FILSAFAT KORUPSI - Direktori File UPI

country-level factors affect individuals‘ probability of trusting others, as well as how
country-level factors influence the effects of individual-level factors on social trust
concurrently. Hierarchical models not only enable richer analysis but also solve
statistical problems that conventional methods face.
One problem with statistical analysis of social trust is endogeneity, since social trust
may affect inequality —say, through its effect on corruption and support for
redistribution— because trusting people may tend to act more in a trustworthy and
uncorrupt manner. Ideally, we should have longitudinal data that contain substantial
cross-time variations in social trust, inequality, and corruption, or valid instrumental
variables for inequality and corruption. However, neither adequate longitudinal data nor
appropriate instruments are available. In this situation, it is not possible to establish
causal direction through statistical analysis. Yet, by testing multiple implications of
competing hypotheses, I hope I will be able to provide substantial evidence for either the
fairness or the similarity explanation.
For a comparative historical case study of corruption and social trust, I selected South
Korea (Korea, hereafter) as the primary case and Taiwan and the Philippines as
comparison cases. The selection of Korea is natural for me as a Korean national, because
I am most familiar with Korea. Moreover, Korea has been studied by many scholars as
an important example of a ―relatively uncorrupt‖ developmental state, together with
Taiwan, or as a case of crony capitalism, together with the Philippines. Indeed, Taiwan
and the Philippines are ideal comparison cases.
Korea shares many similarities with Taiwan and the Philippines. The initial economic
conditions in the 1950s and 1960s were not much different among these countries. The
three countries had all experienced colonial rule before the World War II, and were all
heavily supported by the US during the Cold War. They all have been experiencing
democratization processes over the last two decades. Despite the similar initial
conditions, however, the levels of corruption and economic development today are quite
different. Taiwan clearly has a lower level of corruption than the Philippines. Not only
do all the available quantitative measures of (perceived) corruption indicate that fact, but
also no qualitative studies exist to the contrary, to my knowledge. Where, then, is
Korea‘s relative level of corruption located, and why is that so?
Various measures of perceived levels of corruption and of experience of corruption
consistently show that Korea‘s level of corruption has been much lower than that of the
Philippines but somewhat higher than that of Taiwan at least since the early 1980s. Also,
the World Values Surveys show that the level of social trust is much higher in Korea than
in the Philippines but lower than in Taiwan. Inequality of income and wealth in Korea is
much lower than in the Philippines and slightly higher than in Taiwan. Thus, the
correlations between inequality, corruption, and social trust among these three countries
are consistent with my hypotheses.
Since the correlations do not tell us about the causal directions as well as causal
mechanisms, I conduct careful process tracing. In particular, I focus on the role of land
144