Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t8hqh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T15:05:37.329Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Politics, Economy, and Dynamics of Presidential Popularity in the Kim Dae Jung Government in South Korea

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 March 2016

Hoon Jaung
Hoon Jaung*
Affiliation:
Chung-Ang University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

What determines the public evaluation of South Korean president? Is it a temporal cycle of presidential tenure, the economy or political events? This paper explores these questions by examining the case of President Kim Dae Jung who enjoyed high popularity in the early phase of his tenure but experienced consistent decline of popularity after 18 months in office, much like his predecessors did. The paper argues that the high and low of public support for the president is not simply a function of the temporal cycle and that the fluctuation of public rating is strongly influenced by the public's consideration of economic matters and corruption scandals. In the case of the current South Korean president, one's performance in resuscitating the economy could not rescue a president besieged by one corruption scandal after another. Also, the improved economic conditions did not save Kim Dae Jung's public approval rate from tumbling, because reforms failed to alleviate the economic hardship felt by the lower class. All of this demonstrates that the public does separate economic and political issues and weigh them disproportionately in evaluating presidential performance.

Type
Regional Report
Information
Journal of East Asian Studies , Volume 2 , Issue 1 , February 2002 , pp. 241 - 259
Copyright
Copyright © East Asia Institute 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bates, R. 1981. Markets and States in Tropical Africa. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Brace, Paul and Hinckley, Barbara. 1991. The Structure of Presidential Approval: Constraints within and across Presidencies. Journal of Politics 53(4): 993–1017.Google Scholar
Haggard, Stephan and Webb, Steven. 1994. Voting for Reform: Democracy, Political Liberalization and Economic Adjustment. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Jeong, Yong-duk. 2001. Korean State Institutions and Administration Reform. In Crisis and Response of Korean Political Economy, edited by Korean Political Science Association. Seoul: Oruem.Google Scholar
Kahneman, D. and Tversky, A. 1979. Prospect Theory. Econometrica 47: 263–291.Google Scholar
Kim, Byung-Kook. 2000. The Politics of Crisis and Crisis of Politics: The Presidency of Kim Dae Jung. In Korea Briefing 1997–1999 Challenges and Changes at the Turn of the Century, edited by Oh, Kongdan. New York: M.E. Sharpe Google Scholar
Kim, Chae-Han. 1993. The 14th Presidential Election and the Korean Economy. (In Korean). Korean Political Science Review 27: 99–120.Google Scholar
Kim, Young Bum. 2001. Changes in Social Policies after the Economic Crisis. (In Korean). Korean Sociological Review 35: 31–57.Google Scholar
Krosnick, Jon and Kinder, Donald. 1990. Altering the Foundations of Support for the President through Priming. American Political Science Review 84: 497–512.Google Scholar
Lee, Hyun-Woo. 1998. Economic Voting in Korea. In Election in Korea 2: The 15th Presidential Election, edited by Lee, Namyoung. Seoul: Pooruengil.Google Scholar
MacKuen, Michael. 1983. Political Drama, Economic Conditions, and the Dynamics of Presidential Popularity. American Journal of Political Science 27: 165–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mo, Jongryn. 2001. Strong government and the Challenge of Democratic Governance. Korea Focus 9.Google Scholar
Moon, Chung-In and Mo, Jongryn. 2000. Economic Crisis and Structural Reforms in South Korea: Assessments and Implications. Washington: Economic Strategy Institute.Google Scholar
Ostrom, Charles and Simon, Dennis. 1985. Promise and Performance: A Dynamic Model of Presidential Popularity. American Political Science Review 79: 334–358.Google Scholar
Payne, J., Bettman, J., and Johnson, E. 1992. Behavioral Decision research. Annual Review of Psychology 43: 87–131.Google Scholar
Roberts, K. 1995. Neoliberalism and the Transformation of Populism in Latin America. World Politics 48: 82–116.Google Scholar
Shin, Doh. C. 1999. Mass Politics and Culture in Democratizing Korea. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Walton, J. and Ragin, Charles. 1990. Global and National Sources of Political Protest. American Sociological Review 55: 876–890.Google Scholar
Weyland, Kurt. The Political Fate of Market Reform in Latin America, Africa and Eastern Europe. International Studies Quarterly 42: 645–674.CrossRefGoogle Scholar