TY - JOUR
T1 - The change of administrative capacity in Korea
T2 - contemporary trends and lessons
AU - Ko, Kilkon
AU - Park, Hyun Hee
AU - Shim, Dong Chul
AU - Kim, Kyungdong
N1 - Funding Information:
The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship and/or publication of this article: This work was supported by the Ministry of Education of the Republic of Korea and the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF-2016S1A3A2924956; NRF-2018S1A3A2075609).
Publisher Copyright:
© The Author(s) 2021.
PY - 2021/6
Y1 - 2021/6
N2 - This article empirically explores the understanding and changes in the concept of administrative capacity in the Korean context. Despite a universal consensus on its importance, administrative capacity is defined differently by regimes and stakeholders (i.e. in this study: the public, members of the National Assembly, and academia). To improve our understanding of administrative capacity, we collected three types of texts (337 academic papers, 1470 National Assembly minutes, and 3316 newspaper articles from 2000 to 2019) and analyzed the data using topic modeling and text-network analysis methods. The results suggest that although academic articles emphasized leadership, manpower, education, and other policymaking capacities, the National Assembly stressed innovation capacity in solving different policy problems. Finally, the media, assumed to reflect public opinion, emphasized capacities related to national security. Points for practitioners: This study suggests that different types of administrative capacities could be needed according to the developmental stage of states. While managerial and administrative capacity should be developed in countries pursuing state-led economic development, governance capacity could be more requested in countries facing demands for democratization and meeting citizens’ various needs and participation.
AB - This article empirically explores the understanding and changes in the concept of administrative capacity in the Korean context. Despite a universal consensus on its importance, administrative capacity is defined differently by regimes and stakeholders (i.e. in this study: the public, members of the National Assembly, and academia). To improve our understanding of administrative capacity, we collected three types of texts (337 academic papers, 1470 National Assembly minutes, and 3316 newspaper articles from 2000 to 2019) and analyzed the data using topic modeling and text-network analysis methods. The results suggest that although academic articles emphasized leadership, manpower, education, and other policymaking capacities, the National Assembly stressed innovation capacity in solving different policy problems. Finally, the media, assumed to reflect public opinion, emphasized capacities related to national security. Points for practitioners: This study suggests that different types of administrative capacities could be needed according to the developmental stage of states. While managerial and administrative capacity should be developed in countries pursuing state-led economic development, governance capacity could be more requested in countries facing demands for democratization and meeting citizens’ various needs and participation.
KW - administrative capacity
KW - competency-based human resource management
KW - organizational capacity
KW - text analysis
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85100577806&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1177/0020852320982340
DO - 10.1177/0020852320982340
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85100577806
SN - 0020-8523
VL - 87
SP - 238
EP - 255
JO - International Review of Administrative Sciences
JF - International Review of Administrative Sciences
IS - 2
ER -