IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i6p2205-d331715.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Priority Analysis of Right Remedies of Basic Living Recipients in Korea

Author

Listed:
  • Kichan Yoon

    (Social Security Information Institute, Social Security Information Service, Seoul 04554, Korea)

  • Gyubeom Park

    (Social Security Information Institute, Social Security Information Service, Seoul 04554, Korea
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Munjae Lee

    (Department of Medical Device Management and Research, SAIHST, Sungkyunkwan University, Seoul 06351, Korea
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

Abstract

Through an active administration approach, the Local Living Security Commission (LLSC) has provided relief to protect the poor strata and reinforce the distribution of entitlements. However, the absence of a system to monitor operational performance makes it difficult to manage it efficiently. The purpose of this study is to find ways to strengthen and efficiently operate the functions of the LLSC through priority analysis of its operation. To this end, the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) was conducted based on the results of the focus group interview to derive priorities for the operation of the LLSC. The variables used in the AHP analysis included regional conditions, operational performance, organizational method, and network. The result of the analysis revealed, first, that the performance of the committee has increased due to a joint evaluation or verification survey conducted at the end of each year, second, that the creation of a budget for the organization and the operation of an independent LLSC is necessary, and third, that operational performance is the most important, followed by organizational method, network, and regional conditions. Therefore, a system for monitoring performance should be established to improve the operation performance of the LLSC. Additionally, it is necessary to establish an independent LLSC and secure the budget for each city and county. It should be possible to provide feedback on operations through regular priority analysis.

Suggested Citation

  • Kichan Yoon & Gyubeom Park & Munjae Lee, 2020. "Priority Analysis of Right Remedies of Basic Living Recipients in Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-9, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:6:p:2205-:d:331715
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/6/2205/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/6/2205/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Isabelle Joumard & Alastair Thomas & Hermes Morgavi, 2017. "Making income and property taxes more growth-friendly and redistributive in India," OECD Economics Department Working Papers 1389, OECD Publishing.
    2. Niehues, Judith, 2010. "Social Spending Generosity and Income Inequality: A Dynamic Panel Approach," IZA Discussion Papers 5178, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    3. Judith Niehues, 2010. "Social Spending Generosity and Income Inequality: A Dynamic Panel Approach," SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research 336, DIW Berlin, The German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP).
    4. Bucciol, Alessandro & Cavalli, Laura & Fedotenkov, Igor & Pertile, Paolo & Polin, Veronica & Sartor, Nicola & Sommacal, Alessandro, 2017. "A large scale OLG model for the analysis of the redistributive effects of policy reforms," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 104-127.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Antonio Filippin & Luca Nunziata, 2019. "Monetary effects of inequality: lessons from the euro experiment," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 17(2), pages 99-124, June.
    2. Quinonez, Pablo, 2022. "Social spending and income inequality in Latin America. A panel data approach," MPRA Paper 113538, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Mónica Patricia Ospina, 2014. "El efecto del gasto social en la distribución del ingreso: un análisis para economías latinoamericanas," Revista Ciencias Estratégicas, Universidad Pontificia Bolivariana, December.
    4. Farhad Taghizadeh‐Hesary & Naoyuki Yoshino & Sayoko Shimizu, 2020. "The impact of monetary and tax policy on income inequality in Japan," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(10), pages 2600-2621, October.
    5. Jianu, Ionut & Dobre, Ion & Bodislav, Dumitru Alexandru & Radulescu, Carmen Valentina & Burlacu, Sorin, 2019. "The implications of institutional specificities on the income inequalities drivers in European Union," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 53(2), pages 59-76.
    6. Bação, Pedro & Duarte, Joshua & Simões, Marta, 2024. "Social expenditure composition, inequality and growth in the OECD: Labour market policies are most effective," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 75-89.
    7. Ángeles Sánchez & Antonio L. Pérez-Corral, 2018. "Government Social Expenditure and Income Inequalities in the European Union," Hacienda Pública Española / Review of Public Economics, IEF, vol. 227(4), pages 133-156, December.
    8. Giorgio d'Agostino & Luca Pieroni & Margherita Scarlato, 2018. "Further evidence of the relationship between social transfers and income inequality in OECD countries," Working Papers 482, ECINEQ, Society for the Study of Economic Inequality.
    9. Jiří Hasman & Josef Novotný, 2015. "Cross-National Variation in Income Inequality and its Determinants: An Application of Bayesian Model Averaging on a New Standardized Inequality Data Set," Prague Economic Papers, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2015(2), pages 211-224.
    10. Kyriacou, Andreas & Muinelo-Gallo, Leonel & Roca-Sagalés, Oriol, 2015. "On the redistributive efficiency of fiscal policy," MPRA Paper 63276, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Ali T. Cem Başlevent, 2014. "Social Transfers and Income Inequality in Turkey: How Informative Is the Survey of Income and Living Conditions?," Ekonomi-tek - International Economics Journal, Turkish Economic Association, vol. 3(3), pages 23-42, September.
    12. Mihaylova Svilena & Bratoeva-Manoleva Silviya, 2017. "Social Transfers and Income Inequality in Bulgaria," South East European Journal of Economics and Business, Sciendo, vol. 12(1), pages 38-49, April.
    13. Tingyun Chen & Jean-Jacques Hallaert & Alexander Pitt & Haonan Qu & Maximilien Queyranne & Alaina Rhee & Anna Shabunina & Jérôme Vandenbussche & Irene Yackovlev, 2018. "Inequality and Poverty across Generations in the European Union," IMF Staff Discussion Notes 18/01, International Monetary Fund.
    14. Djeneba Doumbia & Mr. Tidiane Kinda, 2019. "Reallocating Public Spending to Reduce Income Inequality: Can It Work?," IMF Working Papers 2019/188, International Monetary Fund.
    15. Karl-Friedrich Israel & Tim Florian Sepp & Nils Sonnenberg, 2023. "The Effects of Unconventional Monetary Policy on Stock Markets and Household Incomes in Japan," Post-Print halshs-04024219, HAL.
    16. Abdulaleem Isiaka & Alexander Mihailov & Giovanni Razzi, 2022. "Reallocating Government Spending to Reduce Income Inequality: Panel Data Evidence from the Middle-Income Countries," Economics Discussion Papers em-dp2022-08, Department of Economics, University of Reading.
    17. d’Agostino, Giorgio & Pieroni, Luca & Scarlato, Margherita, 2020. "Social transfers and income inequality in OECD countries," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 313-327.
    18. Philipp Doerrenberg & Andreas Peichl, 2014. "The impact of redistributive policies on inequality in OECD countries," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 46(17), pages 2066-2086, June.
    19. Malgorzata Szczepaniak, 2020. "Redistribution and the alleviation of income inequalities: the case of the European Union," Ekonomia i Prawo, Uniwersytet Mikolaja Kopernika, vol. 19(1), pages 149-161, March.
    20. Marta C. N. Simões & Adelaide P. S. Duarte & João Sousa Andrade, 2015. "Social Spending, Inequality and Growth in Times of Austerity: Insights from Portugal," GEMF Working Papers 2015-16, GEMF, Faculty of Economics, University of Coimbra.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:6:p:2205-:d:331715. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.