Popular in Development Politics
Popular in Department
This 4 page Class Notes was uploaded by Laura Castro Lindarte on Friday February 12, 2016. The Class Notes belongs to PSC 2337 at George Washington University taught by Jessica C. Liao in Spring 2016. Since its upload, it has received 17 views.
Reviews for Week 5
Report this Material
What is Karma?
Karma is the currency of StudySoup.
You can buy or earn more Karma at anytime and redeem it for class notes, study guides, flashcards, and more!
Date Created: 02/12/16
February 9, 2016 Korea vs Greece ● Developmental State:states focused on developing econoased on meritocracy and independent from politics (bureaucracy) ○ Ideal bureaucracy = no corruption ○ Opposite of Latin America where government worries too much about social pressure so focus on inside not trading so no development occurs ○ Kang’s Argument “Asia seemingly neutral bureaucracies, effective politicians and consistent trade policies as central factor in economic growth.” “The state is neutral, pick winners and provide public goods because civil service is inside.” ● Korea is more patrimonithan Greece ● Kang’s challenges and arguments: ○ Look at analytical framework ○ Political explanation ○ Corruption is rampant in Korea ○ Providing public good is result of corruption ○ Coherent Statedecision making concentrated small group ○ Fractured Statdecision inarger group each looking to self ○ Concentrated business sectoew larger playersmall number)n one industry ○ Dispersed business sectoots small player(large numberin one industry ■ Evenly competing ○ If you havright combination you can control corruption: ■ Predatory Stateoherent state, dispersed busintopdown) ■ Rent Seeking:fractured state, concentrated busibottomup) ■ Laissezfairfracture state, dispersed busin(hard to do corruption because too many) a. Most developed advanced democracies ■ Mutual hostage:coherent state, concentrated busin(easy to cancel out corruption) a. Corruption easier to contain ○ Chaebol:Korean familyownedconglomerate of organized firms that cover many sectors of economy ■ Ex: Samsung control all aspects of market ■ Like oligarchy system in all dimensions ○ Late 1990s: ■ Economic crisis due to currency devalue a. Foreigners in these countries took out all money in banks so companies no longer had money ○ Pre1987 Korea:started with Park Chunghee regime (19611979) ■ DPR Party Chunghee had lots of power under party ■ Start to need lots of money for campso get money from large Chaebol companies (patronage because individuals do transactions) ■ Politicians would demand political funds because had ue to American aid, foreign/bank loans and licenses ■ Moral hazard is that politicians have little choices of where to get money and HAVE to give them money ■ At this time only way to get money is from state controlled banks ■ Mutual Hostage:government control over capital madehreat to cut off credit doing so would hurt public sector as much as Chaebol ○ Post1987 Korea:transformed from autocracy to democracy ■ Increased demand for political payoffs for elections shifted advantages the business ■ Based on personal connections ■ Similar to USA but higher level ■ Lack of rule of law in 1990s ○ Conclusion: ■ In rentseeking at the expense of economic efficiency? a. Kang says that even though it is not ideal, it does a good job of helping with economic development. b. Fukuyama says that that it is an incentive that is needed to improve economic investment. ■ Is rentseeking and public goods mutually exclusive? a. No ■ Why does corruption have different outcomes in Korea and Greece? a. Korea has an organized bureaucracy, Greece lacks capital industrialization b. Korea: state before democracy, Greece: democracy before state c. Now Korea is trying to help smaller businesses but it is hard because of corruption February 11, 2016 The End of Clientelism and StateBuilding ● USA in early 1880s: ○ Tammany Hall olitical machine where politicians got elected by giving people jobs in government(aka political boss) ■ More in local government ■ Unlike Europe at this time, USA had little threat so only needed basic military to overlook the borders ○ At the timesociety was still agrarian with small government (libertarian paradise) ○ Government would get money through ustoms taxes had little connection with citizens ○ Small government not enough after 1880s because ondustrial revolution economic development demands more government control and regulation ● Birth of Bureaucracy: ○ The difference between Europe and USA during 1880s ■ Britain passed civil service reform to base all bureaucracy on merit leading to a strong capacity government/bureaucracy ■ In USA those given work by politicians not based on merit (patronage both in federal and state) ■ Due to checks and balances in USA, any big change takes a LONG time ○ Assassination of Garfiy person who thought they were entitled to a specific positioand ended up not being appointed to that position ■ Triggered the creation of National Civil Service Reform League and the 1883 Pendleton Act ● 1883 Pendleton Act: ○ Imposed Civil Service Exato enter bureaucracy ○ Based on the British Civil Service system ○ Revived theCivil Service Commissiond created a meritbased service ■ Still reform was way SLOWER in USA than in Britain ■ Commission was there but not powerful, needed a strong president to help it grow ○ Ended practice of appointees handing back part of their salaries to the party ● Commission was effective whenTheodore Roosevelt was head6 years) ● In local governmentmiddleclass created groups to go against machines ○ Resented that machine giving power to poor by getting them to vote (huge democracy reform) ○ Chicago example of mayor having huge power ● 2 explanations: ○ Economic explanationue to industrial and economic development that change society wilarger middleclass demanding more ○ Ideational explanatiiddleclass start to educate others that then join more people to call for change ○ Both of these fit into each other ● Progressive Coalitiobusiness, middleclass, professionals, urban social reformers ○ Wilson and Eaton brought them together ○ People against elite representing all of society ○ Urban business and manufacture because need better regulation ○ Lawyers, journalists, academics. doctors feel that government should run government ● Leadership: ○ 1886 election: ■ Republican victory ■ Huge domination in both executive and legislative allowed for reform ■ Slow down once Roosevelt leaves office because Taft was unable to fight Congress ■ Social mobilization from bottom and need good leadership to help them reform ■ Gave power to the Northeast business interest and split the democratic south from the coalition ○ Presidency of Theodore Roosevelt andedefining executive leadership ■ Most important is giving power to commission ■ Decreased number of appointees in government ■ Wilson had trouble pushing for reform because not liked by Democrats or Republicans ● Under FDR’s first term there was a setbbecause he wanted to expand government due to Depression and put in a lot of loyalists in government to get ideut in ed b late 1930s the problem was corrected ● Conclusion: ○ Reform took so long in the USA because ohecks and balances ○ Compared to Britain, ■ Hard to compare to Prussia because structure is too different ■ USA reform was super slow due to institutional differences (checks and balances, federalstate) and society size (in Britain it was middleclass fighting for people graduated from specific colleges, in USA middleclass fighting for those that are educated against political machines) ■ Elite in Britain all live in London and all decide to reform because easy to get together while in the USA it is harder to form community because of geography ● Implications for developing countries: ○ Reform is rofoundly political process NOT technical one ■ Won’t happen same in all places because different politics ■ Problem in giving aid and steps to “fix” problem ○ Political coalition favoring rneeds to come from those outside of existing system ○ Ideas are criticin shaping how individuals see their interests ○ Reform takes a LONG time especially for those that saw democracy before state ○ Public sector unions are doubleedge swoecause unions of employees can end up protecting government from reform
Are you sure you want to buy this material for
You're already Subscribed!
Looks like you've already subscribed to StudySoup, you won't need to purchase another subscription to get this material. To access this material simply click 'View Full Document'