• The Korean Journal of Archival Studies
• /
• no.37
• /
• pp.189-237
• /
• 2013

Since central governments began to establish and use the Standard Records Management System(RMS) in 2007, more and more local governments and other public organizations have constructed RMS. RMS is the essential tool for records management in electronic environments, but it is not known how well the functions of RMS reflect standards and practice related records management or how many records managers use RMS in performing their works. This paper deals with analyzing the evaluation of 'classification & disposal schedule management' function in RMS. 'Classification & disposal schedule management' function has 4 subfunctions of review of classification & preservation period, management of the schedule items, assignment of classification scheme and reclassification. Classification and disposal schedule is at the heart of intellectual control of records and core area of records management. So it is important to analyze whether this function plays well a role in RMS or not. This research carried out evaluation of function and use about classification & disposal schedule management in RMS. Functional evaluation is to compare and analyze how well RMS meets the functional requirements which home and foreign standards give. Use evaluation is to investigate how records managers use RMS in accomplishing their task of managing classification & disposal schedule and to look into what is the problem with the use. This paper could get the implications through the survey of records managers who are working at central governments, regional local governments and basic local governments. And these implications are considered in institutional, functional, use and administrative aspect. It is important to communicate with stakeholders so that 'classification & disposal schedule management' function, further, all functions of the RMS in practice of records management could be used smoothly. Users of RMS have to raise demands or call for technical solutions of the problems which come up in use, while RMS developers and administrators must make more of an effort to satisfy their demands, reflect them on the RMS and enhance the system.

• Journal of the Society of Disaster Information
• /
• v.18 no.1
• /
• pp.202-217
• /
• 2022

Purpose: The recent increased use of Personal Mobility (PM) has been accompanied by a rise in the annual number of accidents. Accordingly, the safety requirements for PM use are being strengthened, but the laws/systems, infrastructure, and management systems remain insufficient for fostering a safe environment. Therefore, this study comprehensively searches the main problems and improvement methods through a review of previous studies that are related to PM. Then the priorities according to the importance of the improvement methods are presented through the Delphi survey. Method: The research method is mainly composed of a literature study and an expert survey (Delphi survey). Prior research and improvement cases (local governments, government departments, companies, etc.) are reviewed to derive problems and improvements, and a problem/improvement classification table is created based on keywords. Based on the classification contents, an expert survey is conducted to derive a priority improvement plan. Result: The PM-related problems were in 'non-compliance with traffic laws, lack of knowledge, inexperienced operation, and lack of safety awareness' in relation to human factors, and 'device characteristics, road-drivable space, road facilities, parking facilities' in relation to physical factors. 'Management/supervision, product management, user management, education/training' as administrative factors and legal factors are divided into 'absence/sufficiency of law, confusion/duplication, reduced effectiveness'. Improvement tasks related to this include 'PM education/public relations, parking/return, road improvement, PM registration/management, insurance, safety standards, traffic standards, PM device safety, PM supplementary facilities, enforcement/management, dedicated organization, service providers, management system, and related laws/institutional improvement', and 42 detailed tasks are derived for these 14 core tasks. The results for the importance evaluation of detailed tasks show that the tasks with a high overall average for the evaluation items of cost, time, effect, urgency, and feasibility were 'strengthening crackdown/instruction activities, education publicity/campaign, truancy PM management, and clarification of traffic rules'. Conclusion: The PM market is experiencing gradual growth based on shared services and a safe environment for PM use must be ensured along with industrial revitalization. In this respect, this study seeks out the major problems and improvement plans related to PM from a comprehensive point of view and prioritizes the necessary improvement measures. Therefore, it can serve as a basis of data for future policy establishment. In the future, in-depth data supplementation will be required for each key improvement area for practical policy application.

• Journal of Korean Society of Disaster and Security
• /
• v.14 no.4
• /
• pp.69-80
• /
• 2021

This study tried to suggest improvement measures by discovering problems or matters requiring improvement among the annual regional safety evaluation systems. Briefly introducing the structure and contents of the study, which is the introduction, describes the regional safety evaluation method newly applied by the Ministry of Public Administration and Security in 2020. Utilization plans were also introduced according to the local safety level that was finally evaluated by the local government. In this paper, various views of previous researchers related to regional safety are summarized and described. In addition, problems were drawn in the composition of the index of local safety, the method of calculating the index, and the application of the current index. Next, the problems of specific regional safety evaluation indicators were analyzed and solutions were presented. First, "Number of semi-basement households" is replaced with "Number of households receiving basic livelihood" of 「Social Vulnerability Index」 in the field of disaster risk factors is replaced with "the number of households receiving basic livelihood". In addition, the "Vinyl House Area" is evaluated by replacing "the number of households living in a Vinyl House, the number of container households, and the number of households in Jjok-bang villages" with data. Second, in the management and evaluation of habitual drought disaster areas, local governments with a water supply rate of 95% or higher in Counties, Cities, and Districts are treated as "missing". This is because drought disasters rarely occur in the metropolitan area and local governments that have undergone urbanization. Third, the activities of safety sheriffs, safety monitor volunteers, and disaster safety silver monitoring groups along with the local autonomous prevention foundation are added to the evaluation of the evaluation index of 「Regional Autonomous Prevention Foundation Activation」 in the field of response to disaster prevention measures. However, since the name of the local autonomous disaster prevention organization may be different for each local government, if it is an autonomous disaster prevention organization organized and active for disaster prevention, it would be appropriate to evaluate the results by summing up all of its activities. Fourth, among the Scorecard evaluation items, which is a safe city evaluation tool used by the United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction(UNDRR), the item "preservation of natural buffers to strengthen the protection functions provided by natural ecosystems" is borrowed, which is closely related to natural disasters. The Scorecard evaluation is an assessment index that focuses on improving the disaster resilience of local governments while carrying out the campaign "Creating cities resilient to climate crises and disasters" emphasized by UNDRR. Finally, the names of "regional safety level" and "local safety index" are similar, so the term of local safety level is changed to "natural disaster safety level" or "natural calamity safety level". This is because only the general public can distinguish the local safety level from the local safety index.