• Journal of Science and Technology Studies
• /
• v.7 no.1
• /
• pp.117-150
• /
• 2007

This paper attempted a content analysis on the S&T comprehensive plans in Korea focusing on five-year plans. They include twelve plans from the 1st five-year plan for technological promotion($1962{\sim}1966$) to S&T basic plan in participatory government($2003{\sim}2007$). The result of content analysis on such plans was explained according to policy environments, formative system, policy goals, policy scopes, and policy subjects. In the case of policy subjects, this paper reconstructed nine policy categories such as national strategic technology development, S&T investment, S&T manpower, basic science research, private technology development, international S&T cooperation, regional S&T innovation, S&T infrastructure, and S&T culture. In conclusion, this paper proposed future directions for the making of S&T comprehensive plans in Korea.

• Proceedings of the Technology Innovation Conference
• /
• 2005.06a
• /
• pp.140-158
• /
• 2005

Science & Technology (S&T) is the most important thing to attain competitiveness in the 21st century. Our traditional S&T policies have been focused on hardware infra structure. But, we should consider soft infra of S&T to enhance welfare development of S&T personnel. S&T should be had a correct understanding method of the creation for S&T culture. It implies that S&T policy in the 21st century should consider non-material factors which include social, human, environment and culture. Under this background. This paper defines the concept of welfare of S&T personnel. Also this paper deals with the change of S&T policy of Korea and analyzes the characteristic of each phase. This paper argues that all actors (for example S&T personnel, corporate using S&T, public) should participate in the process of S&T innovation since the 21st century is the generation of popularization of S&T. The purpose of this paper is to suggest a few methods of welfare improvement of S&T personnel to reinforce soft infra structure of S&T.

• Journal of Digital Convergence
• /
• v.10 no.2
• /
• pp.11-23
• /
• 2012

This study makes an attempt to understand the changes in the National R&D policy by the comparative analysis in terms of R&D policy regime. We characterize the related issues on the National R&D policy, and analyze the direction of science and technology(S&T) policy using the method of scientometrics. The result shows that the policy regime can be categorized into three groups with respect to the R&D efficiency and the keywords; Regime 1: National S&T Innovation 5-year Plan(1999-2002) and National S&T Master plan of the previous adminstration(2003-2007), Regime 2: National S&T Master Plan(2002-2006) and National S&T Master Plan of the previous administration(2003-2007), Regime 3: National S&T Master Plan of the current administration (2008-present).

• STI Policy Review
• /
• v.6 no.1
• /
• pp.85-110
• /
• 2015

Science and technology diplomacy has become an important policy agenda because of its diplomatic utility and enhancing of international science networks. However, different countries possess different objectives and governance of S&T diplomacy. In this context, this paper seeks to answer the following questions: what are the similarities and differences of S&T diplomacy in countries and what shapes these characteristics? To answer these questions, this paper conducts a comparative case study with five countries - Switzerland, Germany, Japan, the United Kingdom, and the United States - whose S&T diplomatic programs are highly recognized and benchmarked by other countries. A useful typology is devised to conduct a systematic comparison. For S&T diplomatic objectives, this paper suggests five types by elaborating concepts from the previous literature: access diplomacy, promotion diplomacy, public aid diplomacy, functional diplomacy, and global leadership diplomacy. Also, in terms of a governance model for S&T diplomacy, three models - a sciencecentered model, a science-outsourcing model and a top-down coordinating model - are suggested based on leadership organization. This paper reveals the different characteristics of the selected countries in S&T diplomacy. While the selected countries pursue almost every type of S&T diplomatic objective, the US and the UK tend to conduct influence-based diplomacy more than other countries do. In addition, different countries each have unique governance models for S&T diplomacy. While more research is necessary for vigorously testing the causes of different objectives and their relationship with governance models, this paper suggests more general policy implications throughout. The strength of the country's S&T base is fundamentally important for the success of S&T diplomacy. However, domestic S&T assets need to be transferred to its diplomatic capabilities. In this sense, the appropriate governance that fits best with the country's S&T mission should be established, while S&T communities should increasingly play a leadership role in evolving global S&T networks.

• Asian Journal of Innovation and Policy
• /
• v.10 no.3
• /
• pp.355-379
• /
• 2021

This study examined the evolution of S&T Basic Acts in Korea from the Science and Technology Promotion Act (1967) through the Special Act on STI (1997) to the Framework Act on Science and Technology (2001) in the following aspects: 1) comprehensive plans, 2) coordination mechanisms for S&T policies, 3) enforcement of R&D programs and performance diffusion, 4) promotion of human resources, 5) and S&T investment and budgeting. Before the Framework Act on S&T was enacted in 2001, critical issues were found in establishing S&T master plans, promotion of R&D programs, comprehensive coordination mechanisms, and R&D budgeting. The three Basic Acts have expanded the scope of regulation over time to cover the entire cycle of the S&T process. They concern a wide range of issues, including creating a basis for scientific and technological development, S&T promotion, disseminating and commercializing research outcomes, and preventing adverse effects from science and technology. The content of the Basic Acts has evolved in response to changes in the political, economic, and social environment of Korean industry during the past five decades.

• STI Policy Review
• /
• v.9 no.1
• /
• pp.99-132
• /
• 2018

Developing countries face numerous challenges in the process of building science, technology, and research capacity; in particular, the formation and accumulation of skilled S&T workforce. The lack of organized and sustainable higher education options (Master and Doctoral programs), nonexistent or low-quality academic programs, and the absence of research-oriented study options are some of the strong contributors for talented students to emigrate to developed countries. At the same time, the consolidation of a global knowledge economy, the internationalization of higher education, and the competition to attract foreign talent in industrialized countries present challenges for underdeveloped nations to retain their already scarce skilled human resources. In this context, student mobility has been used as a policy mechanism to cope with S&T workforce shortages in S&T laggard nations. It has also enabled opportunities for international cooperation to play a key role. While significant literature has been devoted to studying the gains of developed nations with the arrival and potential migration of the mobilized students, few scholarly inquiries have addressed the benefits and losses experienced by their countries of origin. More importantly, limited research can be found on policy options and policy implications for developing countries to deal with the dilemmas presented by the brain-drain/brain-circulation debate. The goal of this article is to study empirical evidence of an international cooperation initiative for student mobility between the Republic of Korea and Guatemala (implemented during 2009-2015). The paper analyzes this particular international cooperation experience from the perspective of the different actors involved and attempts to draw policy implications and policy options for developing countries to deal with potential risks and gains derived from international mobility for their S&T capacity building.

• Journal of Technology Innovation
• /
• v.4 no.1
• /
• pp.185-207
• /
• 1996

It is frequently pointed out that the Korean economy, with its scarce natural resources, would never have been able to achieve current levels of economic development without the massive provision of well-educated, hardworking human resources. Throughout the industrialization process ,full-fledged deployment and mobilization of qualified human resources have been the foundation to industrial policy and S&T policy. This paper describes the development of S&T human resources in Korea using various statistics including educational enrollment rates, unemployment rates, the allocation of researchers and R&D expenditures among sectors of performance, educational composition of employment within and across industries, technical human resource shortage rates, relative wage levels of SMEs, and composition of labor force by age-group and gender. While analyzing S&T human resources development, this paper discusses issues such as the mismatched demand and supply of skill and knowledge levels of the highly educated, the unbalanced distribution of S&T human resources between sectors, and the low utilization of the female and aged labor force. This paper suggests that the policy maker applies a hybrid of quantitative and qualitative policies to reduce the mismatches of supply and demand of skill and knowledge levels for each labor market categorized according to supply side.

• Asian Journal of Innovation and Policy
• /
• v.2 no.2
• /
• pp.123-149
• /
• 2013

In the past three decades since the advent of market oriented reforms began in 1978, China has made rapid strides in catalyzing economic growth. The economic development coincides with the development of significant capabilities in several areas of science, technology, and innovation. China has recorded notable achievements in a number of emerging fields. This paper investigates the process that has catalyzed the developments in Science and Technology (S&T) and the key factors that have facilitated this process. The causality of dynamism of S&T in China points at targeted development, an emphasis on high growth industries and high technology, commensurate resource mobilization, ruthless restructuring of innovation actors, dynamic organization and management of R&D, continuously evolving policies with strict enforcement, and implementable instruments. This paper attempts to bring out the roadmap of the Chinese transformation process in S&T and derive policy lessons for India.

• STI Policy Review
• /
• v.3 no.2
• /
• pp.92-110
• /
• 2012

An active policy role is suggested for collaboration that will enhance national level Science and Technology (S&T) capabilities. In contrast, some studies see a limited role of policy support for collaborative S&T research at the individual level (including research groups or institutional levels) due to their self-organizing nature. Two views on S&T collaboration look at different levels but existing research largely ignores the context of developing countries. This paper shows how S&T collaborations between Brazil and Korea have developed over the past two decades. The paper indicates the gaps between initiation and the actual establishment of collaborative research at national and individual levels, differences in the focus areas of research, differences in resources and project planning, and the nature of collaborations. Collaborative research activities at the national level were initiated before the individual level but activated later than the individual level; in addition, the focus areas of research were laid down earlier at the national level with individual collaborations focused on different areas. Project types remained different at each level (i.e. top-down and bottom-up) or with a slightly changing mix. This study suggests appropriate policy measures (such as the timely and effective information collection of activities at different levels and proactive coordination) that could reduce the gaps in the timing and alignment of research areas. This paper also alludes to an evolutionary model to develop S&T collaboration among developing countries.

• Journal of Distribution Science
• /
• v.9 no.2
• /
• pp.25-30
• /
• 2011

Transport is animportant sector of government regulation. Every country has its own transport policy, but European countries are evolving a common transport policy, which has a long history. The establishment of a consistent common policy in the EU's transport sector is still underway. The key motivations of this policy are 1) to establish and implement a common transport policy, 2) to clarify the concept of sustainability in the transport sector, and 3) to integrate transport services into a common infrastructure. One of the policy's objectives is the progressive movement towards sustainable development in the transport section. The EU'stransport policy has recognised that intermodality is a very important competitive tool. The EU's policy thrustin intermodal transport can be catergorised into infrastructure, technology, and standards and rules. However, obstacles to success can be detected. Cases like that of TEN-T and Marco Polo illustrate European intermodal policies in practice. As regards sustainability in the transport sector, intermodality can be an alternative solution to the increasing imbalance between transport modes and congestion arising from increased road use. Sustainability has been emphasised by the EU, which aims to establish intermodality in its future alternative transport systems while fostering sustainable development in the transport sector. Therefore, intermodality can be defined as a general trend in the current transport market, drawing interest from public institutions and transport-related market players. The EU has thus made an effort to facilitate intermodality in its territory, materialised through various policy options. Therefore, looking into the EU's intermodal transport policies is worthwhile, as doing so can provide useful lessons for all concerned parties.