Kang Young-cheol, Chairman of the Good Regulation Citizens' Forum, "Bad Regulations Like the Yellow Envelope Act Must Be Improved"

Limitations of Government-Led Regulatory Reform
Must Curb Government's 'Regulatory Instinct'... Citizens Should Directly Monitor

The citizen regulatory watchdog group, ‘Good Regulation Citizens' Forum,’ has identified five regulations, including the Yellow Envelope Act, as ‘bad regulations’ that need to be urgently dismantled or closely monitored.

Kang Young-cheol, chairman of the Good Regulation Citizens' Forum (pictured), emphasized in an interview with Asia Economy on the 13th that “bad regulations are those that violate cost-benefit or regulatory principles” and “will impose burdens rather than benefits on the national economy.”

Chairman Kang prioritized five bad regulations: ▲Yellow Envelope Act ▲Three Lease Laws ▲Serious Accident Punishment Act ▲Sunset regulation on traditional industry preservation zones ▲Mandatory purchase regulation on excess rice production.

Regarding the Yoon Seok-yeol administration’s regulatory reform efforts, he criticized, “They are working hard, but the government’s regulatory reform remains a benevolent approach that listens to and resolves complaints raised by the private sector.” He added, “Our government needs to conduct discovery-type reforms that identify regulations with a high degree of market intervention,” and noted that “the fundamental transformation of regulatory reform is insufficient.”

Chairman Kang launched the Good Regulation Citizens' Forum on the 9th together with university professors and regulatory reform experts, positioning it as a citizen-led regulatory watchdog organization. A former director of the Regulatory Coordination Office at the Office for Government Policy Coordination, he revealed the reason for establishing a private nonprofit organization: “It was difficult to expect the government to effectively carry out regulatory reform on its own.” Kang pointed out, “Governments over the past 25 years have pursued regulatory reform, but regulations that practically inconvenience citizens’ economic lives have not disappeared,” and “state intervention has not been alleviated at all.”

He cited the ‘regulatory instinct’ as the cause. He analyzed, “Regulation is the government’s power and authority,” and “when regulations are enacted, laws follow; when laws are made, organizations follow; and when organizations operate, budgets follow.” Since the benefits gained from regulations are substantial, bureaucrats want to maintain regulations and have no incentive to abolish them. Kang’s diagnosis is that if the government continues to lead regulatory reform, “the outcome is bleak.”

He also raised critical voices about why Korea has become a regulatory republic. Kang analyzed, “Since Korea’s capitalism and state formation occurred simultaneously, state economic intervention was inevitable from the beginning,” but “we introduced a market economy in the 1960s, yet no one advocated for the state to gradually withdraw from the market economy.”

The Good Regulation Citizens' Forum will engage in activities where citizens directly monitor regulatory legislation and enforcement to identify defective regulations and transform them into regulations that meet the standards of good regulation.

In particular, it will promote projects such as regulatory monitoring and evaluation to ensure that innovative ideas from companies that should freely enter the market are not thwarted by regulations, proposing solutions to regulatory difficulties, supporting regulatory petitions, and providing a platform for scientific discussions through regulatory impact analysis. The forum will collect cases from ordinary citizens and companies struggling with regulations but unable to properly communicate these issues to the government, and if necessary, support effective demands for regulatory improvements to the government.

The Good Regulation Citizens' Forum also presented 13 conditions for ‘good regulations,’ including ▲regulations that increase the overall benefit to the public ▲regulations that pursue safety and growth together ▲regulations that promote innovation without restricting technological development ▲regulations based on scientific analysis and evidence ▲regulations that minimize regulatory intensity compared to international standards.