Administrative Mechanisms for Integrating Technology Foresight into National Technology Policy: The Case of the Republic of Korea

The article identifies the main measures and administrative mechanisms for implementing technological forecasting in state technological policy, including public procurement of innovation. the creation of special economic zones, free trade agreements, the formation of knowledge networks, the training and development of human resources, national strategies, and support for innovative companies. The paper examines how these measures are applied within the technological policy of the Republic of Korea and highlights administrative mechanisms that have proven effective in achieving the desired outcomes. These mechanisms are classified in according to their legal, organizational, and freedom/obligation components. Such a classification illustrates possible approaches to managing technology policy and can serve as a guide for government agencies in selecting appropriate mechanisms for implementation, taking into account the cultural, managerial, and political characteristics of the country. The practical application of these administrative mechanisms is essential for creating a foundation to adapt and modify current technology policies in response to future technological trends. In addition, the experience of the Republic of Korea may be useful for Russia in terms of applying administrative mechanisms and strategic planning for innovative development.

1. Alekseev A.O., Afanasyev V.Y. (2020). Integration of corporate technological foresight into the technological development management system in oil and gas companies. Management. No. 1, pp. 35–46 (in Russian). DOI: 10.26425/2309-3633- 2020-1-35-46.

2. Andersen A.D., Andersen P.D. (2012). Innovation-system foresight: Explicating and systemizing the innovation-system foundations of foresight and exploring its implications. DTU Library. Technical University of Denmark. 33 pp. Available at: https://backend.orbit.dtu.dk/ws/portalfiles/portal/10590515/Innovation_system_foresight.pdf, accessed 12.12.2024.

3. Cho E., McLean G.N. (2017). National human resource development revisited in the Republic of Korea. KEDI Journal of Educational Policy. Vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 25–46.

4. Choi M., Choi H.L. (2015). Foresight for Science and Technology Priority Setting in Korea. Foresight and STI Governance. Vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 54–67. DOI: 10.17323/1995-459X.2015.3.54.65.

5. Efimenko D.K. (2014). Free Trade Agreement between the European Union and the Republic of Korea in the Context of the EU’s East Asian Policy. Bulletin of Moscow University. Series 25: International Relations and World Politics. No. 1, pp. 139–159 (in Russian).

6. Havas A., Schartinger D., Weber M. (2010). The Impact of Foresight on Innovation Policy-Making: Recent Experiences and Future Perspectives. Research Evaluation. Vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 91–104. DOI: 10.3152/095820210X510133.

7. Hong O. (2022). STEM/STEAM education research in South Korea. In: Teo T.W., Tan A.L., Teng P. (Eds.). STEM Education from Asia: Trends and Perspectives. Luxembourg: Routledge, pp. 211–227. DOI: 10.4324/9781003099888-11.

8. Keenan M. (2009). Technological Foresight: International Experience. Foresight and STI Governance. No. 3, pp. 60– 67 (in Russian). DOI: 10.17323/1995- 459X.2009.3.60.68.

9. Ko B.K., Yang J.S. (2023). Developments and Challenges of Foresight Evaluation: Review of the Past 30 Years of Research. Futures. Vol. 155, no. 1, article 103291. DOI: 10.1016/j.futures.2023.103291.

10. Kovrigin E.B., Suslov D.V. (2008). Free Trade Agreements as an Instrument of Japan’s Foreign Trade Policy at the Beginning of the 21st Century. Spatial Economy. No. 1, pp. 89–110 (in Russian).

11. Lee J.M. (2021). Policy Analysis on AI SW Human Resources Development Using Cognitive Map Analysis. Journal of Information Technology Applications & Management. Vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 109–125.

12. Litvina K.Y. (2024). New Technological Policy as an Instrument of Strategic Public Administration. Progressive Economy. No. 2, pp. 5–21 (in Russian). DOI: 10.54861/27131211_2024_2_5.

13. Medzhidov Z.U. (2016). Foreign experience of functioning of special economic zones. Bulletin of the Volga University named after V.N. Tatishchev. Vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 207–215 (in Russian).

14. Miles I., Saritas O., Sokolov A. (2016). Foresight for Science, Technology and Innovation. Luxembourg: Springer, 405 pp. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-32574-3.

15. Neels C.A. (2020). Systematic Literature Review of the Use of Foresight Methodologies Within Technology Policy Between 2015 and 2020. STEaPP Working Paper Series, University College London. Available at: https://www.ucl.ac.uk/steapp/sites/steapp/files/final_neels_111120.pdf, accessed 12.12.2024.

16. Popper R., Popper M. (2024). Action Roadmaps for More Resilient Research and Innovation Futures: Strategic Pathways to Foresight-Driven and Sustainable R&I Policies in FP10. CFI Working Paper Series. Available at: https://rafaelpopper. wordpress.com, accessed: 12.12.2024.

17. Savostin A.A. (2002). Comparative characteristics of the administrative-legal method with other methods of regulating public relations. Jurist. No. 7, pp. 49–50 (in Russian).

18. Schneider C., Veugelers R. (2010). On young highly innovative companies: why they matter and how (not) to policy support them. Industrial and Corporate Change. Vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 969–1007. DOI: 10.1093/icc/dtp052.

19. Shuvalov S.S. (2013). State order for innovations: approaches, problems and prospects. ETAPE: Economic Theory, Analysis, Practice. No. 5, pp. 85–100 (in Russian). Technology Foresight… (2023). Andersen P.D. et al.

20. Technology Foresight for Public Funding of Innovation: Methods and Best Practices. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 78 pp. DOI: 10.2760/759692.