World Development,Vol.22,No.9.pp.1269-1293.1994 Pergamon Copyright1994 Elsevier Science Ltd Printed in Great Britain.All rights reserved 0305-750X/94$7.00+0.00 0305.750X(94)00051-4 Where Do High Growth Political Economies Come From?The Japanese Lineage of Korea's "Developmental State" ATUL KOHLI* Princeton University.New lersey Summary.-While many scholars have sought to analyze South Korea's economic success,not enough attention has been paid to the impact of Japanese colonialism.Japanese colonial influence on Korea in 1905-45.while brutal and humiliating,was also decisive in shaping a political economy that later evolved into the high-growth South Korean path to development.More specifically,three state- society characteristics that we now readily associate as elements of the South Korean "model"originated during the colonial period:Korean state under the Japanese influence was transformed from a relatively corrupt and ineffective social institution into a highly authoritarian,penetrating organization,capable of simultaneously controlling and transforming Korean society:production-oriented alliances involving the state and dominant classes evolved,leading up to considerable expansion of manufacturing,including "exports:"and the lower classes in both the city and the countryside came to be systematically con- trolled by the state and dominant classes.While there were impurtan discontinuities following WWIl. when the dust settled.South Korea under Park Chung-Hee fell back into the grooves of colonial origins and traveled along them,well into the 1980s. Questions about the wide range of (economic)perfor- ment,the current debate bogs down over the interpre- mance of underdeveloped countries today ..belong as tation of this role,i.e.over the extent to which state much to history as (they)do to economic analysis. intervention was "market conforming"versus "mar- Sir Arthur Lewis ket distorting,"or to use a related set of concepts,the [We]turn to history and only to history if what we are extent to which the state "led"rather than"followed" seeking are the actual causes,sources,and conditions of the market.2 overt changes of patterns and structures in society. Interesting and significant as this debate is,it is Robert Nisbet also incomplete,Much of it revolves around unravel- ing the economic role of the South Korean state and,in turn.tracing the impact of this role on economic out- 1.INTRODUCTION comes.The prior question of why the South Korean state was able to do what it did,and the related genetic Three decades of sustained.high economic growth issue of the historical roots of the Korean political has made South Korea a "model of development." economy thus tend to be underemphasized.Since Performance of other developing countries is now there is much to be learned about the Korean"model often judged against that of "East Asian newly indus- of development"by adopting a longer historical per- trializing countries (NICs),"including South Korea. Scholars and policy makers around the world have become curious:"How did South Korea do it?;"Can *I would like to acknowledge the helpful comments of the others learn from the experience?"A large body of lit- anonymous reviewers and the following:Bruce Cumings erature has developed-some of it of rather high Anthony D'Costa,Frank Dobbin,Cary Fraser,Stephan quality-attempting to interpret the Korean political Haggard,Koichi Hamada,Chung-in Moon.James Palais. economy.A central debate in this literature concerns Gustav Ranis,Benjamin Schneider,Robert Wade and John the relative roles of the state and of the market in Waterbury.This paper was written during 1992-93.while I was on sabbatical and,thanks to T.N.Srinivasan.a visitor at explaining South Korea's economic success.While the Economic Growth Center.Yale University.Financial hardly any sensible observer continues to deny the support from Ford Foundation is also acknowledged.Final state's extensive role in Korean economic develop- revision accepted:March 15,1994. 1269Pergamon World Developpmenr, Vol. 22, No. 9, pp. 1269-l 293, 1994 Copyright 0 1994 Elsevier Science Ltd Printed in Great Britain. All rights reserved 0305-750x/94 $7.00 + 0.00 0305-750x(94)00051-4 Where Do High Growth Political Economies Come From? The Japanese Lineage of Korea’s “Developmental State” ATUL KOHLI* Princeton University, New Jersey Summary. - While many scholars have sought to analyze South Korea’s economic success, not enough attention has been paid to the impact of Japanese colonialism. Japanese colonial influence on Korea in 1905-45, while brutal and humiliating, was also decisive in shaping a political economy that later evolved into the high-growth South Korean path to development. More specifically, three state￾society characteristics that we now readily associate as elements of the South Korean “model” originated during the colonial period: Korean state under the Japanese influence was transformed from a relatively corrupt and ineffective social institution into a highly authoritarian, penetrating organization, capable of simultaneously controlling and transforming Korean society; production-oriented alliances involving the state and dominant classes evolved, leading up to considerable expansion of manufacturing, including “exports;” and the lower classes in both the city and the countryside came to be systematically con￾trolled by the state and dominant classes. While there were important discontinuities following WWII. when the dust settled, South Korea under Park Chung-Hee fell back into the grooves of colonial origins and traveled along them, well into the 1980s Questions about the wide range of (economic) perfor￾mance of underdeveloped countries today . belong as much to history as (they) do to economic analysis. Sir Arthur Lewis [We] turn to history and only to history if what we are seeking are the actual causes, sources, and conditions of overt changes of patterns and structures in society. Robert Nisbet 1, INTRODUCTION Three decades of sustained, high economic growth has made South Korea a “model of development.” Performance of other developing countries is now often judged against that of “East Asian newly indus￾trializing countries (NICs),” including South Korea. Scholars and policy makers around the world have become curious: “How did South Korea do it?; “Can others learn from the experience?” A large body of lit￾erature has developed - some of it of rather high quality - attempting to interpret the Korean political economy.’ A central debate in this literature concerns the relative roles of the state and of the market in explaining South Korea’s economic success. While hardly any sensible observer continues to deny the state’s extensive role in Korean economic develop￾ment, the current debate bogs down over the interpre￾tation of this role, i.e. over the extent to which state intervention was “market conforming” versus “mar￾ket distorting,” or to use a related set of concepts, the extent to which the state “led” rather than “followed” the market.’ Interesting and significant as this debate is, it is also incomplete. Much of it revolves around unravel￾ing the economic role of the South Korean state and, in turn, tracing the impact of this role on economic out￾comes. The prior question of why the South Korean state was able to do what it did, and the related genetic issue of the historical roots of the Korean political economy thus tend to be underemphasized. Since there is much to be learned about the Korean “model of development” by adopting a longer historical per- *I would like to acknowledge the helpful comments of the anonymous reviewers and the following: Bruce Cumings. Anthony D’Costa, Frank Dobbin, Cary Fraser, Stephan Haggard, Koichi Hamada, Chung-in Moon, James Palais, Gustav Ranis, Benjamin Schneider, Robert Wade and John Waterbury. This paper was written during 1992-93, while I was on sabbatical and, thanks to T. N. Srinivasan. a visitor at the Economic Growth Center, Yale University. Financial support from Ford Foundation is also acknowledged. Final revision accepted: March 15, 1994. 1269