한국제도·경제학회

At first glance, South Korea’s performance management and evaluation system receive positive assessments. However, in reality, it appears that the system lacks substantive effectiveness. While various performance evaluation mechanisms are in place, they do not seem to result in meaningful performance management. In December 2021, the addition and revision of Chapter 4-2 of the National Finance Act may not suffice to establish a comprehensive performance management system. Furthermore, performance in areas, such as subsides, funds, and tax expenditures, is managed separately, leading to limitations in performance management. To address these issues, it is essential to transition towards a ‘performance management framework’ based on the Performance Management Act, building upon Chapter 4-2 of the National Finance Act and consolidating scattered performance management provisions found in laws like the Government Performance Assessment Act, Subside Management Act, and Restriction of Special Taxation Act. Additionally, moving from a one-size-fits-all performance evaluation system under individual laws to a contextually appropriate performance evaluation system (based on agency types, project executing entity, project types, budget process, and performance objectives) should be considered. To achieve this, the establishment of a collaborative governance framework is necessary, along with the coordinated management of performance information. Only through these measures can performance data be effectively used as a foundational resource for ‘evidence-based policy-making’.