extent. 2) Upper institutional elements As for the upper institutional elements, it was found out that the most upper plans related to the scientific and technological policies for each period, such as basic science and technology plan, basic plan for control and use of research performance and the innovative growth strategy for research industries have made direct effect on the research facilities and equipment policies such as ‘advancement in substructure of science and technology’, ‘making research equipment efficient’, ‘introduction of pooling system for research and equipment cost’, and ‘method of developing the research equipment industry 3) Actor’s elements Last, the interaction between the core actors and the surrounding actors who participated in the research facilities and equipment policy may be viewed as critical elements in the research facilities and equipment policy changes. It was confirmed that the strategic selection and behavior of many actors who try to control the research equipment from viewpoint of each department rather than from the company-wide viewpoint were the elements of policy changes such as the adjustment of management standard for research equipment and the conversion from ‘duality’ to ‘usefulness’ in the introduction review standard. 4. Conclusion First, in the changes in the research facilities and equipment policy by period, the type of policy change during the period of joint use promotion and the whole period of all managements was analyzed as the ‘policy innovation’. The policy changes during this period may be viewed as the ‘policy transitional period’ for the effective establishment of the research facilities. Second, the type of policy change during the period of establishing the comprehensive plan for all departments was analyzed as the ‘policy succession’ and that the period may be called as ‘the period of stability in policy changes’. Third, the type of policy changes during the paradigm transitional period was analyzed to be “policy succession” and this period may be called the period of “keeping the policy changes. Accordingly, the flow of policy change type for each period can be said as the sequence of “policy innovation → policy innovation → policy succession → policy succession”, thus showing that it is different from general flow (policy innovation → policy keeping → policy succession → policy keeping“). In addition, this study has implication in that it is the comprehensive research from the diachronic and contextual viewpoints over the factors which change the research facilities and equipment policy in Korea. As the first theoretical implication, the concepts of macroscopic aspect (environmental element), the mid-range aspect (upper institutional element), and the microscopic aspect (actor’s factor) of the historical institutionalism theory are applied to explain the factors that change the research facilities and equipment policy, thereby checking the possibility that the theory is actually applied. On top of that, the it has contributed to the widening theoretical horizon of the policy change researches by expanding and developing Hogwood and Peters’ policy change type theory (1983). Last, it has implication in that it tried to analyze the factors changing the research facilities and equipment policy and the following policy change results for the first time. It has the second implication in policy by dividing the facilities into the research equipment and large research facilities. The study proposes that there shall be the policy change for the research equipment from “regulation” to “autonomy”, and that there shall be the policy of continuous ‘management ‘viewpoint for the large research facilities policy. In addition, it also suggests that there shall be the government’s pump priming actions for activation of the national research facilities industry. Last, it suggests that the existing policies shall be boldly terminated or partly revised through the objective evaluation and that, furthermore, the interdepartmental committee is to be operated to make the research facilities and equipment policy helpful to the research field.

원자력안전위원회 합의제 정책결정 과정 분석: 월성1호기 계속운전·영구정지 정책논증 체계를 중심으로

김영준 忠南大學校 大學院 2023 국내박사

이 연구는 원안위가 합의제 정책결정 방식을 통해 어떻게 월성1호기에 대한 계속운전과 영구정지라는 상이한 결정을 내리게 되는지에 대한 과정을 분석하였다. 월성1호기에 대한 두 차례의 정책결정은 사업자인 한수원의 상이한 운영변경 신청에 따라, 원안위라는 동일 기관이 동일 대상에 대해 비교적 단기간에 상반된 결정을 내린 사례다. 원안위는 독립규제위원회로서 다양한 전문성을 갖춘 위원들 간의 집합적 토론을 통해 의견을 수렴해나가면서 정책결정의 정당성을 확보하는 합의제 정책결정 방식을 채택하였다. 하지만 월성1호기에 대한 두 차례 상이한 결정은 위원들 간의 합의 도출에 실패하면서, 행정소송을 포함하여 사회적인 논란과 갈등을 야기하였고 급기야 원자력 규제정책의 최고 의사결정기구인 원안위에 대한 신뢰는 악화되었다. 향후 노후원전의 운영변경 허가 문제, 사용후핵연료 문제와 같이 국가적, 사회적으로 중요한 정책결정 현안이 산적한 점을 고려한다면, 원안위 규제정책 결정 과정의 문제를 진단하고 보완하기 위한 대안을 마련하는 것은 매우 시급하다. 이와 같은 문제의식을 바탕으로 이 연구는 원자력 규제정책이 이뤄지는 제도적 포럼으로서 위원회 합의제 정책결정 방식에 주목하고, 월성1호기 정책결정 과정의 특징 분석을 통해 향후 원안위 합의제 정책결정 방식이 적절하게 작동할 수 있는 정책대안을 제시하였다. 이를 위해 위원회 합의제 정책결정 과정에 대한 분석틀로서 정책논증 체계 개념을 제시하였다. 정책논증 체계는 위원회와 같이 합의를 목표로 운영되는 제도 내에서 벌어지는 일련의 정책결정 과정이다. 이때 정책논증 체계는 구조적 구성요소와 내용적 구성요소를 통해 과정적 특징이 구성되는데, 구조적 구성요소는 참여자 구성, 운영 규칙으로 구성되며, 내용적 구성요소는 핵심쟁점과 정책논쟁으로 구성된다. 합의제 정책결정에서 정책논증 체계의 작동은 공식적인 행위자를 통해 제도 내부의 정책분석 결과 산출된 의결안건과 다수 위원들의 인식에 영향을 미칠 수 있는 제도 외부의 사회환경 변화들이 투입되어 작동된다. 이후 안건이 마련되어 회의가 개회되면, 개회전 구성된 구조적 요소와 개회후 구성되는 내용적 구성요소의 상호작용을 통해 합의제 정책결정 방식이 운영된다. 이 연구에서는 계속운전과 영구정지 정책결정을 위한 원안위 회의의 양태를 각각 구조적, 내용적 측면에서 특징을 비교 분석하였다. 그 결과, 원안위가 상이한 결정을 내린 이유를 밝히고, 합의 도출에 실패한 원인과 문제를 진단함으로써 향후 정당성을 확보하기 위한 4가지 발전방향과 8가지 정책대안을 제안하였다. 연구결과는 다음과 같다. 첫째, 원안위의 규제정책 결정에 대한 구조는 정책분석 단계와 정책결정 단계로 이원화되어 있었다. 전자는 문제정의와 대안의 비교검토를 통해 의결안건을 만드는 것은 원안위 사무처의 기술관료들과 KINS, 전문위원회 소속의 공학전문가 위주로 수행되면서 지역주민이나 시민사회의 의견 수렴이 이뤄지기 어려운 구조로 운영되고 있었다. 의사결정 단계에서는 다양한 배경을 갖는 위원들이 참여하고 있으나 정부 여당의 추천이 과반을 넘는 구조로써, 정치적 영향으로부터 자유롭지 못한 구성적 특징을 갖고 있었다. 더욱이 해당 위원들은 주로 비상임위원 위주로 운영되면서 위원들이 합리적 정책결정을 위한 충분한 준비를 하기에는 근본적인 제약이 있었다. 둘째, 상술한 구조하에 참여하는 원안위원들에게 투입되는 정책관련 정보는 비단 제도 내부의 정책분석의 결과인 안건자료에 담긴 정보뿐만 아니라, 제도 외부 사회환경으로부터 비롯된 다양한 이슈들로 구성되었다. 제도 외부의 사회환경은 원자력 안전에 대해 기술낙관론에서 위험인식이 확산되는 상황에서 정권교체로 인해 정책기조가 급변하였다. 2009년 운영변경 허가가 최초 신청된 월성1호기는 후쿠시마 사고를 거쳐 스트레스 테스트를 포함한 추가적인 안전성 심사를 거쳐 2015년 계속운전이 결정되었다. 하지만 문재인 정권 들어 조기폐쇄 방침이 결정되면서 감사원 감사가 착수되기도 하였다. 이 과정에서 사회적인 여론도 계속운전 찬성과 반대로 양분되었는데, 각 대안을 선호하는 시민사회들은 집단적인 움직임을 통해 선호하는 대안의 채택을 주장하면서 각 입장에 대한 사회적 담론이 형성되었다. 이때 제도 내부의 정책분석 결과 제기되는 안건의 내용과 달리 사회적 담론들에서 제기되는 이슈들은 잠재적 이슈들로서 원안위 합의제 정책토론의 궁극적 이슈가 되었다. 즉, 합의제 정책결정 과정에서 원안위원들은 주어진 자료가 아닌 외부사회 환경의 변화에 따라 정책토론의 양상이 영향을 받는 형태로 운영되었음을 확인하였다. 셋째, 원안위의 합의제 정책결정 과정은 정책논증 체계의 구조적 특징과 내용적 특징으로 분석하였다. 우선, 구조적 특징은 계속운전 결정 과정과 영구정지 결정 과정에 참여한 위원들은 각각 총원, 전공, 소속기관별 상이했는데, 특히 계속운전 결정과정은 공학전문가들이 중심이 되었다면 영구정지 결정 과정은 인문사회 전문가들이 중심이 되었다. 임기로 살펴보면, 계속운전 결정 과정에 참여한 위원들은 최소 1년 이상 원안위원으로서 경험을 갖고 있었지만, 영구정지 결정 과정에서는 7명중 4명이 새롭게 임명되어 월성1호기 영구정지 결정에 참여했다. 회의 운영방식 측면에서는 두 결정 모두 소수 위원들의 과점적 발언으로 정책토론이 불균형적으로 이뤄졌다. 계속운전 결정 과정에서는 소수의 위원들과 KINS, 시민단체 소속 참고인들 간의 논쟁이, 영구정지 결정 과정에서는 위원들 간, 위원과 사무처 간의 논쟁이 주로 이뤄졌다. 정책토론을 중재하는 위원장의 역할은 계속운전 결정 과정에서는 적극적으로 토론에 참여했다면 영구정지 결정 과정에서는 비교적 소극적인 사회자 역할에 국한되었다. 마지막으로 두 결정 과정 모두 최종 합의도출은 실패하였으며, 3차례 회의 막바지에 다수결에 따른 표결로 안건이 처리되었다. 월성1호기 규제정책 결정 과정의 내용적 특징 분석은 계속운전과 영구정지라는 주어진 안건에 대해, 위원들 간의 집단적인 정책토론을 통해 형성된 핵심쟁점과 정책논증의 구도를 각각 내용적 합리성과 절차적 합리성관점에서 분석하여 제시하였다. 계속운전과 정책결정 과정 모두 원안위 사무처가 안건자료를 통해 제시한 안전성 심사와 별개로 위원들이 제기한 잠재적 이슈들이 중점적으로 논쟁이 되면서, 합의도출 여부에 영향을 미치는 궁극적 이슈들이 되었다. 계속운전 결정 시는 월성1호기가 계속운전하기에 공학적으로 안전한가와 같은 내용적 합리성에 대한 쟁점들뿐만 아니라, 안전성 심사의 적절성과 같은 절차적 합리성와 관련된 쟁점들이 모두정책토론 양상에 영향을 미쳤다. 반면, 영구정지 결정 과정에서는 일부 위원들이 내용적 합리성과 관련된 잠재적 이슈들을 제시하였으나 한정적 조건이 받아들여지지 않으면서, 절차적 합리성 위주의 논쟁이 진행되었다. 이처럼 핵심쟁점들이 위원들이 제기한 잠재적 이슈들 위주로 구성된 점은, 아무리 독립규제위원회라 하더라도 다수의 비상임위원들이 참여한 이상 외부 환경으로부터 영향을 받으며 의사결정이 이뤄졌음을 알 수 있었다. 정책논증의 형성 양상을 살펴보면, 계속운전 결정 과정에서 내용적 합리성 논쟁은 계속 운전해도 충분히 안전하다와 안전하지 않다라는 입장을 중심으로 논거와 보충이유들이 각각 대립하였다. 특히, 각 입장에서 제시된 보충이유들은 상호간의 교점이 없이 서로 충돌하는데, 반대 입장의 위원들과 참고인들이 제시한 문제와 반대 이유에 대해, 찬성 입장의 위원들과 KINS 전문가들은 각각 실증적 근거를 제시하였다. 이 과정에서 상호간의 교점을 찾지 못하고 의견을 수렴하지 못했는데, 결국 찬성과 반대입장에서 원전의 사고가능성에 대한 근본적인 인식의 차이가 존재하였고 합의제 정책결정 과정을 통해 수렴하지 못했음을 확인하였다. 영구정지 정책결정 과정에서는 영구 정지에 반대하는 위원들이 사회환경이 변화되면 다시 재가동 될 수 있다라는 한정적 전제에 따라 이슈들을 제기했으나, 영구정지를 심의하는데 정지 후 재가동이라는 상황 자체가 받아들여지지 않으면서 토론이 성립되지 않았다. 영구정지 심의의 절차적 합리성에 대한 정책논증은 주로 외부의 여론에서 제기된 절차적 합리성에 대한 이슈들을 중심으로 하는 심의가 적절하느냐에 대한 논쟁이 이뤄졌다. 이때 찬성과 반대 입장의 논쟁은 독립규제위원회로서 원안위의 정체성에 대한 상이한 인식에서 비롯되는데, 계속운전과 영구정지에 대해 찬성하는 입장은 모두 원안위 외부의 사회적 영향력과 별개로 심사가 이뤄져야 한다고 주장했다. 즉, 각각 계속운전을 해야한다와 영구정지를 해야한다는 두 가지 상이한 주장을 구성하는 논거와 보충이유가 독립적인 규제결정 기관으로서 과학적 전문성에 기반한 안전성만 심사해야 한다는 이유가 제시된 것이다. 이처럼 원안위의 독립규제위원회라는 정체성에 대한 논거의 이중사용 구조는 절차적 합리성 논쟁에서 계속운전 혹은 영구정지와 같은 사무처가 제안한 의결안건의 주문 처리를 지지하는데 작용했다. 이상의 분석결과를 종합적으로 고려하여, 원안위 합의제 정책결정이 합의를 도출과 정당성 확보에 실패한 원인을 네 가지로 제시하였다. 첫째, 원안위 규제정책 결정 과정의 제도적 구조가 비합리적이고, 둘째, 정책분석 단계가 폐쇄적으로 진행되었으며, 셋째, 합의제 정책논증 참여자이자 정책결정자인 원안위원들의 합리성 결여로 합의제가 정상적으로 작동되지 못했으며, 넷째, 정책논증 형성 과정에서 위원들의 개방적 자세가 부족했다. 이로 인해 원안위의 합의제 정책결정 방식은 합의제 제도의 근본적 취지와 달리 불합리적으로 운영될 수밖에 없었다. 상술한 문제의 원인을 개선하기 위한 대안으로 네 가지 발전방향과 8개의정책대안과 14개의 실행과제를 제안했다. 각 발전 방향별 대안을 정리하면, 첫째, 합리적 정책결정 구조를 마련하기 위해, 조직위상을 강화하고 균형적인 위원구성이 필요하다. 둘째, 정책분석 단계의 개방성 확보를 위해 정책분석 단계에서 시민참여를 보장하고 민간검증단 운영을 활성화함으로써정책분석 결과의 대표성을 강화해야 한다. 셋째, 정책결정자의 합리성 확보를 위해 위원들의 합리적 심의 활동을 보장하고, 위원들의 상호작용적 전문성 확보가 시급하다. 넷째, 합의도출을 통한 정당성 확보의 핵심 기제로서 정책토론이 합리적으로 운영되어야 하며, 이를 위해 정책토론의 운영규칙 정립, 정책논증의 교환을 독려할 수 있는 제도적 보완이 필요하다. This study analyzes the process of how the Nuclear Safety and Security Commission (NSSC) came to make two different decisions on permission to operate Wolseong Unit 1, one for continued operation and the other for permanent shutdown. The analysis is based on newly designed conceptual framework called policy argument system framework that aims to analyze characteristics of consensus policy decision-making process in the committee. The two policy decisions on Wolseong Unit 1 were made by the same agency, the NSSC, in a relatively short period of time, based on different applications for operational changes by the operator, the Korea Hydro and Nuclear Power (KHNP). As an independent regulatory commission, the NSSC regulates uses of nuclear materials including commercial nuclear power plants through licensing, inspection and enforcement of its requirements in Korea. The committee consisted of diverse experts has adopted a consensus policy-making approach that secures the legitimacy of policy decisions. Nevertheless, the NSSC's two different policy decisions on the Wolseong Unit 1 caused social controversy and conflict, including administrative lawsuits, and deteriorated social trust toward the NSSC as the highest decision-making body for nuclear regulation. Considering the numbers of potential issues such as the permission to change the operation of 10 old nuclear power plants by 2030 in Korea, it is urgent to diagnose the problems in the NSSC regulatory policy-making process and prepare alternative measures to complement it. Therefore, this dissertation focuses on the NSSC's consensus policy-making process as an institutional forum in order to suggest policy alternatives that can make the consensus policy-making method work properly. To this end, the concept of policy argumentation system as an analytical framework is designed after reviewing public policy theories of decision-making as well as the concept of policy argumentation. The research adopts the contents analysis for analyzing both structural and content features of the committee meetings for continued operation and permanent shutdown policy-making, respectively. Various computer-assisted qualitative data analysis software including Atlas.ti. is applied into analysis activities for ensuring reliability of qualitative analysis. Throughout the analysis, it provides the reasons why the NSSC made different decisions, diagnosed the causes and problems of the failure to reach consensus, and proposed development directions and policy alternatives. The findings are as follows. First, the structure of the NSSC regulatory policy-making process was divided into a policy analysis stage and a policy-making stage. In the former, the creation of resolution proposals through problem definition and comparative review of alternatives was carried out mainly by technocrats of NSSC and the experts from Korea Institute of Nuclear Science (KINS) that made it difficult to gather opinions from local residents and civil society. At the decision-making level, on the other hand, the committee is composed of members with diverse backgrounds, but is dominated by recommendations from the ruling party, which is not free from political influence. Moreover, the committee was mainly composed of non-executive members, which fundamentally limited the ability of the committee members to prepare sufficiently for rational policy-making. Second, the policy-related information provided to the committee members consisted not only of information contained in the agenda itself, which were the result of policy analysis withinthe aforementioned policy analysis system, but also of various issues stemming from the social environmental changes outside the institutional system. The social environment had changed drastically due to the change of regime, with a shift from technological optimism to risk awareness regarding nuclear safety. Wolseong Unit 1, which first applied for permission to change its operation in 2009, was decided to continue operating in 2015 after additional safety reviews, including stress tests, following the Fukushima accident in 2011. However, the Moon Jae-in administration in 2017 decided an early shutdown of aged nuclear power plant policy that triggered public dispute on the alternatives of between continued operation and permanent shutdown. Civil society advocating for each alternative formed a social discourse on each position, advocating for the adoption of their preferred alternative through collective movements. At this time, the issues raised in social discourses became the ultimate issues of policy debate within the committee policy debate. In other words, in the consensus system policy-making process, the members of the independent regulatory committee was influenced by changes in the external social environment rather than the given agenda materials provided by internal policy analysts. Third, the consensus policymaking process of the NSSC was analyzed in terms of structural and content features of the policy argument system. Regarding the structural features, the members of the committee who participated in the decision-making process for continued operation and the decision-making process for permanent shutdown differed by total number of members, majors, and affiliations, respectively. In particular, the decision-making process for continued operation was centered on engineering experts, while the decision-making process for permanent suspension was centered on social science-majored experts. The committee members who participated in the decision to continue operation had at least one year of experience, while four of seven members participated in the decision to permanent shutdown were newly appointed. In terms of how the meeting was run, both decisions were dominated by a small number of members who disproportionately dominated the policy discussion. In the case of the decision on continued operation, the debate was between a small number of committee members and non-members, i.e. observers, while the debate in the case of the decision on permanent suspension was mainly among committee members. The role of the chairperson in moderating the policy debate was limited to a relatively passive moderator role in the permanent shutdown debate in 2019, as opposed to an active and diverse roles in the continued operation process. Finally, both decision-making processes failed to reach a final consensus, and the issues were resolved by majority vote at the end of the three consecutive meetings. The analysis of the content features of the regulatory policy-making process of Wolsong Unit 1 is presented by identifying the key issues and the structure of the policy debate formed through the collective policy discussions within the committee from the perspectives of substantive rationality and procedural rationality, respectively. The potential issues in debates on both the continued operation and permanent shutdown became the ultimate issues affecting whether a consensus could be reached, while the issues raised by official actors who analyzed policy problem were not highlighted. In the case of the decision on continued operation, both issues related to the substantive rationality, such as whether Wolsong Unit 1 is engineerably safe for continued operation, as well as issues related to the procedural rationality, such as the adequacy of the safety review, influenced the policy debate. On the other hand, in the permanent shutdown decision process, the debate centered on procedural rationality. The fact that the potential issues affecting characteristics of policy debates raised by the decision makers, not policy analysts, shows that even an independent regulatory decision-making system is influenced by the social environment. In terms of the formation of policy arguments, the debate in 2015 for continued operation related to substantive rationality issues was centered on the positions whether the facility readiness is safe enough to continue to operate or not safe enough. In particular, the supplementary reasons presented by each position clashed with each other without any intersection between them. In the end, it was confirmed that the proponents and opponents had fundamental differences in their perceptions of the likelihood of nuclear accidents and were unable to converge through the consensus policy-making process. In the permanent shutdown policy-making process in 2019, members opposed to the permanent shutdown raised issues based on the limited premise that the plant could be restarted if the social environment changed, but the discussion was not established because the situation of restarting after shutdown was not accepted. The policy debate on the procedural rationality was mainly a debate on the appropriateness of a review raised by external public opinion. Both proponents and opponents of continued operation and permanent shutdown argued that the review should be conducted independently of social influences outside the NSSC, i.e., the arguments and supplementary reasons that constitute the two different arguments for continued operation and permanent suspension are presented as reasons why the NSSC, as an independent regulatory decision-making body, should only review safety based on scientific expertise. This dual use of warranty about the agency's identity as an independent regulatory body served to support the ordering of the NSSC’s proposed resolution, i.e., continued operation in 2015 or permanent suspension in 2019. The above analysis finds four reasons why the NSSC failed to reach the consensus among members within the consensus policy decision-making process. First, the institutional structure of the NSSC's regulatory policy-making process was irrational; second, the policy analysis stage was conducted in a closed manner; third, the lack of rationality of decision makers who are participants in the committee consensus decision-making system; and fourth, the lack of openness of the members participating in the policy debate caused the NSSC’s consensus system policy-making method to operate irrationally, contrary to the fundamental purpose of the consensus system. As an alternative to improve the causes of the above-mentioned problems, four policy directions, eight policy alternatives, and 14 implementation tasks are proposed. First, it is necessary to strengthen the organizational status and establish a balanced composition of members in order to establish a rational policy-making structure. Second, it is also necessary to strengthen the representativeness of policy analysis activities such as identifying problem, risk measurement, etc., by ensuring citizen participation in the policy analysis stage. Third, to ensure the rationality of policy makers, it is urgent to ensure the rational deliberation activities of committee members and secure their interactive expertise. Fourth, as a key mechanism for securing legitimacy through consensus building, policy debates should be operated rationally, and for this purpose, institutional complements are needed to establish operating rules for policy debates and encourage the exchange of policy arguments among members.

해양과학기술의 정책결정 네트워크 분석 : 해양과학기술 중장기계획을 중심으로

엄기호 충남대학교 국가정책대학원 2018 국내석사

본 연구는 과학기술정책 중에서 정부와 일부 행위자들에 의해 독점적인 논의가 이뤄져 국민적 관심이나 정책적 우선순위에 주목받지 못하는 원인으로 지적되는 해양과학기술정책에 대하여 행위자 간 실제적인 관계를 분석한다. 따라서 본 연구에서는 현장 중심의 공익적이고 다학제적인 특성을 가진 해양과학기술정책에 대하여 네트워크를 분석하였다. 분석을 위하여 1996년 해양수산부가 출범한 이후 20년간 해양과학기술정책으로 활용되는 해양과학기술 중장기계획을 분석대상으로 행위자의 존재와 상호작용, 연계구조에 대해 분석하였다. 이를 통해서 해양과학기술정책에 대해 처음으로 체계적이고 객관적인 정책적 타당성을 확보하기 위해 학술적인 접근을 시도하였다. this author has analyzed here the network of marine science and technology policy that is equipped with site-oriented public interest and multidisciplinary characteristics. For analysis, this researcher has analyzed the mid-long term plans of marine science technology that have been used as marine science and technology policy for 20 years since 1996 when Ministry of Maritime Affairs and Fisheries was launched in terms of the existence of the doers, their interactions, and connective structures.

논리모형을 활용한 우주발사체개발사업 성과관리 발전방향 : 성과지표 개발과 적용을 중심으로

이은정 忠南大學校 大學院 2017 국내석사

As a measure to improve Performance Management on the Korean Space Launch Vehicle(KSLV) Development Project, which is a large scale long-term R&D project in the area of aerospace, this study is intended to derive its outcome-based Key Performance Indicators from setting up Logic model for the project. Korea has begun the Korean Space Launch Vehicle(KSLV) Development Project in a full swing on the basis of successful launch of small satellite launch vehicle(KSLV-I, NARO) in 2013. According to the National Space Development Promotion Basic Plan established in 2007, the project of space launch vehicle development in Korea, covering the development of KSLV-I and KSLV-II, has been carried out under the goal of securing technological capability by developing a space launch vehicle independently. Also, the successful launch of KALV-I has laid the groundwork for KSLV-II Development Project, which is a follow-up project to KSLV-I. In addition, Korea presented the long term vision to strengthen its competitiveness in space development by developing a heavy-lift GEO launch vehicle till 2040 in the medium and long-term space development plan established in 2013. Against this backdrop, even though the performance management on space launch vehicle development project, which is a large scale R&D project and requires the long term national strategies, is highly essential, it is true that there has been a lack of studies in terms of performance management. As the need for effectively utilizing a result from preceding R&D project is being more emphasized, this study analyzed the current status of performance management on space launch vehicle development project entailing a substantial amount of budget by using a logic model. 나로호와 한국형발사체 개발을 포괄하는 우리나라 우주발사체 개발사업은 2007년 마련된 국가우주개발진흥기본계획에 의거, 발사체 독자개발을 통한 기술자립이라는 최종 목표의 기술적 연장선 상에서 소형위성발사체 연구개발의 성과를 후속사업인 한국형발사체개발사업에 직접적으로 연계 활용하고 있다. 또한 2013년 수립된 우주개발중장기계획에 따르면 한국형발사체 개발을 통해 획득한 자력발사 능력을 바탕으로 2040년까지 대형 정지궤도 발사체 개발을 추진하고 우주개발 경쟁력을 강화한다는 장기비전을 제시한 바 있다. 이러한 상황에서 장기적이고 국가 전략적 성격이 강한 대형 연구개발사업인 우주발사체개발사업에 대한 전체적인 시각에서의 성과관리가 필수적이다. 본 연구에서는 현재 선행 연구개발 성과의 연계와 활용이 더욱 강조되고 있는 우주발사체개발사업을 대상으로 논리모형을 활용한 성과관리 현황을 분석해 봄으로써 대규모 예산이 투입되고 있는 우주발사체 개발사업에 대한 성과를 기술적인 측면에서만 국한하지 않고 전반적인 성과관리 시각에서 재접근하고 이를 통한 발전방향을 고찰해 보았다.