This working paper is part of the Asia Democracy Research Network (ADRN) Working Paper Series for 2015-2016. ADRN is an independent network of democracy research institutions across Asia. It analyzes challenges and tasks facing democracy in the region and expands the scope of action-oriented, policy-driven research that supports the advocacy activities of Asian civil society organizations in promoting, consolidating, and deepening democracy. EAI is currently serving as the ADRN secretariat.
Abstract
For students of democratization, the experience of South Korea has been an example of how a nation can successfully transition to and consolidate democracy. However, a number of recent scholarly efforts have begun to lose faith in this assessment, disputing the promises of South Korea’s democracy. This paper endeavors to contribute to an understanding of the current state of South Korea’s democracy by examining the empirical foundations of the debate. According to Jung Kim, the erosion of democracy in South Korea has core roots. First, the erosion of democratic authenticity has originated from the decay of freedom of expression. Second, erosion of the liberal quality of democracy is attributed to the decay of judicial constraints on the executive branch. Third, erosion of the participatory quality of democracy is traced to the decay of participation in civil society. Fourth, the erosion of the deliberative quality of democracy is caused by the decay of engaged society. Lastly, the erosion of democratic depth has its foundations in the increasing inequality in the distribution of resources. The paper concludes that South Korea’s democracy today is in an extremely perilous position from a comparative perspective across nations as well as over time in every dimension of democracy.
Quotes from the Paper
“All in all, South Korea’s place among advanced industrial democracies falls short of our expectations in all dimensions of democratic authenticity, quality, and depth. Out of 34 OECD countries, South Korea ranks 29th in democratic authenticity, 30th in the liberal quality of its democracy, 30th in the participatory quality of its democracy, 29th in the deliberative quality of its democracy, and 28th in democratic depth. In every dimension of democracy, South Korea is one of the six countries–Hungary, Israel, Mexico, Slovakia, and Turkey–that are consistently ranked at the bottom.”
“All in all, since South Korea’s democratic transition in 1987, the nation’s democracy improved considerably in terms of authenticity, quality, and depth up until the late 2000s. Since then, it has substantively worsened in every measurable dimension of democracy, falling back to the level of the early 1990s.”
“It also reveals a consistent downward trend across every dimension of democracy in South Korea over the past ten years: the decay of the freedom of expression critically affects the erosion of democratic authenticity; the decay of judicial constraints on the executive is the main source of the erosion of the liberal quality of democracy; the decay of civil society participation has a significant bearing on the erosion of the participatory quality of democracy; the decay of engaged society is a critical factor in the erosion of the deliberative quality of democracy; and the increasingly unequal distribution of resources is the primary cause of the erosion of democratic depth. In short, it seems as though today South Korea’s democracy has arrived at its most hazardous juncture since its inauguration thirty years ago.”
