생명공학 거버넌스의 인과경로 분석
The Casual Path Analysis of Governance of Biotechnology
0
조회
0
다운로드
4
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The purpose of this study is to analyze the causal path between variables that operate in the governance for communication of biotechnology and to derive an effective method of governance. The research method was conducted by the survey of public officials, researchers, and consumer groups, which are major actors of governance. Based on the existing research and theories, 43 metrics were developed and classified into seven variables. The results show that the most effective causal path for domestic biotechnology governance is as follows; usability recognition ⇒ communication process appropriateness ⇒ governance performance, regardless of the type of partnership. However, in Type A (cooperation with consumer groups), the structure of governance and cooperative communication seem to have no casual relationship. In type B (civil servant – researcher cooperation), the casual relationship between the level of participation and governance performance is pointless.
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to analyze the causal path between variables that operate in the governance for communication of biotechnology and to derive an effective method of governance. The research method was conducted by the survey of public officials, researchers, and consumer groups, which are major actors of governance. Based on the existing research and theories, 43 metrics were developed and classified into seven variables. The results show that the most effective causal path for domestic biotechnology governance is as follows; usability recognition ⇒ communication process appropriateness ⇒ governance performance, regardless of the type of partnership. However, in Type A (cooperation with consumer groups), the structure of governance and cooperative communication seem to have no casual relationship. In type B (civil servant – researcher cooperation), the casual relationship between the level of participation and governance performance is pointless.
참고문헌 (36)
- 강윤재, "식품위험과 불확실성, 그리고 굿거버넌스", 한국과학기술학회 학술대회, pp.222~224 (2016)
- 곽병훈, "복지국가의 거버넌스와 사회자본의 이론적 연계", 한국비교정부학보, 21(4), pp.117~142 (2017), 한국비교정부학회[DOI]
- 김석준, "거번넌스의 이해" (2002), 대영문화사
- 김원제, "위험커뮤니케이션의 구성요인 및 요인 간 영향관계에 관한 탐색 연구 : S-M-C-R-E 모델 적용을 통한 원자력 위험커뮤니케이션의 구조분석을 중심으로", 한국소통학보, (11), pp.80~123 (2009), 한국소통학회
- 김종미, "GMO 공적의사소통에서 정부의 역할과 그 효과 분석:한･미･일 3개국 비교", 한국공공관리학보, 31(3), pp.117~144 (2017), 한국공공관리학회[DOI]
- 김종미, "GMO 신뢰에 대한 위험의사소통전략의 효과: 일반인과 전문가집단의 비교", 한국공공관리학보, 31(1), pp.207~233 (2017), 한국공공관리학회[DOI]
- 문영훈, "거버넌스 특성이 커뮤니티 개발정책 성과에 미치는 영향 연구 : 한국의 "살기좋은 지역만들기"와 미국의 "다운타운 재활성화"를 중심으로", 박사, 행정학과 행정학전공, pp.2012
- 박진희, "이머징 기술 위험과 참여적 리스크 거버넌스", 과학기술정책, 26(7), pp.36~47 (2016)
- 탈추결형 기술혁신의 기술위험관리, "성지은", 과학기술정책연구원, ~ (2007)
- 유재원, "정부인가 거버넌스인가? 계층제인가 네트워크인가?", 한국행정학보, 39(1), pp.41~63 (2005), 한국행정학회
- 이명석, "거버넌스의개념화:‘사회적 조정’으로서의 거버넌스", 한국행정학보, 36(4), pp.321~338 (2002), 한국행정학회
- 이영주, "실패하는 공공커뮤니케이션, 그리고 위험한 정부에 대한 비판적 시론", 한국방송학회 학술대회 논문집, pp.33~55 (2016)
- 이영희, "참여적 위험 거버넌스의 논리와 실천", 동향과 전망, (79), pp.281~314 (2010), 한국사회과학연구회
- 이혜영, "위험 규제 거버넌스에 관한 시론적 연구: 식품안전 분야에의 적용", 한국사회와 행정연구, 24(4), pp.387~409 (2014), 서울행정학회
- 정성호, "중앙-지방 상생발전 가능한 거버넌스 대안 : 복지재정과 지방재정 간 관계를 중심으로", 한국비교정부학보, 19(2), pp.135~155 (2015), 한국비교정부학회[DOI]
- 최성욱, "지역사회와 위험 거버넌스 구축:여수국가산업단지 사례를 중심으로", 지방정부연구, 10(4), pp.237~259 (2007), 한국지방정부학회
- 최영출, "지역의 사회자본측정지표 설정", 지방정부연구, 8(3), pp.119~144 (2004), 한국지방정부학회
- Aven, Terije, "Risk Management and Governance. Concepts, Guidelines and Applications" (2010), Springer
- Elster, J., "Deliberative Democracy" (1998), Cambridge Univ. Press
- De Rodes, Deneen M., "Risk Perception and Risk Communication in the Public Decision-Making Process", Journal of Planning Literature, V, 8(3), pp.324~335 (1994)
- Dietz, T. R., "Handbook of Environmental Sociology", pp.329~369 (2002), Greenwood Press
- Dryzek, J., "Deliberative Democracy and Beyond" (2004), Oxford Univ. Press
- EST-Frame deliverable 1.1 Frameworks for assessing societal impacts of emerging science and technologies, "EST Frameprojekt", EST, ~, pp.EST-Frame G.A. no:288981 (2014)
- Heath, R. L., "Another Part of the Risk Communication Model : Analysis of Communication Processes and Message Content", Journal of Public Relations Research, 14(2), pp.127~158 (2002)
- Risk Governance: Towards an Integrative Approach, International Risk Governance Council, "IRGC", ~, pp.White Paper. no.1 (2005)
- Guidelines for Appropriate Risk Governance of Synthetic Biology, "IRGC", International Risk Governance Council Policy Brief, ~ (2010)
- Introduction to the Irgc Risk Governance Framework, Revised Version 2017, "IRGC", EPFL International Risk Governance Center, ~ (2017)
- Vallero, Theo Vermeire, "Comparative, collaborative, and integrative risk governance for emerging technologies", Environment Systems and Decisions, 38(2), pp.170~176 (2018)
- Lofstedt, R., "Risk communication : pitfalls and promises", European Review, 11(3), pp.417~435 (2003)
- Plough, A., "The emergence of risk communication studies: social and political context", Science, Technology, and Human Values, 12, pp.78~85 (1987)
- Powell, D., "Mad Cows and Mother's Milk : The Perils of Poor Risk Communication" (1997), McGill-Queen's Univ. Press
- Risk Governance-towards an integrative approach, "Renn, O.", Iinternational Risk Governance Council, ~, pp.White Paper. no.1 (2005)
- Renn, O., "Risk Governance. Coping with Uncertainty in a Complex World" (2008), Earthscan
- Siegrist, M., "The Influence of Trust and Perceptions of Risks and Benefits on the Acceptance of Gene Technology", Risk Analysis, 20(2), pp.195~204 (2000)
- Tait, J., "Adaptive governance of synthetic biology", European Molecular Biology Organization(EMBO) reports, 13(7), pp.579~ (2012)
- Van Asselt, Marjolein B. A, "Risk Governance", Journal of Risk Research, 14(4), pp.431~439 (2011)