韓國經濟의 成果에 대한 세 見解-1960~70年代를 中心으로-

Three Views of the Korean Economy, with reference to Its Performance in the 1960s and 1970s

The purpose of this paper is to classify and compare various views on Korean economic performance in the 1960s and 1970s. These views which are expressed in materials written mostly during the 1970s are lined up, according to their positions : a) the neo-classical school, b) the dependency school and c) the structuralists. The neo-classical school, at the positive end of the spectrum, regard the Korean economy as a model of success for developing countries and admire its rapid growth through export expansion. The dependency school, in the opposing camp. believe that Korea's growth led to deepening economic dependence, with undesirable social costs. The third group, the structuralists, do not accept or reject the value of export-led growth per se but rather are critical of what they believe to be structural distortions in the ecomomy arising from the nature of growth followed. Though the efforts of each of these three groups are useful in revealing some aspects of the Korean economy, they have failed to present an adquate analytical framework for evaluating the structural development of the economy. The neo-classical school have uncritically equated aggregate output growth with structural development or progress. The arguments of the dependency school are rigidly guided by their own perceptions, not based on concrete analyses. Among the Korean structuralists, there is an evident streak of nationalism, and their concept or standard of 'self-reliance' is not very clear. They have rather adopted a somewhat piecemeal approach. This paper, lastly, points out the necessity and importance of a systematic comparison and evaluation of various views of the Korean economy which have been mounting up. Two useful ways for this are suggested : a) micro-comparisons by fields and b) building-up of a comprehensive analytical framework.