• The Journal of Fisheries Business Administration
• /
• v.33 no.2
• /
• pp.1-29
• /
• 2002

The main objective of this research aims at analyzing efficiency of government financial transfers(GFTs) to the Korean fisheries sector, using the Linear Structural Relations model(i.e., LISERL model) and the field survey data. Most policies of GFTs tend to be implemented to protect industries with weak competitive advantages such as infant and/or primary industries. Specific policy instruments include income transfers, government loans with lower interest rates, taxes and the like. Fishing activities are made at a highly changeable natural environment of the ocean with a great amount of risk and uncertainty. Fishing households make their livelihood under the small-scale fisheries. Such fisheries and fishing households have also a relatively weak market power. Because of these fisheries characteristics most coastal states have adopted a variety of government support programs. However, despite such a huge government support, during the past several decades the world fishing communities have seen a tendency of continuous fishereis resource overexploitation. For this resason there have been hot debates over the government support policies for fisheries through OECD, FAO, WTO, and UNEP. In general, policy evaluations tend to be made on the basis of benefit-cost(B/C) analysis. However, the B/C analysis may produce results quite different from real ones primarily due to many unmeasurable effects. Thus, the authors composed simple questionaires and let fishermen, government officials and academic people answer the questions. The survery was made in several ways such as post-mail and personal/group interviews. In recent years, for analysis of policy performances and effectiveness, the LISREL model has often been used, which consists of structural and measurement eqquations. This model has a good advantage of transforming unobservable variables to observable ones so that it helps construct endogenous cause and effect relationships among relevant variables. The evaluation was done from the two aspects: policy results and policy effectiveness. The policy result evaluation showed that there is a need for improvement for policy problem perception and decision-making process, while the policy effect evaluation suggested that the policy goals were successfully achieved and social justice was improved from the perspective of the entire society as well. However, the research results showed that the GFT policies rendered little contrubtion to narrowing down the gap between GFT beneficiaries and non-beneficiaries incomes.

• KDI Journal of Economic Policy
• /
• v.31 no.2
• /
• pp.155-194
• /
• 2009

The Korean economy successfully overcame the macroeconomic downturns driven from the Asian financial crisis in a very short period of time. The economic shock, however, generated a variety of social problems, one of which was the increase in felonies (homicides, robbery, rape, and arson), or degradation of public safety. We argue that the Korean criminal policy has not been effective to ameliorate the rising trends in crime caused by the financial crisis. In order to substantiate this claim, we assess the effectiveness of criminal policy: policing, sentencing, and corrections. First, there has been resource shortage in policing since the 1997 financial crisis. For the past ten years, the investment of human resource and budget in the police has been virtually stagnant, as well as in prosecutors' investigation activities. The insufficient resource allocation in policing caused a huge decline in arrest rates and prosecution rates. Second, the Korean judicial system has not increased the severity of punishment. Comparing the pre- and the post-financial crisis period, the average length of prison sentence by the courts has declined. Given the degrading in the quality of crime and the decreasing amount of inputs into the policing and prosecution, the government should have increased the severity of punishment to deter crime. Third, we found that the government hired more officers and allocated larger budget into prison and probation. However, it is difficult to suggest that the increased level of resources in correctional programs have been effective in preventing released prisoners from committing future crimes. This is because the number of repeat offenders convicted of more than a third offense increased dramatically since 1997, pushing felonies upward. In sum, the government organizations failed to respond respectively or to make coordinated actions, eventually causing a dramatic increase in crimes. This research brings explicit policy implications. In order to prevent possible additional degradation of public safety, the government must put more efforts into increasing the effectiveness of policy and to investing more resources into said policies. We also emphasize the importance of the institutional mechanisms which foster policy coordination among the Police, the Prosecutor's Office, the Ministry of Justice, and other relevant government organizations.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.34 no.1
• /
• pp.3-38
• /
• 2019

In 1984, Congress enacted a new measure of administrative sanctions which is a civil money penalty program for violations of Aviation Act and its implementing regulations. This civil money penalty system has been in operations in lieu of suspending or revoking certificates issued by Korean government, Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, and Transport. According to the rules of Aviation Business Act or Aviation Safety Act, where the Minister of Land, Infrastructure and Transport should order an air carrier to suspend operation because of her violation under certain rules, in which case the suspension of operation is likely to cause serious inconvenience to consumers of air transport services or to harm public interest, the Minister of the department may impose an administrative monetary penalty in lieu of the suspension of operation. In this regard, airline related civil money penalties are somewhat different from those of fair trade, which is the origin of the money penalties system in Korea. Civil money penalties in the field of fair trade are imposed on executive duty violations that undermine the value of the market economy order, and focus on reimbursement of profits due to violations and compensation for unfair spending by consumers. However, in the aviation sector, breach of duty by a business operator does not simply cause the property loss of the public, but it has a direct impact on life or property of the public. In this respect, aviation penalties are more likely to be administrative sanctions or punitive measures than refunds of unfair benefits, compared to penalties in the field of fair trade. In general, civil money penalties have been highly preferred as administrative sanctions because they are subject to investigations by administrative experts and thus, efficiency can be ensured and execution is quicker than judicial procedures. Moreover, in Korea, because punitive civil damages cannot awarded by the courts, the imposition of civil money penalties is recognized as a means of realizing social justice by recognizing the legal feelings of the people. However, civil money penalties are administrative sanctions, and in terms of effectiveness, they are similar to criminal fines, which are a form of punishment. Inadequate legislation and operation of penalties imposition may cause damage to the value of Constitution. Under the above recognition, this paper has been described for the purpose of identifying the present status of the civil money penalties imposition system and operating status in the area of air transport under the laws and regulations in Korea. Especially, this paper was focused on exploring the problem and improvement direction of Korean system through the comparative study with foreign laws and regulations.