Could the British Style of Parliamentary Government Be Successful in the Republic of Korea
0
조회
0
다운로드
1
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Many arguments have been continued on which political system model is better for South Korea. However, most studies on this topic have been done in the viewpoint of the American presidentialism, without any study on a basic question whether or not the American presidential system is fit or not to the South Korean case which has many different cultural backgrounds from the American case. The South Korean presidential system has revealed some problems and will continue to raise them. Especially there seem to be a serious dilemma between democratic control of government and effective government and it seems to be not so easy to make a harmony of them in the Korean case. Then, could the parliamentary system be an alternative to the presidential system, now in South Korea? This study has tried to solve this question, analyzing the British style of parliamentary system, especially focusing on why the cabinet system is successful in Britain. Here the word successful means the accord of democratic control and effective government in a country, as reviewed in theory. This study has considered various causal factors for this success, such as political system, electoral system, political party system, and other political cultural backgrounds. And this study has compared these factors to those of South Korea and tried to find any similarity or difference between them. This comparative study on the causal factors could say that there are more similarities between the South Korean case and the British than between the South Korean and the American. Therefore, the British style of parliamentary system could be more successful in South Korea than the American presidential system.
Abstract
Many arguments have been continued on which political system model is better for South Korea. However, most studies on this topic have been done in the viewpoint of the American presidentialism, without any study on a basic question whether or not the American presidential system is fit or not to the South Korean case which has many different cultural backgrounds from the American case. The South Korean presidential system has revealed some problems and will continue to raise them. Especially there seem to be a serious dilemma between democratic control of government and effective government and it seems to be not so easy to make a harmony of them in the Korean case. Then, could the parliamentary system be an alternative to the presidential system, now in South Korea? This study has tried to solve this question, analyzing the British style of parliamentary system, especially focusing on why the cabinet system is successful in Britain. Here the word successful means the accord of democratic control and effective government in a country, as reviewed in theory. This study has considered various causal factors for this success, such as political system, electoral system, political party system, and other political cultural backgrounds. And this study has compared these factors to those of South Korea and tried to find any similarity or difference between them. This comparative study on the causal factors could say that there are more similarities between the South Korean case and the British than between the South Korean and the American. Therefore, the British style of parliamentary system could be more successful in South Korea than the American presidential system.
참고문헌 (30)
- Ahn. Hae-kyun, "Han'guk Haengjong Ch'ejeron (Korean administrative system)" (1986), Seoul National University Press
- Ahn, Pyong-chun, "Han'guk e Isso'so Kucga, Sahoe mit Chongchi, In Hyondae Han'guk Chongchi wa Kucga" (1986), Pommunsa
- Ahn, Pyong-man, "Han'guk Chongburon" (1993), Tasan Ch'ulpansa
- Beer, Samuel. H., "The British Political System" (1974), Random House
- Brady, David W., "The Causes and Consequences of Divided Government: Toward a New Theory of American Politics", American Political Science Review, 87(1), pp.221~234 (1993)
- Cotton, James, "Understanding the State in South Korea Bureaucratic-Authoritarian or State Autonomy Theory", Comparative Political Studies, 24(4), pp.425~438 (1992)
- Coxall, Bill, "Contemporary British Politics" (2003), Palgrave Maccmillan
- Dunleavy, Patrick, "Leaders, Politics and Institutional Change: The Decline of Prime Ministerial Accountability to the House of Commons, 1868-1990", British Journal of Political Science, 23(3), pp.303~318 (1993)
- Forman, F. N., "Mastering British Politics" (1996), MacMillan
- Fukuyama, Francis, "Confucianism and Democracy", Journal of Democracy, 6(2), pp.89~114 (1995)
- Graham, Lawrence S., "Politics and Government" (1994), Chatham House Publishers, Inc
- Horowitz, Donald L., "Comparing Democratic Systems", Journal of Democracy, 4(1), pp.79~86 (1990)
- Jack, Malcolm, "Parliament's Role as a Check on Government", Parliamentary Affairs, 38(2), pp.355~366 (1985)
- 차지은, "The Gap between Discourse and Budget Reality: A Preliminary Analysis of the UK Coalition Government’s Social Service Policy", 한국비교정부학보, 16(1), pp.27~42 (2012), 한국비교정부학회[DOI]
- Kang, David C., "Understanding Korean Politics" (2001), State University of New York Press
- Jang Seok Kang, "Conflict management in divisive legislatures:a theory and its application to Korean legislative conflicts", 박사, pp.1988
- Kavanagh, Dennis, "British Politics: Continuities and Change" (1990), Oxford University Press
- 엄기홍, "Campaign Contribution Limits and Strategic Political Parties: Empirical Analysis of Gubernatorial Elections in the American States", 한국비교정부학보, 16(1), pp.1~26 (2012), 한국비교정부학회[DOI]
- Kim, Kwang Woong, "Five years of Democratisation: Faction and Fiction", Korea Focus, 1(1), pp.19~32 (1993)
- Kukhoe Samucho, "Kukhoe Kyongkwa Pogoso (the reports on the Proceedings of the National Assembly) (from the 5th to the 18th)" (2008), Kukhoe Samucho
- Lee, Chi-hun, "Han'guk Chongchi Munwha ui Kibon Yoin", Han'guk Chongchi Hakhoebo, 16, pp.35~52 (1982)
- Lijphart, Arend, "Parliamentary versus Presidential Government" (1992), Oxford University Press
- Lord Hunt, "Being a Minister", Lecture paper for the Hansard Society, ~ (2004)
- Norton, Philip, "In Defence of the Constitution", Unpublished paper addressed to a seminar of the Department of Politics of the University of Sheffield, ~ (1993)
- Norton, Philip, "Parliaments: A Framework for Analysis and Parliament in the United Kingdom: Balancing Effectiveness and Consent", West European Politics, 13(3), pp.121~138 (1990)
- Pious, Richard, "Which System Does Work Best?; Concluding Reflections", Political Science Quarterly, 109(3), pp.113~120 (1994)
- Weaver, R. Kent, "Assessing the Effects of Institutions, In Do Institutions Matters" (1993), The Brookings Institution
- Williams, Andy, "UK Government & Politics" (1998), Heinenmann
- Willis, Michael, "Democracy and the State, 1830-1945" (1999), Cambridge University Press
- Yang, Sung-chul, "The North and South Korean Political System" (1994), Westerview Press