• Journal of the Korean association of regional geographers
• /
• v.3 no.2
• /
• pp.37-87
• /
• 1997

As a results of researches on the cultivation processes and settlement developments on the Mangyoung river valley as a whole could be have four 'Space-Time Continuity' through a [Origin-Destination] theory model. On a initial phases of cultivation, the cultivation process has been begun at mountain slopes and tributory plains in upper part of river-basin from Koryo Dynasty to early Chosun Dynasty. At first, indigenous peasants burned forests on the mountain slopes for making 'dryfield' for a cereal crops. Following population increase more stable food supply is necessary facets of life inducing a change production method into a 'wetfield' in tributory plains matching the population increase. First sedentary agriculture maybe initiated at this mountain slopes and tributory plains on upper part of river basin through a burning cultivation methods. Mountain slopes and tributory plains are become a Origin area in cultivation processes. It expanded from up to down through the valleys with 'a bits of land' fashion in a steady pace like a terraced fields expanded with bit by bit of land to downward. They expanded their land to the middle part of river basin in mid period of Chosun Dynasty with dike construction techniques on the river bank. Lower part of river cultivated with embankment building techniques in 1920s and then naturally expanded to the tidal marshes on the estuaries and river inlets of coastal areas. 'Pioneer fringes' are consolidated at there in modern times. Changes in landscapes are appeared it's own characters with each periods of time. Followings are results of study through the Mangyoung river valley as a whole. (1) Mountain slopes and tributory plains on the upper part of river are cultivated 'dryfields' by indigenous peasants with Burning cultivation methods at first and developed sedentary settlements at the edges of mountain slopes and on the river terrace near the fields. They formed a kind of 'periphery-located cluster type' of settlement. This type of settlement are become a prominant type in upper part of river basin. 'Dryfields' has been changed into a 'wetfields' at the narrow tributory plains by increasing population pressure in later time. These wetfields are supplied water by Weir and Ponds Irrigation System(제언수리방법). Streams on the tributory plains has been attracted wetfields besides of it and formed a [water+land] complex on it. 'Wetfields' are expanded from up to downward with a terraced land pattern(adder like pattern, 붕전) according to the gradient of valley. These periphery located settlements are formed a intimate ecological linkage with several sets of surroundings. Inner villages are expanded to Outer villages according to the expansion of arable lands into downward. (2) Mountain slopes and tributory plains expanded its territory to the alluvial deposited plains on the middle part of river valley with a urgent need of new land by population increase. This part of alluvial plains are cultivated mainly in mid period of Chosun Dynasty. Irrigation methods are changed into a Dike Construction Irrigation method(천방수리방법) for the control of floods. It has a trend to change the subjectives of cultivation from community-oriented one who constructed Bochang along tributories making rice paddies to local government authorities who could be gather large sums of capitals, techniques and labours for the big dike construction affairs. Settlements are advanced in the midst of plains avoiding friction of distances and formed a 'Centrallocated cluster type' of settlements. There occured a hierarchical structures of settlements in ranks and sizes according merits of water supply and transportation convenience at the broad plains. Big towns are developed at there. It strengthened a more prominant [water+land] complex along the canals. Ecological linkages between settlements and surroundings are shaded out into a tiny one in this area. (3) It is very necessary to get a modern technology of flood control at the rivers that have a large volume of water and broad width. The alluvial plains are remained in a wilderness phase until a technical level reached a large artificial levee construction ability that could protect the arable land from flood. Until that time on most of alluvial land at the lower part of river are remained a wilderness of overgrown with reeds in lacks of techniques to build a large-scale artificial levee along the riverbank. Cultivation processes are progressed in a large scale one by Japanese agricultural companies with [River Rennovation Project] of central government in 1920s. Large scale artificial levees are constructed along the riverbank. Subjectives of cultivation are changed from Korean peasants to Japanese agricultural companies and Korean peasants fell down as a tenant in a colonial situation of that time in Korea. They could not have any voices in planning of spatial structure and decreased their role in planning. Newly cultivated lands are reflected company's intensions, objectives and perspectives for achieving their goals for the sake of colonial power. Newly cultivated lands are planned into a regular Rectangular Block settings of rice paddies and implanted a large scale Bureaucratic-oriented Irrigation System on the cultivated plains. Every settlements are located in the midst of rice paddies with a Central located Cluster type of settlements. [water+land] complex along the canal system are more strengthened. Cultivated space has a characters of [I-IT] landscapes. (4) Artificial levees are connected into a coastal emnankment for a reclamation of broad tidal marshes on the estuaries and inlets of rivers in the colonial times. Subjectives of reclamation are enlarged into a big agricultural companies that could be acted a role as a big cultivator. After that time on most of reclamation project of tidal marshes are controlled by these agricultural companies formed by mostly Japanese capitalists. Reclaimed lands on the estuaries and river inlets are under hands of agricultural companies and all the spatial structures are formed by their intensions, objectives and perspectives. They constructed a Unit Farming Area for the sake of companies. Spatial structures are planned in a regular one with broad arable land for the rice production of rectangular blocks, regular canal systems and tank reservoir for the irrigation water supply into reclaimed lands. There developed a 'Central-located linear type' of settlements in midst of reclaimed land. These settlements are settled in a detail program upon this newly reclaimed land at once with a master plan and they have planned patterns in their distribution, building materials, location, and form. Ecological linkage between Newly settled settlemrnts and its surroundings are lost its colours and became a more artificial one by human-centred environment. [I-IT] landscapes are become more prominant. This region is a destination area of [Origin-Destination] theory model and formed a 'Pioneer Fringe'. It is a kind of pioneer front that could advance or retreat discontinously by physical conditions and socio-cultural conditions of that region.

• KDI Journal of Economic Policy
• /
• v.12 no.1
• /
• pp.31-68
• /
• 1990

The concentration of economic power takes the form of one or a few firms controlling a substantial portion of the economic resources and means in a certain economic area. At the same time, to the extent that these firms are owned by a few individuals, resource allocation can be manipulated by them rather than by the impersonal market mechanism. This will impair allocative efficiency, run counter to a decentralized market system and hamper the equitable distribution of wealth. Viewed from the historical evolution of Western capitalism in general, the concentration of economic power is a paradox in that it is a product of the free market system itself. The economic principle of natural discrimination works so that a few big firms preempt scarce resources and market opportunities. Prominent historical examples include trusts in America, Konzern in Germany and Zaibatsu in Japan in the early twentieth century. In other words, the concentration of economic power is the outcome as well as the antithesis of free competition. As long as judgment of the economic system at large depends upon the value systems of individuals, therefore, the issue of how to evaluate the concentration of economic power will inevitably be tinged with ideology. We have witnessed several different approaches to this problem such as communism, fascism and revised capitalism, and the last one seems to be the only surviving alternative. The concentration of economic power in Korea can be summarily represented by the "jaebol," namely, the conglomerate business group, the majority of whose member firms are monopolistic or oligopolistic in their respective markets and are owned by particular individuals. The jaebol has many dimensions in its size, but to sketch its magnitude, the share of the jaebol in the manufacturing sector reached 37.3% in shipment and 17.6% in employment as of 1989. The concentration of economic power can be ascribed to a number of causes. In the early stages of economic development, when the market system is immature, entrepreneurship must fill the gap inherent in the market in addition to performing its customary managerial function. Entrepreneurship of this sort is a scarce resource and becomes even more valuable as the target rate of economic growth gets higher. Entrepreneurship can neither be readily obtained in the market nor exhausted despite repeated use. Because of these peculiarities, economic power is bound to be concentrated in the hands of a few entrepreneurs and their business groups. It goes without saying, however, that the issue of whether the full exercise of money-making entrepreneurship is compatible with social mores is a different matter entirely. The rapidity of the concentration of economic power can also be traced to the diversification of business groups. The transplantation of advanced technology oriented toward mass production tends to saturate the small domestic market quite early and allows a firm to expand into new markets by making use of excess capacity and of monopoly profits. One of the reasons why the jaebol issue has become so acute in Korea lies in the nature of the government-business relationship. The Korean government has set economic development as its foremost national goal and, since then, has intervened profoundly in the private sector. Since most strategic industries promoted by the government required a huge capacity in technology, capital and manpower, big firms were favored over smaller firms, and the benefits of industrial policy naturally accrued to large business groups. The concentration of economic power which occured along the way was, therefore, not necessarily a product of the market system. At the same time, the concentration of ownership in business groups has been left largely intact as they have customarily met capital requirements by means of debt. The real advantage enjoyed by large business groups lies in synergy due to multiplant and multiproduct production. Even these effects, however, cannot always be considered socially optimal, as they offer disadvantages to other independent firms-for example, by foreclosing their markets. Moreover their fictitious or artificial advantages only aggravate the popular perception that most business groups have accumulated their wealth at the expense of the general public and under the behest of the government. Since Korea stands now at the threshold of establishing a full-fledged market economy along with political democracy, the phenomenon called the concentration of economic power must be correctly understood and the roles of business groups must be accordingly redefined. In doing so, we would do better to take a closer look at Japan which has experienced a demise of family-controlled Zaibatsu and a success with business groups(Kigyoshudan) whose ownership is dispersed among many firms and ultimately among the general public. The Japanese case cannot be an ideal model, but at least it gives us a good point of departure in that the issue of ownership is at the heart of the matter. In setting the basic direction of public policy aimed at controlling the concentration of economic power, one must harmonize efficiency and equity. Firm size in itself is not a problem, if it is dictated by efficiency considerations and if the firm behaves competitively in the market. As long as entrepreneurship is required for continuous economic growth and there is a discrepancy in entrepreneurial capacity among individuals, a concentration of economic power is bound to take place to some degree. Hence, the most effective way of reducing the inefficiency of business groups may be to impose competitive pressure on their activities. Concurrently, unless the concentration of ownership in business groups is scaled down, the seed of social discontent will still remain. Nevertheless, the dispersion of ownership requires a number of preconditions and, consequently, we must make consistent, long-term efforts on many fronts. We can suggest a long list of policy measures specifically designed to control the concentration of economic power. Whatever the policy may be, however, its intended effects will not be fully realized unless business groups abide by the moral code expected of socially responsible entrepreneurs. This is especially true, since the root of the problem of the excessive concentration of economic power lies outside the issue of efficiency, in problems concerning distribution, equity, and social justice.