KOREA INDUSTRIAL POLICY AND IMPLICATIONS FOR COTE D'IVOIRE
학위논문 (석사) -- 서울대학교 대학원 : 국제대학원 국제학과(국제지역학전공), 2020. 8. 이영섭. ; 코트디부아르는 1960년대 초부터 구조적 변화 과정을 시작했습니다. 이 프로세스에 사용되는 정책은 여전히 효과적이지 않은 것으로 나타났습니다. 그동안 코트디부아르와 비슷한 역사적, 경제적 특성을 공유하고 있는 한국은 3년 만에 경제를 성공적으로 이관한 성공적인 산업정책을 이행했다. 대부분의 문헌은 한국산업정책이 규제국가를 통한 제품순환이론의 개발상태를 통해서만 이같은 이론을 따르고 있다고 주장했지만, 우리는 한국의 역동적인 이론을 주장하고 있다. 한국의 산업정책은 연합적 접근을 따르고 있다. 따라서 이 연구는 한국의 성공사례의 경우 산업화에 의한 구조적 변화를 이루기 위해 연합론이 사용되는 패턴이라고 가정하고 있다. 첫째, 선진국을 이끈 산업 정책의 주요 이론적 접근방식을 분석합니다. 둘째, 연합이론을 적용해 한국산업정책에서 수립된 정책의 패턴을 검토했다. 궁극적으로, 이 논문은 코트디부아르의 미래 국가 계획 개발을 위한 산업 정책을 촉진하기 위한 적절한 전략 교훈을 그립니다. 이 연구에 따르면 1960년부터 1980년까지 LE, SME, HCI와의 강력한 연합 이론이 한국의 산업 정책을 주도해 왔다는 사실이 밝혀졌습니다. 다양한 유형의 기업 내에서의 변화는 Cote d'Ivoire가 국가 주도 기업의 승진을 암시하고 강력한 정부는 더 많은 p 생산 적 부문으로 정책을 전환 할 것입니다. ; Cote d'Ivoire has started its process of structural change since the early 1960s. It turns out that the policies used for this process are still not effective. In the meantime, Korea, which is sharing certain similar historical and economic characteristics with Cote d'Ivoire, implemented within three decades a successful industrial policy that shifted successfully its economy. Whereas most of literature argued that the Korean Industrial Policy is following solely either the statist theory through developmental state either the product cycle theory through regulatory state, we are conducting this analysis by claiming that the dynamic of Korean Industrial policy is following a coalitional approach. Thus, this research is assuming that coalition theory is the pattern used to achieve the structural transformation by industrialization in the case of the Korean success story. First, we analyze the main theoretical approaches of industrial policies that led those advanced countries. Secondly, we applied the coalition theory to examine the pattern of the policy formulated in Korean industrial policy. Ultimately, this paper draws appropriate strategy lessons to promote industrial policy for the development of the future national plan in Cote d'Ivoire. The research found that a strong coalition theory with LEs, SMEs and HCIs, from 1960 to 1980, has led the industrial policy of Korea. The shifting within different types of enterprises is implying for Cote d'Ivoire the promotion of state-led companies and a strong government will to shift the policy towards more p productive sectors. ; CHAPTER ONE: GENERAL INTRODUCTION 1 1.0. Background of the study 1 1.1. Statement of the problem 2 1.2. Research objectives 5 1.3. Research questions and hypothesis 6 1.4. Scope of study and limitations 6 1.5. Research methodology 7 1.6. Significance of the study 9 CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW 11 2.0 Introduction 11 2.1. Definition of main concepts 11 2.1.1. Industrial Policy 11 2.1.2. Structural Transformation 14 2.1.3. Import substitution policy 15 2.1.4. Export-led policy 16 2.2. Theoretical frameworks of industrial policy 18 2.2.1. Developmental state 18 2.2.2. Regulatory State 24 2.2.3. Revisionist or Coalition Theory 27 2.2.4. Product Cycle Theory 33 2.3. Discussion on industrial policy 36 2.3.1. More requirements of industrial policy 36 2.3.2. Failure of european industrial policy 37 2.3.3. The non efficience of industrial policy for growth 38 CHAPTER THREE: ASSESSING ABOUT SOUTH KOREAN INDUSTRIAL POLICY FROM 1960 TO 1980 40 3.0. Introduction 40 3.1. Overview of Korean economic development 41 3.1.1. Per capita income rate from 1950 to 2015 43 3.1.2. Evolution of employement structure 45 3.1.3. Investment, domestic savings and foreign savings 46 3.2. Evolution of Korean industrial policy 47 3.2.1. Large Entreprises (LEs) from 1960 to 1970 49 3.2.2. Coalition with LEs from 60s to 70s 50 3.2.3. HCI from 70s 51 3.2.4. SMEs and LEs since 1980 53 3.2.5. Electronics Industry since 1990 54 3.3. Preliminar findings 56 CHAPTER FOUR : COTE D'IVOIRE INDUSTRIAL POLICY 59 4.0. Introduction 59 4.1. Evolution of ivorian Industrial policy 60 4.1.1 The phase of steady growth : 1960-1980 61 4.1.2. The cyclical growth phase: 1980-1999 63 4.1.3. The phase of socio-political crisis: 2000 to 2011 66 4.1.4. The phase of steady growth : 2012 to today 70 4.2. Comparison Cote d'Ivoire and South Korea 75 4.3. Conclusion and recommendations 81 CHAPTER FIVE: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS 84 5.0. Introduction 84 5.1. Findings from South Korean Industrial policy analysis 84 5.2. Policy implications for Cote d'ivoire industrial policy 85 5.3. Recomendations for further studies 86 5.4. General conclusion 87 REFERENCES 90 추상 94 ; Master
