Revisiting the welfare state system in the Republic of Korea

Abstract   The Republic of Korea's welfare system has undergone radical institutional expansion since the 1990s, largely as a consequence of the financial crisis of 1997. In spite of these changes, public social expenditure remains extremely low — particularly with regard to all other OECD countries — with the result that the overall social insurance system and social welfare service sector remain underdeveloped. Thus, the current welfare system can best be characterized as a residual model, in that state intervention as a provider of welfare remains highly limited and the family and the private market economy play the central roles in offering a social safety net. This situation is largely the legacy of the so-called 'growth-first' ideology, which has remained the dominant approach favoured by the majority of the country's political and economic decision-makers since the period of authoritarian rule (1961-1993). The adoption of Western European-style neo-liberal restructuring, implemented following the 1997 financial crisis, has also played a role.     

The Transformation of Ideology from Mao to Deng: Impact on China's Social Welfare Outcome

This article aims at making a dialectical assessment of the development of social welfare between the period of Mao's socialism and Deng's economic marketization. It examines the transformation of ideological discourses between the two periods and its impact on social welfare outcomes. It posits that an ideological system is important in affecting the outcome of social welfare policy. Mao's welfare policy, despite certain shortcomings, created a relatively equal, sustainable and self-sufficient society with solid achievements in social welfare and especially in human development. Deng's economic marketization, although remarkable in economic growth, is producing social contradictions leading to the decline of welfare service. The current development discourse is dismantling Mao's welfare policy without establishing a new and more democratic conception of socialist political economy.     

An Agenda for Welfare Pluralism in Housing

During the 1980s the concepts of “welfare pluralism” and a “mixed economy of welfare” were developed by academics writing from the perspective of the social democratic centre of British politics as a response to the criticisms of state welfare put forward by the New Right and the New Left in the 1970s. Whereas the New Right gave little critical attention to such concepts regarding them as useful supports to an anti-state stance the New Left claims that they were an attempt to allow the Fabian-style managers of the old consensus to have some role in the restructuring of welfare to be carried out by the political wing of the New Right. It is argued that the claim of the New Left has limited validity but a more certain case can be made for the contention that the lack of a detailed specification of a social and economic context for welfare pluralism has given credibility to the accusation that welfare pluralism has provided a smokescreen for the introduction of market principles into welfare. Housing policy is here utilized to illustrate the argument and the ingredients of a socio-economic context for welfare pluralism in housing policy are set out in the hope that similar frameworks will be provided for other domains of welfare.     

Do housing regimes matter? Assessing the concept of housing regimes through configurations of housing outcomes

Based on a conceptualisation of de‐commodification as the right to decent and affordable housing, we assessed to what extent this right is realised for low‐to‐moderate‐income owners and renters across Western European housing regimes in 1995 and 2012. If differences in the social production of housing do matter (regardless of type of welfare state and the country's economic affluence), then distinct configurations of housing outcomes should exist. This was found to be indeed the case: More state intervention results in good housing conditions and low housing cost burdens across tenure‐age groups (but particularly for renters), although more so in social‐democratic than in conservative‐corporatist welfare states. A more important role for the family in housing provision is associated with higher subjective housing cost burdens and poor housing conditions. As housing regimes became more commodified between 1995 and 2012, it seems that configurations of housing outcomes have become less associated with the features of housing regimes, and more with type of welfare state and the country's economic affluence.     

Productive welfare: Korea's third way?

How can the various pressures of economic globalisation and changes in the established welfare systems of the industrialised nations inform the development of the Korean welfare state? As the twenty‐first century dawns, Korea is confronted with a serious dilemma: How to adapt to globalisation and survive under worldwide competition and at the same time construct an effective egalitarian welfare state? The objective of this paper is to explore the future directions for the Korean social welfare system as it adjusts to economic globalisation. As it seeks a course between the social democratic welfare state model and the rising tide of the neo‐liberal welfare state, we pose the question: Is there a ‘third way’ for Korea? In trying to discern where the Korean welfare state is headed, it may be helpful to understand where it has come from and how it compares with the established welfare states in the industrialised nations.     

Social Security in Hungary: A Balance Sheet after Twelve Years

The social and political transformation in Hungary contributed to the development of a democratic political system and to the establishment of the rule of law and a market economy. The process was accompanied by a series of economic and social problems. The paper first reviews the social policy orientation of the three free consecutive governments elected since the transition. None of them has had a clear political profile: they have constituted mixed and unclear welfare regimes. None of them has sketched a clear welfare policy except perhaps the current government. In its case central redistribution is consistently biased in favour of the middle and upper strata at the expense of the poor. Instead of a consensual plan defining priorities, decisions and reforms in the last ten years have been motivated by political interests, at hoc ideas, and authoritarian rulings. The paper next shows what reform meant in the case of the different instruments and various fields of social policy, namely unemployment, health, pensions, family benefits and social assistance. It concludes that while both the inherited and the newly created systems had contributed to alleviate the shocks of the transition, yet there never was enough political will to give sufficient or adequate help to those needing it. As a consequence of the "reforms" public expenditures have been significantly reduced. The welfare gap between East and West has thereby grown. The consequence is that the country has become gravely divided, and that poverty is greater and deeper than it might have been under a different set of policies.     

Swedish Family Policy – Continuity and Change in the Nordic Welfare State Model

The main question addressed in this regional issue is whether or not the Nordic welfare states can still be considered a distinct welfare regime cluster given recent changes, such as the introduction of more private elements into the welfare state. The Nordic welfare states are often described as emphasizing full employment, economic and gender equality, and universal access to cradle‐to‐grave welfare state benefits and services. In the case of Sweden, often pointed to as the model of a social democratic welfare state, such elements remain intact in most aspects of the welfare state, even given the challenges presented by the global neo‐liberal economic paradigm since the 1970s. One way to determine whether or not the Nordic welfare states remain a distinct cluster is to provide an in‐depth examination of various welfare state policies in each Nordic country. To contribute to this analysis, an investigation of family policy in the Swedish context will be provided. Even given recent challenges, such as the introduction of private for‐profit childcare providers and a home care allowance, I argue that Swedish family policy has remained largely social democratic in its underlying goals, and thus acts to support the case for a distinct Nordic welfare regime cluster.     

Social Protection in Greece: A Brief Glimpse of a Welfare State

This paper examines the delayed development of the welfare state in Greece and its restructuring since the early 1990s. The emphasis is on factors, such as the rapid shift from pre-Fordist to post-Fordist socio-economic structures, the weak development of contractual relationships and a solidaristic culture, and the extensive reproduction of a statist/clientelist form of social organization strongly linked to a high degree of social fragmentation and a particularistic appropriation of welfare benefits and services, which have hindered the full maturation of social citizenship in Greek society up to now. An expensive trend of social protection in conjunction with some major law reforms in the early 1980s contributed to the development of a “weak form” of universalism. These trends were soon overturned, however, well before Greek society could develop a welfare state, under the pressure of a serious fiscal crisis, low economic growth, increasing international competition, significant demographic changes and a fragile social consensus. Thus, the national health care system has hardly succeeded in establishing universal coverage, the social insurance system has remained highly fragmented and dualist, while policy measures for tackling increasing unemployment, hardship and poverty have been rudimentary. These have caused serious deadlocks and a deep institutional crisis. For this crisis to be overcome, it is essential that a new social balance promoting social solidarity is achieved in the country, while a reinvigorated Social Europe can help enormously in this direction.     

The Universal Decline of Universality? Social Policy Change in Canada,Denmark, Sweden and the UK

The debate about the future of universal social programmes has been raging for years, both in social‐democratic and in liberal welfare states. The objective of this article is to contribute to the literature on universality by analyzing the evolution of universal social programmes in two social‐democratic and two liberal countries: Denmark, Sweden, Canada and the UK. This choice of countries provides the opportunity to investigate whether the principle and practice of universality has fared differently both within and between countries. The analysis focuses primarily on the national level while exploring three policy areas: pensions, healthcare and family policy, specifically child benefits and day care. The main conclusion of our comparative analysis is clear: among our two liberal and two social‐democratic countries, the institutional strength of universality varies greatly from one policy area and one country to another. Considering this, there is no such a thing as a universal decline of universality.     

The evolution of the Georgian social protection system since independence: An unclear future despite recent expansion

In the first decade of transition, the Georgian social protection system experienced a major retrenchment as the government struggled to finance welfare provision in the face of massive economic contraction and the near collapse of public institutions. Since 2004, this trend has been reversed, with the economy returning to a fast growth path and public administration improving considerably. Recent reforms, including the notable introduction of universal public health insurance, are welcome steps towards building a modern welfare state. Major challenges still remain, however, especially in relation to the system's limited effect on widespread poverty. Decelerating growth, the lack of strong pro‐welfare actors, and the absence of positive external pull factors may stall or prevent future growth, but the changing nature of the social contract between the people and government, as well as Georgian politicians' growing recognition of the importance of the welfare system for inclusive growth, leaves ample space for optimism.     

Neoliberal Knowledge: The Decline of Technocracy and the Weakening of the Montreal Protocol*

Objective. The turn to participatory, stakeholder modes of governance has been accompanied by the legitimization of a new “particularist knowledge regime” emphasizing the knowledge claims made by private interests and local voices. It has also tended to de‐legitimize the ways of knowing that had characterized central state governance, namely, state expertise based on general welfare analytics such as cost‐benefit analysis. This turn away from state expertise, what we call the “anti‐technocratic consensus,” while stemming from democratic motivations, may actually make environmental governance less democratic. Method. We examine the problems that arise from the abandonment of general welfare economic analytics and technical expertise—the anti‐technocratic consensus—through a specific case study: the recent handling of “critical use exemptions” to the ban on methyl bromide under the Montreal Protocol, a treaty that mandates the elimination of methyl bromide in order to protect the ozone layer. We show that decisionmakers specifically rejected general welfare analytics as a basis of regulatory action in favor of a particularist form of analytics based on measuring market disruption. Results. This case illustrate how the de‐legitimization of technical expertise can weaken the effectiveness of an environmental agreement in meeting its regulatory mandate. Critics have often criticized technical expertise as supporting the economic status quo. However, in the case of methyl bromide and the Montreal Protocol, technical experts using general welfare analytics represented a challenge to U.S. regulatory officials who supported industrial interests and their request for significant exemptions to the ban. Conclusion. The legitimization of a particularist knowledge regime opens up policy making to domination by private interests playing the stakeholder game. Stakeholder input and particularist knowledges are important to democratic decision making. However, technical expertise, despite all its weaknesses, is a form of knowledge that remains necessary to the protection of the environment and public health.     

Leaving the Nordic Path? The Changing Role of Danish Trade Unions in the Welfare Reform Process

For a long period, Denmark has been labeled a ‘model country’ with a comprehensive welfare state and a successful model of corporatist policy‐making. Danish unions are considered amongst the strongest in the world, and they have for a long time been a distinct part of the political system, and as social partners, they were strongly integrated into decision‐making processes. The analysis of the Danish welfare and labour market policy during the last two decades documents a profound change in the arrangement and in the status of the social partners (especially unions) in the Danish political system. The results show that two important pillars of the Danish model – the social partner basis and the collective trust in partnership – are eroding. Unions are no longer part of the law‐making process and, since 2007, they are formally excluded from the organization of the decision‐making process. Recent developments point at weaker unions that operate more as lobbyists instead of being strong corporatist institutions or part of the decision‐making process. The results of the study are thought‐provoking and the basis for a revised thinking of the Danish and the Nordic model.     

Nationalist Reframing of the Finnish and Swedish Welfare States – The Nexus of Nationalism and Social Policy in Far‐right Populist Parties

The rise of right‐wing populist parties in the Nordic countries is slowly redefining the Nordic social democratic discourse of the universal and egalitarian welfare state. The nexus of nationalism and social policy has been explored in regions and countries such as Quebec, Scotland, Belgium and the UK, but the change of discourse in the Nordic countries has received less attention. Taking the case of Sweden and Finland, this article argues that Nordic populism does not question the redistributive welfare state per se as many other European neo‐liberal far‐right parties have done. Instead, it reframes the welfare state as being linked to a sovereign and exclusive Swedish and Finnish political community with distinct national boundaries. Although Sweden and Finland largely share a common welfare nation state discourse, the article also points to important differences in the way this discourse is able to frame the welfare nation state where access to, and the design of, social services are no longer universal and egalitarian but based around ethnicity. The article aims to demonstrate this through an analysis of the welfare discourses of two populist parties: Sweden Democrats and True Finns.     

The Dynamics of Welfare Policy‐Making in South Korea: Social Movements as Policy Entrepreneurs*

This paper analyzes the role of social movements in the creation and evolution of a welfare state in South Korea. We begin with a theoretical overview of the existing works on policy change, highlighting concepts such as ideas, policy paradigms, and windows of opportunity. We then examine state institutions, hegemonic policy paradigms, and the specific dynamics of welfare policy‐making during South Korea’s authoritarian period (1961–1987). Next, characterizing the democratic transition in 1987 and the economic crisis of 1997–1998 as “windows of opportunity,” we probe how social movements emerged as “policy entrepreneurs” and played crucial roles in building welfare institutions and promoting welfare policies. In particular, we focus on the role of social movements in legislating the National Basic Livelihood Security Act in 1999 and consolidating fragmented health insurance systems in 2000. We conclude that social movements in democratized South Korea have assumed the role of policy entrepreneurs, filling the vacuum left by the central government and elite bureaucrats in the field of social welfare policy‐making.     

网络监督：政协民主监督的新渠道

网络监督作为社会主义监督体系的重要形式，其兴起、内涵、特点以及实质有其特定的理解。网络监督可以作为政协民主监督的新渠道，已经成为不可忽视的社会存在。网络监督的优势可以弥补政协民主监督的弱势，提升政协民主监督的效力。政协民主监督可以弥补网络监督的局限，增强网络监督的公信力。网络监督成为政协民主监督新渠道的路径主要是转变观念，建立社会信息采集机制；积极架构政协官方网站，抢占舆论主动权；掌握互联网传播规律，提高政协委员网络素养。     

民主行政:价值·框架·生态环境

在当今各国的公共行政改革中 ,民主的价值日益得到人们的重视。民主行政的基本框架主要包括建立参与型的公共行政决策架构 ,实施程序化的公共行政管理模式 ,推行竞争性的公共服务机制。民主行政运作所需要的社会生态环境是 ,以法治为保证的民主政治体制的确立、以市场为基础的公民社会的培育和以公开为前提的社会信息传播机制的发展     

The End of the Welfare State?

This paper critically examines claims of a new consensus on welfare and the end of the welfare state. We first review the concept of welfare consensus, concentrating on the idea of welfare pluralism, in particular the relatively neglected distinction between national minimum (base) and extension ladder (superstructure). We then examine these concepts in the 1990s under Conservative and New Labour governments. Important changes to welfare pluralism are noted. There have been changes in the character of means-tests, with the national minimum replaced by a series of residual minima, which represent fundamental changes to structural incentives governing the social division of welfare and work. The line between state and non-state provision has been blurred and there have been moves to achieve universalism in the private sector. It is possible to tentatively classify Labour's principles and fledgling policies into three categories: essential continuity with the Conservatives, reversing Conservative policies and extending Conservative policies. However, it is difficult to detect the degree of consensus because a new flexible language is beginning to pervade social policy, with the result that the welfare state is being redefined, notably in areas of full employment, citizenship and conditionality. It is possible to detect, in our terms, moves towards turning Beveridge inside out and from the "Marshall" towards the "Beveridge" welfare state. It is clear that the welfare state is being redefined, but reports of its death have been much exaggerated.     

当代中国决策体制的形成与变革(英文)

中国的决策体制是中国政治体制的中枢系统，也是决定中国发展的关键因素。以中国共产党为领导核心的决策体制是在中国共产党领导革命、创建新中国的长期历史中形成的，具有其历史合理性。决策体制从建立到改革开放前呈现集中化的趋势。决策权力日趋集中的体制，存在着决策结构专业化分工程度不高、制度化程度低、偏重经验决策、决策过程封闭和缺乏自我修正与调节机制等弊端。改革开放后，决策体制改革的重点，是在决策结构、决策方式和决策机制三个主要方面推进决策的民主化、科学化和法治化建设。决策体制改革的实践证明，以决策民主化、科学化和法治化为导向的决策体制改革，成功应对了中国由经济和社会迅速变迁所带来的各种挑战。从政治发展的角度看，决策体制改革呈现出的基本趋势是：从个人决策向民主决策、从经验决策向科学决策、从决策组织高度集中向决策组织结构分化、从封闭式决策向开放式决策、从被动参与决策向自主参与决策、从决策非制度化向决策制度化转变。一个中国共产党主导、多方参与、科学论证、过程开放、依法运行的决策模式在决策体制改革的实践中初步形成。     

Government for the people: the substantive elements of democracy

The most widely used understandings of the concept of democracy – normative, procedural and institutional – focus on its methods and approaches. This article argues that democracy needs also to be understood in terms of its substantive implications. Democratic rights include not only the civil and political rights associated with liberal democracy, but also the economic and social rights promoted in industrially developed countries. Liberal principles promote democracy and economic development. Social rights have developed, not just through state action, but through the independent establishment of solidarities facilitated by the exercise of democratic rights. Every established democracy has a system of social welfare provision. This is not coincidental. Democracy, economic development and social protection are intimately linked.     

论马克思的“社会共和国”理论与真实民主制度--兼论其对中国公民民主参与制度的启示

“社会共和国”是马克思主义者对新型无产阶级人民主权的政体设计,它保留了共和国的政体形式并以阶级内容的无产阶级属性取代并超越了资产阶级民主共和国。马克思为“社会共和国”设计了一系列真实而有效的民主制度：人民普选制、社会主义代议制、议行合一制与民主监督制。这些真实的民主制度为我国当下的公民民主参与实践提供了坚实的理论依据,并将指导着我们进一步完善人民代表大会制度下的公民参与权、基层民主自治制度与民主监督等制度。