Policy Transfer in Times of Techno Bureaucracy: South Korea’s Regulatory Response to the Online Intermediation Services
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
With the recent rapid growth in online intermediation services, the South Korean Fair Trade Commission (KFTC) proposed a bill in 2020 aiming to prevent unfair trade practices and promote innovation. Legislation of the bill has been proactively driven by the KFTC and is scheduled to be deliberated at the Parliament after being approved at the Cabinet meeting. The key ideas of the bill have been adopted from regulatory framework of the EU, who had long been a world leader in regulating the tech sector. This study explores how the Korean regulators made their regulatory choices and why they made such decision, from the perspective of cross-national policy transfer. In doing so, this paper analyzes the distinguished regulatory frameworks of the South Korean and EU regimes, as well as the different business landscapes of the two jurisdictions. Through the analysis, this study finds that policy transfer is seemingly an ‘easy’ tool but how it operates is much more complex, because every jurisdiction has a distinguishably unique environment –both in business and regulatory terms. The South Korean government’s attempt to adopt a new regulation from the EU framework misses numerous points as it decided to accelerate the legislation process instead of tailoring the law to the Korea-specific situation with more delicacy. The unclarity of the legislation also leaves burden to the business sector, but a significant learning is learned of policy transfer - that policy transfer can be used as an effective and convenient tool only if the ‘adopter’ takes a thorough and robust approach in preparing a policy strategy that is delicately tailored to the domestic business and regulatory environment.
Abstract
With the recent rapid growth in online intermediation services, the South Korean Fair Trade Commission (KFTC) proposed a bill in 2020 aiming to prevent unfair trade practices and promote innovation. Legislation of the bill has been proactively driven by the KFTC and is scheduled to be deliberated at the Parliament after being approved at the Cabinet meeting. The key ideas of the bill have been adopted from regulatory framework of the EU, who had long been a world leader in regulating the tech sector. This study explores how the Korean regulators made their regulatory choices and why they made such decision, from the perspective of cross-national policy transfer. In doing so, this paper analyzes the distinguished regulatory frameworks of the South Korean and EU regimes, as well as the different business landscapes of the two jurisdictions. Through the analysis, this study finds that policy transfer is seemingly an ‘easy’ tool but how it operates is much more complex, because every jurisdiction has a distinguishably unique environment –both in business and regulatory terms. The South Korean government’s attempt to adopt a new regulation from the EU framework misses numerous points as it decided to accelerate the legislation process instead of tailoring the law to the Korea-specific situation with more delicacy. The unclarity of the legislation also leaves burden to the business sector, but a significant learning is learned of policy transfer - that policy transfer can be used as an effective and convenient tool only if the ‘adopter’ takes a thorough and robust approach in preparing a policy strategy that is delicately tailored to the domestic business and regulatory environment.
참고문헌 (44)
- "Big tech's new rules: How Europe became the world’s top tech regulator" (2021)[URL]
- 배유일, "불확실성하의 정책이전, 확산 그리고 제도변화: 정책 아이디어를 중심으로", 국정관리연구, 5(2), pp.95~117 (2010), 성균관대학교 국정전문대학원[DOI]
- Berry, F.S., "Theories of the Policy Process" (1999)
- Black, J., "Regulatory innovation" (2005), Edward Elgar Publishing
- Chung, H. R., "Tendency in regulating online platform and legal review on competition policy", pp.2020
- Dobbin, F., "The global diffusion of public policies : Social construction, coercion, competition, or learning", Annual Review of Sociology, 33(1), pp.449~472 (2007)[DOI]
- Committee of National Policy at the National Assembly of Korea, "Review report on the amendment on the Online Platform Intermediary Transactions Fairness Act", ~ (2020)
- "E-commerce market analysis: The eCommerce market in South Korea"[URL]
- "Business-To-Business Relations in the Online Platform Environment: Final Report" (2017)[URL]
- "Report of the European Law Institute: Model Rules on Online Platforms" (2019)[URL]
- "Platform-to-business Trading Practices" (2021)[URL]
- "Questions and Answers: Establishing a Fair, Trusted and Innovation Driven Ecosystem in the Online Platform Economy" (2020)[URL]
- "Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 June 2019 on promoting fairness and transparency for business users of online intermediation services" (2019)[URL]
- Evans, M., "Understanding policy transfer : A multi-level, multi-disciplinary perspective", Public Administration(London), 77(2), pp.361~385 (1999)[DOI]
- (2021)[URL]
- "Review of current Online Platform Intermediary Transactions Fairness Bill. Digital 365. 8(0)" (2021)[URL]
- Gilardi F., "Who learn from what in policy diffusion processes", American Journal of Political Science, 54(3), pp.650~666 (2010)
- Graham E. R., "The diffusion of policy diffusion research in political science", British Journal of Political Science, 43(3), pp.673~701 (2013)
- 홍대식, "온라인 플랫폼과 공정경제 정책 ― 거래공정화 규제의 쟁점 ―", 법학연구, 31(1), pp.317~352 (2021), 법학연구원[DOI]
- "Research report on legislative tasks to enhance fairness in online platform intermediary trades" (2020)[URL]
- "Internet user report" (2021)[URL]
- Kim, H. K., "Evaluating suitability of the Online Platform Intermediary Transactions Fairness Act from the regulatory perspective", Proceedings of the Seminar on Current Issues on Online Intermediary Trade and Relevant Legislation Driven by the Government (2020)
- "Number of legislative bills to regulate businesses surge three times in the Moon administration" (2021)[URL]
- Korea Economic Research Institute, "Number of FTC-driven bills reinforcing regulation increase by 2.5 times during last six years", Press release, ~ (2019)
- Korea Fair Trade Commission, "Proposed amendment on the Online Platform Intermediary Transactions Fairness Act", ~ (2020)
- Korea Fair Trade Commission, "Amended Online Platform Intermediary Transactions Fairness Act gets approval at Cabinet meeting", Press release, ~ (2021)
- Korea Fair Trade Commission, "Policy to drive fairness in digital economy announced", Press release, ~ (2020)
- (2021)[URL]
- (2021)[URL]
- 이정란, "온라인플랫폼 공정화법 제정안에 대한 검토", 경쟁법연구, 43, pp.60~96 (2021), 한국경쟁법학회[DOI]
- "Coupang becomes a giant" (2021)[URL]
- "Report on online platform trades and forecast after implementation of Online Platform Intermediary Transactions Fairness Bill. Proceedings of the Seminar on Current Issues on Online Intermediary Trade and Relevant Legislation Driven by the Government" (2020)[URL]
- "Social media usage in South Korea - Statistics & facts" (2021)[URL]
- 박경미, "디지털 플랫폼 투명화·공정화 법제의 동향과 전망: EU, 일본, 우리나라 법제의 주요 내용과 평가에 대한 비교법적 검토", 고려법학, (99), pp.195~235 (2020), 법학연구원[DOI]
- "How Can EU Legislation Enable and/or Disable Innovation (European Commission)" (2014)[URL]
- "Regulation 2019/1150. Regulation (EU) 2019/1150 of the European Parliament and of the Council. The European Parliament and the Council of the European Union"[URL]
- "Internet usage rate in South Korea from 2000 to 2020" (2021)[URL]
- "Countries with the fastest average mobile internet speeds as of May 2021" (2021)[URL]
- Strang D., "Adding social structure to diffusion models : An event history framework", Sociological Methods & Research, 19(3), pp.324~353 (1991)
- Teubner, G., "Legal irritants: Good faith in British law, or how unifying law ends up in new differences" (2000), Hart Publishing
- Walker, J. L., "The diffusion of innovations among the American states", American Political Science Review, 63, pp.880~899 (1969)
- "Online Platforms: How to Adapt Regulatory Framework to the Digital Age? (European Parliament Briefing)" (2017)[URL]
- "Corporations 'suffer' from excessive regulations in contrast to government's pledge for relaxed regulations" (2020)[URL]
- "Big Tech startups spring up in South Korea" (2021)[URL]