DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

A Comparative Analysis of Informatization Level for Agricultural Corporations and SMEs

농업법인과 중소기업의 정보화수준 비교 분석

  • Received : 2015.02.01
  • Accepted : 2015.05.08
  • Published : 2015.05.31

Abstract

Agri-food ICT(Information and Communications Technologies) convergence has been raised as an important issue for agricultural industry competence. In this situation, this study is to enhance agricultural competitiveness and seek to development plan for agricultural corporation by diagnosing informatization level. For this purpose, this study conducted survey on informatization level of 3,019 agricultural corporations and calculated level score. And result is compared with SMEs(Small and Medium Enterprise) informatization survey, including manufacturing and service industries, conducted by Korea Technology & Information Promotion Agency for SMEs in recent agricultural corporations' growing with automation of agricultural production and improving service to customer satisfaction. Evaluation system is established to calculate informatization level score and AHP(Analytic Hierarchy Process) method was used by the experts to investigate weighting of assessment area, assessment indicators, assessment items. As a result, agricultural corporation informatization level score was 40.16 points which is lower than the benefitted organization of agri-food IT convergence modeling(43.44 points). By assessment area, the informatization level of promotional environment area was low and investment and training items were analyzed low especially so need to improve urgently. In the analysis result by organization type, agricultural company corporation's informatization level was higher than the agricultural association corporation and 'Processing and distribution' was higher than others by business type. Informatization level of agricultural corporation is 80 percent of 2013 SMEs' level(50.18 points) and 59.4 percent of a large corporation(67.64 points). In particular, big difference is occurred in investment feasibility analysis, informatization investment and education which will be need to improve.

최근 농업 분야의 경쟁력 강화를 위한 농식품 ICT융복합이 중요한 이슈로 제기되고 있다. 이러한 상황에서 본 연구는 농업법인의 정보화 수준을 진단하고 발전 방안을 도출하기 위해 농업법인 3,019개에 대해 설문조사를 진행하여 정보화수준 점수를 산출하였고, 농업도 점차 기업화되고 있는 농업법인이 늘어나고 있어 중소기업 정보화 수준 조사 결과와 비교분석을 진행하였다. 농업법인의 점수 산출을 위해 정보화수준 평가체계를 수립하였고, 평가 영역, 평가 지표, 평가 항목별 가중치 산출을 위해 AHP(Analytic Hierarchy Process) 기법을 사용하였다. 그 결과 평가 영역별로 보면 정보화 추진 환경 영역의 수준이 낮은 것으로 분석되었다. 조직형태별 분석 결과에서는 농업 회사법인의 정보화수준이 영농조합법인보다 높았으며, 경영유형별로는 가공 및 유통의 정보화수준이 다른 유형에 비해 높은 것으로 분석되었다. 농업법인의 정보화수준은 2013년 기준 중소기업(50.18점) 정보화수준 대비 80.0%, 대기업(67.64점) 대비 59.4%로 나타났다. 특히, 투자타당성 분석, 정보화 투자, 정보화 교육의 격차가 큰 것으로 나타나 개선방안이 필요할 것이다.

Keywords

References

  1. Y. C. Choi and I. H. Jang, "The status and prospect of swine industry informatization," J. KICS, vol. 31, no. 5, pp. 67-72, May 2014.
  2. B. M. Yu, S. W. Kim, S. Y. Park, H. J. Park, and E. J. Lee, "Strategies for improving agricultural ICT literacy," J. Korean Agricultural Education, vol. 41, no. 4, pp. 93-119, Dec. 2009.
  3. S. H. Kang, K. S. Han, J. Y. Imm, and S. H. Kim, "A study on the dairy information system and effective dairy extension service system," J. Korean Dairy Technol. Sci. Association, vol. 19, no. 1. pp. 22-29, 2001.
  4. C. J. Yoo, "Situation and implication of agricultural information systems in korea," The J. Korean Rural Sociological Soc., vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 115-141, Jun. 2003.
  5. J. W. Lee, J. H. Hwang, and H. Yeo, "Agriculture ICT convergence technology trends and future direction," J. KICS, vol. 31, no. 5, pp. 54-60, May 2014.
  6. J. H. Moon, Y. M. Hwang, and H. Yeo, "Latest case of ICT convergence for agri-food sector," J. KICS, vol. 31, no. 5, pp. 61-66, May 2014.
  7. Korea Technology and Information Promotion Agency for SMEs, 2013 Survey on the Information Level of Korean Small and Medium Enterprises, 2014.

Cited by

  1. 청년농업인의 영농다각화 활동 선택 결정요인 분석 vol.25, pp.2, 2015, https://doi.org/10.7851/ksrp.2019.25.2.075
  2. 여성농업인의 테크노 스트레스가 인터넷 정보활용에 미치는 영향 - 정보서비스 수용성에 대한 매개 효과 - vol.28, pp.1, 2015, https://doi.org/10.12653/jecd.2021.28.1.0025