Poisoned Prosperity: Development, Modernization, and the Environment in South Korea (review)

Abstract

1 30KOREAN STUDIES, VOL. 21 tions for the difficulties Korea has experienced in its efforts to transform itself into a modern society and nation. Chung argues, in fact, that this transformation has not yet been completed. As he notes, "beneath the surface . . . one can still discern the traditional religious-cultural beliefs and values. But the traditional culture can no longer adequately respond to the challenges of the contemporary world. And Korea has not yet found a new pattern to provide an alternate social order, justice, and meaning of life. Therefore, Korea today finds itself in transition, a stasis of moral disorientation that explains much about it various trials" (229-230). Robert R. Swartout, Jr. Carroll College Poisoned Prosperity: Development, Modernization, and the Environment in South Korea, by Norman Eder. Armonk: M. E. Sharpe. 192 pp. $54.95 cloth, $21.95 paper. This book deals with an interesting and timely topic: the environmental costs of industrialization in Korea. In some ways, the story is well known—following the destruction of the Korean War, the nation embarked on a path of modernization and development, which came at the cost of human rights and the environment. This particular book, a case study of South Korea, comes at an interesting point in time. It is timely in that many Koreans, having reached a relatively high level of prosperity, have become increasingly concerned about the physical environment, public health, and the human costs of industrialization . This book has also come when Korea has embarked on a path of democratization , decentralization, and devolution of government. The time is ripe for discussion of the issues raised in this book. Eder paints his picture with broad strokes, which may seem a bit too gross and overgeneralized for Korean scholars and those familiar with the political economy of Korean development. Like other "case studies," the underlying theoretical assumptions and framework are not altogether clear. It reads as a "factual" recounting of environmental conditions and various events in the modern period, but also contains some analysis, some prescription, and a normative tone, which is captured in text, photographs, and in concluding sections . After describing the "costs of industrialization," Eder proceeds to review environmental administration in Korea (chap. 2), covering environmental law (chap. 3), as well as nongovernmental organizations (chap. 5). He also devotes a chapter to "the forces of change: prosperity, democratization, and internationalization " (chap. 4), and another one to internationalization (chap. 6). His concluding chapter is on "environmental stability and the prospects for progress." BOOK REVIEWS131 The strength of this book lies in its readability and its accessibility to a broad sector of the population. It assumes little or no knowledge or understanding of Korea. It seems to have been written for people interested in environmental issues, but who have little real knowledge of Korea. While it contains limited technical data on environmental conditions, it offers very little analysis of environmental indicators and their relationship to public health. There are few, if any, direct comparisons to technical standards that have been promulgated in the U.S. or elsewhere. From the perspective of environmental science, Eder fails to provide sufficient detail about biophysical or cultural factors associated with environmental quality. He offers little discussion of the unique physical landscape, nor of fauna, flora, wildlife, or other aspects of natural science that might be of interest to environmentalists. The underlying assumption is that industries pollute, that Korea has had much industrial development, and therefore that conditions must be far worse than before. This may be true, but the evidence he cites is not very compelling. Moreover, the data he presents (although somewhat outdated) suggest that, contrary to the main thesis of the book, pollution levels in most cities are on die decline. For example, between 1984 and 1992, the average SO2 in Seoul has dropped from .066 to .035 ppm, and in Pusan from .050 to .033 (7). The same can be said for suspended particulates. As a frequent traveler to Seoul, it is hard for me to believe that the city currently suffers "air pollution levels slightly below those of Mexico City, which has been long known for having the most polluted air of the world's major urban centers...