IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/cposxx/v38y2017i1p39-58.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Distorted policy transfer? South Korea’s adaptation of UK social enterprise policy

Author

Listed:
  • Chisung Park
  • Jooha Lee
  • Mark Wilding

Abstract

This study draws upon communicative processes in policy transfer to consider the ways in which policy may be adapted to context or distorted. The theoretical framework is used to investigate exactly what the South Korean government borrowed from UK social enterprise policy. Despite claims that the UK was the source of both the general policy direction and the particular regulatory device, the Korean government did not learn about the specific contexts of the British policy, nor attempt two-way communication with domestic stakeholders. Rather, the UK policy was interpreted in accordance with the Korean government’s own ideas about how to utilize social enterprise. Historical legacies of top-down decision-making played an important role in this process, as did the state’s role as a regulator which mobilizes the private sector to achieve policy goals. The consequences have been negative for those organizations refused social enterprise status under the Ministry of Labor’s strict approval system, as well as for the original target population: the socially disadvantaged and vulnerable. It is suggested that the model advanced may help to illuminate the reasons why some borrowed policies differ considerably from the originals, and the use of policy transfer as a means of legitimization.

Suggested Citation

  • Chisung Park & Jooha Lee & Mark Wilding, 2017. "Distorted policy transfer? South Korea’s adaptation of UK social enterprise policy," Policy Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 38(1), pages 39-58, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:cposxx:v:38:y:2017:i:1:p:39-58
    DOI: 10.1080/01442872.2016.1188904
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/01442872.2016.1188904
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/01442872.2016.1188904?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:cposxx:v:38:y:2017:i:1:p:39-58. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/cpos .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.