일반논문 행정논총 제 49 권제 1 호 (2011. 3): 139~165 의약품리베이트자율규제의한계 : 제도론적접근 Ⅰ. 서론 Ⅱ. 이론적고찰 Ⅲ. 의약품리베이트사례분석 < 目次 > Ⅳ. 이론적시사점 Ⅴ. 결론 < 요약 > Ⅰ. 서론 **. 1 (mpolicy@snu.ac.kr). **. (savio@chosun.ac.kr).
140 행정논총 제 49 권제 1 호.,.,..,.,,.. (,2004),,,...,....,,. ( ).
의약품리베이트자율규제의한계 : 제도론적접근 141.,.,.... Ⅱ. 이론적고찰 1. 자율규제의의의 (,2008;,2001;,2000). (,1992) 1)., (,1992). (Black,1996; Gunningham & Rees,1997).,, 1).,.,, (,2008).
142 행정논총 제 49 권제 1 호 (,2008)..,. (Baldwin & Cave,1999).,, (,, ) 2) (,2000)..,.,,, (,1992:399-404). 2. 선행연구의검토 TV,, (,2008)., (,2002;,1997;,2001;,2000;,2002;,2005;,2006;,2002;,2006),, (,2003;,2008). 2) (Cairncross, 1993; Treasury,2000;,2002 ).
의약품리베이트자율규제의한계 : 제도론적접근 143, (,2007). (,2000;,1998;,2004; 2007), (,1998;,1999;,2006). - (,2001) (,2003;,2004)..,,.,. 3. 본연구의분석기준 1) 자율규제의제도론적접근,,. (North,1990), (incentive effect), (,2006:196).,
144 행정논총 제 49 권제 1 호 (,2003:253),. ( ). 3)... 2) 자율규제와협력 (,2004:302).. (,2004). (,1995) (opportunity set),... Axelrod(1984) ( ) ( ), (Axelrod,1984; Kreps et al.,1982). 3). Horn(1995)..
의약품리베이트자율규제의한계 : 제도론적접근 145.,,. (tit-for-tat) (Ostrom,1990;,1999).. Ostrom(1990) 4)..,.. 3) 본연구의분석기준도출 (,2004),.,,. (2004),,, 4) Ostrom (Ostrom,1990;, 1999). (2004).
146 행정논총 제 49 권제 1 호.,. (,2001).,.., 3.,,..,.. 1), 2), 3) ( ), 4). 5) ( ) (homogeneity). 5). (2002),. (2005),. (2006) (2008), (2007), (2001), (1998). (1998),. (2003). Ostrom,. (2002)..
의약품리베이트자율규제의한계 : 제도론적접근 147.,.,..,... ( ).. 6).. (,2004; 2010). ( ),,.. 7) (, 2008). 6) Ostrom (self-governing). Ostrom (self-governing),,,,,,,, (,,,,,, ( ) (Ostrom,1990).
148 행정논총 제 49 권제 1 호 Ⅲ. 의약품리베이트사례분석 1. 사례의개요 1) 의약품시장의특성과리베이트,...,... i), ii), iii) 3. ( ).,. (,2009).. 7) Axelord(1984). (,2008).
의약품리베이트자율규제의한계 : 제도론적접근 149.. (,1999), (,2009). 3,. ( ) ( )..,,.,,,,, (, 2009). 3.,,,. (,2009: 244-245),... 2) 정부규제의변화과정. 8). 8) (ratchet effect)(,2006)
150 행정논총 제 49 권제 1 호,, (, ) (, ).,, 9),. < 표 1> 리베이트근절을위한규제강화 3) 의약품리베이트자율규제의변화과정 2009. ( )..,.. ( ),, (, 2009.7.13). 9), ㆍ,,,,,,,, (, 2010.7.13).
의약품리베이트자율규제의한계 : 제도론적접근 151. 1994 3 14. < 2>. < 표 2> 제약업계의자율규제변화과정 ( )., 10). (KRPIA) 2002 11). 10).,,, (,,, ) 10 5, 20, 10, 1 50, 1 100. (,2010.2.17). 11) (KRPIA) (KPMA)
152 행정논총 제 49 권제 1 호.. ( )., 12). 2. 재산권구조및이해관계변화분석 1) 이해관계자및재산권구조, 13)., 14)..,..., (, 2009.11.16). 2002 2007 2010. 12). 2005 3 20. 2005 4 22,,,,, 5 (, 2005.4.22) 2006 11,,,, (, 2007.1.17). 13) ( ). 14) 190..( http://www.kpma.or.kr, :2011.1.30)
의약품리베이트자율규제의한계 : 제도론적접근 153,. ( ),.. (,2009).,. 15). 16). 17). 15),,.,, OTC(Over The Counter, )..,. 16),. 17). (2008),,,,, (31.4%), (41.2%) (51.5%) (39.4%).
154 행정논총 제 49 권제 1 호 18). -,,,,...,. 2) 의약품거래제도의유인구조 ( ). ( ). 68% 19). 20). ( ).., 18) (iron-triangle).,,. 19) 1 68%, 2 5 85%, 6 90% 85% (, 2009.8.1). 20) 13.2 8,000, 50.5 5. 2006 1/4 51 50.5 (,2008).
의약품리베이트자율규제의한계 : 제도론적접근 155...., (,2009)..,.,.,.. 99%.,. (,1998) (,2008). 3) 정부규제와유인구조변화...
156 행정논총 제 49 권제 1 호..,,. 3. 협력기제와행태변화 1) 협력유인.,.. 21),.,,.. 2) 협력기제 ( ).,., 22). 21) (, 2010.6.7.). 22) 2006, MSD,,, 2007 2008
의약품리베이트자율규제의한계 : 제도론적접근 157,. ( ).. -...,. 3) 행위자의행태변화. 23)., 24).. ' ' (, 2008.2.10). 23),. 100%. ( ),. 24), ( ).
158 행정논총 제 49 권제 1 호. 2 25). 4. 신뢰할만한공약미확보. 26). 27).,., 25) 1 300 2 ' ' (, 2010.7.16). 26) 2009 3 ( ).. 6 500 " ". (, 2009.9.24). 27) 18 ( ). 1... 1. 1. 2. : 3. :, 2 1,000. 3. 1.1 2. 3. 4 1.
의약품리베이트자율규제의한계 : 제도론적접근 159..., 28) (,2008)... Ⅳ. 이론적시사점 1. 재산권제약상황에서행위자들간이해관계의일치,.,..,.. 28) 2008 2, 335, 100 46, 2. 5,228 199 (, 2009), (2008) (, 2008:68).
160 행정논총 제 49 권제 1 호 2. 협력을통한재산가치확대재생산가능성..,... 3. 신뢰할만한공약의확보.. (tit fot tat ).,.,. Ⅴ. 결론..,
의약품리베이트자율규제의한계 : 제도론적접근 161.,..,..,.... (,2004),.... 3., 3..
162 행정논총 제 49 권제 1 호,. 참고문헌. (2000). :, 34(3). 111-128.. (2002).,. 36(3). 185-205.. (2008)... (2007). 10... (2009). 2009.. (2008)..... (2009). 7.. (2005)... (2000)., 25(3). 345-378. (1998). :, 23. 385-432. (2001)., 9(2). 83-101., (1998). :, 22. 107-153.. (2006).. :.. (1998.11.19)., 9.. (2006). :, 20. 85-118. (1995).. :.. (2000). :,.. (2004)., 17(5). 1915-1938.. (1997) :, 31(4). 787-816. (2001). :, 10(2). 173-201.
의약품리베이트자율규제의한계 : 제도론적접근 163. (2002)., 11(2). 167-187. (2005)... (2009.7.30)... (2010. 2.)... (2007)... (1999). :, 8(2). 183-204. (2002).,?: ISP. 9(2). 54-74.. (2002). :, 12(1). 3-23. (2007)., 31(1). 235-259. (1999).. :.. (1999).. :. (2008).,... 2009 4 24. (2003). :, 14(3).. (2004). :, 42(3). 75-103.. (2005). -NIMBY... (2010).,, :, 48(4). 31-54.. (2009)., 50(4).. (2007). :,,, 18(5). 157-171. (2008)., 33.. (2009)., 47(1).. (2006). :, 14(1). 34-72. (2009)., 29(2).. (2009).., 4(2).. (2006)., 18(4). 1259-1282. (2008). :, 8(4). 628-666. (2006)., 15(4). 83-110.
164 행정논총 제 49 권제 1 호. (2009). (Co-regulation) 2,.. (2008). (Co-regulation),.. (1992).. :.. (2006)., 19(1).. (2010)., 19(1).. (2010)., 23. 353-372.. (2003). :, 37(2). 469-495. (2005). :, 15. 5-55. (2001)., 3. 222-252. (2008)., 34. Alchian A. & Demsetz H. (1973). The Property Right Paradigm. Journal of Economic History. 33(1) Axelrod R. (1984). The Evolution of Cooperation. New York: Basic Books. Baldwin R. & M. Cave. (1999). Understanding Regulation: Theory, Stratege and Practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Black, Julia. (1996). Constitutionalizing Self-Regulation, The Modern Law Review. 24-55. Cairncross F. (1993). Costing the Earth. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. Cheung S. (1974). A Theory of Price Control, Journal of Law and Economics. 17. 54-71. Coase R. (1960). The Problem of Social Cost, Journal of Law and Economics. 4. 1-44. Gunningham N. & J. Rees. (1997). Industry Self-Regulation: An International Perspectives, Law & Policy 19(4). 363-414. Horn M J. (1995). The Political economy of public administration. Cambridge: Chambridge University Press. Kreps et al. (1982). Rational Cooperation in the Finitely Repeated Prisoner's Dilemma, Journal of Economic Theory 27(2). 245-52. Lewis T.R. & J. Cowens. (1983). Operation in Commons: An Application of Repetitious Rivalry. Vancouver: University of British Columbia. Department of Economics. North D.C. (1990). Institutions. Institutional Change. and Economic Performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Ostrom. E. (1990). Governing the Commons: The Evaluation of Institutions for Collective Action. New York: Cambridge University Press. Treasury. Australia. (2000). International Policy on Industry Self-Regulation.(http://www.treasury.gov.au/ publications/consumeraffairs/industryself-regulation/taskforceonindustryself-regulation/draft Report/appd.asp)
의약품리베이트자율규제의한계 : 제도론적접근 165 ABSTRACT The Limit of the Self-Regulation of Pharmaceutical Rebates: An Insititutional Approach Ha-young Lee & Min-chang Lee This article aims to reexamine the success factors for the self-regulation of pharmaceutical rebates through a case analysis. The results of the case study show the reasons for inevitable failure in the self-regulation of pharmaceutical rebates. First, the interests of the actors diverged. Second, these separate interests cannot make actors agree to search for alternatives that increase property value. Third, as a result, actors cannot establish a system that could induce voluntary cooperation. Finally, actors were not able to develop and enforce a credible commitment mechanism. The success factors for self-regulation were corroborated from a theoretical perspective and it was also found that those factors are useful for explaining the causes of the failure of self-regulation. Self-regulation cannot be successfully managed in a distorted market structure with actors with diverse interests.