International Comparative Analysis on Start-up Incubation Ecosystem Based on PCII Model

PCII 모델에 근거한 창업보육생태계 국제 비교 연구

  • Received : 2018.03.14
  • Accepted : 2018.04.30
  • Published : 2018.04.30

Abstract

Since the Korean economic development path has been unique compared to other counties, it is necessary to build an incubation ecosystem matching with unique economic environment in Korea. In order to revive the dynamism of the economy, establishment of the incubator ecosystem should be a policy priority so that ventures with innovative ideas and challenging minds can grow into a global stage. The purpose of this study is to derive the policy implications for establishing ecosystem and infrastructure by comparing to other OECD countries such as US, Israel, Finland, and Japan that can offer meaningful policy implications to Korea. For this purpose, the most appropriate model for explaining the incubation ecosystem in Korea was designed. PCII Model (People, Capital, Incubating, Infra) has 4 elements. It provides a framework for incubation of entrepreneurship, funding for start-up, incubation course, establishment of business foundation infrastructure. The comparative analysis was conducted with 12 sub-items under 4 elements and qualitative and quantitative evaluations were performed for each category. As a result of the comparative analysis, Korea's incubation policy seems to be still in the initial stage in terms of establishment of ecosystem compared to other countries. Therefore, a systematic approach based on the ecosystem model is needed other than the short-term incubation policy.

한국은 경제 발전 과정 자체가 다른 여느 나라와는 달리 독특하기 때문에 한국 특유의 창업보육생태계 구축이 요구된다. 또한, 침체된 경제 역동성을 되살리기 위해서는 무엇보다도 혁신적인 아이디어와 도전정신으로 무장한 창업 벤처가 글로벌 무대로 성장해 나아갈 수 있는 창업보육생태계 구축이 정책우선순위로 제고될 필요가 있다. 이에 본 연구는 OECD 국가 중 우리나라에게 독특한 시사점을 제시할 수 있는 국가들 중 미국, 이스라엘, 핀란드 그리고 일본을 비교국으로 선정하여 사례 비교를 통해 창업 보육 생태계와 기반 조성에 관한 정책적 함의를 도출하는 것을 목표로 하였다. 이를 위하여 창업보육생태계를 설명하는 여러 모델 중 한국에 가장 적합한 모델로서 창업주체보육, 창업자금지원, 창업과정보육, 창업인프라구축으로 큰 틀을 잡고, 창업주체보육을 중심으로 확장해 가는 거시적 창업보육생태계모델을 통한 비교 분석을 실시하였다. 평가는 총 12개의 세부 항목으로 나누어서 부문별로 정성적, 정량적 평가를 수행하였다. 창업보육육성정책의 비교 분석 결과, 우리나라의 창업보육육성정책은 창업생태계 구축의 측면에서 볼 때 여전히 초기 단계로 나타났다. 특히 민 관 학 협력체계와 클러스터, 그리고 대기업과 창업 기업의 협력이 요구되는 창업 인프라와 창업기업에 투자하는 민간펀드와 회수시장의 활성화가 비교국에 비해 뒤처지는 것으로 나타났다. 따라서, 단기적 보육정책 위주에서 벗어나 생태계 모델에 기반한 체계적인 접근방법이 필요하며 창업주체보육, 창업자금지원, 창업과정보육 그리고 창업 인프라구축이 동시에 병행되도록 정책 방향이 바람직스럽다. 또한 기존의 성공 및 실패 사례들에서 정책의 성과를 점검해 수정해 나가는 현장중심 바텀업(bottom-up) 접근방식이 필요한 것으로 보인다.

Keywords

References

  1. An, S. A.(2015). The Best Practices for Supporting Entrepreneurship by Large Corporate in the Last Three Years, Korea Corporate governance Services, CSR Report, 66-88.
  2. An, S. B., & Shin, Y. J.(2017). The current Status and Development Measures of Start-Up Support System of Korea, Journal of Business History, 32(2), 149-172. https://doi.org/10.22629/kabh.2017.32.2.007
  3. Bae, Y. I.(2013). Features and Implications of Israel's Technology Incubator Program, Science and Technology Policy, 23(2), 70-84.
  4. Kim, D. H.(2013). The Role of Large Companies in Entrepreneurial Ecosystem, Asia-Pacific Journal of Business Venturing and Entrepreneurship, 8(2), 83-91. https://doi.org/10.16972/apjbve.8.2.201306.83
  5. Korea Economy Research Institute(2017). A study on Comparison and Evaluation of Venture Capital and Policy Implications, KERI Brief, 17(26), 1-26.
  6. Kwon, H. K.(2017). A study on the University Spin-Offs in Japan: Focused on Listed Companies, Asian Pacific Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 12(3), 333-355.
  7. LG Economy Research Institute(2013). The Solution Equation for Korean Entrepreneurship Based on the Silicon Valley Solution, LG Business Insight.
  8. Lee, H. H., Hwangbo, Y., & Gong, C. H.(2017). A study on the Factors that Determine the Initial Success of Start-Up, Asia-Pacific Journal of Business Venturing and Entrepreneurship, 2(1), 1-13.
  9. Lee, W. J.(2014). A Study on Fostering Entrepreneurship of Israel, Science and Technology Policy, 24(3), 56-64.
  10. Maeil Daily Economy Newspaper(2016). Knowledge Based Entreneurship should lead the Growth, 2016.08.14, http://news.mk.co.kr/column/view.php?year=2016&no=578802.
  11. Seoul Daily Economy Newspaper(2015). VC.Government should nurture Innovation entrepreneur, 2015-06-15, http://news.naver.com/main/read.nhn?mode=LSD&mid=sec&oid=011&aid=0002698098&sid1=001, Exit from the safe investment
  12. OECD(2012), Income inequality and growth: The role of taxes and transfers, OECD Economics Department Policy Notes, No. 9.
  13. Oh, J. S.(2016). Japan's Entrepreneurial Trends and Entrepreneurial Ecosystem, Entrepreneurship Korea, 1, 25-28.
  14. Park, K. I.(2013). The Recent Changes and Implications of Entrepreneurial Ecosystem of Finland, Institute for International Trade, Trade Focus, 12(8), 1-25.
  15. http://thegedi.org/global-entrepreneurship-and-development-index/