• Korean Journal of Social Welfare Studies
• /
• v.41 no.3
• /
• pp.5-27
• /
• 2010

The objective of this study is to examine the dicourse of East Asian Welfare Models and its applicability to explain the development of the Korean Welfare State(regime). The Confucianist Welfare State, representing East Asian Welfare Models has limitations in explaining the current features and dynamics of east asian welfare states. Compared to the western and northern european welfare states, the Welfare State(Regime) of Korea, one of the east asian countries show the clear differences in terms of its origin, the background of formulation, the orientation of the policy and the actors. Thus, a new approach to examine the East Asian Welfare Model is needed. As a theoretical framework, the origin and the growth of the Korean Welfare State(Regime) can be understood and explained in the boundary of concept and the theoretical framework of the Authoritative Developmental State; Historically, the democratization of the 1980s and the financial crisis of the end of 1990s in Korea contributed to the growth of the welfare policies and institutions in Korea. Japan, Taiwan and other east asian counties, such as Hong Kong and Singapore have many similarities with Korea in terms of welfare policies and institutions. Comparative studies of these countries can create significant and useful results to develop a new concept and model of East Asian Welfare States. Case studies and active academic exchanges among welfare state researchers in these east asian countries are very important to develop a new concept of East Asian Welfare State Models.

• 한국사회정책
• /
• v.25 no.1
• /
• pp.231-257
• /
• 2018

Japan has generally been considered as the developmentalist welfare state. However, Japan has recently been transformed into a social investment state. Although it still has a developmentalist characteristics with its institutional path dependence, the new social and economic challenges derived from the new social risks such as low birth rates and aging population forced Japan to adopt a new welfare state strategy. The paradigm shift in terms of welfare state strategy was launched by the Third Way positioning of the Democratic party government and succeed to the Second Stage of Abenomics under the Third Abe Cabinet. This paper argues that the welfare state paradigm shift towards a social investment state in Japan is not limited to the Japan's Plan for Dynamic Engagement of All Citizens for a virtuous cycle of growth and distribution, but expands its scope to include the work-family balance policies such as labor market activation for women and public caring for children.

• International Journal of Human Ecology
• /
• v.3 no.1
• /
• pp.73-94
• /
• 2002

The important argument explored in this article is women's position in welfare regimes. By examining feminist critiques on the welfare state, we intend to look into whether the welfare state is designed to promote the equal status of both men and women. In the post-war period, it was believed that social provision, together with full employment and rising real wages, would improve the welfare of all citizens. However, women were inevitably treated as second class citizens by the new welfare legislation and were assumed to be economically dependent on their husbands. As a result, though welfare provision plays a significant and liberating role in women's lives in some ways, it may also serve to restrict women by defining them in certain ways. This contradictory situations is especially true in successfully developing third world countries such as Korea. This is because the western welfare state can be misconceived as an idealistic model in which men and women obtain equality in terms of social context.

• 한국사회정책
• /
• v.25 no.4
• /
• pp.39-67
• /
• 2018

The Korean welfare state has achieved remarkable development during the last two decades, but simultaneously we have witnessed growing prevalent social conflicts and exclusion in the society. This research argues that the source of current problems lies in the nature of the Korean welfare regime, so called, 'paternalistic liberalism'. The paternalistic liberalism has been formulated by the combination of legacies of the developmental state and neo-liberalism. Paternalism with the growth-oriented and employment-centered approach has been a significant factor to restrict individuals' freedom and happiness in the Korean welfare state. It has also been embedded in the Korean welfare state such as social insurance, workfare programs, and centralized social services. In this context, this research proposes social liberalism, pursuing real freedom for all, as a new paradigm for the Korean welfare state. Breaking from the old path, Freecurity, combining freedom and security, which is argued to be the upgraded version of flexicurity, is also newly proposed as the operating model of social liberalism.

• Korean Journal of Social Welfare Studies
• /
• v.44 no.3
• /
• pp.371-393
• /
• 2013

The objective of this article is to compare the characteristics and the origin of Welfare State in Korea and France. This study also finds out the causes of underdevelopment of Welfare State in Korea. In the third Republic of France, the first Industrial Accident Compensation Law was legislated in 1898. The discussion of the project of Law commenced in 1880. The Parliamentary Debate on the legislation of the Law had continued for 18 years. The leaders of the debate was the group of progressive Republicans(Radicals) in the French Parliament. In Korea, it was also in the period of the third Repulic, the President and several members of the Supreme Committee of National Reconstruction (Guk-Ga-Jai-Gun-Choi-Go-Ho-Eui), the authoritative military government who enacted and developed the Social Insurance Law of Industrial Accident Compensation, the first Law of Welfare State in Korea. However, Korea and France show more differences than similarities in the terms of the origin of the Welfare State. The motivations and goals of social policies of the two countries were quite different at the beginning stage. In France, the progressive Republicans of Parliament made welfare state policies in order to maintain the politico-social hegemony and social peace by provision of economic supports to workers. In Korea, the group of military officers had begun the welfare legislation in order to win the general election and obtain political power in 1963. Comparison on the origins of the welfare states in the two countries shows similarities as well as differences in terms of the role of actors. In France, the state and the owners of big enterprises had agreed and played positive roles in the legislation of the welfare state policies. However, the owners of small companies, merchants and farmers had played negative roles. Like the French case, Korean government and owners of big enterprises had played positive roles. The state as a major actor of the legislation of the social insurance programs in the two countries are slightly different. In Korea, the owners of small companies had played negative roles in making of medical insurance programs in 1976. Comparison of the current state of two welfare states shows substantial differences in terms of the development of the welfare state. What is the reason for such differences? Why does Korean Welfare State underdevelop? Historically, the developmentalism as an major ideology of the third Republic of Korea has continually influenced the underdevelopment of the Welfare State. It implies that Koreans have to invent a new ideology of Welfare State which can replace the developmentalism and support the development of Welfare State in the future. Without such a new ideology, it is very difficult to develop an european style welfare state in Korea.

• Korean Journal of Social Welfare
• /
• v.62 no.1
• /
• pp.5-30
• /
• 2010

This paper offers an alternative approach to measure the welfare state change by using fuzzy-set methodology. The fuzzy-set method is particularly useful for assessing change across a limited number of cases, and that it can help to translate interval fuzzy membership scores into verbal qualifiers. Applying the measurement of welfare state change, four sets(accessibility, generosity, activation, state's care responsibility) in two dimensions(old and new social risks) have been identified, which reflect theoretical importance. The analysis sets out fuzzy membership scores for 12 OECD countries in the 16 possible welfare state ideal types. This paper found that each country has its own strategies to deal with the changes, however, the changes are not dramatic or a qualitative one. This does not mean that there are no changes, but that are no paradigm shifts or path breaking in the welfare state changes.

• Korean Journal of Social Welfare
• /
• v.59 no.3
• /
• pp.229-252
• /
• 2007

Traditional quantitative approaches to comparative social policy research in welfare state have mostly focused on cross-national variations in social policy. More recently, they have attempted to account for disparities in the local provision of social policy. However, heavily relying on traditional theories of welfare state development (e.g., industrialism theory, power resource approach, and state-centric thesis), most of them seem to have explained the local variation from a central or national perspective, thereby completely ignoring the local perspective. Furthermore, their theoretical bases have been exclusively derived from the social context of post-war era. In tackling these issues, this study aims at localizing and updating the theoretical framework of local welfare policy in the post-industrial age. The framework provided in this study calls for a shift in the theoretical perspective towards more local and new approaches (e.g., new social risks, new public management and intergovernmental relations).

• Korean Journal of Social Welfare
• /
• v.67 no.2
• /
• pp.161-181
• /
• 2015

This article tries to identify the regulating mechanism of the welfare states on the private spheres of individuals and families. When the welfare state is to be understood as an institutional arrangement which is based upon the 'modernity', the reflectivity on the welfare state is about to be on the modernity and on the institutions as well. Authors assume the welfare state as an historical and developmental type of modern states. The critical components of modernity embedded in birth and growth of modern welfare states projected to their institutions are identified. Welfare states dissociates the political dynamics which have built the foundation of the welfare state itself, and faces against the new political dynamics of the individualized society. Finally, welfare state confronts the institution failure due to its intrinsic characteristics, and consequently individuals and families come across the institution dependency. Individuals in the overly rationalized spheres are being depoliticized, and they are identified themselves as the subjects of status-struggles of the institutions other than the subjects of the political dynamics of welfare states.

• Korean Journal of Social Welfare
• /
• v.43
• /
• pp.193-221
• /
• 2000

The conventional framework of welfare politics, based on class concepts, tends to fail in explaining the recent social changes. Theoretical response from the social science diverges into two blocs. One is the postmodernist approach that denies possibility of structural cleavage; the other is the alternative trial that seeks to find various kinds of cleavages. The former approach is to be rejected because there is few empirical supports for it. The latter is too sparse to be applied to the studies of welfare politics that requires a comprehensive analysis. This study starts from critical investigation of such approaches, aiming at providing a theoretical framework that combines merits of existing studies on welfare politics. The theoretical framework of three statuses of welfare rights and duties, which is to be presented as an alternative to the conventional class counterpart, does not only underscore the expansion of welfare rights but also the burden of welfare duties. Hence, it can comprehensively subsume complex existence of interest cleavages of welfare politics. To make a long story short, individual interest, related to the welfare state, will effect individual attitudes toward the welfare state and their ways of political support.

• Korean Journal of Social Welfare
• /
• v.38
• /
• pp.255-283
• /
• 1999

The community chest has been known as an effective means for private sectors in social welfare by mobilizing community resources. The purpose of this study is to analyze the process of developing community chest system in Korea and to suggest how Korean community chest system can be changed to develop private sectors in social welfare. To obtain this purpose, the author studied as follows. Firstly, The difference between former Korean community chest law and new Korean community chest law were examined. Secondly, the background of establishment of Korean community chest law and the present condition and state of Korean community chest system for private sectors in social welfare were analyzed. Thirdly, the tasks to be solved about developing Korean community chest system for developing private sectors in social welfare were suggested as follows; 1) activating the demonstration work for influencing the formulation of pragmatic partnership between state and private sectors in social welfare 2) utilizing a variety of communication channels for community participation 3) cooperating and coordinating the relationship between community chest system and the most voluntary social welfare agencies 4) raising as much funds as possible for maintaining autonomy of private sectors in social welfare.