바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

logo

  • P-ISSN0023-3900
  • E-ISSN2733-9343

Eochongye Social Capital in Jujeon-dong, Ulsan

Korea Journal, (P)0023-3900; (E)2733-9343
2009, v.49 no.1, pp.5-32
https://doi.org/10.25024/kj.2009.49.1.5

  • Downloaded
  • Viewed

Abstract

A demand for empirical studies on the practical workings of social capital in Korean society is on the rise now that theoretical discussions on social capital have taken root to a certain extent. This paper examines the eochongye (rotating credit system of a fishing village) in Jujeon-dong, Ulsan as a case study in order to verify whether economic efficiency at the individual level harmonizes with—and does not contradict—social justice at the collective level through social capital. Questionnaires were used first to identify the existing type of social capital of the eochongye in Jujeon-dong, after which in-depth interviews were conducted to investigate how this type of social capital works there. Analysis of the questionnaires and in-depth interviews produced the following conclusion: “Philos relationship,” a type of social capital, exists widely and is actually practiced in the intersubjective life world of the Jujeon-dong eochongye where common-pool resources are shared. By way of preventing generalization of values, philos relationship resolves the dilemma of collective action while causing the problem of community. The main reason behind this is the collective memory of cultural trauma of the eochongye.

keywords
social capital generalized reciprocity common-pool resource dilemma of collective action eochongye generalization of values cultural trauma

Reference

1.

Alexander, Jeffrey C. 2004. “Toward a Theory of Cultural Trauma.” In Cultural Trauma and Collective Identity, edited by Jeffrey C. Alexander et al., 1-30. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

2.

Choi, Jongryul. 2004. “Silloe-wa hohyeseong-ui tonghap-ui gwanjeom-eseo barabon sahoe jabon: sahoe jabon gaenyeom-ui inyeomhyeongjeok guseong” (Social Capital from the Integrative Perspective of Trust and Reciprocity: Construction of Ideal Types of Social Capital). Hanguk sahoehak (Korean Journal of Sociology) 38.6: 97-132.

3.

Hardin, Garrett. 1968. “The Tragedy of the Commons.” Science 162: 1243- 1248.

4.

Jacobs, Ronald N. 1996. “Civil Society and Crisis: Culture, Discourse, and the Rodney King Beating.” American Journal of Sociology 101.5: 1238-1272.

5.

Kim, Soo-Hyun. 2002. “Yeonan eoeop-ui jayuljeok gwalli chegye guchuk-e daehan yeongu: chujado-ui maeul eojang iyong sarye-reul jungsim-euro”(Study of Constructing an Autonomous Management System for a Coastal Fishing Industry: Focusing on the Case Study of Village Breeding Ground Usage on Chujado Island). Master’s thesis, Pukyong National University.

6.

Lew, Seok Choon. 2002. “Hanguk-ui sahoe jabon: yeongo jipdan” (Social Capital of Korea: Group Ties). Hanguk-ui simin sahoe, yeongo jipdan, sahoe jabon (Civil Society, Group Ties, and Social Capital of Korea), 149-167. Seoul: Center for Free Enterprise.

7.

Ock, Young-Soo. 2004. Eochongye eoryu yangsigeop-e gwanhan yeongu(Study of Eochongye’s Shellfish Culture Industry). Seoul: Korea Maritime Institute.

8.

Ostrom, Elinor. 1990. Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action. New York: Cambridge University Press.

9.

Polanyi, Karl. 1945. Origins of Our Time: The Great Transformation. London: Gollancz.

10.

Polanyi, Karl. 1957. “The Economy as Instituted Process.” In Trade and Market in the Early Empires: Economies in History and Theory, edited by Karl Polanyi, Conrad M. Arsenberg, and Harry W. Pearson, 243-270. Glencoe, IL: The Free Press.

11.

Putnam, Robert. 1993. Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Korea Journal