This study aims to examine policy direction and support with focus on the characteristics, effectiveness, influence, and ripple effects of local governance in social welfare. The purpose of the study is as follows. First, we examined the characteristics of social welfare governance by investigating the structure and management status of local governance in the social welfare sector. Second, we examined the actual state of activities, performance and influence of the Community Welfare Association (si-gun-gu and eup-myeon-dong) as a representative governance and suggested tasks for the growth of local governance in the social welfare sector. To achieve the goals of this research, the study was composed of the following five parts. First, analysis of actual conditions of the Community Welfare Association (si-gun-gu and eup-myeon-dong) as a key mechanism of local-based governance in the social welfare sector; second, analysis of actual network conditions in local private sectors; third, analysis of international cases of governance in the community social welfare sector; fourth, analyzing the factors for activating the local-based cooperative system (network); lastly, suggestion of a plan for a sustainable public-private partnership system. The results indicated that awareness of the Community Welfare Association is positively changing insted of the awareness of them staying negative (e.g., centered public power, formal management, unclear results), and the Community Welfare Association is growing as a foundation of a healthy local community in providing social welfare. While the work of the Community Welfare Association is organized by the network of the connected local communities as a beginning level, it is simultaneously able to fit in citizen initiative, spontaneity, benefits and public-private partnership, and is indicting changes in values, attitudes, interest toward social welfare such as local solidarity, sense of community, social capital, and self and neighborhood social welfare. Therefore, it is a valuable experience beyond contributing to the social welfare delivery system and suggests that attention and investment in policy should be required for solving multi-dimensional problems in order to develop and expand this experience.

Abstract ················································································································1

I. Introduction ·························································································9

   1. Research Background and Purpose ·············································································11

   2. Research Scope and Methods ·············································································17

II. Major Concepts and Review of Previous Studies ·················································23

   1. Governance ············································································25

   2. Review of Previous Studies on Community Welfare Associations ·············································36

III. Analysis of Local Governance (Ⅰ): Community Welfare Associations ·············43

   1. Legal Basis and Basic Status of Community Welfare Associations ····································45

   2. Operational Status of and Chief Staffers' Thoughts about Community Welfare Associations  ··················60

   3. In-depth Case Studies of Community Welfare Associations ················································100

   4. Chapter Conclusion ·····································································································163

IV. Analysis of Local Governance (Ⅱ): Private Networks and Residents' Participation · 171

   1. Overview of Research on Private-led Governance ···························································173

   2. Private-led Governance: Case Studies ·····················································185

   3. Civil Society Organizations- and Local Residents-led Governance: Case Studies ·························214

   4. Chapter Conclusion ·····································································································257

V. Local Welfare Governance: Case Studies in Selected Countries ··························265

   1. The UK ····························································································267

   2. The US ····························································································283

   3. Japan ····························································································297

   4. Chapter Conclusion ·····································································································310

VI. Conclusion ·······················································································313

   1. Major Research Results and Implications ······································································315

   2. Policy Recommendations ····························································································323

References ···························································································331