Your browser does not support the PubReader view.
Go to this page to see a list of supporting browsers.
Korean Academic Society of Business Administration
[ Article ]
korean management review - Vol. 54, No. 6, pp.1989-2016
ISSN: 1226-1874 (Print)
Print publication date 31 Dec 2025
Received 30 Jun 2025 Revised 17 Oct 2025 Accepted 18 Nov 2025
DOI: https://doi.org/10.17287/kmr.2025.54.6.1989

Comparison of AI Transformation Policy Directionality in Korea and Japan

Sira Maliphol ; Wonsub Eum ; Byeongwoo Kang
(First Author) Seoul National University smaliphol@snu.ac.kr
(Co-Author) Rikkyo University eum@rikkyo.ac.jp
(Corresponding Author) Hitotsubashi University byeongwoo.kang@iir.hit-u.ac.jp
말리폴 시라 ; 엄원섭 ; 강병우
(주저자) 한국뉴욕주립대


Copyright 2025 THE KOREAN ACADEMIC SOCIETY OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0, which permits unrestricted, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

This study examines the Artificial Intelligence (AI) transformation policies of South Korea and Japan through a comparative case study approach, analyzing policy documents from the OECD AI Policy Observatory and other recent legislation. Policies targeting emerging sectors like AI offer the groundwork for understanding policy directionality through how policy objectives and mechanisms evolve. The analytical framework employed includes policy objectives, level of implementation, and dynamics. The findings reveal that both countries follow similar stepwise approaches, but their strategic focus differs significantly. South Korea pursues a sector-oriented strategy, leveraging its existing semiconductor manufacturing capability through vertical integration. In contrast, Japan adopts a more society-centered approach, prioritizing the addressal of challenges such as an aging population and disaster response while building on its strengths in materials science and precision manufacturing. Both cases demonstrate the critical importance of government coordination in AI transformation, although gaps persist in balancing technological innovation with social issues, including safety and ethics. These findings emphasize the need for national AI policies that build upon existing national strengths and call for flexible governance to facilitate communication necessary for AI ecosystem building.

Keywords:

AI transformation, Industrial policy, Korea, Japan

Acknowledgments

This work was partially supported with Startup Funds from Seoul National University (2025-2027).

References

  • Bartlett, L., and Vavrus, F. (2017). “Comparative case studies: An innovative approach,” Nordic Journal of Comparative and International Education (NJCIE), 1(1). [https://doi.org/10.7577/njcie.1929]
  • Baumgartner, F. R., Jones, B. D., and Wilkerson, J. (2011). “Comparative studies of policy dynamics,” Comparative Political Studies, 44(8), pp.947-972. [https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414011405160]
  • Bergek, A., Hellsmark, H., and Karltorp, K. (2023). “Directionality challenges for transformative innovation policy: lessons from implementing climate goals in the process industry. Industry and Innovation, 30(8), pp.1110-1139. [https://doi.org/10.1080/13662716.2022.2163882]
  • Borrás, S., and Edquist, C. (2013). “The choice of innovation policy instruments,” Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 80(8), pp. 1513-1522. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2013.03.002]
  • Cabinet Office (2025). “Integrated Innovation Strategy 2025,” https://www8.cao.go.jp/cstp/tougosenryaku/2025.html, , retrieved Jun 2025.
  • Cabinet Office (2025). “Outline of the Act on Promotion of Research and Development, and Utilization of AI-related Technology,” https://www8.cao.go.jp/cstp/ai/index.html, , retrieved Jun 2025.
  • Carlisle, K., and Gruby, R. L. (2019). “Polycentric systems of governance: A theoretical model for the commons,” Policy Studies Journal, 47(4), pp.927-952. [https://doi.org/10.1111/psj.12212]
  • Cooper, R. G. (2024). “The AI transformation of product innovation,” Industrial Marketing Management, 119, pp.62-74. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2024.03.008]
  • Cubric, M. (2020). “Drivers, barriers and social considerations for AI adoption in business and management: A tertiary study,” Technology in Society, 62, p.101257. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2020.101257]
  • Davy, E., and Hansen, U. E. (2023). “A firm-level perspective on windows of opportunity,” Technology in Society, 75, p.102374. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techsoc.2023.102374]
  • Digital Agency (2021). “Comprehensive Data Strategy,” https://www.digital.go.jp/policies/data_strategy, , retrieved Jun 2025.
  • de Graaff, S., Wanzenböck, I., and Frenken, K. (2025). “The politics of directionality in innovation policy through the lens of policy process frameworks,” Science and Public Policy, scae083. [https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scae083]
  • Diercks, G., Larsen, H., and Steward, F. (2019). “Transformative innovation policy: Addressing variety in an emerging policy paradigm,” Research Policy, 48(4), pp.880-894. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2018.10.028]
  • Eicke, L. (2025). “Does policy design matter for the effectiveness of local content requirements? A qualitative comparative analysis of renewable energy value chains,” Policy Studies Journal. [https://doi.org/10.1111/psj.12590]
  • Eom, S. J., and Kim, S. (2024, June). “The multi-dimensional paradox of AI adoption in the public sector: The Korean experience,” In Proceedings of the 25th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research, pp.133-145. [https://doi.org/10.1145/3657054.3657074]
  • Gao, J., Yang, Y., Lin, P., and Park, D. S. (2018). “Computer vision in healthcare applications,” Journal of Healthcare Engineering, p.5157020. [https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/5157020]
  • Haddad, C. R., and Bergek, A. (2023). “Towards an integrated framework for evaluating transformative innovation policy,” Research Policy, 52(2), p.104676. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2022.104676]
  • Holroyd, C. (2022). “Technological innovation and building a ‘super smart’ society: Japan’s vision of society 5.0,” Journal of Asian Public Policy, 15(1), pp.18-31. [https://doi.org/10.1080/17516234.2020.1749340]
  • Holmström, J. (2022). “From AI to digital transformation: The AI readiness framework,” Business Horizons, 65(3), pp.329-339. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2021.03.006]
  • Jacobides, M. G., Brusoni, S., and Candelon, F. (2021). The evolutionary dynamics of the artificial intelligence ecosystem,” Strategy Science, 6(4), pp.412-435. [https://doi.org/10.1287/stsc.2021.0148]
  • Janssen, M. J., Bergek, A., and Wesseling, J. H. (2022). “Evaluating systemic innovation and transition programmes: Towards a culture of learning,” PLOS Sustainability and Transformation, 1(3), e0000008. [https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pstr.0000008]
  • Jiang, X., and Zhang, P. (2020). “Institutions, policies and diverse innovation systems: experiences from the US, Germany and South Korea,” Journal of Asian Public Policy, 13(2), pp. 241-255. [https://doi.org/10.1080/17516234.2018.1541116]
  • Keidanren (2024). “Toward a renewed leap in Japanese industry,” https://www.keidanren.or.jp/policy/2024/031.html, , retrieved June, 2025.
  • Kim, S., Park, J., and Kang, B. H. (2023). “The Effects of ESG Pressures on Corporate Innovation Activities: Focusing on Regulative and Normative Pressures,” Korean Management Review, 52(4), pp.885-911. [https://doi.org/10.17287/kmr.2023.52.4.885]
  • Kuhlmann, S., and Rip, A. (2018). “Next-generation innovation policy and grand challenges,” Science and Public Policy, 45(4), pp.448-454. [https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scy011]
  • Lee, H., and Chen, Y. P. P. (2015). “Image based computer aided diagnosis system for cancer detection,” Expert Systems with Applications, 42(12), pp.356-5365. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2015.02.005]
  • Lee, K., and Malerba, F. (2017). “Catch-up cycles and changes in industrial leadership: Windows of opportunity and responses of firms and countries in the evolution of sectoral systems,” Research Policy, 46(2), pp.338-351. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2016.09.006]
  • Li, B., Qi, P., Liu, B., Di, S., Liu, J., Pei, J., ... and Zhou, B. (2023). “Trustworthy AI: From principles to practices,” ACM Computing Surveys, 55(9), pp.1-46. [https://doi.org/10.1145/3555803]
  • Lyhne, C. N., Thisted, J., and Bjerrum, M. (2025). “Qualitative content analysis–framing the analytical process of inductive content analysis to develop a sound study design,” Quality & Quantity, pp.1-21. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-025-02220-9]
  • Mao, H., Liu, S., and Gong, Y. (2024). “Balancing structural IT capabilities for organizational agility in digital transformation: a resource orchestration view,” International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 44(1), pp.315-344. [https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOPM-09-2022-0595]
  • Mintrom, M., Goddard, P., and Sumartojo, S. (2025). “Anticipatory policy design for robots in public spaces,” Journal of Asian Public Policy, pp.1-15. [https://doi.org/10.1080/17516234.2025.2511763]
  • Moon, M. J., and Wu, X. (2022). “Sustaining Asia’s development amidst the COVID-19 pandemic: capacity development and governance innovation,” Journal of Asian Public Policy, 15 (2), pp.165-174. [https://doi.org/10.1080/17516234.2021.2015850]
  • Mukadam, S. B., and Patil, H. Y. (2024). “Machine learning and computer vision based methods for cancer classification: A systematic review,” Archives of Computational Methods in Engineering, 31(5), pp.3015-3050. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s11831-024-10065-y]
  • Munger, M. C. (2000). “Ch 1,” Analyzing Policy: Choices, Conflicts, and Practices (New York and London).
  • Olivier, T., and Vallury, S. (2024). “Institutional fit and policy design in water governance: Nebraska's Natural Resources Districts,” Policy Studies Journal, 52(4), pp.809-832. [https://doi.org/10.1111/psj.12550]
  • Parks, D. (2022). “Directionality in transformative innovation policy: who is giving directions?,” Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 43, pp.1-13. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2022.02.005]
  • Placidi, G. (2022). “Ethical issues deriving from the delayed adoption of artificial intelligence in medical imaging,” AI and Ethics, 2(4), pp. 599-602. [https://doi.org/10.1007/s43681-022-00139-7]
  • Radu, R. (2021). “Steering the governance of artificial intelligence: national strategies in perspective,” Policy and Society, 40(2), pp. 178-193. [https://doi.org/10.1080/14494035.2021.1929728]
  • Schot, J., and Steinmueller, W. E. (2018). “Three frames for innovation policy: R&D, systems of innovation and transformative change,” Research Policy, 47(9), pp.1554-1567. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2018.08.011]
  • Schot, J., and Steinmueller, W. E. (2019). “Transformative change: What role for science, technology and innovation policy?: An introduction to the 50th Anniversary of the Science Policy Research Unit (SPRU) Special Issue,” Research Policy, 48(4), pp.843-848. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2018.12.005]
  • Schulze, K. (2024). “The soft channels of policy diffusion: Insights from local climate change adaptation policy,” Policy Studies Journal, 52(4), pp.881-906. [https://doi.org/10.1111/psj.12555]
  • Wamba-Taguimdje, S. L., Wamba, S. F., Kamdjoug, J. R. K., and Wanko, C. E. T. (2020). “Influence of artificial intelligence (AI) on firm performance: the business value of AI-based transformation projects,” Business Process Management Journal, 26(7), pp.1893-1924. [https://doi.org/10.1108/BPMJ-10-2019-0411]
  • Wheale, P., and McNally, R. (1993). “Biotechnology policy in Europe: a critical evaluation,” Science and Public Policy, 20(4), pp.261-279.
  • Xu, Y., and Choi, H. (2025). “The Impact of Digital Technology Orientation on Firms’ Internationalization Outcomes: A Focus on Artificial Intelligence, Blockchain, Cloud Computing, Big Data and Digital Technology Applications,” Korean Management Review, 54(2), pp.307-324. [https://doi.org/10.17287/kmr.2025.54.2.307]
  • Yi, H., and Kim, P. (2019). “The Effect of Consumer’s Technology Acceptance and Resistance on Intention to Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI),” Korean Management Review, 48(5), pp.1195-1219. [https://doi.org/10.17287/kmr.2019.48.5.1195]
  • Yin, R. K. (2018). “Case study research and applications (Vol. 6),” Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

∙ The author Sira Maliphol is an assistant professor at Seoul National University, College of Engineering in the Interdisciplinary Program of Technology Management, Economics & Policy. His area of research focuses on the global aspects of technological change, especially in emerging contexts.

∙ The author Wonsub Eum is an associate professor at Department of Global Business, Rikkyo University, Japan. His research focuses on national capability development, economic growth and innovation policy.

∙ The author Byeongwoo Kang is a (full) professor at Hitotsubashi University, Graduate School of Business Administration and Institute of Innovation Research. His research interests are in innovation management.