This study analyzed the policy decision-making process of the Multicultural Family Support Act in order to contribute to the improvement of the quality of life and social integration of multicultural family members by enabling them to lead a stable family life. From 2004, when the survey on marriage...
This study analyzed the policy decision-making process of the Multicultural Family Support Act in order to contribute to the improvement of the quality of life and social integration of multicultural family members by enabling them to lead a stable family life. From 2004, when the survey on marriage immigrant women was conducted, to 2008, when the Multicultural Family Support Act was enacted, policy issues that appeared in the decision-making process of the Multicultural Family Support Act were centered on policy actors and policy actors constituting the policy network. The interaction of the policy network and the structure of the relationship were analyzed. This study divided the periods into agenda setting, policy formation, and policy adoption, looked at the types of policy networks for each period, and analyzed changes in the policy networks.
As a result of analyzing the policy network of the Multicultural Family Support Act by policy process period, the following facts could be derived.
First, the number and type of policy actors change according to the period of the policy process. Before multiculturalism-related issues were recognized as social issues, official actors recognized the issue and promoted it as a government agenda. In the agenda-setting process, official actors took the lead, there were many official actors, and the participants were limited to official actors. In the final policy-making stage, due to the nature of the decision-making stage, official actors were the main participants in the policy process.
Second, the overall leading role in the policy-making process was that of official actors. In addition, it can be said that a policy network was formed with academia and expert groups that supported official actors. It was an environment where academia and experts could participate by requesting various research services. However, it was the official actors who took the lead in policy output.
Third, the policy network structure of the Multicultural Family Support Act has changed by policy process. Looking at each process, it shows a closed and vertical relationship structure because the agenda setting process was a process of setting the agenda centered on official actors. In the policy formation process, it shows an open and horizontal structure rather than the previous process. In the policy-making process, the horizontal structure between government ministries was shown, and the informal actors also showed a horizontal structure.
Fourth, it was found that the direction of the policy changes not only due to the interaction between policy actors but also due to the socio-environmental situation. The beginning of the Multicultural Family Support Act was a fact-finding survey to establish policies for the human rights of marriage immigrants. However, the low birth rate and aging population emerged as a social problem, and as a solution to the problem, immigration policy was changed to family policy, that is, marriage migrant policy to marriage migrant family policy. It was possible to analyze that the social environment has a great influence on policy.
Fifth, a cooperative relationship and a conflict relationship appeared in the nature of interaction between actors. It was submitted to the plenary session of the National Assembly during the policy-making process, and it can be said that it showed cooperative interaction as the Multicultural Family Support Act was passed by the unanimous consent of 165 lawmakers who attended the meeting.
However, there was a conflict between the Ministry of Gender Equality and Family and the Ministry of Justice over the leadership fight. Since the Ministry of Justice had the initiative in foreign policy, it showed a conflicting relationship at legislative hearings related to multiculturalism, asking for respect for the "Basic Act on Treatment of Foreigners in Korea" every time, and suggesting that other bills need not be enacted.
Sixth, the policy network type of the Multicultural Family Support Act moved from a sub-governmental model to a policy community model. The last one was changed to a policy community model close to sub-government. The policy-making process was a policy community model, but it also showed a sub-governmental model depending on the characteristics of policy issues and policy networks.
Seventh, as the political system became democratized, it was confirmed that various informal actors such as official actors, civic groups, interest groups, media, academia, and experts were promoting activities to form policies. This is one of the various behaviors caused by democratization.
Eighth, the conflict that occurred in the policy network had a great impact on the contents of the Multicultural Family Support Act. The draft of the Multicultural Family Support Act presented at the legislative hearing for the enactment of the Multicultural Family Support Act and the enacted Multicultural Family Support Act are different.
Finally, various policy actors who participated in the policy-making process of the Multicultural Family Support Act have different directions and interests. However, it is meaningful in that it agreed that this law should be enacted and proceeded with mediation and negotiations.
This study analyzed the policy decision-making process of the Multicultural Family Support Act in order to contribute to the improvement of the quality of life and social integration of multicultural family members by enabling them to lead a stable family life. From 2004, when the survey on marriage immigrant women was conducted, to 2008, when the Multicultural Family Support Act was enacted, policy issues that appeared in the decision-making process of the Multicultural Family Support Act were centered on policy actors and policy actors constituting the policy network. The interaction of the policy network and the structure of the relationship were analyzed. This study divided the periods into agenda setting, policy formation, and policy adoption, looked at the types of policy networks for each period, and analyzed changes in the policy networks.
As a result of analyzing the policy network of the Multicultural Family Support Act by policy process period, the following facts could be derived.
First, the number and type of policy actors change according to the period of the policy process. Before multiculturalism-related issues were recognized as social issues, official actors recognized the issue and promoted it as a government agenda. In the agenda-setting process, official actors took the lead, there were many official actors, and the participants were limited to official actors. In the final policy-making stage, due to the nature of the decision-making stage, official actors were the main participants in the policy process.
Second, the overall leading role in the policy-making process was that of official actors. In addition, it can be said that a policy network was formed with academia and expert groups that supported official actors. It was an environment where academia and experts could participate by requesting various research services. However, it was the official actors who took the lead in policy output.
Third, the policy network structure of the Multicultural Family Support Act has changed by policy process. Looking at each process, it shows a closed and vertical relationship structure because the agenda setting process was a process of setting the agenda centered on official actors. In the policy formation process, it shows an open and horizontal structure rather than the previous process. In the policy-making process, the horizontal structure between government ministries was shown, and the informal actors also showed a horizontal structure.
Fourth, it was found that the direction of the policy changes not only due to the interaction between policy actors but also due to the socio-environmental situation. The beginning of the Multicultural Family Support Act was a fact-finding survey to establish policies for the human rights of marriage immigrants. However, the low birth rate and aging population emerged as a social problem, and as a solution to the problem, immigration policy was changed to family policy, that is, marriage migrant policy to marriage migrant family policy. It was possible to analyze that the social environment has a great influence on policy.
Fifth, a cooperative relationship and a conflict relationship appeared in the nature of interaction between actors. It was submitted to the plenary session of the National Assembly during the policy-making process, and it can be said that it showed cooperative interaction as the Multicultural Family Support Act was passed by the unanimous consent of 165 lawmakers who attended the meeting.
However, there was a conflict between the Ministry of Gender Equality and Family and the Ministry of Justice over the leadership fight. Since the Ministry of Justice had the initiative in foreign policy, it showed a conflicting relationship at legislative hearings related to multiculturalism, asking for respect for the "Basic Act on Treatment of Foreigners in Korea" every time, and suggesting that other bills need not be enacted.
Sixth, the policy network type of the Multicultural Family Support Act moved from a sub-governmental model to a policy community model. The last one was changed to a policy community model close to sub-government. The policy-making process was a policy community model, but it also showed a sub-governmental model depending on the characteristics of policy issues and policy networks.
Seventh, as the political system became democratized, it was confirmed that various informal actors such as official actors, civic groups, interest groups, media, academia, and experts were promoting activities to form policies. This is one of the various behaviors caused by democratization.
Eighth, the conflict that occurred in the policy network had a great impact on the contents of the Multicultural Family Support Act. The draft of the Multicultural Family Support Act presented at the legislative hearing for the enactment of the Multicultural Family Support Act and the enacted Multicultural Family Support Act are different.
Finally, various policy actors who participated in the policy-making process of the Multicultural Family Support Act have different directions and interests. However, it is meaningful in that it agreed that this law should be enacted and proceeded with mediation and negotiations.
주제어
#다문화가족지원법 다문화가족 결혼이주여성 결혼이민자 국제결혼 제정과정 정책네트워크 공식행위자 비공식행위자
※ AI-Helper는 부적절한 답변을 할 수 있습니다.