• Korean Journal of Social Welfare
• /
• v.53
• /
• pp.31-49
• /
• 2003

Neo-liberalism, the most influential ideology in the current world, argues for the commercialization of social security programs and for the dissolution of the interventionist welfare state. From the neo-liberal viewpoint, social services become more efficient and more advantageous for recipients, when provided by the market, not by the state. It is also argued that the welfare of all social members is best secured when the market freely operates without any interference from the state. From the neo-liberal point of view, an argument was raised to commercialize the state-administered Workers' Compensation program of Korea in the mid-1990s. This argument was faced with strong resistances from labor unions and social welfare circles, and has disappeared since the economic breakdown and the restructuring of Korean society during the late 1990s. Butr, such an argument can emerge anytime as the nee-liberal ideology become more powerful. This article aims to examine the neo-liberal argument that the privatization of social security programs, through an increases in efficiency, improves the interests of the recipients as well as the whole society. For this, this article attempts to analyze the Workers' Compensation programs of the USA, which, from state to state, are administered by the state government or by private insurance companies. This study can serve as an effective critique for the neo-liberal argument, if it finds that state-administered Workers' Compensation programs are more efficient than those managed by insurance companies. This article's another aim is to assess the controversies over the privatization of the Workers' Compensation program of Korea during the mid to late 1990s. The controversies were more about which viewpoint is right and, in most cases, lacked empirical evidence. This study shall empirically criticize the argument for the privatization of the Workers' Compensation program.

• Journal of Technology Innovation
• /
• v.24 no.3
• /
• pp.107-137
• /
• 2016

By analyzing a nationwide survey on Korean publics, this study examines the social determinants of public support for three types of scientific research-basic research aimed at pure knowledge, applied research toward industrial application, and research for social problem-solving which aims to enhance ordinary citizens' quality of life. The present study finds the differential effects of social- and political value orientations on the level of public support for respective types of research. As ones have more progressive in their subjective political orientations, they are more likely to support research for social problem-solving than other types of research, while conservatives tend to support basic research and those with neo-liberal ideology tend to support applied research. The Korean public also tends to perceive research for social problem-solving as a counter to basic research while it has been developed against the conventional emphasis on applied research in Korea. Also, the level of support for research for social problem-solving increases with the higher level of trust in scientific authority and expertise, while it has been developed against expertism and included public engagement in science as an important element. Finally, those who have lower income tend to support for research for social problem-solving than other types of research. The implications of these findings are discussed.