Causes of Inequality in South Korea from a Capitalism Variety Approach
Main Article Content
Keywords
Network economy, Business groups, Gender gap, Social spending, JEL codes: D31, D63, O53, P36
Abstract
This article identifies the causes that have maintained a high level of inequality in South Korea, through the Varieties of Capitalism (VoC) approach, which classifies the country as a network economy. The study further elaborates on the discussion of the determinants of inequality in countries with a high Gross Domestic Product per capita (GDPp) and the operation of three negative complementarities that maintain these imbalances: gender, social spending, and poverty. To this end, data generated by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) are methodologically and descriptively addressed. In conclusion, inequalities concerning gender, social spending, and poverty constitute a complex negative complementarity that permeates the income distribution of the Asian country.
Downloads
References
Amable, B. (2016). Institutional complementarities in the dynamic comparative analysis of capitalism. Journal of Institutional Economics, June 2015, 79–103. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1744137415000211
Cudd, A. E. (2015). Is Capitalism Good for Women? Journal of Business Ethics, 127(4), 761–770. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-014-2185-9
Davis, G. F., & Cobb, J. A. (2010). Corporations and economic inequality around the world: The paradox of hierarchy. Research in Organizational Behavior, 30, 35–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.riob.2010.08.001
Demirbag, M., Wood, G., Makhmadshoev, D., & Rymkevich, O. (2017). Varieties of CSR: Institutions and Socially Responsible Behaviour. International Business Review, 26(6), 1064–1074. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibusrev.2017.03.011
Do, H., Patel, C., Budhwar, P., Katou, A. A., Arora, B., & Dao, M. (2019). Institutionalism and its effect on HRM in the ASEAN context: Challenges and opportunities for future research. Human Resource Management Review, October 2018, 100729. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2019.100729
Estevez-Abe, M. (2009). Gender, Inequality and Capitalism: The ‘Varieties of Capitalism’ and Women. Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State & Society, 16(2), 182–191. https://doi.org/10.1093/sp/jxp010
Fainshmidt, S., Judge, W. Q., Aguilera, R. V, & Smith, A. (2018). Varieties of institutional systems: A contextual taxonomy of understudied countries. Journal of World Business, 53(3), 307–322. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwb.2016.05.003
Guillaud, E., Olckers, M., & Zemmour, M. (2020). Four Levers of Redistribution: The Impact of Tax and Transfer Systems on Inequality Reduction. Review of Income and Wealth, 66(2), 444–466. https://doi.org/10.1111/roiw.12408
Hall, P. A., & Soskice, D. (2001). An Introduction to Varieties of Capitalism. In Varieties of Capitalism (pp. 1–68). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/0199247757.003.0001
Hall, P. H., Soskice, D., Económico, S. D., & Mar, N. J. (2006). A proposito de los capitalismos contemporaneos*. Desarrollo Económico, 45(180), 573–590.
Han, S. M., & Chang, E. C. C. (2016). Economic Inequality, Winner-loser Gap and Satisfaction with Democracy. Electoral Studies, 44, 85–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.electstud.2016.08.006
Kammas, P., & Sarantides, V. (2019). Do Dictatorships Redistribute More? Journal of Comparative Economics, 47(1), 176–195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jce.2018.10.006
Keeley, B. (2018). Desigualdad de ingresos. OECD. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264300521-es
Kibler, E., Salmivaara, V., Stenholm, P., & Terjesen, S. (2018). The Evaluative Legitimacy of Social Entrepreneurship in Capitalist Welfare Systems. Journal of World Business, 53(6), 944–957. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwb.2018.08.002
Kim, H., & Lee, Y. (2018). Socioeconomic Status, Perceived Inequality of Opportunity, and Attitudes Toward Redistribution. The Social Science Journal, 55(3), 300–312. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soscij.2018.01.008
Kim, N. (2015). Top Incomes In Korea, 1933-2010: Evidence From Income Tax Statistics. Hitotsubashi Journal of Economics, 56, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.15057/27197
Lee, K., & Shin, H. (2018). Varieties Of Capitalism and East Asia: Long-Term Evolution, Structural Change, and the End of East Asian Capitalism. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. strueco.2018.06.006
Milanovic, B. (2011). A Short History of Global Inequality: The Past Two Centuries. Explorations in Economic History, 48(4), 494–506. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eeh.2011.05.001
Milanovic, B. (2016). Global Inequality: A New Approach for the Age of Globalization. In harvard University Press. Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.22325/fes/res.2017.9
OECD. (2014). Resultados de PISA 2012 en foco Overview. In Pisa. http://www.oecd.org/pisa/keyfindings/PISA2012_Overview_ESP-FINAL.pdf
Ostry, J., Berg, A., & Tsangarides, C. (2014). Redistribution, Inequality, and Growth. Staff Discussion Notes, 14(02), 1. https://doi.org/10.5089/9781484352076.006
Park, S. W. (2019). Democracy, Domestic Institutions, and Inequality: Evidence from Emerging Countries and South Korea. In University of British Columbia (Issue December). Doctoral dissertation, University of British Columbia.
Piketty, T. (2014). El capital en el siglo XXI. En El capital en el siglo XXI (pp. 15–50 y 643–649). Fondo de Cultura Económica.
Piketty, T. (2020). Capital and Ideology (Issue Harvard University Pres). Harvard University Pres.
Piketty, T., Yang, L., & Zucman, G. (2019). Capital Accumulation, Private Property, and Rising Inequality in China, 1978–2015. American Economic Review, 109(7), 2469–2496. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.20170973
Ravallion, M. (2020). On Measuring Global Poverty. Annual Review of Economics, 12(1), annureveconomics-081919-022924. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-economics-081919-022924
Rodrik, D. (2020). Why Does Globalization Fuel Populism? Economics, Culture, and the Rise of Right-Wing Populism. The Economic Journal. Harvard, June.
Romero, J. A., & Berasaluce, J. (2018). Corea y México. In Corea y México. El Colegio de México. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv4g1r9j
Romero, J., & Julen-berasaluce, I. (2019). Estado Desarrollador. Casos exitosos y lecciones para México (primera ed). El Colegio de México.
Saucedo, E., Rullán, S., & Villafuerte, L. (2015). Hierarchical capitalism in Latin America: Comparative analysis with other economies. Dubrovnik International Economic Meeting, 2(1), 370–387.
Schneider, B. R. (2007). Comparing Capitalisms : Liberal , Coordinated , Network , and Hierarchical Varieties. 1–32.
Schneider, B. R. (2009). Hierarchical Market Economies and Varieties of Capitalism in Latin America. In Journal of Latin American Studies. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022216X09990186
Schneider, B. R., & Soskice, D. (2009). Inequality in Developed Countries and Latin America: Coordinated, Liberal and Hierarchical Systems. Economy and Society, 38(1), 17–52. https://doi.org/10.1080/03085140802560496
Shin, K. (2019). Neo-Liberal Economic Reform , Social Change , and Inequality in the Post-Crisis Period in South Korea. 73(1), 89–109.
Song, C. (2019). Period Changes in Intergenerational Income Mobility between Welfare State Contexts in South Korea and the United States [University of Washington]. http://hdl.handle.net/1773/43746
Stierli, M., Shorrocks, A., Davies, J. B., Lluberas, R., & & Koutsoukis, A. (2014). Global wealth report 2014. Zurich: Credit Suisse Research Institute (CSRI)., October, 64.
Suisse, C. (2019). Global Wealth report 2019. Global Wealth Report 2019, by Suisse Group, Credit AG, October, 37–42.
Yang, Y., & Greaney, T. M. (2017). Economic Growth and Income Inequality in the Asia-Pacific Region: A Comparative Study of China, Japan, South Korea, and the United States. Journal of Asian Economics, 48, 6–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asieco.2016.10.008
Zafirovski, M. (2019). Exploitation In Contemporary Societies: An Exploratory Comparative Analysis. The Social Science Journal, 56(4), 565–587. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soscij.2018.09.002
Article Sidebar
Article Details
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under aCreative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).