1. Introduction

Maritime Search and Rescue (SAR) represents a vital domain of disaster response that demands effective risk management and rapid mobilization. Owing to the spatial and temporal constraints of maritime incidents, reliance on a single agency is inadequate. The growing scale and complexity of maritime disasters highlight the necessity of cooperation across diverse actors, making collaborative governance indispensable for enhancing the effectiveness of SAR operations.

International practices provide instructive models of institutionalized public–private cooperation. In the United States, the U.S. Coast Guard Auxiliary integrates civilian resources through statutory recognition and systematic training, thereby institutionalizing joint response capacity (USCGAux., 2025). The Netherlands supports the Royal Netherlands Sea Rescue Institution (KNRM) with sustained funding and institutional autonomy, fostering public trust in its operational reliability (Boin et al., 2010a). Similarly, Japan’s Marine Rescue Japan (MRJ) operates under a legal framework that enables structured collaboration with central authorities, forming a multi-actor governance system (Shaw, 2006).

By contrast, South Korea’s SAR system remains predominantly centralized, with the Korea Coast Guard (KCG) responsible for approximately 78.9% of all rescue operations (KCG, 2023). Although civilian vessels played an important role during the 2014 Sewol ferry disaster, public discourse largely criticized the KCG, underscoring vulnerabilities in institutional support and social recognition of public–private collaboration. Current civilian organizations, such as the Maritime Rescue and Salvage Association of Korea (MARSA) and Marine Disaster Rescue Teams, remain fragmented and under-resourced, lacking statutory integration and sufficient financial support (Yun, 2020). As a result, persistent challenges—information asymmetry, goal misalignment, and limited trust—continue to constrain effective collaboration.

Against this backdrop, applying collaborative governance as an analytical lens allows for an empirical evaluation of how public and private stakeholders perceive SAR effectiveness. Collaborative governance emphasizes trust-building, information exchange, collective decision-making, and institutional support in addressing complex challenges (Ansell and Gash, 2008;Emerson and Nabatchi, 2015). Yet empirical studies of this framework in maritime SAR remain scarce, particularly regarding perceptual gaps between civilian and governmental actors and their implications for operational effectiveness.

This study addresses three research questions:

In doing so, the study seeks to identify the structural and perceptual barriers that impede collaboration in Korea’s SAR governance and to derive policy directions through comparative insights from international cases.

2. Theoretical Background

2.1 Collaborative Governance in Maritime Search and Rescue (SAR)

The concept of governance emerged in the late 20th century as an alternative to traditional hierarchical systems, aiming to overcome bureaucratic rigidity and inefficiency. Governance provides institutional and procedural frameworks that facilitate collaboration among government, private organizations, and civil society to address public challenges and generate public value. This perspective emphasizes efficiency, effectiveness, and democratic participation, gaining significant attention in public administration and policy studies (Lee, 2002;Eun, 2009).

Collaborative governance, in particular, enhances public value and accountability through voluntary engagement, trust-based communication, and joint decision-making (Kooiman, 2003;Ansell and Gash, 2008). It is especially relevant in complex policy areas such as disaster response, where no single organization can act alone. Emerson et al. (2012) identify three dimensions—shared motivation, capacity for joint action, and principled engagement— that together enable sustainable collaboration.

Maritime SAR represents a high-risk and time-sensitive domain where government-led responses reveal clear limitations, particularly in large-scale crises. In this context, collaboration with non-governmental actors such as civilian rescue organizations, volunteers, and maritime professionals is indispensable for improving effectiveness. International practices—such as the U.S. Coast Guard Auxiliary, the Royal Netherlands Sea Rescue Institution, and Japan’s Marine Rescue Japan—demonstrate how integrating civilian capacity into public command systems enhances SAR efficiency and reliability (Yun, 2020;Boin et al., 2010a). These examples offer important insights for Korea’s SAR governance.

Drawing on previous research, this study focuses on six governance components particularly relevant to SAR: collaboration, participation, joint decision-making, communication, information disclosure, and support systems. Collaboration involves shared responsibility and authority across organizations (Arnstein, 1969;Gray, 1989;Emerson and Nabatchi, 2015); joint decision-making distributes power equitably to enable consensus (Ostrom, 1990;Ansell and Gash, 2008;Emerson et al., 2012); and participation emphasizes inclusive and sustained stakeholder engagement (Arnstein, 1969;Bryson et al., 2006). Communication ensures effective information exchange and conflict prevention (Innes and Booher, 2003;Thomson and Perry, 2006;Bryson et al., 2006), while information disclosure strengthens transparency and trust (Dawes, 1996;Fung et al., 2007;Yang and Holzer, 2006;Schillemans and Bovens, 2011). Support systems—including legal, financial, operational, and training infrastructures—allow collaborative mechanisms to be institutionalized (Emerson and Nabatchi, 2015;Kim and Lee, 2020).

These six components were selected as principal independent variables for their theoretical significance, empirical measurability through structured surveys, and direct relevance to SAR governance. They align with frameworks developed by Ansell and Gash (2008), Emerson et al. (2012), and Bryson et al. (2006). While other factors such as leadership and resource allocation are also important, the study concentrates on these six to ensure analytical clarity and empirical validity.

2.2 International Comparison: Global Applications of Collaborative Governance

The fundamental elements of collaborative governance have been successfully institutionalized across numerous countries, particularly in policy areas that require swift responses and robust risk management, such as maritime disasters and SAR operations. Leading maritime nations have improved the effectiveness of SAR systems by integrating principles such as collaboration, stakeholder participation, transparency in information sharing, and supportive infrastructure into their institutional frameworks.

The United States serves as a notable example of how civilian involvement is officially integrated into the federal SAR system. Through the U.S. Coast Guard Auxiliary, civilian volunteers receive legal authorization to take part in SAR activities. This integration is guided by a standardized command framework known as the Incident Command System (ICS), which facilitates joint training and systematic information sharing. These elements illustrate the codes of principled engagement and capacity for joint action (USCGAux, 2025;Moynihan, 2008).

Japan provides a prominent example of a civilian-led SAR organization through Marine Rescue Japan (MRJ), which focuses on responding to coastal emergencies. MRJ works closely with both central and local governments, creating a multilayered governance structure. The Japan Coast Guard (JCG) and MRJ operate under clearly defined roles and participate in regular joint exercises. They also sustain their financial resources through national fundraising campaigns, such as the “Blue Feather Donation.” This operational model demonstrates a combination of institutional support and civic engagement in SAR efforts (Shaw, 2006;MRJ, 2025).

The Netherlands adopts a unique approach by allowing non-governmental organizations (NGOs) such as the Royal Netherlands Sea Rescue Institution (KNRM) to perform SAR activities autonomously. The Dutch government provides support to these organizations through matching funds and accountability mechanisms, thus establishing a balance between public funding and operational independence (Boin et al., 2010a;KNRM, 2025). This model exemplifies a synergistic relationship between shared objectives and robust support systems, presenting a blueprint for enhancing collaborative governance (Boin et al., 2010b).

In contrast, South Korea’s Maritime Search and Rescue (SAR) system is highly centralized and predominantly controlled by the Korea Coast Guard. Although civilian rescue organizations, such as the Maritime Rescue and Salvage Association of Korea (MARSA) and the Marine Disaster Rescue Team, have recently been established, They operate under different legal bases and remain fragmented and poorly integrated. Functioning more like isolated networks, these organizations lack a cohesive operational structure. Furthermore, the absence of a comprehensive national legal framework and stable financial support has hindered their full activation and development (KCG, 2023;Yun, 2020).

These characteristics stand in sharp contrast to the international cases discussed above. Notably, the establishment of a unified public–private partnership system with a single civilian rescue organization, the institutionalization of financial backing, the regular implementation of training programs, and the clear definition of information disclosure standards offer valuable lessons for improving the institutional design of SAR governance in South Korea.

These international examples suggest that the effectiveness of SAR collaboration heavily depends on the underlying institutional arrangements and implementation systems. Therefore, within Korea’s SAR governance structure, it is essential to investigate how perception gaps between government and civilian actors arise and how these differences affect the actual effectiveness of collaboration. The following section will provide a theoretical review of these perception gaps between civilian stakeholders and the Korea Coast Guard.

2.3 Perceptual Differences in Collaborative Governance

The effectiveness of collaborative governance is shaped not only by institutional arrangements but also by how the involved actors perceive these arrangements. Even under the same policy environment, public and private stakeholders may have differing views on the importance and impact of governance components. These perceptual gaps often arise from misaligned goals, information asymmetry, cultural differences, and varying levels of operational experience. In particular, discrepancies in the perceived value of information disclosure and support systems can lead to conflicts during policy implementation (Ulibarri et al., 2020).

For instance, government agencies may perceive information disclosure as a potential organizational burden or security risk, while private actors typically advocate for real-time information-sharing to enhance operational reliability and responsiveness. Similarly, public sector stakeholders often prioritize resource allocation within established administrative frameworks, whereas private sector actors emphasize the need for institutionalized legal and financial support mechanisms. These conflicting perspectives can obstruct or distort the effectiveness of collaborative governance and may result in inconsistent evaluations of its overall performance (Alessandro et al., 2019;Grimmelikhuijsen et al., 2020).

Building on these observations, perceptual differences in collaborative governance are rooted not only in institutional structures but also in relational and cultural dimensions. Relational factors, such as inter-organizational trust, interdependence, and prior collaborative experience, directly influence stakeholders’ willingness to cooperate and their perceptions of governance effectiveness (Ma et al., 2025;Wang and Ran, 2023). Meanwhile, cultural factors, including hierarchical organizational norms, closed decision-making processes, and authoritarian leadership styles, tend to hinder openness in communication and information sharing, thereby deepening perceptual gaps between actors (Bianchi, 2021;Kim and Lee, 2020).

Accordingly, understanding the level of collaboration between civilian organizations and the Korea Coast Guard requires an integrative theoretical framework that encompasses these relational and cultural contexts alongside legal and institutional structures. Beyond merely identifying the presence or absence of collaboration, this approach incorporates qualitative dimensions— such as trust, communication, and cultural compatibility—to provide a deeper explanation of the structural origins of perceptual divergence in collaborative governance.

3. Research Methodology

3.1 Variables and Measurement Instruments

Building on the six governance components identified in the theoretical framework—collaboration, joint decision-making, participation, communication, information disclosure, and support systems—this study conceptualizes them as the independent variables. The perceived effectiveness of Maritime SAR operations is treated as the dependent variable. To operationalize these constructs, structured survey items were developed based on prior literature, and responses were measured on a five-point Likert scale (1 = strongly disagree, 5 = strongly agree). The final instrument included 30 items for the independent variables, 11 items for the dependent variable, and 6 demographic questions, totaling 47 items.

Collaboration was assessed through items capturing shared goals, mutual responsibility, willingness to engage in joint SAR operations, and the belief that cooperation improves rescue outcomes. Joint decision-making was measured by the extent to which authority and responsibility are shared between public and private actors, including incorporation of civilian input and satisfaction with the process. Participation evaluated the substantive involvement of private actors, focusing on responsiveness, direct engagement, influence on policy, and frequency of joint activities.

Communication focused on openness and quality of information exchange, including consultation mechanisms, timeliness, and the role of communication in conflict resolution and trust-building. Information disclosure emphasized transparency and accountability, covering real-time data sharing, accessibility of operational information, and adequacy of disclosure for sustaining cooperation. Support systems captured the institutional infrastructure necessary for sustainability, including legal frameworks, financial assistance, administrative continuity, and recognition of private SAR organizations.

The dependent variable, SAR Effectiveness, was measured across three sub-dimensions: private-sector impact (capacity and participation), public-sector impact (expertise, accountability, reliability, and cost-effectiveness), and operational impact (resource mobilization, participation of civilian vessels and personnel, improvements in rescue rates, and reductions in response times).

3.2 Data Collection

Data were collected through a structured survey administered to members of the Korea Coast Guard (KCG) and private maritime professionals with experience in SAR operations. The sample was purposefully selected to include only individuals with relevant operational expertise. Both online and offline distribution methods were employed to maximize accessibility and enhance the diversity of responses. Only fully completed and valid responses were included in the final analysis.

3.3 Analytical Strategy

The analytical process commenced with independent samples t-tests to evaluate the differences in perceptions between KCG officers and private-sector actors. Subsequently, multiple regression analyses were conducted to examine the impact of the six dimensions of collaborative governance on the effectiveness of SAR, with the dependent variable segmented into three sub-dimensions: government performance, private capacity, and operational efficiency. Additionally, validity and reliability assessments were conducted. The factor loadings for all variables surpassed the threshold required for establishing convergent validity, and the Cronbach’s alpha values for each scale were above 0.80, signifying a high level of internal consistency and reliability.

4. Results

4.1 Sample Characteristics

This study seeks to analyze the perceptions and distinctions between private maritime stakeholders and officials from the Korea Coast Guard (KCG) concerning the current status and key enablers of collaborative governance within the domain of Maritime SAR. As a preliminary step, the demographic characteristics of the survey respondents were assessed. Common variables for comparison included gender, age, educational attainment, and geographic area of residence or operational activity (Table 1).

A total of 569 valid responses were obtained, comprised of 250 from the private sector and 319 from the KCG. In terms of gender distribution, both groups exhibited a predominance of male respondents (Private sector: 241, 96.40%; KCG: 291, 91.22%). An analysis of age revealed that the majority of private sector respondents were in their 40s (33.20%) and 50s (34.40%), while KCG respondents were mainly in their 40s (45.14%) and 50s (32.92%).

Regarding regional distribution, approximately two-thirds (62.00%) of private sector respondents were located in the southern coastal region, which is the hub of maritime activities. In contrast, KCG respondents were mainly situated in the western coastal region (67.71%) and the southern coastal region (26.96%), reflecting the areas with significant maritime safety requirements.

4.2 Reliability and Validity of Measurement Instruments

4.2.1 Validity and Reliability of Collaborative Governance Measures

To assess the construct validity of the six components of collaborative governance—namely, collaboration, joint decision-making, participation, communication, information disclosure, and support systems—along with their perceived impacts on the private sector, government, and Maritime SAR operations, a Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) was executed. The findings are delineated in Tables 2 and 3.

Each component was evaluated using five distinct items. The model fit indices indicated a strong overall good fit to the data, with a Goodness of Fit Index (GFI) of 0.93, a Root Mean Square Residual (RMR) of 0.03, a Normed Fit Index (NFI) of 0.94, and a Comparative Fit Index (CFI) of 0.96. All standardized factor loadings exceeded the threshold of 0.65, thereby confirming convergent validity. Furthermore, the internal consistency of the items was found to be satisfactory, with Cronbach’s alpha coefficients surpassing 0.79 for all constructs.

Discriminant validity was also established, as the chi-square (χ²) difference between the constrained and unconstrained models exceeded the critical value of 3.84. Collectively, these results indicate that the survey instrument possesses both reliability and validity in measuring stakeholder perceptions of collaborative governance within the context of Maritime SAR.

4.2.2 Validity and Reliability of SAR Governance Effectiveness Measures

To verify the construct validity and reliability of the items measuring the perceived effectiveness of collaborative governance —specifically with respect to private-sector capacity, government performance, and SAR operational outcomes—a Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) was performed. The results are presented in Table 3.

All factor loadings exceeded the threshold of 0.65, and the model fit indices displayed satisfactory values: GFI = 0.94, RMR = 0.02, NFI = 0.95, and CFI = 0.96. Furthermore, Cronbach’s alpha coefficients for all constructs surpassed 0.83, indicating a high level of internal consistency. Notably, the chi-square difference between the constrained and unconstrained models was greater than 3.84, thereby confirming the presence of discriminant validity across the latent variables.

These results indicate that the measurement instrument demonstrates both statistical validity and reliability in evaluating the perceived effectiveness of collaborative governance within the context of Maritime SAR operations. The instrument effectively captures multidimensional aspects of effectiveness as perceived by both public and private stakeholders, establishing a strong foundation for empirical assessment.

4.3 Analysis of Perception Gaps in Collaborative Governance

Table 4 presents the results of an independent samples t-test comparing the perceptions of private maritime stakeholders and KCG officers regarding the six components of collaborative governance. Statistically significant differences were observed across all variables: collaboration (t = –4.27, p < .01), joint decision-making (t = –3.84, p < .01), participation (t = –2.63, p < .01), communication (t = –3.02, p < .01), information disclosure (t = –3.76, p < .01), and support systems (t = –5.20, p < .01). All categories showed that KCG respondents perceived higher levels than their civilian counterparts. Overall, both groups reported moderate to relatively low perceptions of governance performance.

In terms of specific components, private respondents rated collaboration at an average of 2.97, slightly below the neutral midpoint of 3.00, whereas KCG respondents rated it slightly higher at 3.23. Both groups assessed joint decision-making and participation above the midpoint, with participation receiving the highest ratings from both civilians (M = 3.22) and KCG personnel (M = 3.40). Conversely, support systems were rated the lowest by both groups, with means of 2.65 (private) and 2.99 (KCG), indicating a shared perception of insufficient legal and financial backing for collaborative efforts.

These findings indicate that, while opportunities for participation may be partially institutionalized within the framework of Maritime SAR in Korea, both civilian and government actors continue to identify a substantial deficiency in structural and fiscal support.

4.4 Perception Gaps in Effectiveness between Groups

This section examines how the perceptions of key components that enhance collaborative governance in Maritime SAR affect perceived effectiveness across three dimensions: private-sector capacity, government performance, and overall SAR efficiency, with a focus on group affiliation. Specifically, the analysis evaluates the responses of civilian maritime actors and officials from the KCG to identify intergroup differences in their assessments of the effectiveness of collaborative governance mechanisms.

4.4.1 Impact on the Private-Sector Dimension

This subsection examines how perceptions of collaborative governance components affect anticipated outcomes related to the private sector, particularly the expected increase in civilian engagement and the improvement of private actors’ response capabilities in Maritime SAR operations. To achieve this, multiple regression analyses were conducted for both civilian respondents and KCG officers. The results are summarized in Table 5.

Among private-sector respondents, none of the six governance components had a statistically significant impact on their expectations for private-sector outcomes. This indicates a general perception that collaborative governance mechanisms—such as participation, communication, or institutional support—may not directly lead to noticeable improvements in civilian engagement or response capabilities from the viewpoint of private actors.

In contrast, the KCG group revealed two significant predictors. Participation had a weak but positive effect (t = 1.88, p < .10), suggesting that opportunities for involvement in decision-making are seen as moderately contributing to improved private-sector outcomes. However, Information Disclosure had a statistically significant negative effect (t = –4.70, p< .01; β = –0.35). This finding suggests that increased transparency or open information sharing may paradoxically deter civilian participation, possibly due to concerns over operational risks, legal accountability, or bureaucratic burdens.

4.4.2 Impact on the Governmental Dimension

This section examines how perceptions of collaborative governance components influence the expected benefits for the government, including enhanced accountability, expertise, credibility, and potential cost savings. The regression results for both the private-sector and the KCG respondents are presented in Table 6.

Among private-sector respondents, the regression model was statistically significant at the 0.10 level (F = 1.63, p < .10), with an explanatory power of 8% (R² = 0.08). Notably, two institutional variables—Information Disclosure (t = –1.91, p < .10) and Support Systems (t = –2.05, p < .05)—were found to have negative effects on the perceived benefits of government actions. Based on standardized coefficients, Support Systems exerted the most decisive influence (β = –0.21), followed by Information Disclosure (β = –0.20). These findings suggest that private-sector actors may view current transparency measures and institutional arrangements as inadequate or burdensome, which could hinder government effectiveness from their standpoint.

For the KCG group, the regression model was statistically robust (F = 10.24, p < .01) and demonstrated a relatively high explanatory power of 29% (R² = 0.29). In this group, Participation exhibited a significant positive effect (t= 2.08, p < .05; β = 0.13), while Information Disclosure again showed a negative effect (t = –2.31, p < .05; β = –0.18). These results indicate that while KCG personnel recognize the value of stakeholder involvement in enhancing governmental performance, they also perceive a risk that increased information disclouse could lead to an administrative burden, reduced discretion, or operational inefficiencies.

4.4.3 Impact on Maritime SAR Outcomes

The efficacy of collaborative governance in Maritime SAR operations can be evaluated across two principal outcome dimensions: (1) improvements in the conditions for rescue participation, and (2) enhanced efficiency of rescue operations. The former pertains to the rise in the number of civilian participants in SAR activities, while the latter concerns improved rescue rates— specifically, the number of vessels and individuals rescued—and decreased response times. The regression results are detailed in Table 7 and Table 8.

Initially, the regression analysis investigating the impact of collaborative governance factors on rescue conditions in Maritime SAR reveals significant differences between the civilian and KCG groups.

Among private-sector respondents, the analysis indicated that Support Systems had a statistically significant negative effect on the perceived improvement of SAR conditions (t = –2.43, p < .05). This finding suggests that private actors perceive the existing institutional or financial support as either insufficient or misaligned with practical field requirements, which may hinder the enabling conditions necessary for participation.

On the contrary, the regression model for KCG respondents was statistically significant (F = 12.56, p < .01) and demonstrated a relatively high explanatory power of 33% (R² = 0.33). Two governance components emerged as significant predictors of SAR conditions: Communication and Information Disclosure. Specifically, Communication exhibited a positive effect (t = 1.68, p < .10; β = 0.14), while Information Disclosure revealed a negative effect (t = –3.18, p < .01; β = –0.23).

These findings present a nuanced perspective from the KCG perspective. While improved communication—likely referring to coordination mechanisms, clarity in reporting structures, and trust-building interactions—enhances the operational readiness of SAR activities, an increased emphasis on transparency may be perceived as burdensome or as diminishing tactical flexibility in crises. This perceived trade-off highlights the necessity of developing communication and disclosure mechanisms that effectively balance accountability with operational efficiency.

The regression analysis investigating the impact of collaborative governance factors on rescue efficiency in Maritime SAR reveals significant differences between the civilian and KCG groups.

For the civilian respondents, the regression model was statistically significant at the 0.10 level (F = 1.60, p < .01), with an explanatory power of 8% (R² = 0.08). Among the six governance components, Support Systems had a statistically significant negative effect on rescue efficiency (β = –0.18, t = –2.53, p < .05). This suggests that private actors may perceive existing legal, financial, or administrative support mechanisms as inadequate or inefficient in facilitating actual field-level rescue operations.

For the KCG group, the regression model was also statistically significant at the 0.01 level (F = 7.18, p < .01), with an explanatory power of 22% (R² = 0.22). In this case, Information Disclosure emerged as a significant predictor with a negative influence on rescue efficiency (β = –0.20, t = –2.78, p < .01). This result indicates that public-sector actors may view greater transparency—especially in real-time operational contexts—as potentially burdensome, thereby slowing down decision-making or increasing exposure to risk and liability.

The findings presented a critical tension in the implementation of collaborative governance. While this approach is generally regarded as advantageous, institutional factors, such as support systems and information disclosure, may be perceived as constraints rather than facilitators in high-risk, rapid-response settings like Maritime SAR. Addressing these perceptual discrepancies will be crucial for the establishment of governance frameworks that are both participatory and functionally effective.

In summary, the findings can be outlined as follows. Among civilian respondents, Information Disclosure was found to have an adverse effect on perceived government-side effectiveness. At the same time, Support Systems negatively influenced all domains— government effectiveness, SAR operational conditions, and rescue efficiency—except the civilian-side outcomes.

In contrast, for the KCG group, Participation had a favorable impact on both civilian-side and government-side effectiveness, and Communication was positively associated with improved SAR operational conditions. Notably, Information Disclosure had divergent effects: it positively influenced government effectiveness, but was perceived to hinder civilian dimention, SAR conditions, and rescue efficiency. Support Systems, on the other hand, were found to affect only the civilian-side outcomes positively.

These results reaffirm the critical role of collaborative governance in enhancing SAR effectiveness. They also emphasize the perceptual gap between public and private entities. This difference in perception is a significant factor that needs to be addressed in both institutional design and policy implementation.

To institutionalize collaborative governance and enhance its practical effectiveness, it is essential for policy efforts to focus on bridging these perception gaps and fostering mutual trust between civilian stakeholders and governmental agencies. The implications of these findings will be discussed further in the upcoming section on recommendations for policy improvement.

5. Discussion

This study examined six key elements of collaborative governance—collaboration, participation, joint decision-making, communication, information disclosure, and support systems— within Korea’s Maritime SAR system, and analyzed how these perceptions shape effectiveness across private-sector outcomes, government performance, and SAR operations.

The analysis reveals that both private stakeholders and KCG officials highly value collaboration, participation, joint decision-making, and communication, but significant divergences emerge regarding information disclosure and support systems. Civilians consider these elements detrimental to governmental effectiveness and operational efficiency, while KCG personnel recognize the benefits of participation and support systems but remain skeptical of disclosure. This tension reflects differing priorities: civilians advocate transparency and institutional support, whereas public officials often perceive disclosure as burdensome to stability. Such findings align with prior research on public-sector caution toward transparency (Schillemans and Bovens, 2011) and support Emerson and Nabatchi’s (2015) concept of capacity for joint action.

These results reinforce governance theory by highlighting the roles of trust, information disclosure, and institutional support (Fung et al., 2007;Dawes, 1996). Positive correlations between collaboration, communication, and SAR effectiveness are consistent with disaster management studies, while identifying transparency and support systems as friction points offers a novel contribution. Sustainable collaboration, therefore, requires legal clarity, fiscal stability, and consistent organizational frameworks, while persistent role ambiguity and distrust undermine resilience (Bryson et al., 2006;Emerson and Nabatchi, 2015).

International comparisons further contextualize these findings. The Netherlands’ KNRM benefits from legal recognition and funding that ensure autonomy and trust (Boin et al., 2010a). The U.S. Coast Guard Auxiliary institutionalizes civilian engagement through statutory frameworks and training (Moynihan, 2008), and Japan integrates local and central actors under legal structures (Shaw, 2006). Korea, by contrast, retains a centralized system and lacks sufficient support for private-sector integration (Yun, 2020), fostering negative perceptions and symbolic collaboration (Emerson and Nabatchi, 2015). Korea thus must establish institutionalized mechanisms for genuine public–private cooperation.

The study also extends collaborative governance theory into high-risk, time-pressured environments where informal coordination is insufficient (Boin et al., 2010c;Christensen et al., 2016). The findings underscore that effective collaboration depends on institutional supports—legal, financial, procedural—and cognitive convergence, as divergent perceptions of legitimacy and accountability impede trust (Thomas and Streib, 2003). Comparative insights show that governance is context-dependent: while the United States, the Netherlands, and Japan institutionalize cooperation, Korea’s system remains under-institutionalized. Collectively, the results advance theory by emphasizing the dual imperatives of institutional integration and perceptual alignment in crisis-prone contexts.

Policy implications follow directly. First, real-time information disclosure should be institutionalized to build trust-based sharing mechanisms. Second, legal and financial support must strengthen the legitimacy of civilian SAR actors. Third, durable governance platforms should be embedded in national planning and budgeting to ensure continuity.

An unexpected finding concerns the persistent skepticism toward disclosure among KCG personnel and their limited expectations for civilian participation, suggesting structural inertia in hierarchical culture. Civilians, by contrast, demonstrate strong support for participatory governance, revealing a gap between normative ideals and institutional practice. This indicates that governance reform must address cultural and incentive barriers to trust-building.

Ultimately, while collaborative governance holds significant promise for enhancing SAR effectiveness, its potential is constrained by structural asymmetries and perceptual divides. Achieving resilient and inclusive SAR governance will require structural reform, institutionalized cooperation, and alignment of expectations across stakeholders.

6. Conclusion

This study provides an empirical assessment of six core elements of collaborative governance—collaboration, participation, joint decision-making, communication, information disclosure, and support systems—within the Republic of Korea’s Maritime Search and Rescue (SAR) system. Drawing on independent samples t-tests and multiple regression analyses, the study examined how civilians and Korea Coast Guard (KCG) personnel perceive these elements and how such perceptions influence private-sector capacity, governmental performance, and overall SAR efficiency.

The findings demonstrate that collaboration and communication significantly enhance operational efficiency, while participation and joint decision-making strengthen private-sector capacity, thereby affirming the practical value of collaborative governance in maritime disaster management. Yet divergent evaluations of information disclosure and support systems between civilians and KCG personnel highlight enduring perceptual gaps that complicate the institutionalization of effective governance frameworks.

From a policy perspective, the study emphasizes the need to institutionalize real-time information sharing, provide sustainable infrastructure and financial support for civilian SAR groups, and develop long-term collaborative platforms embedded in national policy and budgeting systems. Additionally, fostering a more inclusive organizational culture within the KCG and enhancing public recognition of maritime safety initiatives are vital for securing legitimacy and resilience. These policy directions hold relevance not only for Korea but also for other nations seeking to establish collaborative governance mechanisms in complex, multi-actor disaster response contexts.

Theoretically, this research extends collaborative governance scholarship into high-risk, rapid-response environments that have been less explored compared to local development or environmental governance. By quantitatively capturing perceptual differences between public and private stakeholders, the study highlights the cognitive and cultural dynamics that shape collaborative outcomes. International comparisons further underscore Korea’s deficiencies, revealing the need for legal reforms, sustainable funding, and systemic integration of civilian capabilities to move beyond symbolic participation.

In conclusion, collaborative governance emerges as a pivotal driver of SAR effectiveness, with stakeholder perceptual alignment serving as a critical enabler. Realizing resilient and inclusive SAR governance will require both structural innovation (e.g., integration of civilian rescue organizations and stable government financial support) and sustained trust-building initiatives. These findings offer a strong theoretical and practical foundation for advancing collaborative governance in maritime safety and crisis management on a global scale