공공갈등에서 ‘견딜만한 타협’을 위한 정부의 역할 탐색: 행정에 대한 Rosenbloom의 세 접근방법을 통한 갈등사례점검을 중심으로

Abstract

This study, based on the recognition that public conflict in Korean society, despite its deepening pluralism, often results in unilateral choices or extreme confrontation rather than rational compromise, examined the government's response to public conflict and explored effective methods for achieving compromise. To this end, we conducted a qualitative case study of three public conflicts—the expansion of medical school student quotas, the restoration of Gariwangsan Mountain, and the construction of Jeju's second airport—and assessed the government's conflict response methods. The analysis revealed commonalities in the government's conflict response: first, the rigidity of its managerial approach, which prioritizes efficiency and goal achievement; second, a structural distortion of its communication style, which views the public sphere as a strategic management tool rather than a forum for gathering public opinion; and third, the limitations of its approach to value conflict management, which avoids or suppresses irreconcilable conflicts. Based on this analysis, this study highlights the need for a new approach to government conflict management and proposes three solutions. First, the government needs to conduct regular conflict response reviews based on a shift in its perception of conflict management. Second, the government should operate a robust public discussion mechanism that facilitates deliberation. Third, the government should design a mediation mechanism to achieve a tolerable compromise. This study is significant in that it combines communicative rationality and value pluralism to suggest a practical role for the government in achieving a “tolerable compromise.”