An empirical study of administrative ethics in Korean local governments

Recently, ethical standards in public service are an ongoing issue in the United States and South Korea. Scandals and allegations of ethical misdeeds have afflicted governments in both countries. And more than a few public administrators and elected public officials in South Korea have been the subjects of allegations of ethical misconduct. These and other incidents have received widespread public attention and undoubtedly do nothing to foster public confidence in and trust of public servants and the government. The ethics movement in public administration comes mainly out of the recognition that public servants use discretion at all levels, and cannot just follow rules. Administrative ethics was long a neglected subject in American and Korean public administration.; Even though ethics in public service has become a main theme in America over the past twenty years, empirical research on administrative ethics is still not a popular area in public administration. And controlling corruption and unethical behavior by elected or public officials is one of the greatest challenges to the consolidation of the local autonomy system in Korea. And to understand administrative ethics is a pivotal mission for keeping democratic society in Korea.; The major question posed in this study is: Are there differences in the ethical behaviors, perceptions, and expectations of elected public officials and public administrators in Korea? Based on this, what implication does the Korean experience have for the further development of administrative ethics research?; There is a definite indication that the frequency of convictions for ethics violation is much higher among elected public officials than among public administrators, and that there is difference in the number of convictions for criminal activity between elected public officials and public administrators. There is significant difference in the sources for assistance and guidance between elected public officials and public administrators when facing an ethical challenge even though ranked first in sources was no one by both groups. There is no significant difference in those activities defined by elected public officials as most unethical and those defined by public administrators as most unethical.; There is no significant difference those activities defined by elected public officials as least unethical and these defined by public administrators as least unethical. That is, the null hypothesis is accepted. Respondents in this study clearly perceive themselves as more ethical than their colleagues, counterparts, and work units. The finding of this survey show that respondents who say they have high ethical standards are also likely to evaluate the ethical standards of their colleagues and work units as high. Generally, public administrators represent that they are more familiar with the Laws and Codes than are elected public officials.