The Korean State And Social Policy

There are two great mysteries in the political economy of South Korea. How could a destroyed country in next to no time become a sophisticated and affluent economy? And how could a ruthlessly authoritarian regime metamorphose with relative ease into a stable democratic polity? South Korea was long ruled with harsh authoritarianism, but, strangely, the authoritarian rulers made energetic use of social policy. The Korean State and Social Policy observes South Korean public policy from 1945 to 2000 through the prism of social policy to examine how the rulers operated and worked. After the military coup in 1961, the new leaders used social policy to buy themselves legitimacy. That enabled them to rule in two very different ways simultaneously. In their determination to hold on to power they were without mercy, but in the use of power in governance, their strategy was to co-opt and mobilize with a sophistication that is wholly exceptional among authoritarian rulers. It is governance and not power that explains the Korean miracle. Mobilization is a strategy with consequences. South Korea was not only led to economic development but also, inadvertently perhaps, built up as a society rich in public and civil institutions. When authoritarianism collapsed under the force of nationwide uprisings in 1987, the institutions of a reasonably pluralistic social and political order were there, alive and well, and democracy could take over without further serious drama. This book is about many things: development and modernization, dictatorship and democracy, state capacity and governance, social protection and welfare states, and Korean history. But finally it is about lifting social policy analysis out of the ghetto of self-sufficiency it is often confined to and into the center ground of hard political science.

Through the analysis of institutional dynamics Kwon argues that social policy development in Korea is not due to common exogenous factors such as international or union pressure but to the desire of the weakly-legitimated government to have itself legitimized. Such political rationale is deeply embedded in the structure of social policy institutions and particularly in the way that the state has played a part in financing social welfare programmes. Kwon shows that the role of the Korean state is characterized as essentially that of regulator-type rather than provider.

Machine generated contents note: 1. Introduction; 2. Theoretical reinterpretation of the small welfare state in South Korea; 3. The emergence of the small welfare state under the authoritarian developmental state (1961-1987); 4. Democratization and limited welfare state development under the conservative rule (1987-1997); 5. Economic crisis, power shift, and welfare politics under the Kim Dae Jung government (1997-2002); 6. Economic Unionism and the limits of the Korean welfare state under the Roh Moo Hyun government (2003-2007); 7. Wind of welfare and tax politics under the returned conservative rule; 8. Conclusion

In a period of rapid change for welfare states around the world, this insightful book offers a comparative study of three historically small welfare states: the US, Japan, and South Korea. Featuring contributions from international distinguished scholars, this book looks beyond the larger European welfare states to unpack the many common political and institutional characteristics that have constrained welfare state development in industrialized democracies.

Modernizing the Korean Welfare State analyzes recent developments in social and public policy in South Korea. Its focus is the new approach to Korea's system of social protection, known as the productive welfare paradigm. This volume brings together an international group of scholars to examine the new paradigm and associated policy developments. In the first part, contributors examine the significance of the productive welfare paradigm and recent policy developments within a broader comparative and international perspective. They question the commitment to welfare in the paradigm, viewing it largely as an example of a global trend towards the "enabling state" in which social welfare serves largely economic goals. Other contributors situate the new paradigm in relation to globalization and its implications for national strategies of social protection developed in earlier times. The new departure in Korea is compared to European welfare state development, and contributors find it a bold attempt to fashion a comprehensive welfare state based on social rights. In the second part, contributors focus on specific issues and policy areas. These include the degree to which Korea has been following a "pro-poor" growth policy. They evaluate developments in the area of unemployment and work injury insurance. They review the progress of policies in the area of social insurance and assistance, and the American system of income support for low income earners and its lessons for Korean policymakers. Other contributors review the public pensions system in Korea, and environmental protection policies are discussed and the impact of those policies on the poor and people of color, who are disproportionately exposed to environmental hazards.

Through the analysis of institutional dynamics, Huck-Ju Kwon argues that social policy development in Korea is not due to common exogenous factors such as international or union pressure but to the desire of the weakly-legitimated government to have itself legitimized. Such political rationale is deeply embedded in the structure of social policy institutions and particularly in the way that the state has played a part in financing social welfare programs. This book shows that the role of the Korean state is characterized as essentially that of regulator-type rather than provider.

Why has Korean social policy developed differently from that of other East Asian countries? While in many respects Korea can be compared with Taiwan, Hong Kong and Singapore, where economic development has been the chief priority of state action, Korea has also implemented extensive welfare reform, expanding its welfare provision even under recent conditions of economic downturn. Gyu-Jin Hwang traces the development of the Korean welfare state, providing a fascinating case study for observers of East Asian industrial growth and the public management of social risks. Arguing that the extension of state welfare presents a unique challenge to existing theoretical propositions underlying social policy development, he draws on detailed empirical analysis of key policy areas, namely public assistance, national pensions, health care and employment insurance. The book offers a definitive analysis of the development of Korean social policy programmes and the politics of implementing them. The book will be important reading for all those interested in comparative Social Policy and more specifically the development of Social Welfare in Asian countries.

Kim offers unique insight into the deeper political dynamics of Korean social policy by analysing the relationship between the broader context of East Asian commonality and the unique circumstances of Korea. Since the 1980s, South Korea has advanced social policy at a rapid pace with the progress of political democracy and the activation of civil society. Currently, South Korea is equipped with a full range of social policies including public assistance, social insurance, and social services. However, South Korea's road to a remarkable social policy accomplishment was not a smooth one and controversies sizzled over the values, directions, and methods of social policy. Kim delves into the political dynamics of Korea's social policy, spanning from the traditional kingdom era to contemporary South Korea. In doing so he examines the influences of Confucianism, developmental welfareism, and the responses to the Asian economic crisis in shaping these policies. An important resource not only for scholars and students of Korean society and social policy, but also for scholars of social policy more broadly, especially those with a focus on other East Asian countries.