Public Organization Review

, Volume 15, Issue 4, pp 551–564 | Cite as

Development, Diversification, and Legitimacy: Emergence of the Committee-Based Administrative Model in South Korea

Article

Abstract

Recently, a committee-based policy making model has become an important element of South Korea’s administrative toolkit. However, most scholars and politicians recognize the inefficiency of this type of decision-making model. Why, then, does the committee-based model continue to gain traction? Taking an institutional perspective, this paper details the processes at work in the legitimation of administrative models in the Korean context, and proposes a framework for understanding how the committee-based system has become predominant. Korea’s rapid development over the past half-century has led to the diversification of groups from whom the government must seek legitimacy, and it is argued that the committee-based system continues to be adopted due to its ability to incorporate these diverse voices into the policy making process, while at the same time allowing the government to further its developmental agenda. The implications of this study for understanding the processes of administrative development are discussed.

Keywords

Organizational Change Committee System Legitimacy South Korea 

References

  1. Aghion, P., Hemous, D., & Veugelers, R. (2009). No green growth without innovation. Bruegel Policy Brief No, 7, 2009.Google Scholar
  2. Aldrich, H. E., & Fiol, C. M. (1994). Fools rush in? The institutional context of industry creation. Academy of Management Review, 19(4), 645–670.Google Scholar
  3. Baek, W (2002). Small Government in Korea. Korea Institute of Public Administration.Google Scholar
  4. Campbell, J. L. (2004). Institutional change and globalization. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Chang, K (2007). The end of developmental citizenship? Restructuring and social displacement in post-crisis South Korea. Economic and political weekly, 67–72.Google Scholar
  6. Cheng, T. J., Haggard, S., & Kang, D. (1998). Institutions and growth in Korea and Taiwan: the bureaucracy. The Journal Development Studies, 34(6), 87–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Chibber, V. (1999). Building a developmental state: The Korean case reconsidered. Politics and Society, 27(3), 309–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Child, J. (1972). Organizational structure, environment and performance: The role of strategic choice. Sociology, 6(1), 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cho, M. (2009). South Korea to spend $85 billion on green industries. Reuters. July 6th. Online at: http://www.reuters.com/article/2009/07/06/us-korea-greengrowth-idUSTRE5651Y720090706? Accessed April 28th, 2012.
  10. Coombs, F. S. (1980). The bases of noncompliance with a policy. Policy Studies Journal, 8(6), 885–892.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Deephouse, D. L., & Suchman, M. (2008). Legitimacy in organizational institutionalism. In R. Greenwood, C. Oliver, K. Sahlin-Andersson, & R. Suddaby (Eds.), The Sage handbook of organizational institutionalism (pp. 49–77). London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Evans, P. B. (1995). Embedded autonomy: states and industrial transformation. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Ferris, S. P., Kim, K. A., & Kitsabunnarat, P. (2003). The costs (and benefits?) of diversified business groups: The case of Korean chaebols. Journal of Banking & Finance, 27(2), 251–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Jepperson, R. L. (1991). Institutions, institutional effects, and institutionalism. In W. W. Powell & P. J. DiMaggio (Eds.), The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis (pp. 143–163). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  15. Jung, Y. D. (2014). The Korean State, public administration, and development: Past, present, and future challenges. Seoul: SNU Press.Google Scholar
  16. Kim, B. (2011). The Leviathan: Economic Bureaucracy under Park. In B. Kim & E. Vogel (Eds.), The Park Chung Hee Era (pp. 200–233). Cambridge: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kim, H., Hoskisson, R. E., Tihanyi, L., & Hong, J. (2004). The evolution and restructuring of diversified business groups in emerging markets: The lessons from chaebols in Korea. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 21(1), 25–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kim, S. (2002). Civil society and democratization. In C. Armstrong (Ed.), Korean society: Civil society, democracy, and the state (pp. 92–131). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  19. KIPA (Korean Institute of Public Administration). (2008). Korean Public Administration, 1948–2008. Pajbookcity: Bobmunsa.Google Scholar
  20. Kwon, H. J. (2003). Advocacy coalitions and the politics of welfare in Korea after the economic crisis. Policy Politics, 31(1), 69–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kwon, H. J., & Yi, I. (2009). Economic development and poverty reduction in Korea: Governing multifunctional institutions. Development and Change, 40(4), 769–792.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lee, C. H., Lee, K., & Lee, K. (2002). Chaebols, Financial Liberalization and Economic Crisis: Transformation of Quasi‐Internal Organization in Korea. Asian Economic Journal, 16(1), 17–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. March, J. G., & Olsen, J. P. (1983). The new institutionalism: Organizational factors in political life. American 488 Political Science Review, 78, 734–749.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Meyer, J. W., & Scott, W. R. (1983). Centralization and the legitimacy problems of local government. In J. W. Meyer & W. R. Scott (Eds.), Organizational Environments: Ritual and Rationality (pp. 199–215). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  25. Minns, J. (2001). Of miracles and models: The rise and decline of the developmental state in South Korea. Third World Quarterly, 22(6), 1025–1043. doi:10.1080/01436590120099777.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. North, D. C. (1993). The new institutional economics and development. EconWPA Economic History, 9309002.Google Scholar
  27. OECD (Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development). (2009). Government at a glance 2009. Available online at http://www.oecd.org.
  28. Park, H. J. (2003). The Origins of Faulted Korean Statism. Asian Perspective, 27(1), 165–195.Google Scholar
  29. Park, S. 2010. Green growth roadmap development in Republic of Korea. Presentation given at the ESCAP Brainstorming Meeting.Google Scholar
  30. Peters, B. G. (1996). The future of governing. Kansas: University Press of Kansas.Google Scholar
  31. Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, G. R. (1978). The External Control of Organizations: A Resource Dependence Perspective. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
  32. Presidential Commission on Green Growth. Online. Retrieved on March 3, 2013 from http://www.greengrowth.go.kr/english/
  33. Rho, S. Y., & Lee, S. J. (2010). History and context of public administration in South Korea. In E. M. Berman, M. J. Moon, & H. Choi (Eds.), Public administration in East Asia: Mainland China, Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan (pp. 329–354). Boca Raton: Taylor and Francis.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Selznick, P. (1957). Leadership in administration. New York, NY: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
  35. Selznick, P. (1996). Institutionalism “old” and “new.”. Administrative Science Quarterly, 41, 270–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Skocpol, T. (1985). Bringing the state back in: strategies of analysis in current research. In P. B. Evans, D. Rueschemeyer, & T. Skocpol (Eds.), Bringing the state back in (pp. 3–43). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Suchman, M. C. (1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 571–610.Google Scholar
  38. Yeom, J.H., Jung, G.G., Kim, J.B., & Gh, M.C. (2007). “Logic and alternative analysis for public organization integration: the case of public administration for environment,” Korean Association for Policy Studies, Proceedings for Winter Conference.Google Scholar
  39. Yim, H. (2002). Cultural identity and cultural policy in South Korea. International Journal of Cultural policy, 8(1), 37–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Zucker, L. G. (1983). Organizations as institutions. In S. B. Bacharach (Ed.), Research in the sociology of organizations (pp. 1–42). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.College of Public ServiceChung-Ang UniversitySeoulKorea
  2. 2.Faculty of Public AdministrationHigher School of EconomicsMoscowRussia

Personalised recommendations