Environmental Protest and Policy Change in Korea

Sunhyuk KimDept of Public Administration, Korea Univ

Seongeun ChoInstitute of Governmental Studies, Korea Univ

Contents

Introduction

Theoretical Overview & Methodology

Analysis: Environmental Protest and Policy Change

Ⅰ

Ⅱ

Ⅲ

C ConclusionⅣ

Introduction

Environmental Governance ▪ Growth of environmental movement →Rethinking of the developmental paradigm →Considerable impact on policy, such as cancelling planned construction

Since 1990

Democratic Transition ▪ Relative attention to environmental issues.1987

Rapid Economic Development ▪ Policy of “growth-first, environmental degradation later” ▪ Absence of attention to the environment1960s-80sDemocratic

Transition (1987)

Environmental Governance

(1990-)

▣ Historical trajectory toward a environmental governance in South Korea

Introduction

To explain the relationship between environ-mental protests and policy changes

What effects did environmental protest have on the environmental policy? Which aspects of environmental protest led to environmental policy change?

Research questions

Aim of this research

Theoretical Overview & Methodology

1. Policy Change: A Theoretical Overview1) Determinants of policy change

Previous works

▪ have focused on institutional variables and policy entrepreneurs.

▪ however political and policy changes in Korea have been initiated and propelled by civic mobilization.

This research

▪ focuses on general public and civic groups.

Theoretical Overview & Methodology

1. Policy Change: A Theoretical Overview2) Social protest as a determinant of policy change

Previous works

▪ have been interested in the relationship between socialprotest and policy change

▪ however they have not yet reached a consensus onthe specific contents of which variables affect policy change

This research

▪focuses on different aspects of protest-scope, strategies and methods, the contents and number of demands/grievances, and analyzetheir effects on policy change.

Theoretical Overview & Methodology

2. The Dataset and Methodology1) Dataset: PEDAK(Protest Event Data Archive Korea)

▪ PEDAK is a database based on protest events that took place and were reported in newspapers between 1988 and 2007 in Korea.

▪ PEDAK collects the following data by analyzing and coding newspaper reports on post-transitional popular protests. -Number of protests per year -General measures of protest activities -Sociovocational category of protest participants -Repertoires of contention -Types and contents of protest goals, demands, grievances -Reactions to protest actions

Theoretical Overview & Methodology 2. The Dataset and Methodology2) Variables & Measurement

Variables Measurement

Dependentvariable Policy change No policy change, Policy modified, Policy changed

Independentvariables

Scope-Duration of protest-Number of protest participation

Strategy

Type Violent, Nonviolent but disruptive, Nondisruptive

Consistency/Continuity

No change, Original methods combined with new ones, Original methods replaced by new ones

Legality/Illegality

Legal(0), Illegal(1)

Participants SociovocationBlue-collar working, Unspecified, White-collar working

Demands ContentsEconomic, Political, Ecological , Economic/Politi-cal, Political/Ecological, Economic/Ecological, Economic/Political/Ecological

Number

Analysis: Simple Correlational Coefficients

Policy change

ScopeDuration .000Number of Participants .025

StrategyViolence -.059Consistency/Continuity .008Illegality -.197**

Participants Sociovocational Categories .153

Demands/Grievances

Contents

Political .058Economic .007Political/Ecological -.159*Economic/Ecological -.192*

Political/Economic/Ecological .100

Number .134

*p<0.1, **p<0.05, ***p<0.01

Analysis: Simple Correlational Coefficients

▣ DISCUSSION

Illegality of protest : Negatively correlated with policy change Contents of demand : Political or economic demands to ecological demands seem to be counterproductive in bringing policy change. Protest Scope: Positively correlated with policy change. Violent protest: Negatively correlated with policy change.

Analysis: Multiple Regression

Policy changeB(S.E) Beta

Constant .194(.822)

ScopeDuration -.105(.089) -.164Number of Participants .036(.069) .062

StrategyViolence .785(.439) .458Consistency/Continuity .109(.284) .047Illegality -1.278(.529)** -.613

Participants Sociovocational Categories .366(.198)* .225

Demands/Grievances

Contents

Political .125(.252) .068

Economic .109(.504) .027

Political/Ecological -1.455(.920) -.186

Economic/Ecological -1.311(.600)** -.328

Political/Economic/Ecological -.112(1.015) -.014Number .705(.350)** .287

F-ValueR2

1.733*0.264

Analysis: Multiple Regression

▣ DISCUSSION

R2 of model is 26.4%, Significance level is 0.1. Statistically significant variables: -Legality/illegality of the protest strategies :Illegal protest strategies are less likely to lead to policy change. -Economic/ecological demands/grievances : Ecological demands combined with economic demands seems to decrease the likelihood of policy change. -The number of demands/grievances : As the number of protest demands increase, likelihood of policy change increases.

Conclusion & Implication

Environmental policy change

Strategy

Demand/Grievances

Participants

Conclusion & Implication

▣ ConclusionEnvironmental policy change is significantly affected by protest strategies, demands/grievances, and not by protest scope.

▣ ImplicationIt is not the objective/absolute size of resource mobilization but the subjective/relative usage of strategies and framing of demands/grievances that are far more closely correlated with policy change.

LOGO

THANK YOUAssociation for Public Analysis and Management