공공협의를 통한 규제형성과정 개선에 관한 연구: 미국·영국·캐나다·호주와의 비교를 중심으로
A Comparative Study on Public Consultation in the Rule-making Process
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
본 연구는 행정규제기본법에 도입된 공공협의제도가 규제형성과정에 착근되지 못하고 있는 원인을 공공협의의 효과성 영향요인 별로 분석하여 현행 공공협의제도 개선방안을 모색하고자 하는 것이다. 이를 위하여 최대유사체계분석기법을 사용하여 미국, 영국, 캐나다, 호주 등의 OECD 주요국가와 한국의 공공협의 제도를 비교․분석하였다. 분석결과를 바탕으로 본 연구는 다음과 같은 정책적 시사점을 도출하였다. 첫째, 외부 환경적 요소와 관련해서 공공협의에 관한 의무조항을 의원입법의 근거법인 국회법에서도 명문화할 것과 행정규제기본법에 제출 의견의 기록 의무 및 미반영 이유 통보의무를 신설할 것을 제언한다. 둘째, 공고와 관련해서 전자 공고시스템을 구축하고, 공고시점과 투명성 확보방안을 명확하게 규정할 것을 제언한다. 셋째, 참여와 관련해서 협의부담을 최소화하는 방안과 공공협의의 개방성을 확보하는 방안을 규정할 필요가 있다는 점을 제언한다. 넷째, 협의와 관련해서 공공협의 절차 자체에 대한 평가제도, 지침, 및 충분한 협의기간을 도입할 것을 제언한다.
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to address how to improve the existing system of public consultation by comparing Korea and OECD countries such as USA, UK, Canada, and Australia. Using MSSD (Most Similar Systems Design) as a methodology for comparative analysis, this study compares the public consultation system of five countries in light of environment, notification, participation, and consultation. On the basis of the comparative analysis, this study suggests the following implications for improving the public consultation system in the rule-making process. First, the mandatory clauses for the public consultation should be stipulated in the National Assembly Act. Second, regarding the notification process, the electronic system for public consultation and the provision for notification transparency should be stipulated in the Framework Act on Administrative Regulations. Third, the provisions for minimizing the participatory burden and maximizing the participatory openness should be established in the Framework Act on Administrative Regulations. Fourth, the evaluation system of public consultation, the manual, and the consultation duration should be established in the Framework Act on Administrative Regulations.
참고문헌 (39)
- 국무총리실, "규제영향분석서 작성지침" (2009), 국무총리실
- "국회법. (일부개정 2012.5.25. 법률 제11453호)", ~ (2012)
- 김태윤, "한국 정부의 규제영향분석의 수준 -평가틀의 도출 및 평가 결과-", 규제연구, 17(2), pp.133~170 (2008), 한국규제학회
- 이송호, "비교정책연구에 있어서 전통적 방법론의 재검토", 한국행정학보, 29(2), pp.399~360 (1995)
- 정병규, "부적절한 규제의 사전예방 및 규제합리화", 행정포커스, 104, pp.25~29 (2013)
- 한국행정연구원, "중앙부처 규제영향분석서 평가결과" (2011), 한국행정연구원
- "행정규제기본법. (일부개정 2013.7.16. 법률 제11935호)", ~ (2013)
- "행정규제기본법 시행령. (타법개정 2013.3.23., 대통령령 제24429호)", ~ (2013)
- APEC-OECD, "Integrated Checklist on regulatory reform : A policy instrument for regulatory quality, competition policy and market openness" (2006), OECD
- Australian Government., "Best practice regulation handbook" (2010), Australian Government
- Discussing the rules : Electronic rule-making and democratic deliberation, "Beierle, T.", ~, pp.Discussion Paper 03-22 (2003)
- BERR., "Effective Consultation" (2007), BERR
- BERR., "Code of Practice on Consultation" (2008), BERR
- Copeland, C., "The regulatory flexibility act : Implementation issues and proposed reforms" (2008), Congressional Research Service Publishing
- Council of Australian Governments., "Best practice regulation : A guide for ministerial councils and national standard setting bodies" (2007), Council of Australian Governments
- Cuellar, M., "Rethinking regulatory democracy", Administrative Law Review, 75, pp.412~499 (2005)
- DEFRA., "Letter on consultation on implementing EU pesticides legislation" (2010), DEFRA
- DEFRA., "Consultation on implementing EU pesticides legislation : List of those who are being consulted" (2010), DEFRA
- DEFRA., "Consultation on implementation of EU pesticides legislation" (2010), DEFRA
- DEFRA., "Consultation on implementation of EU pesticides legislation : Summary and Government Response" (2010), DEFRA
- Dudley, S., "Regulatory consultation in the United States : Summary for Bertelsemann-GW Workshop on regulatory consultation" (2010), The George Washington University Regulatory Studies Center
- "Executive Order 12866", Federal Register, ~ (1993)
- "Executive Order 13563", Federal Register, ~ (2011)
- Furlong, S., "Interest group participation in rule-making : A decade of change", Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 15, pp.353~370 (2005)
- Federal rule-making: Procedural and analytical requirements at OSHA and other agencies, "GAO.", ~, pp.GAO-01-852T (2001)
- Electronic rule-making: Efforts to facilitate public participation can be improved, "GAO.", ~, pp.GAO-03-901 (2003)
- Federal rule-making: Improvements needed to monitoring and evaluation of rules development as well as to the transparency of OMB regulatory reviews, "GAO.", ~, pp.GAO-09-205 (2009)
- Golden, M., "Interest groups in the rule-making process: Who participates? Whose voices get heard?", Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 8(2), pp.245~269 (1998)
- Government of Canada., "Cabinet Directive on Streamlining Regulation" (2007), Government of Canada publishing
- Malyshew, N., "Regulatory policy : OECD experience and evidence", Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 22(2), pp.274~299 (2006)
- Montini, T., "Assessing the evidence submitted to the development of a workplace smoking regulation : The case of Maryland", Public Health Reports, 117, pp.291~298 (2002)
- Nakamura, R, "Taming regulation" (2003), Brookings Institution Press
- OBPR., "Annual regulatory plans : Guidelines for departments and agencies on preparing and publishing annual regulatory plans" (2010), Office of Best Practice Regulation
- OECD., "Engaging citizens in policy-making : Information, consultation and public participation" (2001), OECD
- OECD., "OECD background document on public consultation : Third regional meeting of the working group IV on public service delivery, public-private partnerships and regulatory reform" (2007), OECD
- OECD., "Government at a glance 2011" (2011), OECD
- Reiss, D., "Tailored participation : Modernizing the APA rule-making procedures", Legislation and Public Policy, 12, pp.321~377 (2009)
- West, W., "Inside the black box : Development of proposed rules and limits of procedural controls", Administration & Society, (41(5):), pp.576~599 (2009)
- Yackee, S., "Sweet-talking the fourth branch : Assessing the influence of interest group comments on federal agency rule-making", Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 16(1), pp.103~124 (2006)