Skip Navigation

South Korea

  • Member Since 2011
  • Action Plan 4

ON THE PAGE


Current Action Plan

2018-2020

Action Plan 4

  • Number of Commitments: 13
  • Policy Area Focus: Citizen Participation in Policy Making, Disclosing High-Value Open Data, Public-Private Partnership on Anti-Corruption

South Korea is currently implementing 13 commitments from their 2018-2020 action plan.

This action plan features commitments related to citizen participation in domestic and foreign policy-making and open data.


OGG title graphic no logos

A Guide to Open Government and the Coronavirus

Check out this guide for a one-stop shop of the best current resources on how open government projects and approaches can support tackling the pandemic.


Contact

Yujin Lee Deputy Director of Innovation Planning Division, Ministry of the Interior and Safety yujinflee@korea.kr
Jihye Park Assistant Deputy Director, Innovation Planning Division, Ministry of the Interior and Safety parkjihye66@korea.kr

Commitments

  1. Public-Private Anti-Corruption System

    KR0036, 2018, Anti-Corruption

  2. Management System for Performance Venues

    KR0037, 2018, Public Service Delivery

  3. Real-Name Policy System

    KR0038, 2018, Open Parliaments

  4. Safety Inspection System

    KR0039, 2018, Public Service Delivery

  5. Public Diplomacy System

    KR0040, 2018, Public Service Delivery

  6. Open Communication Forum

    KR0041, 2018, Public Service Delivery

  7. Citizen Participation in Policy-Making

    KR0042, 2018, Public Service Delivery

  8. Disclosure of the Amount of Harmful Substance Contained in Foods

    KR0043, 2018, Public Service Delivery

  9. Open Data

    KR0044, 2018, Open Data

  10. Discosure of Cultural Heritage Resources

    KR0045, 2018, Infrastructure & Transport

  11. Open National Priority Data

    KR0046, 2018, Public Service Delivery

  12. Public Data Qulity Management

    KR0047, 2018, Public Service Delivery

  13. Voluntary Compliance Customs Administration

    KR0048, 2018, Human Rights

  14. Organization Information Disclosure Online

    KR0022, 2016, Education

  15. Information in Original Form

    KR0023, 2016, Fiscal Openness

  16. Standard Model for Pre-Release Information

    KR0024, 2016, Fiscal Openness

  17. National Data Disclosure

    KR0025, 2016, Fiscal Openness

  18. Public Data Quality Management

    KR0026, 2016, Fiscal Openness

  19. Free Open Format Use

    KR0027, 2016, Open Data

  20. Open Data Standards

    KR0028, 2016, Fiscal Openness

  21. Citizen Groups Government Service Design

    KR0029, 2016, Public Service Delivery

  22. e-Government Service Environment

    KR0030, 2016, E-Government

  23. Citizen Service Portals

    KR0031, 2016, Capacity Building

  24. Citizen Services Application

    KR0032, 2016, Anti-Corruption

  25. Public Sector Corruption Research

    KR0033, 2016, E-Government

  26. Citizens' Accessibility to ODA Statistics

    KR0034, 2016, Fiscal Openness

  27. Disclosing Information on International Aids

    KR0035, 2016, Fiscal Openness

  28. Strengthening Public-Private Collaboration

    KR0017, 2014, Public Service Delivery

  29. Providing Customized Services

    KR0018, 2014, Public Service Delivery

  30. Enhancing Information Disclosure

    KR0019, 2014, Public Participation

  31. Strengthening Public Service Ethics

    KR0020, 2014, Anti-Corruption

  32. Encouraging the Private Sector to Utilze Public Data

    KR0021, 2014, Open Data

  33. Provision of Diverse Public Services

    KR0001, 2012, Public Service Delivery

  34. Strengthening Citizens’ Monitoring of Government

    KR0002, 2012, Fiscal Openness

  35. Use e-People to Promote Public Input in Policy Development

    KR0003, 2012, Public Participation

  36. Promote the Proposal System for Receiving Public Input Electronically

    KR0004, 2012, Public Participation

  37. Develop a Manual on Consensus Building Among Various Stakeholders

    KR0005, 2012, Public Participation

  38. Conduct Field Visits to Interact Directly with Stakeholders

    KR0006, 2012, Public Participation

  39. Simplify Online Civil Affairs Application Forms

    KR0007, 2012, E-Government

  40. Refine the Portal to Be More User Friendly

    KR0008, 2012,

  41. Customise Online Services for Business

    KR0009, 2012, Private Sector

  42. Establish an Online Civil Affairs Hub to Provide 24-Hour Services

    KR0010, 2012, E-Government

  43. Disclose Critical Information on Food, Environment, and Education

    KR0011, 2012, Public Participation

  44. Engage CSOs on Relevant Information to Be Disclosed

    KR0012, 2012, Public Participation

  45. Strengthen Asset Disclosure for Public Servants

    KR0013, 2012, Anti-Corruption

  46. Monitor Restrictions on Post-Public Employment

    KR0014, 2012, Anti-Corruption

  47. Release Public Information for Private Sector Use on the Data Sharing Portal

    KR0015, 2012, Private Sector

  48. Engage Citizens in Administrative and Budget Processes

    KR0016, 2012, Public Service Delivery


Resources

  1. OGP Letter – South Korea – September 2016

    2016, Letter, Web page

  2. OGP Letter to South Korea Regarding Lack of Consultation: April 2014

    2017, Letter, Web page

  3. OGP Letter to South Korea Regarding Lack of Consultation: September 2016

    2017, Letter, Web page

  4. OGP Letter- South Korea – April 2014

    2015, Letter, Web page

  5. South Korea 2014-2015 IRM Progress Report for Public Comment

    2016, IRM Report, Web page

  6. South Korea Action Plan 2012-2013

    2015, Action Plan, Web page

  7. South Korea Action Plan 2018-2020

    2018, Action Plan, Web page

  8. South Korea Design Report 2018-2020 – For Public Comment

    2020, Report Comments, Web page

  9. South Korea End of Term Report 2014-2016

    2017, IRM Report, Web page

  10. South Korea End of Term Report 2014-2016 – For Public Comment

    2017, Report Comments, Web page

  11. South Korea End of Term Self-Assessment Report 2014-2016

    2017, Self Assessment, Web page

  12. South Korea End-of-Term Report 2016-2018 – For Public Comment

    2020, Report Comments, Web page

  13. South Korea End-of-Term Report 2016–2018

    2020, IRM Report, Web page

  14. South Korea End-of-Term Self-Assessment Report 2016-2018

    2018, Self Assessment, Web page

  15. South Korea First IRM Report – Public Comments Received

    2016, IRM Report, Web page

  16. South Korea IRM Progress Report 2012-2013

    2015, IRM Report, Web page

  17. South Korea Letter of Intent to Join OGP

    2017, Letter, Web page

  18. South Korea Mid-Term Report 2016-2018

    2019, IRM Report, Web page

  19. South Korea Mid-Term Report 2016-2018 – For Public Comment

    2018, Report Comments, Web page

  20. South Korea Mid-Term Self-Assessment Report 2016-2018

    2017, Self Assessment, Web page

  21. South Korea Progress Report 2014-2015 (Korean) – Public comments version

    2016, IRM Report, Web page

  22. South Korea Second Action Plan for 2014-2016

    2015, Action Plan, Web page

  23. South Korea Third National Action Plan 2016-2018

    2016, Action Plan, Web page

  24. South Korea, Midterm Self-Assessment, 2014-16

    2015, Self Assessment, Web page


Current Data

The data below is updated periodically, most often after large numbers of new action plans and IRM reports.

Commitment Performance

The following variables answer the question “Did this commitment open government?“, and focus on how government practices have changed as a result of the commitment’s implementation.

Key

No IRM data

Pending IRM Review

Major
Outstanding
Starred Commitments
Action Plan 1
0
Action Plan 2
0
0
0
Action Plan 3
0
Action Plan 4

Global

Most per action plan
4
7

Regional

Most per action plan
2
3

How to Get More Starred Commitments

Starred commitments in OGP are one of the ways the IRM designates promising reforms. The graph below shows where the major areas for improvement in action plan design and implementation should take place based on past action plans.

Key

Stars (Global average 7%)

Focus on implementation

Focus on design

Pending IRM review

No IRM data

Focus on design

Focus on objectives and impact (ambition/potential impact)

Focus on relevance to open government

Focus on verifiability

Action Plan 4

Public Participation

This table shows: 1) the level of public influence during the development and implementation of OGP action plans, 2) whether consultations were open to any member of the public or only to those invited; and 3) whether a forum existed that met regularly.

Key

Participation was closed

Participation was open to any interested party

No IRM data

Forum

Pending IRM review

Definitions

Collaborate: Iterative dialogue and public helped set agenda

 

Involve: Government gave feedback on public inputs

 

Consult: Public gave input

 

Inform: Government provided public with information on plan

Collaborate
Involve
Consult
Inform
No Consultation

Development

Action Plan 1
Action Plan 2
Action Plan 3
Action Plan 4
Collaborate
Involve
Consult
Inform
No Consultation

Implementation

Action Plan 1
Action Plan 2
Action Plan 3
Action Plan 4

OGP Global Report Data

The data below is drawn from the 2019 OGP Global Report. You can view and learn more about the report here.

Selected Dimensions of Open Government

This section captures how each OGP member can play a leadership role, based on IRM-based findings and third-party scores. This list does not cover all of open government and OGP members are not required to take any action.

Action implications

These are recommendations on the role that each OGP member might play in each policy area. The recommendations are derived from a combination of the IRM-based findings and third-party scores.

IRM-based findings

Reflect the performance of commitments in a particular policy area, as assessed by the IRM.

 

(NC) No Commitments
(CA) Commitment(s) in the policy area.
(IR) IRM-Reviewed: At least one IRM-assessed commitment.
(C) Was Complete: At least one commitment was substantially or fully completed.
(A) Was Ambitious: At least one commitment with moderate or transformative potential impact.
(ER) Showed Early Results: At least one commitment opened government in a “Major” or “Outstanding” way.

Third-party scores

Reflect “real-world” performance, i.e., performance outside of the OGP framework. Scores are comprised of various indicators collected by respected organizations.

Anti-Corruption

Action Implications
Consider Action
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
Action Implications
Consider Action
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)

Civic Space

Action Implications
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
Action Implications
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
Action Implications
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)

Open Policy Making

Action Implications
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
Action Implications
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)

Access to Information

Action Implications
Implement for Results
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
Action Implications
Consider Action
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
Action Implications
Implement for Results
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
Action Implications
Consider Action
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)

Fiscal Openness

Action Implications
Implement for Results
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
Action Implications
Consider Action
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)
Action Implications
IRM-Based Findings
NC
CA
IR
C
A
ER
3rd-Party Score (0-4)

Recent Posts

Bogota, Colombia (OGP Local)

56 Local Jurisdictions Join Global Partnership to Promote Open Government

OGP welcomes 56 new local jurisdictions composed of 64 local governments and civil society organizations to join OGP Local at a critical time for open government.

Asia Graphics

Open Response + Open Recovery: Conversations with Asia-Pacific’s Open Gov Community

On July 7, over 100 open government reformers across the Asia-Pacific region convened for the conversation “Open Response + Open Recovery: Inclusive Participation and Civic Space in Times of Crisis”. The discussion focused on how reformers in the region are working to maintain inclusive civic participation and protect and expand civic space during the COVID-19 pandemic. This is what we heard.

full size Asia OR + OR webinar
Tech6

United for an Open Digital Future

Freedom of expression is an important sign of a thriving democracy, including across constantly emerging digital platforms and social media.

Show More
Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!