This study aims to suggest policy measures for making the local governance of agricultural policy more rational and effective. To do so, the problems and actual conditions of the current governance system are analyzed.
The policy measures for restructuring the implementation system of agricultural policy are suggested as follows.
First, the administrative affairs related to agricultural policy are classified into central government's and local government's operations according to their characteristics. Based on this classification, a system of managing the administrative work will be established.
Second, in order to systematically manage central affairs, a new administrative agency, tentatively named as “Local Administration of Agriculture,” should be set up. The study finds that it is desirable to restructure the National Agricultural Products Quality Management Service and re-establish it as the new agency.
Third, a great deal of discretion is given to local governments in managing localized affairs of agriculture, forestry, and fisheries. Local governments are in charge of budget allocation and implementation and supervision of detailed projects, whereas the Ministry for Food, Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries determines the continuity and nullification of projects through monitoring and evaluation.
Lastly, the governance system of local agricultural policy is either replaced with a new system or restructured so that the administrative work at the local level can be carried out in a democratic and fair manner.
The policy measures for improving the governance of agricultural policy at the local level are as follows.
First, the Agricultural Policy Commission should be reformed institutionally. The main issues for deliberation should be set on agricultural/rural development plans. Operational guidelines should be established to secure regular meetings and real discussions. Detailed plans should also be made concerning the formulation and substantive deliberation of rural development plans, and ways to secure financial resources that are needed to implement the rural development plans should be drawn up in a plan.
Second, policy programs that either support voluntary governance in tune with local characteristics or strengthen governance activities should be developed. Although providing support for the governance is important, the more important thing here is to promote active and voluntary participation of local residents.
Third, introducing a “Chamber of Agriculture” that fits our situation should be carried forward as a way of improving the governance of agricultural policy. The key to launching the new entity is how to organize a working group whose basic function is to provide services to farmers. Basically, the Chamber of Agriculture has the intrinsic function of providing guidance (consulting) and vocational education to farmers. And this function is tied to the question of how to match it with other institutions that already provide such services to farmers. In regard to the organization of a working group, we suggest three policy options: First, restructure the "agricultural technology center" into a working group. Second, restructure the guidance division of the National Agricultural Cooperative Federation into a working group. Third, let the Chamber of Agriculture reshape the working group on its own.


Researchers: Soo-Suk Kim, Gyu-Cheon Lee, Kwang-Soo Kim
E-mail address: soosuk@krei.re.kr