A Study on the Linkage and Development of the BRM Based National Tasks and the Policy Information Contents (BRM기반 국정과제와 정책정보콘텐츠 연계 및 구축방안에 관한 연구)
-
- Journal of the Korean Society for information Management
- /
- v.39 no.4
- /
- pp.191-213
- /
- 2022
With a view to providing a high-quality policy information service beyond the existing national task service of the national policy information portal (POINT) of the National Library of Korea Sejong, it would be necessary to effectively provide the policy data needed for the implementation of the new national tasks. Accordingly, in this study, an attempt has been made to find a way to connect and develop the BRM-based national tasks and the policy information contents. Towards this end, first, the types of national tasks and the contents of each field and area of the government function's classification system were analyzed, with a focus placed on the 120 national tasks of the new administration. Furthermore, by comparing and analyzing the national tasks of the previous administration and the current information, the contents ought to be reflected for the development of contents related to the national tasks identified. Second, the method for linking and collecting the policy information was sought based on the analysis of the current status of policy information and the national information portal. As a result of the study, first, examining the 1st stage BRM of the national tasks, it turned out that there were 21 tasks for social welfare, 14 for unification and diplomacy, 17 for small and medium-sized businesses in industry and trade, 12 for general public administration, 8 for the economy, taxation and finance, 6 for culture, sports and tourism, science and technology, and education each, 5 for communication, public order and safety each, 4 for health, transportation and logistics, and environment each, 3 for agriculture and forestry, 2 for national defense and regional development each, and 1 for maritime and fisheries each, among others. As for the new administration, it is apparent that science technology and IT are important, and hence, it is necessary to consider such when developing the information services for the core national tasks. Second, to link the database with external organizations, it would be necessary to form a linked operation council, link and collect the information on the national tasks, and link and provide the national task-related information for the POINTs.
In 2009 Iridium 33, a satellite owned by the American Iridium Communications Inc. and Kosmos-2251, a satellite owned by the Russian Space Forces, collided at a speed of 42,120 km/h and an altitude of 789 kilometers above the Taymyr Peninsula in Siberia. NASA estimated that the satellite collision had created approximately 1,000 pieces of debris larger than 10 centimeters, in addition to many smaller ones. By July 2011, the U.S. Space Surveillance Network(SSN) had catalogued over 2,000 large debris fragments. On January 11, 2007 China conducted a test on its anti-satellite missile. A Chinese weather satellite, the FY-1C polar orbit satellite, was destroyed by the missile that was launched using a multistage solid-fuel. The test was unprecedented for having created a record amount of debris. At least 2,317 pieces of trackable size (i.e. of golf ball size or larger) and an estimated 150,000 particles were generated as a result. As far as the Space Treaties such as 1967 Outer Space Treaty, 1968 Rescue Agreement, 1972 Liability Convention, 1975 Registration Convention and 1979 Moon Agreement are concerned, few provisions addressing the space environment and debris in space can be found. In the early years of space exploration dating back to the late 1950s, the focus of international law was on the establishment of a basic set of rules on the activities undertaken by various states in outer space.. Consequently environmental issues, including those of space debris, did not receive the priority they deserve when international space law was originally drafted. As shown in the case of the 1978 "Cosmos 954 Incident" between Canada and USSR, the two parties settled it by the memorandum between two nations not by the Space Treaties to which they are parties. In 1994 the 66th conference of International Law Association(ILA) adopted "International Instrument on the Protection of the Environment from Damage Caused by Space Debris". The Inter-Agency Space Debris Coordination Committee(IADC) issued some guidelines for the space debris which were the basis of "the UN Space Debris Mitigation Guidelines" which had been approved by the Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space(COPUOS) in its 527th meeting. On December 21 2007 this guideline was approved by UNGA Resolution 62/217. The EU has proposed an "International Code of Conduct for Outer Space Activities" as a transparency and confidence-building measure. It was only in 2010 that the Scientific and Technical Subcommittee began considering as an agenda item the long-term sustainability of outer space. A Working Group on the Long-term Sustainability of Outer Space Activities was established, the objectives of which include identifying areas of concern for the long-term sustainability of outer space activities, proposing measures that could enhance sustainability, and producing voluntary guidelines to reduce risks to long-term sustainability. By this effort "Guidelines on the Long-term Sustainability of Outer Space Activities" are being under consideration. In the case of "Declaration of Legal Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exp1oration and Use of Outer Space" adopted by UNGA Resolution 1962(XVIII), December 13 1963, the 9 principles proclaimed in that Declaration, although all of them incorporated in the Space Treaties, could be regarded as customary international law binding all states considering the time and opinio juris by the responses of the world. Although the soft law such as resolutions, guidelines are not binding law, there are some provisions which have a fundamentally norm-creating character and customary international law. In November 12 1974 UN General Assembly recalled through a Resolution 3232(XXIX) "Review of the role of International Court of Justice" that the development of international law may be reflected, inter alia, by the declarations and resolutions of the General Assembly which may to that extend be taken into consideration by the judgements of the International Court of Justice. We are expecting COPUOS which gave birth 5 Space Treaties that it could give us binding space debris mitigation measures to be implemented based on space debris mitigation soft law in the near future.
Global challenges such as the corona pandemic, climate change and the war-on-tech ensure that the demand who the technologies of the future develops and monitors prominently for will be on the agenda. Development of, and applications in, agrifood, biotech, high-tech, medtech, quantum, AI and photonics are the basis of the future earning capacity of the Netherlands and contribute to solving societal challenges, close to home and worldwide. To be like the Netherlands and Europe a strategic position in the to obtain knowledge and innovation chain, and with it our autonomy in relation to from China and the United States insurance, clear choices are needed. Brainport Eindhoven: Building on Philips' knowledge base, there is create an innovative ecosystem where more than 7,000 companies in the High-tech Systems & Materials (HTSM) collaborate on new technologies, future earning potential and international value chains. Nearly 20,000 private R&D employees work in 5 regional high-end campuses and for companies such as ASML, NXP, DAF, Prodrive Technologies, Lightyear and many others. Brainport Eindhoven has a internationally leading position in the field of system engineering, semicon, micro and nanoelectronics, AI, integrated photonics and additive manufacturing. What is being developed in Brainport leads to the growth of the manufacturing industry far beyond the region thanks to chain cooperation between large companies and SMEs. South-Holland: The South Holland ecosystem includes companies as KPN, Shell, DSM and Janssen Pharmaceutical, large and innovative SMEs and leading educational and knowledge institutions that have more than Invest €3.3 billion in R&D. Bearing Cores are formed by the top campuses of Leiden and Delft, good for more than 40,000 innovative jobs, the port-industrial complex (logistics & energy), the manufacturing industry cluster on maritime and aerospace and the horticultural cluster in the Westland. South Holland trains thematically key technologies such as biotech, quantum technology and AI. Twente: The green, technological top region of Twente has a long tradition of collaboration in triple helix bandage. Technological innovations from Twente offer worldwide solutions for the large social issues. Work is in progress to key technologies such as AI, photonics, robotics and nanotechnology. New technology is applied in sectors such as medtech, the manufacturing industry, agriculture and circular value chains, such as textiles and construction. Being for Twente start-ups and SMEs of great importance to the jobs of tomorrow. Connect these companies technology from Twente with knowledge regions and OEMs, at home and abroad. Wageningen in FoodValley: Wageningen Campus is a global agri-food magnet for startups and corporates by the national accelerator StartLife and student incubator StartHub. FoodvalleyNL also connects with an ambitious 2030 programme, the versatile ecosystem regional, national and international - including through the WEF European food innovation hub. The campus offers guests and the 3,000 private R&D put in an interesting programming science, innovation and social dialogue around the challenges in agro production, food processing, biobased/circular, climate and biodiversity. The Netherlands succeeded in industrializing in logistics countries, but it is striving for sustainable growth by creating an innovative ecosystem through a regional industry-academic research model. In particular, the Brainport Cluster, centered on the high-tech industry, pursues regional innovation and is opening a new horizon for existing industry-academic models. Brainport is a state-of-the-art forward base that leads the innovation ecosystem of Dutch manufacturing. The history of ports in the Netherlands is transforming from a logistics-oriented port symbolized by Rotterdam into a "port of digital knowledge" centered on Brainport. On the basis of this, it can be seen that the industry-academic cluster model linking the central government's vision to create an innovative ecosystem and the specialized industry in the region serves as the biggest stepping stone. The Netherlands' innovation policy is expected to be more faithful to its role as Europe's "digital gateway" through regional development centered on the innovation cluster ecosystem and investment in job creation and new industries.
Since 2000, the employment rate of small and medium enterprises (SMEs) has dwindled while the creation of new jobs and the emergence of healthy SMEs have been stagnant. The fundamental reason for these symptoms is that the economic structure is disadvantageous to SMEs. In particular, the greater gap between SMEs and large enterprises has resulted in polarization, and the resulting imbalance has become the largest obstacle to improving SMEs' competitiveness. For example, the total productivity has continued to drop, and the average productivity of SMEs is now merely 30% of that of large enterprises, and the average wage of SMEs' employees is only 53% of that of large enterprises. Along with polarization, rapid industrialization has also caused anti-enterprise consensus, the collapse of the middle class, hostility towards establishments, and other aftereffects. The general consensus is that unless these problems are solved, South Korea will not become an advanced country. Especially, South Korea is now facing issues that need urgent measures, such as the decline of its economic growth, the worsening distribution of profits, and the increased external volatility. Recognizing such negative trends, the MB administration proposed a win-win growth policy and recently introduced a new national value called "ecosystemic development." As the terms in such policy agenda are similar, however, the conceptual differences among such terms must first be fully understood. Therefore, in this study, the concepts of win-win growth policy and ecosystemic development, and the need for them, were surveyed, and their differences from and similarities with other policy concepts like win-win cooperation and symbiotic development were examined. Based on the results of the survey and examination, the study introduced a South Korean model of win-win growth, targeting the promotion of a sound balance between large enterprises and SMEs and an innovative ecosystem, and finally, proposing future policy tasks. Win-win growth is not an academic term but a policy term. Thus, it is less advisable to give a theoretical definition of it than to understand its concept based on its objective and method as a policy. The core of the MB administration's win-win growth policy is the creation of a partnership between key economic subjects such as large enterprises and SMEs based on each subject's differentiated capacity, and such economic subjects' joint promotion of growth opportunities. Its objective is to contribute to the establishment of an advanced capitalistic system by securing the sustainability of the South Korean economy. Such win-win growth policy includes three core concepts. The first concept, ecosystem, is that win-win growth should be understood from the viewpoint of an industrial ecosystem and should be pursued by overcoming the issues of specific enterprises. An enterprise is not an independent entity but a social entity, meaning it exists in relationship with the society (Drucker, 2011). The second concept, balance, points to the fact that an effort should be made to establish a systemic and social infrastructure for a healthy balance in the industry. The social system and infrastructure should be established in such a way as to create a balance between short- term needs and long-term sustainability, between freedom and responsibility, and between profitability and social obligations. Finally, the third concept is the behavioral change of economic entities. The win-win growth policy is not merely about simple transactional relationships or determining reasonable prices but more about the need for a behavior change on the part of economic entities, without which the objectives of the policy cannot be achieved. Various advanced countries have developed different win-win growth models based on their respective cultures and economic-development stages. Japan, whose culture is characterized by a relatively high level of group-centered trust, has developed a productivity improvement model based on such culture, whereas the U.S., which has a highly developed system of market capitalism, has developed a system that instigates or promotes market-oriented technological innovation. Unlike Japan or the U.S., Europe, a late starter, has not fully developed a trust-based culture or market capitalism and thus often uses a policy-led model based on which the government leads the improvement of productivity and promotes technological innovation. By modeling successful cases from these advanced countries, South Korea can establish its unique win-win growth system. For this, it needs to determine the method and tasks that suit its circumstances by examining the prerequisites for its success as well as the strengths and weaknesses of each advanced country. This paper proposes a South Korean model of win-win growth, whose objective is to upgrade the country's low-trust-level-based industrial structure, in which large enterprises and SMEs depend only on independent survival strategies, to a high-trust-level-based social ecosystem, in which large enterprises and SMEs develop a cooperative relationship as partners. Based on this objective, the model proposes the establishment of a sound balance of systems and infrastructure between large enterprises and SMEs, and to form a crenovative social ecosystem. The South Korean model of win-win growth consists of three axes: utilization of the South Koreans' potential, which creates community-oriented energy; fusion-style improvement of various control and self-regulated systems for establishing a high-trust-level-oriented social infrastructure; and behavioral change on the part of enterprises in terms of putting an end to their unfair business activities and promoting future-oriented cooperative relationships. This system will establish a dynamic industrial ecosystem that will generate creative energy and will thus contribute to the realization of a sustainable economy in the 21st century. The South Korean model of win-win growth should pursue community-based self-regulation, which promotes the power of efficiency and competition that is fundamentally being pursued by capitalism while at the same time seeking the value of society and community. Already existing in Korea's traditional roots, such objectives have become the bases of the Shinbaram culture, characterized by the South Koreans' spontaneity, creativity, and optimism. In the process of a community's gradual improvement of its rules and procedures, the trust among the community members increases, and the "social capital" that guarantees the successful control of shared resources can be established (Ostrom, 2010). This basic ideal can help reduce the gap between large enterprises and SMEs, alleviating the South Koreans' victim mentality in the face of competition and the open-door policy, and creating crenovative corporate competitiveness. The win-win growth policy emerged for the purpose of addressing the polarization and imbalance structure resulting from the evolution of 21st-century capitalism. It simultaneously pursues efficiency and fairness on one hand and economic and community values on the other, and aims to foster efficient interaction between the market and the government. This policy, however, is also evolving. The win-win growth policy can be considered an extension of the win-win cooperation that the past 'Participatory Government' promoted at the enterprise management level to the level of systems and culture. Also, the ecosystemic development agendum that has recently emerged is a further extension that has been presented as a national ideal of "a new development model that promotes the co-advancement of environmental conservation, growth, economic development, social integration, and national and individual development."