Reform Experiences in Latin America and Britain:Their Implications for KoreaWon-Ho Kim/Chong Wha Lee/Cheol-Won LeeKi-Su Kwon/Jin-O Kim

Up until the mid-1980s, Latin America experienced repeated periods of political and economic crisis. The region was characterized by a deeply rooted dictatorial form of political governance, and by class, regional, ethnic and social conflict. Moreover, the growing fiscal deficits caused by negligent handling of public finances and deep-rooted inflation on the part of the military regimes increased the need for reforms. From the late 1980s, a new form of government emerged. Governments began to pursue market-oriented reform policies such as privatization of state enterprises, trade liberalization and deregulation. From 1979, the British government under Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher sought drastic structural reforms such as industrial restructuring, privatization of state enterprises, deregulation of economic activities, labor market reform and renovation of the bureaucratic framework. The success of these reforms led many to regard Britain as the most advanced among the OECD countries in terms of its ability to implement effective economic changes.

There are several lessons one can extract from the experiences of reform among the four countries of Latin America--Mexico, Argentina, Brazil and Chile--and Britain.First, the reform must be wide-ranging. An economic crisis, such as a currency crisis, has the potential to propel economic reforms. However, economic reforms cannot be successful unless they are pursued parallel to political and social reforms. Previous attempts to implement market-oriented reforms in the Latin American countries in the wake of the economic crises of the early 1980s were hindered by the military dictatorships which held the reins of power. It was not until these regimes stepped down and popularly elected administrations took over that these reform attempts began to bear fruit. However, further political and social reforms are necessary among many Latin American countries. While Chile has been relatively successful in building a transparent political apparatus, deep-rooted corruption in Argentina and Brazil has continued to impede the reform process in those nations. There also remains a social structure of conflict between the capitalist and labor/peasant classes in Latin America, and between the white ruling class and the native/mestizo-dominated class. The social instability now arising from the latter conflict is preventing further market-economy reforms.Secondly, political stability is also crucial for an environment conducive to reform.

Even though the countries of Latin America have been redemocratized since mid-1980s, political instability remains partly due to the overflow and disorganization of political parties, and the lingering remnants of authoritarian rule. This can seriously hinder reform legislation, which in the recent case of Brazil precipitated an economic crisis. Britain, on the other hand, was able to put the reform measures into effect under an environment of political stability under Prime Minister Thatcher's nine years of governance.The third lesson that can be extracted is that reform must be based on market principles. After the currency crises, the Latin American countries and Britain carried out core economic reforms such as slimming of the bureaucratic structure, reduction of public debt, privatization of state enterprises, financial reform, deregulation, and promotion of labor market flexibility and an open economy. Similar economic reforms have been or are being put into effect by Asian countries in an attempt to heal their economies following the region-wide crash that began in late 1997.A fourth conclusion is that consistency and continuity in reform constitute crucial factors for a successful reform. During its 1976 currency crisis and 1982 foreign debt crisis, Mexico attempted to carry out reforms. For political reasons, however, the reform process was abandoned within two to three years of implementation, allowing the crisis to re-emerge. On the other hand, the reformist efforts in Britain since the early 1980s worked well under the policy consistency by Prime Minister Thatcher.Fifth, it is important to establish labor stability. The common dilemma of increased unemployment and the shrinking of the middle class have been a recurring problem in the process of reform. In 1976, a general strike among British workers led to the ouster of the James Callaghan administration. Similarly, labor instability in Latin American countries lies dormant just beneath the surface, threatening decisive reform efforts. In establishing labor stability, it is important to uphold the principles of a market economy: free and impartial competition, and consent on the outcome of competition. It is also necessary to eliminate the sense of alienation felt by workers, by instituting measures to reduce unemployment, expand the social safety net, ensure a more equal distribution of wealth, and promote employees participation in management and ownership.

The final lesson to be learned is the importance of reform supervision. It is important to maintain the direction and the adequate supervision of the reform process. The role of the government should ideally change over time. In the initial stage of reform, the governments's direct intervention is unavoidable. As reforms are carried out, though, the government's role--supervision of the institutions operation, analysis of effectiveness, and institutional improvement--should shift to a more indirect one.

I. 중남미 주요국의 개혁추진과 시사점
1. 중남미 정치경제의 역사적 특징
2. 개혁과정
3. 국가별 개혁공과와 시사점

I-1. 멕시코의 개혁추진과 시사점
1. 1980년대 이전 멕시코의 정치경제
2. 1982년대의 외채위기와 극복의 한계
3. 1994년 외환위기와 개혁정책
4. 평가 및 시사점

I-2. 아르헨티나의 개혁추진과 시사점
1. 개혁의 배경
2. 개혁의 결과
3. 평가 및 시사점

I-3. 브라질의 개혁추진과 시사점
1. 개혁의 배경
2. 개혁의 내용
3. 개혁의 결과
4. 평가 및 시사점

I-4. 칠레의 개혁추진과 시사점
1. 개요
2. 피노체트 군사정부의 개혁(1973～1981년)
3. 1982년 외채위기와 군사정부의 제2단계 개혁
4. 민선정부의 개혁(1990년 이후)
5. 평가 및 시사점

Ⅱ. 영국의 개혁추진과 시사점
1. 개혁의 배경: 외환위기의 발생과 노동당 정권의 몰락
2. 대처수상의 개혁내용
3. 개혁의 결과
4. 평가 및 시사점

Ⅲ. 결론
1. 총체적 국가개혁의 필요성
2. 정치안정의 중요성
3. 시장경제 지향적 개혁
4. 개혁의 일관성과 지속성이 중요
5. 노사안정의 중요성
6. 개혁관리의 중요성

參考文獻