The purpose of this study is to examine a characteristic of three Elderly Welfare Acts in the aspect of comparative studies and to analyze the formative process of new Elderly Welfare Acts in 1989 and 1997 with pluralism, through the realistic analysis as to how the process of enactment and revision...
The purpose of this study is to examine a characteristic of three Elderly Welfare Acts in the aspect of comparative studies and to analyze the formative process of new Elderly Welfare Acts in 1989 and 1997 with pluralism, through the realistic analysis as to how the process of enactment and revision for the Elderly Welfare Act in 1981, the Elderly Welfare Act in 1989 (the first all-out amendment) and the Elderly Welfare Act in 1997 (the third overall revision) was formed. By attempting to analyze a role shown by participants and a dynamic relationship among participants in the process of overall revision for the Elderly Welfare Act and by grasping the behaviors of several interest groups, it is considered to be capable of examining when, how and how much they intervened in the formative process of policy and exerted their influence. Under this purpose of a study, the detailed research matters of this study are as follows. First, it aims to examine the formative process of the Elderly Welfare Act in 1981, the Elderly Welfare Act in 1989 and the Elderly Welfare Act in 1997. Second, it aims to compare and analyze the formative process of the Elderly Welfare Acts in 1981, 1989 and 1997 through the formative process of policy. Third, in case the Elderly Welfare Acts in 1989 and 1997 can explain the formative process through pluralism, it aims to clarify under which background the implementation from elitism to pluralism was formed in the formative process of policy and which meaning this has. Fourth, In the reality to which pluralism is applied In the formative process of policy, it tries to seek for strategy or a method to establish the better elderly welfare policy. To specifically verify it, this study divided the process of enacting the Elderly Welfare Act in 1981 and the Elderly Welfare Acts in 1989 and 1997 into the detailed steps. The division by step was properly used for the formative process of the elderly welfare policy, by quoting a model of the policy formative process of the elderly welfare policy, by quoting a model of the policy formative process by James. This study made up and utilized up to the step of legitimation among models of the policy formative process by James. In other words, this study reconstructed and used, respectively, the step of recognition and definition by James and the step of recognizing and stipulating by James as the step of establishing and embodying an agenda aiming at allowing the elderly welfare to become policy, and the step of formation and legitimation by James as the step of drawing up the elderly welfare policy. After comparing and examining the legislative process of three Elderly Welfare Acts, the derived results were as follows. First, as it is related to the situation of authority, it is a point that the characteristic shown commonly in the overall process of three Acts, has tendency in which the authority concentrates on a small number of the elite. Second, it is about the contents of governmental role. In the process of enacting three Acts, the government can be seen that it performed a role to reflect the interest and value preference of small-number policy elite. Accordingly, it revealed a characteristic not to reflect rightly the opinion of the masses. Third, it is about the number, shape and characteristic of a group. The numbers of a group relevant to the formative process of the legislative Act, and the 1st and 3rd revision Acts were not the many. As the group in which the elderly become the principal axis was one or so, that is, Korea people Co., in case of the legislative Act, the function as interest group was weak, and can be said to have been just the level of co-operative society Also, their character was homogeneous and closed. In case of the 1st and 3rd revision Acts, it is understood that the numbers were not small, such as Koreapeople Co., Korea Association of Senior Citizen Welfare Institutions, Korea League of Senior Voters, and the character was also more open-ended, and their activities had much influence on tie formation of the elderly welfare policy. However, because it can't be said that these series of activities are the creation If policy by the competition of interest group, which is a characteristic of pluralism, there is scantiness in explaining the process of enacting the Act with pluralism, even in case of the 1st and 3rd revision Acts as well as the legislative Act. When seeing the number or the character of participatory group, the case of revision Act reveals the elitist character, and the case of the 1st and 3rd revision Acts is showing a pluralist character even though being immature. Fourth, it is about the structure and process of forming policy. The formative structure of policy shown in the formative process of the revision Act is displaying the closed and authoritative structure in which the demand of several groups is not properly accepted, and the inner thoughts of a high-ranking decision maker were unilaterally reflected even in the process. However, the case of the 1st and 3rd revision Acts relatively displayed open-ended and democratic looks, and this seems to be resulted from a change of social environment and political consideration corresponding to a flow of the times. As above, it summed up a characteristic of the policy formative process on the basis of a participant's role. After all, giver synthesizing, it can be seen that the decisive structure of our country's elderly welfare policy is in the middle of process being changed to pluralistic decisive structure from elitist decisive structure. That is to say, the 1st and 3rd all-out revision Acts have strong pluralistic factor compared to the legislative Act, but it can be concluded that there is a limit in defining it as pluralism.
The purpose of this study is to examine a characteristic of three Elderly Welfare Acts in the aspect of comparative studies and to analyze the formative process of new Elderly Welfare Acts in 1989 and 1997 with pluralism, through the realistic analysis as to how the process of enactment and revision for the Elderly Welfare Act in 1981, the Elderly Welfare Act in 1989 (the first all-out amendment) and the Elderly Welfare Act in 1997 (the third overall revision) was formed. By attempting to analyze a role shown by participants and a dynamic relationship among participants in the process of overall revision for the Elderly Welfare Act and by grasping the behaviors of several interest groups, it is considered to be capable of examining when, how and how much they intervened in the formative process of policy and exerted their influence. Under this purpose of a study, the detailed research matters of this study are as follows. First, it aims to examine the formative process of the Elderly Welfare Act in 1981, the Elderly Welfare Act in 1989 and the Elderly Welfare Act in 1997. Second, it aims to compare and analyze the formative process of the Elderly Welfare Acts in 1981, 1989 and 1997 through the formative process of policy. Third, in case the Elderly Welfare Acts in 1989 and 1997 can explain the formative process through pluralism, it aims to clarify under which background the implementation from elitism to pluralism was formed in the formative process of policy and which meaning this has. Fourth, In the reality to which pluralism is applied In the formative process of policy, it tries to seek for strategy or a method to establish the better elderly welfare policy. To specifically verify it, this study divided the process of enacting the Elderly Welfare Act in 1981 and the Elderly Welfare Acts in 1989 and 1997 into the detailed steps. The division by step was properly used for the formative process of the elderly welfare policy, by quoting a model of the policy formative process of the elderly welfare policy, by quoting a model of the policy formative process by James. This study made up and utilized up to the step of legitimation among models of the policy formative process by James. In other words, this study reconstructed and used, respectively, the step of recognition and definition by James and the step of recognizing and stipulating by James as the step of establishing and embodying an agenda aiming at allowing the elderly welfare to become policy, and the step of formation and legitimation by James as the step of drawing up the elderly welfare policy. After comparing and examining the legislative process of three Elderly Welfare Acts, the derived results were as follows. First, as it is related to the situation of authority, it is a point that the characteristic shown commonly in the overall process of three Acts, has tendency in which the authority concentrates on a small number of the elite. Second, it is about the contents of governmental role. In the process of enacting three Acts, the government can be seen that it performed a role to reflect the interest and value preference of small-number policy elite. Accordingly, it revealed a characteristic not to reflect rightly the opinion of the masses. Third, it is about the number, shape and characteristic of a group. The numbers of a group relevant to the formative process of the legislative Act, and the 1st and 3rd revision Acts were not the many. As the group in which the elderly become the principal axis was one or so, that is, Korea people Co., in case of the legislative Act, the function as interest group was weak, and can be said to have been just the level of co-operative society Also, their character was homogeneous and closed. In case of the 1st and 3rd revision Acts, it is understood that the numbers were not small, such as Koreapeople Co., Korea Association of Senior Citizen Welfare Institutions, Korea League of Senior Voters, and the character was also more open-ended, and their activities had much influence on tie formation of the elderly welfare policy. However, because it can't be said that these series of activities are the creation If policy by the competition of interest group, which is a characteristic of pluralism, there is scantiness in explaining the process of enacting the Act with pluralism, even in case of the 1st and 3rd revision Acts as well as the legislative Act. When seeing the number or the character of participatory group, the case of revision Act reveals the elitist character, and the case of the 1st and 3rd revision Acts is showing a pluralist character even though being immature. Fourth, it is about the structure and process of forming policy. The formative structure of policy shown in the formative process of the revision Act is displaying the closed and authoritative structure in which the demand of several groups is not properly accepted, and the inner thoughts of a high-ranking decision maker were unilaterally reflected even in the process. However, the case of the 1st and 3rd revision Acts relatively displayed open-ended and democratic looks, and this seems to be resulted from a change of social environment and political consideration corresponding to a flow of the times. As above, it summed up a characteristic of the policy formative process on the basis of a participant's role. After all, giver synthesizing, it can be seen that the decisive structure of our country's elderly welfare policy is in the middle of process being changed to pluralistic decisive structure from elitist decisive structure. That is to say, the 1st and 3rd all-out revision Acts have strong pluralistic factor compared to the legislative Act, but it can be concluded that there is a limit in defining it as pluralism.
※ AI-Helper는 부적절한 답변을 할 수 있습니다.