본 연구는 정책네트워크이론을 적용하여 한국과 일본의 노인장기요양(개호)보험제도의 정책결정과정을 상호 비교, 분석하고 우리나라에의 정책적․이론적 시사점을 도출하고자 하였다. 연구결과로는, 한국과 일본 모두 노인요양(개호)문제에 대한 정책의제형성은 정부 주도로 이루어지고 정책과정단계별 특성에 따라 정책참여자의 범위가 확대되었으나, 두 나라간 노인요양문제에 대한 정책의제형성 배경에는 차이가 있음을 알 수 있다. 그리고 두 나라 모두 정책의제형성 초기단계부터 정책참여자간의 상호작용은 비교적 협력적이었으나, 제도골격이 국민들에게 공표되면서 급격히 갈등관계 내지 비판적으로 변화해 갔으며, 정책과정단계별 특성에 따라 주도적 참여자들의 역할이 두드러졌고, 연계형태도 비슷한 모습을 보여주고 있다. 또한 정책과정별로 정책참여자의 범위와 정책산출에의 정책참여자들의 의견반영 정도가 다르지만, 한국, 일본 모두 정부주도로 노인요양문제에 대한 정책 추진결과로 정책의제형성기부터 국회심의결정기까지 매우 유사한 정책네트워크모형을 보여주고 있다. 정책참여자의 범위 뿐만 아니라 개방적인 상호작용시스템 구축의 중요성, 개호보험제도 정책결정과정의 많은 한계점, 과도한 정부주도 정책네트워크로 인한 정책산출에 정부의지가 너무 많이 반영되는 단점 등이 본 연구의 시사점으로 볼 수 있다.
This study is to compare and analyze the policy decision process between Korea Long-term Care Insurance and Japan's using policy network theory as an analysis tool, and to lead political and theoretical implications. The result of the study is summarized as follows. First, a policy agenda about Long-term Care problem for the Elderly set up by the government-leading both Korea and Japan. and the number of policy participation(actors) increased to characteristics of policy process stage. but there is a difference between Korea and Japan in a background of setting up policy agenda about Long-term Care problem. Second, interaction among policy actors is corporative from early policy agenda establishment stage in Korea and Japan. but it changes to dissenting or critical rapidly as being announced the frame of system to the people. Also, it shows that main policy actors play a role in policy making decision and the connection structures of network is similar to both countries although it has a difference in the interaction frequency. Fourth, although the number of policy actors and the extent of their opinion reflection to the policy effect are different, it shows that policy network pattern is very similar to from policy agenda setting stage to parliament(The National Assemble) policy decision stage as a result of government-leading policy process. The theoretical and political implications of this study are as follows. The number and the variety of policy participation, the importance of establishing opened-interaction system, lots of limitation of policy making-decision process of Japan Long-term Care system, and exclusively the government-leading network has demerits about the reflection of too much government's opinion to the policy outcomes.
This study is to compare and analyze the policy decision process between Korea Long-term Care Insurance and Japan's using policy network theory as an analysis tool, and to lead political and theoretical implications. The result of the study is summarized as follows. First, a policy agenda about Long-term Care problem for the Elderly set up by the government-leading both Korea and Japan. and the number of policy participation(actors) increased to characteristics of policy process stage. but there is a difference between Korea and Japan in a background of setting up policy agenda about Long-term Care problem. Second, interaction among policy actors is corporative from early policy agenda establishment stage in Korea and Japan. but it changes to dissenting or critical rapidly as being announced the frame of system to the people. Also, it shows that main policy actors play a role in policy making decision and the connection structures of network is similar to both countries although it has a difference in the interaction frequency. Fourth, although the number of policy actors and the extent of their opinion reflection to the policy effect are different, it shows that policy network pattern is very similar to from policy agenda setting stage to parliament(The National Assemble) policy decision stage as a result of government-leading policy process. The theoretical and political implications of this study are as follows. The number and the variety of policy participation, the importance of establishing opened-interaction system, lots of limitation of policy making-decision process of Japan Long-term Care system, and exclusively the government-leading network has demerits about the reflection of too much government's opinion to the policy outcomes.
