Offering gifts or offering bribes? Code of ethics in South Korea

Journal of Third World Studies, Spring 2001 by Chang, Chan Sup, Chang, Nahn Joo, Freese, Barbara T

OFFERING GIFTS OR OFFERING BRIBES? CODE OF ETHICS IN SOUTH KOREA

BY CHAN SUP CHANG, NAHN JOO CHANG, AND BARBARA T. FREESE*

INTRODUCTION

South Korea is experiencing a serious economic crisis that has recently affected other Asian countries. The causes of this crisis have been discussed from many aspects including mismanagement of the powerful chaebol and inefficient banking system. One of the main causes can be traced to ethical issues. Lee1 and Glain2 claim that the entire society of South Korea is corrupt and no one can do business without bribes. They insist that the unethical behavior of Koreans has caused Korea to lose its competitive edge and so has contributed to the significant downturn of the Korean economy.

There are numerous examples of bribes in South Korea. Mr. Roh Tae Woo, former president of South Korea, received a slush fund of $650 million in concealed contributions while he was president from 1988 to 1993.3 Former trade minister Ahn Byong Hwa was sentenced to three years in prison for accepting more than one million dollars in bribes.4 One businessman paid 30 million won ($37,500 at $1=800 won, currently $1=1,164 won) to government officials as bribes while he was applying for a permit to build a factory plant valued at 130 million won ($162,500).5

The unethical behavior of Koreans is not unique in that people in other parts of the world, including Asia, Europe, and the United States, are not exempt from the unethical behavior of corruption and bribes. The purpose of this paper is to examine the ambiguity that exists in South Korea between offering gifts and offering bribes within the context of Oriental culture.

ORIENTAL CULTURE AND THE CODE OF ETHICS

Are Koreans and other Asians more corrupt than Europeans and Americans? The Economist6 states "Corruption is supposedly -so endemic in Asia that it has made Puritanism a competitive issue." Terry McCarthy,7 a Time magazine, reporter raised this issue of ethics when he interviewed Mr. Lee Kuan Yew of Singapore, "Some say the reason there is bribery and corruption is `Asian values'."

These statements imply that Koreans and other Asians exhibit the unethical behavior of corruption and bribery more often than do Europeans and Americans. This implication raises an important issue: whose criteria or standards are applied when the behavior of people in different cultures is compared to an ethical standard?

There seem to be two perspectives on the criteria that are applied to judge whether or not behavior is ethical for people of different cultures. The first perspective is the assumption that there is a universally applicable code of ethics for all people. If behavior complies with this universal code of ethics, it is ethical; otherwise, it is not ethical

The second perspective is the assumption that the code of ethics is culture-bound. According to this perspective, there is no universal or superior code of ethics. Each culture dictates a different code of ethics with which to comply, and ethical behavior is culture-specific. Therefore, behavior that complies with the code of ethics in the culture in which the behavior occurs is ethical. For example, Shunji Hosaka and Yukimasa Nagayasu8 claim that Japanese economic ethics are closely related to Buddhism. Meier Tamari9 describes ethical issues in terms of Jewish perspectives. M. Cherif Bassiouni10 understands the code of ethics from the perspective of Islam.

Can the first perspective--that there is a universal code of ethics--be applied in all cultures? The answer may be yes or no. The answer is yes in the sense that the codes of ethics feature commonly accepted values, such as honesty, obedience to ones parents, not stealing, and not lying. The answer is no in the sense that each culture imposes its own unique code of ethics.

Some attempts have been made to develop a universally applicable code of ethics. For example, both the Carnegie Council of the United States and the Uehiro Foundation of Japan11 established a code of ethics based on the common heritage of virtue ethics. According to them:

The Greek world of Plato and Aristotle and the Chinese world of Confucius were separated by centuries and distance, yet they gave rise to similar ideas, especially regarding concepts of the ideal and the real, and the cultivation of the superior individual. These ideas have become part of the fabric of American and Japanese societies. (p. 11)

These two organizations established a foundation for a universal code of ethics; however, this code of ethics is not universally applicable because it is not accepted in all cultures.

Can the second perspective--that the code of ethics is culturebound--be applied in all cultures? If one agrees with the perspective that ethics are culture-bound, confusion may develop in understanding behavior (ethical or unethical) among people from different cultures. However, a common code of ethical behavior develops among people of different cultures because each culture shares common beliefs and attitudes with others regarding basic human values.