面向可持续发展目标的公共部门创新:泰国与韩国创新类型的比较研究

IF 2.1 4区 管理学 Q2 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION
Chutima Suchitwarasan, Emre Cinar, Chris Simms, Jae-Yeon Kim
{"title":"面向可持续发展目标的公共部门创新:泰国与韩国创新类型的比较研究","authors":"Chutima Suchitwarasan, Emre Cinar, Chris Simms, Jae-Yeon Kim","doi":"10.1111/1467-8500.12619","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The aim of this paper is to compare the focus (strategy, capacity, and operation) and locus (internal and external) of innovation types of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)-oriented public sector innovation (PSI) in Thailand and Korea and to contribute to the limited understanding of the role of national context in PSI. Our study analysed 263 SDGs-oriented innovations based on the new typology proposed by Chen et al. The findings identified that the orientation of SDGs-oriented PSI is more external and policy innovation is the most common type in both countries. These distributions, however, vary depending on the contextual differences in administrative and technological contexts, resulting in SDGs-oriented PSI in Korea emphasised on strategy focus, whereas Thailand emphasised capacity focus. This also demonstrates a temporality between strategy, capacity, and operations foci in Korea, but Thailand attempted to fill the capacity gap through SDGs-oriented innovation. Insights from this empirical study can assist public managers in selecting innovation portfolio configurations applicable to their national context.","PeriodicalId":47373,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journal of Public Administration","volume":"64 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Public sector innovation for sustainable development goals: A comparative study of innovation types in Thailand and Korea\",\"authors\":\"Chutima Suchitwarasan, Emre Cinar, Chris Simms, Jae-Yeon Kim\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/1467-8500.12619\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The aim of this paper is to compare the focus (strategy, capacity, and operation) and locus (internal and external) of innovation types of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)-oriented public sector innovation (PSI) in Thailand and Korea and to contribute to the limited understanding of the role of national context in PSI. Our study analysed 263 SDGs-oriented innovations based on the new typology proposed by Chen et al. The findings identified that the orientation of SDGs-oriented PSI is more external and policy innovation is the most common type in both countries. These distributions, however, vary depending on the contextual differences in administrative and technological contexts, resulting in SDGs-oriented PSI in Korea emphasised on strategy focus, whereas Thailand emphasised capacity focus. This also demonstrates a temporality between strategy, capacity, and operations foci in Korea, but Thailand attempted to fill the capacity gap through SDGs-oriented innovation. Insights from this empirical study can assist public managers in selecting innovation portfolio configurations applicable to their national context.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47373,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Australian Journal of Public Administration\",\"volume\":\"64 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Australian Journal of Public Administration\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8500.12619\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian Journal of Public Administration","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8500.12619","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文的目的是比较泰国和韩国面向可持续发展目标(sdg)的公共部门创新(PSI)创新类型的重点(战略、能力和运作)和轨迹(内部和外部),并有助于对国情在PSI中的作用的有限理解。我们的研究基于Chen等人提出的新类型学分析了263项面向可持续发展目标的创新。研究发现,两国以可持续发展目标为导向的PSI的取向更偏向外部,政策创新是最常见的类型。然而,这些分布因行政和技术背景的差异而有所不同,导致以可持续发展目标为导向的PSI在韩国强调战略重点,而泰国强调能力重点。这也表明韩国的战略、能力和运营重点之间存在时间性,但泰国试图通过以可持续发展目标为导向的创新来填补能力差距。从实证研究中获得的见解可以帮助公共管理者选择适合本国国情的创新组合配置。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Public sector innovation for sustainable development goals: A comparative study of innovation types in Thailand and Korea
The aim of this paper is to compare the focus (strategy, capacity, and operation) and locus (internal and external) of innovation types of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)-oriented public sector innovation (PSI) in Thailand and Korea and to contribute to the limited understanding of the role of national context in PSI. Our study analysed 263 SDGs-oriented innovations based on the new typology proposed by Chen et al. The findings identified that the orientation of SDGs-oriented PSI is more external and policy innovation is the most common type in both countries. These distributions, however, vary depending on the contextual differences in administrative and technological contexts, resulting in SDGs-oriented PSI in Korea emphasised on strategy focus, whereas Thailand emphasised capacity focus. This also demonstrates a temporality between strategy, capacity, and operations foci in Korea, but Thailand attempted to fill the capacity gap through SDGs-oriented innovation. Insights from this empirical study can assist public managers in selecting innovation portfolio configurations applicable to their national context.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
9.10%
发文量
26
期刊介绍: Aimed at a diverse readership, the Australian Journal of Public Administration is committed to the study and practice of public administration, public management and policy making. It encourages research, reflection and commentary amongst those interested in a range of public sector settings - federal, state, local and inter-governmental. The journal focuses on Australian concerns, but welcomes manuscripts relating to international developments of relevance to Australian experience.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信