농업 R&D 거버넌스 효율성 제고 및 민간 투자 활성화 방안(1/2차연도)

Abstract

’08~’14년 사이 농림축산식품 R&D 투자액은 연평균 7.7% 증가하여 현재 농림식품 전체예산의 5.3%를 차지한다. 현 정부는 ‘농림축산업의 미래성장산업화’를 국정과제 중 하나로 선정하고, R&D 강화를 통한 농업부문 창조경제 실현과 농업의 경쟁력 강화를 위해 향후에도 이를 지속적으로 확대할 계획이다.

하지만 외연적인 R&D 투자확대와 농림식품 R&D 정책통합 및 조정 강화 노력에도 불구하고 국정 및 농정방향을 고려한 중점투자방향 설정의 불명확, 부·청 간, 부처 간 융합연구의 미흡, 개발기술의 농산업현장으로의 실용화·사업화 연계 미흡 등과 같은 한계로 인해 결과적으로 농업 R&D의 투자 확대가 농산업의 경쟁력 향상으로 이어지지 못하고 있는 상황이다.

이러한 한계를 극복하기 위해 본 1차연도 연구에서는 농업혁신시스템 관점에서 농업 R&D 거버넌스 개선방향을 제시하고, 농업 R&D 성과 결정요인 분석 등을 통해 기술이전·사업화를 중심으로 농업 R&D 성과 극대화를 위한 정책방향을 제시하였다. 2차연도 연구에서는 민간 투자 활성화를 위해 민간의 역할 모색과 더불어 혁신의 주체로서 농산업경영체의 역할 확대방안을 검토할 계획이다.

Background of Research The Korean government has continually expanded investment in agriculture, forestry, and food R&D to realize the creative economy in agriculture and enhance the sector’s competitiveness through strengthening R&D, with an average annual increase of 7.7% from 2008 to 2014. Particularly, the Park Geun-hye administration selected agriculture’s future growth industrialization as one of the major government projects, and tries to continuously increase investment in agrifood R&D for it. Despite the quantitative expansion of agricultural R&D investment, the percentage of investment in agriculture is still lower compared to other ministries. Moreover, problem-solving in the field of agriculture and economic performance of improving the industry’s competitiveness are insufficient owing to the unclear direction of intensive investment considering state affairs and agricultural policy directions; inadequate convergence research among ministries in spite of efforts to strengthen coordinating and integrating agricultural R&D policies; and lack of commercialization of technology developed through R&D investment. To overcome these limits, this study aims to present the improvement direction of agricultural R&D governance from a view of an agricultural innovation system (AIS) and to suggest the basic policy direction for maximizing agricultural R&D results with a focus on technology transfer and commercialization.

Method of Research The first year’s study consists of an analysis of the agricultural R&D governance system, an analysis of agricultural R&D investment outcomes, and agricultural R&D technology transfer and commercialization. The second year’s research will establish private roles in the AIS to promote private investment and will seek plans to expand the role through a survey on agricultural enterprises’ awareness of technology developed. First, in the analysis of agricultural R&D governance, we reviewed R&D governance theoretically through the literature and examined the relation with governance by introducing the concept of innovation. Also, we collected opinions through R&D expert interviews, policy workshops, and meetings, and presented problems in the agricultural R&D system and the improvement direction. In the analysis of agricultural R&D results, we analyzed the current state of R&D investment and outcomes by gathering data and reviewing the literature, and an analysis of agricultural R&D outcome determinants using raw data of the IPET (Korea Institute of Planning & Evaluation for Technology in Food, Agriculture, Forestry & Fisheries)’s R&D projects was conducted as a project commissioned by SNU (Seoul National University) R&DB Foundation. In case of agricultural R&D technology transfer and commercialization, we identified their present situation and problems through the literature analysis, visits to related organizations, policy workshops, and meetings, and proposed the basic direction of the policy for their promotion in the frame of the AIS presented in agricultural R&D governance.

Research Results and Implications This study presented agricultural R&D governance’s operation state and suggested its improvement direction, analyzed the current status of agricultural R&D investment and results and outcome determinants, and proposed the policy direction for developing agricultural R&D technology transfer and commercialization. To improve the agricultural R&D system, first, we propose using “the classification system of science and technology for food, agriculture and forestry” as the R&D role division standard of the Ministry of Agriculture (MAFRA) and the Rural Development Administration (RDA). Second, it is needed to review a measure to unify commercialization management in agriculture by reorganizing the relating projects. Third, MAFRA’s R&D department should be expanded and reshuffled to improve the function of directing agricultural R&D. The following are major plans to establish the agricultural R&D governance system for strengthening the role of the Science and Technology Commission of Food, Agriculture, Forestry (STCA)’s R&D planning and implementation system. First, the Framework Act on Science and Technology should clarify the STCA’s institutional status. Second, the STCA needs to strengthen its function of a practical control tower by having rights to distribute and coordinate R&D budgets and to operate them autonomously. Last, the commission’s key task as the R&D planning system should be to set the direction of desirable agricultural R&D at the present stage, and the function of preparing a blueprint needs to be a top priority in establishing R&D policies including a comprehensive plan. According to the analysis of agricultural R&D investment and outcomes, Korea’s agrifood R&D investment increased 7.6% annually from 2009 to 2012. However, it is lower than 13.5%, the growth rate of the country’s total R&D costs. With expanding investment, R&D project results are on the rise with an average annual increase rate of 18.9% in the same period. Nonetheless, the growth rate of technology transfer and commercialization (5.7-16.6%) is lower than that of papers and patents (13-50.9%). The following implications for policy can be drawn from the result of the R&D project outcome analysis through the NBR and IDEA. First, school-industry cooperative studies should be expanded to enhance research outcomes such as papers, technology transfer, and commercialization. Second, it is necessary to create differentiated performance indicators by R&D stage (basic, application, development) and to strengthen their management. Third, various research institutes’ matching investment should increase to commercialize technology developed. Fourth, because multiyear study projects enhance research results due to economic efficiency of scale, mid- and long-term projects need to be expanded through systematic planning. Finally, this study presented major policy directions for promoting technology transfer and commercialization of agricultural R&D outcomes in the frame of the AIS. First, agricultural enterprises should be considered as the most important agent that leads innovation and performs technology transfer and commercialization. Second, R&D needed by the field should be strengthened by creating an innovation platform centered on the enterprises. Third, private R&D investment needs to be boosted to expand R&D that fits consumers’ demand. Fourth, it is necessary to promote the application of technology developed through technology financing to the field of agriculture. Fifth, the base of facilitating agricultural innovation needs to be created by the strengthening of each agent’s role in the technology commercialization system and cooperation. Sixth, diverse agents’ participation and a competitive system should be reinforced for innovative R&D outcomes. Seventh, it is needed to improve the STCA’s status and planning capacity for establishing R&D policy directions and implementation in response to economic, social, and environmental features. Eighth, it is necessary to increase practical exchange and partnership between agricultural enterprises and the government. Ninth, it is required to nurture local market and consumer specialized regional strategic industries by strengthening each area’s innovation network.

Researchers: Lee Myoung-ki, Kim Soo-suk, Hwang Eui-sik, Yoon Sungeun Research Period: 2014. 1. ~ 2014. 10. E-mail address: mklee@krei.re.kr