2019, Vol.28, No.1

Journal of Regulation Studies 2023 KCI Impact Factor : 0.78

pISSN : 1738-7132
https://journal.kci.go.kr/ksrs2002

Although regulatory impact analysis has been institutionalized for over 20 years, there are still many limitations in the actual implementation process. In particular, the current regulatory policy debate emphasizes the fact that the social effects of regulation are not fully analyzed, and the current government has suggested strengthening the analysis of social regulatory cost benefits as an important policy task. In this context, this study pointed out that the analysis focusing on social value as social purpose should be emphasized as the analytic contents(society as an end approach) by differentiating the social regulatory cost benefit analysis from the existing approach as the analysis unit (society as a whole approach). As a reflection on the focus on the regulation cost analysis of regulated firms and small business owners after the introduction of the Cost-in, Cost-out system, it is necessary to expand the analysis of the social benefits of regulation for the general public, which can be expected to contribute enhancing social values of government regulations. Based on the conceptual understanding of the social cost-benefit analysis, the level of application of the social cost-benefit analysis in the current process of preparing the regulatory impact analysis was analyzed. As a result, only 64 (2.7%) of the total 2,355 analyses completed between 2015-2016 have conducted quantitative cost-benefit analyses on general public. In addition, this study intends to provide basic information that can be referenced in future analysis through social value estimation and relative comparison. The social benefits of major regulatory policies for the four sectors of environment, disaster safety, vulnerable class protection, and economic activation were estimated through using the Contingent Value Method(CVM). In conclusion, based on the issues discussed in this study, some policy implications are suggested to improve current regulation impact analysis system for revitalizing social cost benefit analysis.

The existing studies about regulatory reform for small business primarily focused on institutional analysis. As an effort to overcome this limitation, this study analyzed 246 actual regulatory reform cases of OSMB Ombudsman. Analytical framework was derived from regulatory reform theories and literature review. The framework included stages, means, and categories of regulatory reform, as well as contents, level of intervention, and business cycle. According to the results of the analysis, it can be seen that individual regulation improvement is still focused on the standard relaxation of command and control regulations as well as procedural or administrative simplification. On the other hand, there are few or almost no examples of regulatory improvements related to new approach such as the use of alternative regulations, the application of regulatory flexibility, and the introduction of negative regulatory system. In terms of intervention level, regulations at the level of guidelines, manuals, and planning also accounted for a considerable proportion, confirming the need to identify and improve regulations that are not included in regulation registry system. Based on the findings, it is necessary to utilize the new approach more positively at the level of individual regulation improvement. The introduction of a negative regulatory system, regulatory reform at the level of manuals and guidelines, and rationalization of social regulations are required.

This study uses the 1st~11th waves of Korea Welfare Panel and the method of difference in differences(DID) to analyze the effect of the non-regular employee protection law on the employment of the vulnerable social groups. Overall, the empirical results indicate that the law decreased the employment in the labor market. Especially the law decreased the employment of non-regular workers significantly while there was no empirical evidence for the increase in the employment of regular workers. In addition the law had much worse effect on the employment of the vulnerable social groups such as youth group, low income group, and female heads of household group. This paper also finds that the negative effects intensified over time. Therefore we should consider amending the non-regular employee protection law in the direction of easing the regulation on the use of non-regular workers while emphasizing the prohibition of discrimination against the non-regular workers.