문화분권과 문화행정 거버넌스의 제도구조에 관한 비교법적 연구- 문화정책 권한배분 구조를 중심으로 -

This article shifts the focus from the outcomes of cultural policy to the institutional allocation of authority through which cultural policy is formulated, decided, and implemented, and offers a comparative analysis of cultural governance in Korea and Japan. Cultural policy requires state support while simultaneously presupposing cultural autonomy, thereby embodying a complex fundamental rights structure in which liberal and social rights intersect. From this perspective, cultural decentralization is not merely the dispersion of administrative functions but a question of how policy-making authority is institutionally distributed. It is closely connected to the constitutional principle of the cultural state enshrined in Article 9 of the Korean Constitution and to the guarantee of local autonomy. To examine the substantive meaning of cultural decentralization, this study develops an analytical framework consisting of four elements: the scope of policy-making authority, the autonomy of fiscal decision-making, the institutionalization of planning obligations, and the structure of citizen participation. Applying this framework to Japan’s relocation of the Agency for Cultural Affairs to Kyoto and the development of local cultural ordinances, the analysis finds that Japan has gradually expanded the institutional basis for regional involvement in policy formation through ordinances, planning systems, and participatory mechanisms. In contrast, although Korea has established an implementation system centered on local cultural foundations, core authority over policy planning and fiscal control remains largely concentrated in the central government, limiting the substantive transfer of policy-making power. The comparison demonstrates that cultural decentralization cannot be achieved solely through the physical relocation of institutions or the expansion of implementing bodies. What ultimately matters is whether institutional conditions enable regions to set policy objectives and allocate financial resources. The substance of cultural decentralization lies not in the formal dispersion of authority but in the creation of a governance structure in which policy-making power and responsibility effectively operate at the regional level.