The perceived identity of policy participants
The agenda-building process of universal basic income in South Korea
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 6113593 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Sunggeun Kim (Sungkyunkwan University), Sung Geun Kim (0000-0002-3087-9728, Sungkyunkwan University), Don S Lee (0000-0001-9138-9661, Sungkyunkwan University, corresponding author), Soonae Park (0000-0001-5330-3599, Seoul National University) |
| Year | 2025 |
| Publication date | 2025-01-22 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Public Policy and Administration (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0952-0767 • E-ISSN: 1749-4192 |
| Publisher | SAGE Publications Inc (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1177/09520767241312361 |
| OpenAlex | W4406698055 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 51 |
Due to a detrimental impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on domestic economies, many countries have considered adopting government programs that can stimulate individual consumption, such as a universal basic income. Since such programs would potentially require greater bureaucratic involvement, how civil servants evaluate the introduction of these programs has important implications for policy implementation. In this study, we develop a vignette survey experiment to understand how the perceived identity of those who drive the development of these programs, from the agenda-setting to the next stage, shapes civil servants’ assessments. Specifically, we propose four different participants with their roles related to the programs in this process as main treatment conditions. Analyzing original data of more than 4000 civil servants from central and local governments in South Korea, we find that civil servants have more positive perceptions when a basic income policy evolves through incorporating academic experts’ advice. We further find that central and local bureaucrats have different preferences, as the former actually consider reflecting demands from the public more important in this process
Basic income · Development economics · Economic growth · Economics · Political science · Public economics · Computer Science · Global Educational Reforms and Inequalities · Intergenerational and Educational Inequality Studies · Law · Public Administration · Social Policy and Reform Studies
Bureaucracy and policy implementation
Deliberate Discretion?
Policy Alienation of Public Professionals
Covid‐19 and Inequalities
On the Political Feasibility of Universal Basic Income
The Palgrave International Handbook of Basic Income
Why has the Covid-19 pandemic increased support for Universal Basic Income
Basic Income Guarantee and Politics
Exploring Universal Basic Income
Behavioural science and policy
Creativity and the Experts
A Policy Comet in Moominland? Basic Income in the Finnish Welfare State
Covid-19 and welfare state support
Measuring and framing support for universal basic income
Complementarity of Politics and Administration as a Legitimate Alternative to the Dichotomy Model
Get Ready
The Effect of Administrative Burden on Bureaucratic Perception of Policies
Innovation Type and Diffusion
A wave of support? A natural experiment on how the Covid-19 pandemic affected the popularity of a basic income
Agenda Building as a Comparative Political Process
Covid‐19 and support for basic income in Korea
Policy Positions of Bureaucrats at the Front Lines
Four Systems of Policy, Politics, and Choice
The Politics of Unconditional Basic Income
Representation and Agenda Setting
Policy Knowledge, Policy Formulation, and Change
Beyond nudge
What motivates street-level bureaucrats to implement the reforms of elected politicians
Bureaucratic Responsiveness under Dynamic Political Settings
Policy Recommendations for Multi-Actor Implementation
How do policy environments shape public service motivation during the national disaster? Evidence from large-scale survey experiments
The Bureaucracy and the Policy Agenda
Politicians, Managers, and Street-Level Bureaucrats
The Necessity of Discretion
A Robin Hood for all
Toward Better Theories of the Policy Process
Backward Mapping
Experimenting with Wellbeing
| Highly cited | No |
|---|