Financial structures, firms, and the welfare states in South Korea and Singapore

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

South Korea and Singapore display distinctive patterns of social provision. The Singaporean welfare state has served as the primary provider of social infrastructure and services, whereas the South Korean welfare state has developed its primary role in supporting income maintenance. These differences are not well accounted for in the existing literature, which focuses on similarities between the two regimes. This paper shows that deep institutional legacies in the two countries' respective financial structures powerfully shaped their unique social policy instruments. In South Korea, where financial openness was low and firms relied on relationship-based financing, the corresponding long-term perspectives on production and employment encouraged the private provision of welfare-related infrastructure and services. In Singapore, where firms have relied heavily on arm's length financing, the corresponding flexible investment and employment perspectives encouraged the utilization of private income maintenance arrangements. Each country's government prioritized the mode of social provision that the firms were less willing to engage in. These findings suggest that financial liberalization may be an important determinant of welfare regimes in developing countries.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)327-354
Number of pages28
JournalBusiness and Politics
Volume17
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2015 Aug 1
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

South Korea
welfare state
Singapore
firm
welfare
private provision
social infrastructure
income
mobile social services
liberalization
utilization
developing country
regime
determinants
infrastructure
Welfare state
Financial structure
Financing
Income
literature

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Industrial relations
  • Political Science and International Relations

Cite this

Financial structures, firms, and the welfare states in South Korea and Singapore. / Lim, Sijeong.

In: Business and Politics, Vol. 17, No. 2, 01.08.2015, p. 327-354.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{32c10ceb0600428f813df37b527ff2f8,
title = "Financial structures, firms, and the welfare states in South Korea and Singapore",
abstract = "South Korea and Singapore display distinctive patterns of social provision. The Singaporean welfare state has served as the primary provider of social infrastructure and services, whereas the South Korean welfare state has developed its primary role in supporting income maintenance. These differences are not well accounted for in the existing literature, which focuses on similarities between the two regimes. This paper shows that deep institutional legacies in the two countries' respective financial structures powerfully shaped their unique social policy instruments. In South Korea, where financial openness was low and firms relied on relationship-based financing, the corresponding long-term perspectives on production and employment encouraged the private provision of welfare-related infrastructure and services. In Singapore, where firms have relied heavily on arm's length financing, the corresponding flexible investment and employment perspectives encouraged the utilization of private income maintenance arrangements. Each country's government prioritized the mode of social provision that the firms were less willing to engage in. These findings suggest that financial liberalization may be an important determinant of welfare regimes in developing countries.",
author = "Sijeong Lim",
year = "2015",
month = "8",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1515/bap-2014-0025",
language = "English",
volume = "17",
pages = "327--354",
journal = "Business and Politics",
issn = "1469-3569",
publisher = "Berkeley Electronic Press",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Financial structures, firms, and the welfare states in South Korea and Singapore

AU - Lim, Sijeong

PY - 2015/8/1

Y1 - 2015/8/1

N2 - South Korea and Singapore display distinctive patterns of social provision. The Singaporean welfare state has served as the primary provider of social infrastructure and services, whereas the South Korean welfare state has developed its primary role in supporting income maintenance. These differences are not well accounted for in the existing literature, which focuses on similarities between the two regimes. This paper shows that deep institutional legacies in the two countries' respective financial structures powerfully shaped their unique social policy instruments. In South Korea, where financial openness was low and firms relied on relationship-based financing, the corresponding long-term perspectives on production and employment encouraged the private provision of welfare-related infrastructure and services. In Singapore, where firms have relied heavily on arm's length financing, the corresponding flexible investment and employment perspectives encouraged the utilization of private income maintenance arrangements. Each country's government prioritized the mode of social provision that the firms were less willing to engage in. These findings suggest that financial liberalization may be an important determinant of welfare regimes in developing countries.

AB - South Korea and Singapore display distinctive patterns of social provision. The Singaporean welfare state has served as the primary provider of social infrastructure and services, whereas the South Korean welfare state has developed its primary role in supporting income maintenance. These differences are not well accounted for in the existing literature, which focuses on similarities between the two regimes. This paper shows that deep institutional legacies in the two countries' respective financial structures powerfully shaped their unique social policy instruments. In South Korea, where financial openness was low and firms relied on relationship-based financing, the corresponding long-term perspectives on production and employment encouraged the private provision of welfare-related infrastructure and services. In Singapore, where firms have relied heavily on arm's length financing, the corresponding flexible investment and employment perspectives encouraged the utilization of private income maintenance arrangements. Each country's government prioritized the mode of social provision that the firms were less willing to engage in. These findings suggest that financial liberalization may be an important determinant of welfare regimes in developing countries.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84938524598&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84938524598&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1515/bap-2014-0025

DO - 10.1515/bap-2014-0025

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:84938524598

VL - 17

SP - 327

EP - 354

JO - Business and Politics

JF - Business and Politics

SN - 1469-3569

IS - 2

ER -