IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/policy/v48y2015i3p319-338.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Is “legitimized” policy always successful? Policy legitimacy and cultural policy in Korea

Author

Listed:
  • Chisung Park
  • Jooha Lee
  • Changho Chung

Abstract

This study aims to provide a new three-way typology of policy legitimacy (i.e., substantive legitimacy, procedural legitimacy, and feasibility-centered legitimacy), while taking into account the relationship between politics (elected officials) and administration (unelected officials) as one of the most significant but under-discussed issues in the studies of policy legitimacy. This analytical framework is used to investigate the empirical case of South Korea’s cultural policy. The sequential causal relations between the three types of legitimacy and policy outcomes are then discussed. The case analysis demonstrates that the substantive and procedural legitimacy achieved in the earlier stages of the policy process were not enough to guarantee a successful policy outcome, and hence, feasibility-centered legitimacy was needed as a necessary condition for policy success. If there is a lack of consistency among the three types of legitimacy and coordination issues between elected and unelected officials in the legitimization process, seemingly legitimate policies could have unsuccessful outcomes. This study will contribute to the theoretical advancement of policy legitimacy and to the empirical examination of the legitimization process in recently democratized countries like Korea. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Suggested Citation

  • Chisung Park & Jooha Lee & Changho Chung, 2015. "Is “legitimized” policy always successful? Policy legitimacy and cultural policy in Korea," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 48(3), pages 319-338, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:policy:v:48:y:2015:i:3:p:319-338
    DOI: 10.1007/s11077-015-9220-2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s11077-015-9220-2
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11077-015-9220-2?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.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Michael Howlett & Ishani Mukherjee, 2014. "Policy Design and Non-Design: Towards a Spectrum of Policy Formulation Types," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 2(2), pages 57-71.
    2. Pablo Gilabert & Holly Lawford-Smith, 2012. "Political Feasibility: A Conceptual Exploration," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 60(4), pages 809-825, December.
    3. Scharpf, Fritz W., 1998. "Interdependence and democratic legitimation," MPIfG Working Paper 98/2, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.
    4. John Parkinson, 2003. "Legitimacy Problems in Deliberative Democracy," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 51(1), pages 180-196, March.
    5. Atkinson, Michael M. & Coleman, William D., 1989. "Strong States and Weak States: Sectoral Policy Networks in Advanced Capitalist Economies," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 19(1), pages 47-67, January.
    6. Lijphart, Arend, 1971. "Comparative Politics and the Comparative Method," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 65(3), pages 682-693, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Chisung Park & Jooha Lee, 2020. "Stakeholder framing, communicative interaction, and policy legitimacy: anti-smoking policy in South Korea," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 53(4), pages 637-665, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Levi-Faur, David, 2003. "Comparative Research Designs in the Study of Regulation: How to Increase the Number of Cases Without Compromising the Strengths of Case-Oriented Analysis," Centre on Regulation and Competition (CRC) Working papers 30695, University of Manchester, Institute for Development Policy and Management (IDPM).
    2. Chris F. Wright, 2017. "Employer Organizations and Labour Immigration Policy in Australia and the United Kingdom: The Power of Political Salience and Social Institutional Legacies," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 55(2), pages 347-371, June.
    3. Petteri Repo & Kaisa Matschoss, 2019. "Social Innovation for Sustainability Challenges," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-12, December.
    4. Jennifer Robinson, 2011. "Cities in a World of Cities: The Comparative Gesture," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(1), pages 1-23, January.
    5. Gisselquist, Rachel M., 2020. "How the cases you choose affect the answers you get, revisited," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    6. Dishil Shrimankar, 2023. "Comparative Assessments of Indian Democracy," Studies in Indian Politics, , vol. 11(1), pages 134-139, June.
    7. Michael Haus & David Sweeting, 2006. "Local Democracy and Political Leadership: Drawing a Map," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 54(2), pages 267-288, June.
    8. Rachel M. Gisselquist, 2018. "Legal empowerment and group-based inequality," WIDER Working Paper Series 039, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    9. Andrew Murray Faure, 1994. "Some Methodological Problems in Comparative Politics," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 6(3), pages 307-322, July.
    10. Kristin Bergtora Sandvik & Ingunn Bjørhaug & Astrid Espegren & Adèle Garnier, 2023. "Protecting skilled Afghan women: Brain save and the politics of vulnerability," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 14(1), pages 5-15, February.
    11. Virginie Boutueil & Thomas Quillerier & Anna Voskoboynikova, 2019. "Benefits and Pitfalls of Deregulating Taxi Markets: Can Contrasted Case Studies Help Inform the Debate?," Post-Print hal-02422160, HAL.
    12. Cacace, Mirella & Ettelt, Stefanie & Mays, Nicholas & Nolte, Ellen, 2013. "Assessing quality in cross-country comparisons of health systems and policies: Towards a set of generic quality criteria," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 112(1), pages 156-162.
    13. Sangbum Shin & Taedong Lee, 2021. "Credible Empowerment and Deliberative Participation: A Comparative Study of Two Nuclear Energy Policy Deliberation Cases in Korea," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 38(1), pages 97-112, January.
    14. Huiqi Yan & Jeroen van der Heijden & Benjamin van Rooij, 2017. "Symmetric and asymmetric motivations for compliance and violation: A crisp set qualitative comparative analysis of Chinese farmers," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 11(1), pages 64-80, March.
    15. Mathieu Rousselin, 2012. "The EU as a Multilateral Rule Exporter - The Global Transfer of European Rules via International Organizations," KFG Working Papers p0048, Free University Berlin.
    16. Sovacool, Benjamin K. & Van de Graaf, Thijs, 2018. "Building or stumbling blocks? Assessing the performance of polycentric energy and climate governance networks," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 317-324.
    17. Justin Reedy & Raymond Orr & Paul Spicer & Jessica W. Blanchard & Vanessa Y. Hiratsuka & Terry S. Ketchum & Bobby Saunkeah & Kyle Wark & R. Brian Woodbury, 2020. "Deliberative democracy and historical perspectives on American Indian/Alaska native political decision-making practices," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 7(1), pages 1-11, December.
    18. Mathias Lund Larsen, 2023. "Bottom-up market-facilitation and top-down market-steering: comparing and conceptualizing green finance approaches in the EU and China," Asia Europe Journal, Springer, vol. 21(1), pages 61-80, March.
    19. Giliberto Capano & Benedetto Lepori, 2024. "Designing policies that could work: understanding the interaction between policy design spaces and organizational responses in public sector," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 57(1), pages 53-82, March.
    20. Roth, Felix, 2024. "Is Generalized Trust Stable over Time?," Hamburg Discussion Papers in International Economics 15, University of Hamburg, Department of Economics, revised 2024.

    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:kap:policy:v:48:y:2015:i:3:p:319-338. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.