합리성의 제약요인으로서 정책딜레마와 정책변화: 금산분리 관련 정책을 중심으로

초록

This study addresses why public policy is established and changes by adopting the dilemma concept as a factor restricting objective rationality, rather than a traditional policy making model. This paper analyzes the case of the ‘Separation of Banking and Commerce' since this case is a dilemma case with an intense dilemma among groups. Dilemma constrains the objective rationality; the result leads the several dilemma responses such as policy making and changes. The findings were as follows. First, dilemma context restricted the objective rationality. As a result, there appeared three major policy responses: 1) response as creation and extension of application exclusion or exception clauses (Fair Trade Acts), 2) separation and inconsistent response (Act on Structural Innovation of Financial Industry), 3) application of third resource (Act on Capital Market and Financial Investment Industry). This shows that the cause of policymaking and change is the result of policy response according to the constrained objective rationality induced by dilemma in the context of separation of banking and commerce industry. Second, the examination of three Legislations (including Enforcement Ordinances) shows that the three different types of dilemma responses progressed simultaneously with each legislation. The nature of such responses was the formalism that the policy maker continues to seek relaxed restriction on the merge of banking with the commerce industry while they insist on the separation in principle. Third, dilemma constrained the objective rationally as one of institutional factors and forced the policy makers to make a choice of a formal response. Those analysis results may present the possibility of a dilemma model as policymaking model under bounded rationality.

키워드