• 한국사회정책
• /
• v.23 no.1
• /
• pp.1-23
• /
• 2016

This study evaluates the strategic capacity of Korean labor union movement by examining policy alternatives and strategic steps that the Federation of Korean Trade Unions and the Korean Confederation of Trade Unions have shown in response to Park Geun-Hye government's labor market structuring policies. While the government-led labor reform was carried out as intended, organized labor has not simply failed to achieve progressive labor reforms to enhance employment security, but also to exert their strategic capacity effectively for preventing Park's labor market flexibilization policies. The two national centers have not been able to exert their strategic capacity (such as intermediating, framing, articulating, learning) for mobilizing the resources of internal solidarity, network embeddedness, narrative discourse, and organizational infrastructure. In particular, the formation and diffusion of public discourse is a significant part of strategic capacity of labor unions dealing with the labor politics of labor market restructuring, since organized labor, which is under the unfavorable constraints of limited movement resources and power imbalance with the business circle, needs to mobilize massive support and participation from union members and civil society organizations. In this light, it becomes of more importance for labor union movement to exert their strategic capacity toward internal solidarity and network embeddedness in the stage of labor market reforms. Under the recent stage of labor reforms, however, the labor unions has not harnessed their movement resources effectively, but undertaken their protest in a traditional manner, thereby losing its public efficacy from inside and outside. Moreover, it is necessary to build and activate the network of organic solidarity among organized labor, civil society organizations and progressive political parties, in order to cope with the pro-business coalition of power elites for accomplishing pro-labor reforms.

• Journal of Intelligence and Information Systems
• /
• v.26 no.2
• /
• pp.105-129
• /
• 2020

This study uses corporate data from 2012 to 2018 when K-IFRS was applied in earnest to predict default risks. The data used in the analysis totaled 10,545 rows, consisting of 160 columns including 38 in the statement of financial position, 26 in the statement of comprehensive income, 11 in the statement of cash flows, and 76 in the index of financial ratios. Unlike most previous prior studies used the default event as the basis for learning about default risk, this study calculated default risk using the market capitalization and stock price volatility of each company based on the Merton model. Through this, it was able to solve the problem of data imbalance due to the scarcity of default events, which had been pointed out as the limitation of the existing methodology, and the problem of reflecting the difference in default risk that exists within ordinary companies. Because learning was conducted only by using corporate information available to unlisted companies, default risks of unlisted companies without stock price information can be appropriately derived. Through this, it can provide stable default risk assessment services to unlisted companies that are difficult to determine proper default risk with traditional credit rating models such as small and medium-sized companies and startups. Although there has been an active study of predicting corporate default risks using machine learning recently, model bias issues exist because most studies are making predictions based on a single model. Stable and reliable valuation methodology is required for the calculation of default risk, given that the entity's default risk information is very widely utilized in the market and the sensitivity to the difference in default risk is high. Also, Strict standards are also required for methods of calculation. The credit rating method stipulated by the Financial Services Commission in the Financial Investment Regulations calls for the preparation of evaluation methods, including verification of the adequacy of evaluation methods, in consideration of past statistical data and experiences on credit ratings and changes in future market conditions. This study allowed the reduction of individual models' bias by utilizing stacking ensemble techniques that synthesize various machine learning models. This allows us to capture complex nonlinear relationships between default risk and various corporate information and maximize the advantages of machine learning-based default risk prediction models that take less time to calculate. To calculate forecasts by sub model to be used as input data for the Stacking Ensemble model, training data were divided into seven pieces, and sub-models were trained in a divided set to produce forecasts. To compare the predictive power of the Stacking Ensemble model, Random Forest, MLP, and CNN models were trained with full training data, then the predictive power of each model was verified on the test set. The analysis showed that the Stacking Ensemble model exceeded the predictive power of the Random Forest model, which had the best performance on a single model. Next, to check for statistically significant differences between the Stacking Ensemble model and the forecasts for each individual model, the Pair between the Stacking Ensemble model and each individual model was constructed. Because the results of the Shapiro-wilk normality test also showed that all Pair did not follow normality, Using the nonparametric method wilcoxon rank sum test, we checked whether the two model forecasts that make up the Pair showed statistically significant differences. The analysis showed that the forecasts of the Staging Ensemble model showed statistically significant differences from those of the MLP model and CNN model. In addition, this study can provide a methodology that allows existing credit rating agencies to apply machine learning-based bankruptcy risk prediction methodologies, given that traditional credit rating models can also be reflected as sub-models to calculate the final default probability. Also, the Stacking Ensemble techniques proposed in this study can help design to meet the requirements of the Financial Investment Business Regulations through the combination of various sub-models. We hope that this research will be used as a resource to increase practical use by overcoming and improving the limitations of existing machine learning-based models.

• Journal of the Korean Recycled Construction Resources Institute
• /
• v.1 no.1
• /
• pp.89-97
• /
• 2005

Recently, for the problem solution of demand and supply imbalance of fine aggregate due to the shortage of natural fine aggregate resource and the environment regulation on sea sand extraction in the construction field, the studies for the application of recycled fine aggregate using waste concrete are being progressed versatilely. On the other hand, the treatment of fly-ashes that of industrial by-product originated in the steam power plant is discussed by the continuous increasing of origination quantities. In the ease of using fly-ash, advantages are the improvement of workability, viscosity and long-time strength, and the reduction of hydration heat under the early ages, as the admixtures for concrete, but the studies for the application of fly-ash as recycled concrete admixtures are inadequacy. There fore, in this study, through investigating the properties of fresh, hardened and durability according to the replacement of recycled fine aggregate and fly-ash, it is intended to propose the fundamental data for structural application of recycled concrete using recycled fine aggregate and fly-ash. As the result of this study, they arc shown that the engineering properties and durability, in the case of replacement ratio 100% of recycled fine aggregate, arc similar to those of concrete using natural fine aggregate, so it is considered that recycled fine aggregate could be used as the fine aggregate for concrete. Also, the performances of recycled concrete are improved by replacing fly-ash.

• KDI Journal of Economic Policy
• /
• v.32 no.4
• /
• pp.153-195
• /
• 2010

The recent global financial crisis has been the outcome of, among other things, the mismatch between institutions and the reality of the market in the current global financial system. The International financial institutions (IFIs) that were designed more than 60 years ago can no longer effectively meet the challenges posed by the current global economy. While the global financial market has become integrated like a single market, there is no international lender of last resort or global regulatory body. There also has been a rapid shift in the weight of economic power. The share of the Group of 7 (G7) countries in global gross domestic product (GDP) fell and the share of emerging market economies increased rapidly. Therefore, the tasks facing us today are: (i) to reform the IFIs -mandate, resources, management, and governance structure; (ii) to reform the system such as the international monetary system (IMS), and regulatory framework of the global financial system; and (iii) to reform global economic governance. The main focus of this paper will be the IMS reform and the role of the Group of Twenty (G20) summit meetings. The current IMS problems can be summarized as follows. First, the demand for foreign reserve accumulation has been increasing despite the movement from fixed exchange rate regimes to floating rate regimes some 40 years ago. Second, this increasing demand for foreign reserves has been concentrated in US dollar assets, especially public securities. Third, as the IMS relies too heavily on the supply of currency issued by a center country (the US), it gives an exorbitant privilege to this country, which can issue Treasury bills at the lowest possible interest rate in the international capital market. Fourth, as a related problem, the global financial system depends too heavily on the center country's ability to maintain the stability of the value of its currency and strength of its own financial system. Fifth, international capital flows have been distorted in the current IMS, from EMEs and developing countries where the productivity of capital investment is higher, to advanced economies, especially the US, where the return to capital investment is lower. Given these problems, there have been various proposals to reform the current IMS. They can be grouped into two: demand-side and supply-side reform. The key in the former is how to reduce the widespread strong demand for foreign reserve holdings among EMEs. There have been several proposals to reduce the self-insurance motivation. They include third-party insurance and the expansion of the opportunity to borrow from a global and regional reserve pool, or access to global lender of last resort (or something similar). However, the first option would be too costly. That leads us to the second option - building a stronger globalfinancial safety net. Discussions on supply-side reform of the IMS focus on how to diversify the supply of international reserve currency. The proposals include moving to a multiple currency system; increased allocation and wider use of special drawing rights (SDR); and creating a new global reserve currency. A key question is whether diversification should be encouraged among suitable existing currencies, or if it should be sought more with global reserve assets, acting as a complement or even substitute to existing ones. Each proposal has its pros and cons; they also face trade-offs between desirability and political feasibility. The transition would require close collaboration among the major players. This should include efforts at the least to strengthen policy coordination and collaboration among the major economies, and to reform the IMF to make it a more effective institution for bilateral and multilateral surveillance and as an international lender of last resort. The success on both fronts depends heavily on global economic governance reform and the role of the G20. The challenge is how to make the G20 effective. Without institutional innovations within the G20, there is a high risk that its summits will follow the path of previous summit meetings, such as G7/G8.

• Korean small business review
• /
• v.33 no.4
• /
• pp.77-93
• /
• 2011

Since 2000, the employment rate of small and medium enterprises (SMEs) has dwindled while the creation of new jobs and the emergence of healthy SMEs have been stagnant. The fundamental reason for these symptoms is that the economic structure is disadvantageous to SMEs. In particular, the greater gap between SMEs and large enterprises has resulted in polarization, and the resulting imbalance has become the largest obstacle to improving SMEs' competitiveness. For example, the total productivity has continued to drop, and the average productivity of SMEs is now merely 30% of that of large enterprises, and the average wage of SMEs' employees is only 53% of that of large enterprises. Along with polarization, rapid industrialization has also caused anti-enterprise consensus, the collapse of the middle class, hostility towards establishments, and other aftereffects. The general consensus is that unless these problems are solved, South Korea will not become an advanced country. Especially, South Korea is now facing issues that need urgent measures, such as the decline of its economic growth, the worsening distribution of profits, and the increased external volatility. Recognizing such negative trends, the MB administration proposed a win-win growth policy and recently introduced a new national value called "ecosystemic development." As the terms in such policy agenda are similar, however, the conceptual differences among such terms must first be fully understood. Therefore, in this study, the concepts of win-win growth policy and ecosystemic development, and the need for them, were surveyed, and their differences from and similarities with other policy concepts like win-win cooperation and symbiotic development were examined. Based on the results of the survey and examination, the study introduced a South Korean model of win-win growth, targeting the promotion of a sound balance between large enterprises and SMEs and an innovative ecosystem, and finally, proposing future policy tasks. Win-win growth is not an academic term but a policy term. Thus, it is less advisable to give a theoretical definition of it than to understand its concept based on its objective and method as a policy. The core of the MB administration's win-win growth policy is the creation of a partnership between key economic subjects such as large enterprises and SMEs based on each subject's differentiated capacity, and such economic subjects' joint promotion of growth opportunities. Its objective is to contribute to the establishment of an advanced capitalistic system by securing the sustainability of the South Korean economy. Such win-win growth policy includes three core concepts. The first concept, ecosystem, is that win-win growth should be understood from the viewpoint of an industrial ecosystem and should be pursued by overcoming the issues of specific enterprises. An enterprise is not an independent entity but a social entity, meaning it exists in relationship with the society (Drucker, 2011). The second concept, balance, points to the fact that an effort should be made to establish a systemic and social infrastructure for a healthy balance in the industry. The social system and infrastructure should be established in such a way as to create a balance between short- term needs and long-term sustainability, between freedom and responsibility, and between profitability and social obligations. Finally, the third concept is the behavioral change of economic entities. The win-win growth policy is not merely about simple transactional relationships or determining reasonable prices but more about the need for a behavior change on the part of economic entities, without which the objectives of the policy cannot be achieved. Various advanced countries have developed different win-win growth models based on their respective cultures and economic-development stages. Japan, whose culture is characterized by a relatively high level of group-centered trust, has developed a productivity improvement model based on such culture, whereas the U.S., which has a highly developed system of market capitalism, has developed a system that instigates or promotes market-oriented technological innovation. Unlike Japan or the U.S., Europe, a late starter, has not fully developed a trust-based culture or market capitalism and thus often uses a policy-led model based on which the government leads the improvement of productivity and promotes technological innovation. By modeling successful cases from these advanced countries, South Korea can establish its unique win-win growth system. For this, it needs to determine the method and tasks that suit its circumstances by examining the prerequisites for its success as well as the strengths and weaknesses of each advanced country. This paper proposes a South Korean model of win-win growth, whose objective is to upgrade the country's low-trust-level-based industrial structure, in which large enterprises and SMEs depend only on independent survival strategies, to a high-trust-level-based social ecosystem, in which large enterprises and SMEs develop a cooperative relationship as partners. Based on this objective, the model proposes the establishment of a sound balance of systems and infrastructure between large enterprises and SMEs, and to form a crenovative social ecosystem. The South Korean model of win-win growth consists of three axes: utilization of the South Koreans' potential, which creates community-oriented energy; fusion-style improvement of various control and self-regulated systems for establishing a high-trust-level-oriented social infrastructure; and behavioral change on the part of enterprises in terms of putting an end to their unfair business activities and promoting future-oriented cooperative relationships. This system will establish a dynamic industrial ecosystem that will generate creative energy and will thus contribute to the realization of a sustainable economy in the 21st century. The South Korean model of win-win growth should pursue community-based self-regulation, which promotes the power of efficiency and competition that is fundamentally being pursued by capitalism while at the same time seeking the value of society and community. Already existing in Korea's traditional roots, such objectives have become the bases of the Shinbaram culture, characterized by the South Koreans' spontaneity, creativity, and optimism. In the process of a community's gradual improvement of its rules and procedures, the trust among the community members increases, and the "social capital" that guarantees the successful control of shared resources can be established (Ostrom, 2010). This basic ideal can help reduce the gap between large enterprises and SMEs, alleviating the South Koreans' victim mentality in the face of competition and the open-door policy, and creating crenovative corporate competitiveness. The win-win growth policy emerged for the purpose of addressing the polarization and imbalance structure resulting from the evolution of 21st-century capitalism. It simultaneously pursues efficiency and fairness on one hand and economic and community values on the other, and aims to foster efficient interaction between the market and the government. This policy, however, is also evolving. The win-win growth policy can be considered an extension of the win-win cooperation that the past 'Participatory Government' promoted at the enterprise management level to the level of systems and culture. Also, the ecosystemic development agendum that has recently emerged is a further extension that has been presented as a national ideal of "a new development model that promotes the co-advancement of environmental conservation, growth, economic development, social integration, and national and individual development."