본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

지방공공서비스 성과정보가 관료의 서비스 성과공개 및 시민참여 강화 의도에 미치는 영향에 관한 연구: 투명성 강화기제를 중심으로

A Study on the Effects of Local Public Service Performance Information on Bureaucratic Intention to Enhance Performance Openness and Citizen Participation: Focusing on Strengthening Mechanisms of Transparency

오영민|신헌태|이현국
한국행정연구원 (The Korea Institute of Public Administration)|2020.09|한국행정연구 (The Korean Journal of Public Administration)|제29권 제3호|pp. 43-76|DOI 10.22897/kipajn.2020.29.3.002

0

조회

0

다운로드

4

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

시민참여투명성정보공개transparencyinformation disclosurecitizen participation지방공공서비스 성과정보설문조사 실험performance information of local public servicessurvey experiment
주제분류행정학

초록

1990년대 이후 투명성은 정부 개혁의 필수요소로서 전 세계적으로 강조되어 왔으며, 이와 관련한많은 연구들이 진행되어왔다. 이러한 연구들은 투명성을 정부가 직면한 문제 해결을 위한 관리적수단으로 제시하면서 투명성 강화의 효과를 강조하였음에도 불구하고 공공부문의 투명성을 강화할 수있는 인과적 경로에 대한 분석은 부족하였다. 이에 본 연구는 실험적 연구방법을 활용하여 주민의삶의 질을 측정하는 지방공공서비스에 대한 성과정보가 투명성 강화와 관련한 관료들의 인식 변화에어떠한 영향을 미치는지를 규명하고자 시작되었다. 분석의 결과, 부정적인 주민만족도를 본 지방정부관리자들은 투명성 강화에 동의하는 것으로 나타났으며, 주민의 투명성 요구가 강화될수록 시민참여에대해 부정적 인식을 가지는 것으로 도출되었다.

Abstract

Since the 1990s, transparency has been emphasized worldwide as an essential element of government reform, and many researchers examined transparency. However, although the studies on transparency suggested that transparency is a managerial tool for solving the problems that the governments faced, only several studies analyzed the causal relations to enhance transparency in the public sector. In this sense, this study examines how performance information on local public service, which measures the quality of life of residents, affects the perceptual change in the bureaucratic transparency efforts, using an experimental method based on behavioral economics. As a result of the analyses, local government managers who received negative information on citizen satisfaction agree to strengthen transparency but disagree with more citizen participation in service delivery processes when citizens’ requests for information disclosure increase.

참고문헌 (81)

  1. 국민권익위원회, "정책투명성 진단 매뉴얼", ~ (2010)
  2. 김민배, "정치자금의 투명성 확보와 시민참여 : 정당국고보조제도를 중심으로", 의정연구, 6(1), pp.48~69 (2000)
  3. 김병섭, "국민행복, 삶의 질, 그리고 공공서비스의 관계 연구", 한국행정학보, 49(4), pp.97~122 (2015), 한국행정학회[DOI]
  4. 김선경, "전자정부의 투명성요인이 정부신뢰에 미치는 영향에 관한 연구: 시민과 공무원의 인식차이를 중심으로", 한국지역정보화학회지, 20(3), pp.89~109 (2017), 한국지역정보화학회[DOI]
  5. 김인, "새행정이론" (2002), 대영문화사
  6. 명재진, "지방자치와 주민참여를 통한 투명성 제고 방안 연구", 한국부패학회보, 12(3), pp.1~20 (2007), 한국부패학회
  7. 박나라, "공공부문 투명성이 만족도에 미치는 효과: 2010-2015년 공공기관의 정보공개와 고객만족도의 관계를 중심으로", 한국행정학보, 51(4), pp.219~253 (2017), 한국행정학회
  8. 박흥식, "투명성 가치 : 개념적 구조와 의미", 한국사회와 행정연구, 12(3), pp.103~118 (2001)
  9. 박흥식, "민원행정서비스 만족도에 대한 투명성 효과: 직접 및 조절인가, 공정성을 통한 매개인가?", 행정논총, 48(4), pp.385~408 (2010), 한국행정연구소
  10. 이혁우, "정책에서 투명성에 대한 재인식: 투명성의 성격과 정책문제에의 적용", 사회과학연구, 27(3), pp.117~142 (2016), 사회과학연구소[DOI]
  11. 지방재정운영의 투명성 강화방안, "이효", 한국지방행정연구원, ~ (2013)
  12. 임동진, "공공서비스의 주민만족도: 주민의 특성에 따라 차이가 나는가?", 행정논총, 52(2), pp.153~178 (2014), 한국행정연구소
  13. 장용석, "한국사회 투명성 패러다임의 전환 1993년～2006년 신문기사 내용분석", 한국사회학, 42(7), pp.146~177 (2008), 한국사회학회
  14. 장지원, "행정정보공개의 관련요인에 관한 실증분석", 한국행정연구, 13(1), pp.170~202 (2004), 한국행정연구원
  15. 제갈돈, "지방정부 공공서비스에 대한 시민들의 기대, 성과 및 만족도의 관계: 기대불일치이론을 중심으로", 한국행정학보, 47(1), pp.69~94 (2013), 한국행정학회
  16. 조희진, "국가 간 비교를 통해 본 정부역량 : 거버넌스 영향 요인을 중심으로", 한국행정연구, 26(3), pp.37~75 (2017), 한국행정연구원[DOI]
  17. 최슬기, "전자정부와 부패의 관계에 관한 실증연구:정책결정 투명성을 중심으로", 한국지역정보화학회지, 17(2), pp.29~59 (2014), 한국지역정보화학회[DOI]
  18. 최승환, "한－중 FTA상의 분쟁해결제도 －공공참여 확대를 통한 투명성 제고방안을 중심으로－", 국제거래법연구, 21(1), pp.219~236 (2012), 국제거래법학회[DOI]
  19. 홍승현, "재정투명성에 관하여", 재정포럼, (189), pp.31~46 (2012)
  20. Alt, J. E., "Fiscal transparency, political parties, and debt in OECD countries", European Economic Review, 50(2006), pp.1403~1439 (2006)
  21. Andersen, S. C., "How leaders respond to diversity : The moderating role of organizational culture on performance information use", Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 26(3), pp.448~460 (2016)
  22. Angner, E., "A course of behavioral economics" (2016), Palgrave Macmillan
  23. Ashford, S. J., "Feedback as an individual resource : personal strategies of creating information", Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 32(3), pp.370~398 (1983)
  24. Baekgaard, M., "Interpreting performance information : Motivated reasoning or unbiased comprehension", Public Administration Review, 76(1), pp.73~82 (2016)
  25. Fiscal transparency and economic performance, "Baldrich, J.", ~ (2005)
  26. Birkinshaw, P., "Freedom of information and openness : Fundamental human rights", Admin Law Review, 58(1), pp.177~218 (2006)
  27. Bloom, H. S., "Using covariates to improve precision for studies that randomize schools to evaluate educational interventions", Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 29(1), pp.30~59 (2007)
  28. Bouckaert, G., "Comparing measures of citizen trust and user satisfaction as indicators of"Good Governance" : Difficulties to linking trust and satisfaction indicators", International Review of Administrative Science, 69, pp.329~343 (2003)
  29. Chen, B., "Assessing interorganizational networks for public service delivery : A process-perceived effectiveness framework", Public Performance & Management Review, 31(3), pp.348~363 (2008)
  30. Cho, Y. H., "E-government to combat corruption : The case of Seoul metropolitan government", International Journal of Public Administration, 27(10), pp.719~735 (2004)
  31. Cucciniello, M., "Transparency for trust in government : How effective is formal transparency", International Journal of Public Administration, 37(13), pp.911~921 (2014)
  32. Cucciniello, M., "25 years of transparency research : Evidence and future directions", Public Administration Review, 77(1), pp.32~44 (2017)
  33. Damgaard, B., "The Oxford handbook of public accountability" (2014), Oxford University Press
  34. de Renzio, P., "Transparency and participation in public financial management: What do budget laws say?", International Budget Partnership, ~ (2011)
  35. Eskildsen, J., "Customer satisfaction: The role of transparency", Total Quality Management & Business Excellence, 18(1-2), pp.39~47 (2007)
  36. Esteller-Moré, A., "Fiscal transparency : (Why)does your local government respond", Public Management Review, 14(8), pp.1153~1173 (2012)
  37. Fozzard, A., "The basic budgeting problem: Approaches to resource allocation in the public sector and their implications for pro-poor budgeting" (2001), Overseas Development Institute
  38. Fung, A., "Varieties of participation in complex governance", Public Administration Review, 66(s1), pp.66~75 (2006)
  39. Grimmelikhuijsen, S. G., "Developing and testing a theoretical framework for computer‐mediated transparency of Local Governments", Public Administration Review, 72(4), pp.562~571 (2012)
  40. Grimmelikhuijsen, S. G., "Behavioral public administration : Combining insights from public administration and psychology", Public Administration Review, 77(1), pp.45~56 (2016)
  41. Halachmi, A., "Citizen participation and performance measurement : Operationalizing democracy through better accountability", Public Administration Quarterly, 34(3), pp.378~399 (2010)
  42. Heald, D. A., "Transparency:The key to better governance?", pp.25~43 (2006), Oxford University Press
  43. General equilibrium treatment effects: A study of tuition policy, "Heckman, J. J.", National Bureau of Economic Research, ~, pp.NBER Working Paper, (6426) (1998)
  44. Herian, M. N., "Public participation, procedural fairness, and evaluations of local governance : The moderating role of uncertainty", Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 22(4), pp.815~840 (2012)
  45. Holm, J. M., "Successful problem solvers? Managerial performance information use to improve low organizational performance", Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 28(3), pp.303~320 (2018)
  46. Holzer, M., "Seoul’s E-governance policy study" (2016), The Seoul Institute
  47. Hong, H., "The internet, transparency, and government : Public relationships in Seoul, South Korea", Public Relations Review, 40(3), pp.500~502 (2014)
  48. Im, T., "Does management performance impact citizen satisfaction", American Review of Public Administration, 42(4), pp.419~436 (2012)
  49. Open budget survey 2017, "International Budget Partnership", ~ (2018)
  50. Irvin, R. A., "Citizen participation in decision making : Is worth the effort", Public Administration Review, 64(1), pp.55~65 (2004)
  51. James, O., "Performance measures and democracy : Information effects on citizens in field and laboratory experiments", Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 21(3), pp.399~418 (2011)
  52. James, O., "Citizens’ blame of politicians for public service failure : Experimental evidence about blame reduction through delegation and contracting", Public Administration Review, 76(1), pp.83~93 (2016)
  53. James, O., "Incredibly good performance : An experimental study of source and level effects on the credibility of government", The American Review of Public Administration, 47(1), pp.23~35 (2017)
  54. James, O., "Motivated reasoning about public performance : An experimental study of how citizens judge the Affordable Care Act", Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 27(1), pp.197~209 (2017)
  55. Jang, Y. S., "National transparency : Global trends and national variations", International Journal of Comparative Sociology, 55(2), pp.95~118 (2014)
  56. Kahneman, D., "The endowment effect, loss aversion, and status quo bias", Journal of Economic Perspectives, 5(1), pp.193~206 (1991)
  57. Kahneman, D., "Prospect theory : An analysis of decision under risk", Econometrica, 47(2), pp.263~291 (1979)
  58. Kampen, J. K., "Assessing the relationship between satisfaction with public service delivery and trust in government. The impact of predisposition of citizens toward government on evaluations of its performance", Public Performance and Management Review, 29, pp.387~404 (2006)
  59. Khagram, S., "Open budgets: The political economy of transparency, participation, and accountability", pp.1~50 (2013), Brookings Institution Press
  60. Kim, S., "E-participation, transparency, and trust in local government", Public Administration Review, 72(6), pp.819~828 (2012)
  61. King, C. S., "The question of participation : Toward authentic public participation in public administration", Public Administration Review, 58(4), pp.317~326 (1998)
  62. Kosack, S., "Does transparency improve governance", Annual Review of Political Science, 17, pp.65~87 (2014)
  63. McDermott, R., "Prospect theory in political science : Gains and losses from the first decade", Political Psychology, 25(2), pp.289~312 (2004)
  64. Miller, K. D., "Variable organizational risk preferences : Test of the March-Shapira model", Academy of Management Journal, 47(1), pp.105~115 (2004)
  65. Mitchell, O., "The Encyclopedia of Crime and Punishment", pp.1~6 (2015)
  66. Morgan, D. R., "Managing urban America" (1996), Chatham House
  67. Nalbandian, J., "Facilitating community enabling democracy : New roles for local government managers", Public Administration Review, 59(3), pp.187~197 (1991)
  68. Nielsen, P. A., "Performance information, blame avoidance, and politicians’ attitudes to spending and reform : Evidence from an experiment", Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 25(2), pp.545~569 (2013)
  69. Nielsen, P. A., "How do politicians attribute bureaucratic responsibility for performance? Negativity bias and interest group advocacy", Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 27(2), pp.269~283 (2017)
  70. Olsen, A. L., "Compared to what? How social and historical reference points affect citizens’ performance evaluations", Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 27(4), pp.562~580 (2017)
  71. Park, H., "The roles of transparency and trust in the relationship between corruption and citizen satisfaction", International Review of Administrative Sciences, 77(2), pp.254~274 (2011)
  72. Pasquier, M., "Organizational barriers to transparency : A typology and analysis of organizational behaviour tending to prevent or restrict access to information", International Review of Administrative Sciences, 73(1), pp.147~162 (2007)
  73. Rhoads, C. H., "The implications of"Contamination"for experimental design in education", Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 36(1), pp.76~104 (2011)
  74. Romzek, B. S., "Cross pressures of accountability : Initiative, command, and failure in the Ron Brown Plane Crash", Public Administration Review, 60(3), pp.240~253 (2000)
  75. Sen, A., "Beyone the crisis: Development strategies in Asis" (1999), Institute of Southeast Asian Studies
  76. Stewart, K., "Write the rules and win : Understanding citizen participation game dynamics", Public Administration Review, 67(6), pp.1067~1076 (2007)
  77. Van Ryzin, G. G., "An experimental test of the expectancy-disconfirmation theory of citizen satisfaction", Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 32(3), pp.597~614 (2013)
  78. Wang, X., "Assessing public participation in U.S. cities", Public Performance &Management Review, 24(4), pp.322~336 (2001)
  79. Welch, E. W., "Linking citizen satisfaction with E-government and trust in government", Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 15(3), pp.371~391 (2005)
  80. Yang, K., "Citizen involvement efforts and bureaucratic responsiveness : Participatory values, stakeholder pressures, and administrative practicality", Public Administration Review, 67(2), pp.248~262 (2007)
  81. Yang, K., "The performance–trust link : Implications for performance measurement", Public Administration Review, 66(1), pp.114~126 (2006)

관련 논문AI추천

정부투명성이 정부신뢰 및 성과에 미치는 영향이정철국가정책연구소 · 국가정책연구2016 · 제30권 제1호공공기관의 정보공개와 투명성의 관계에 관한 연구이현영, 정연경한국기록관리학회 · 한국기록관리학회지2017 · 제17권 제3호공공부문 성과 제고를 위한 정부 혁신에 대한 연구: 참여정부 혁신의 제도적 편향성을 중심으로김보경, 서정욱한국공공관리학회 · 한국공공관리학보2014 · 제28권 제1호주민참여예산제도의 영향요인과성과에 관한 연구: 공무원의 인식조사를 중심으로염영배, 장인봉(재) 인천연구원 · 도시연구2018 · 제13호지방자치단체의 정보화 투입과 투명성에 대한 연구: 정치적 경쟁의 조절효과를 중심으로고영준, 박미영(재) 한국지방행정연구원 · 지방행정연구2022 · 제36권 제4호성과에 대한 중앙정부와 지방정부 공무원의 인식의 차이에 대한 연구임상규, 정철현한국행정연구원 · 한국행정연구2012 · 제21권 제3호

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (4건)

코로나19, 대구의 초기 대응에 관한 주요 쟁점 분석이시철pp. 1-42일자리제공형 사회적기업은 사회적 가치를 실현하고 있는가? : 사회적기업 유형별 취약계층 상대적 고용비중과 임금수준 비교를 중심으로이승주pp. 77-113비교정책연구와 옹호연합모형 : 두 가지 공공시설 명칭정책갈등사례를 중심으로배응환pp. 115-153민속문화에 나타난 관료 이미지 분석김민주pp. 155-189
원문 보기