Final Portfolio WP2
Economics Discourse toward South Korea’s Future challenges An analysis of the Sustainability Report (an organizational report which gives information about economic, environmental, social and governance performance) states the fact that Samsung Group was ranked number one for sales among global IT companies for the first time in 2009. By reviewing the outstanding performance of Samsung, an information technology company established in South Korea in 1969, it is conspicuous for citizens in the global village to notice the country’s growing economic strength. South Korea has indeed established itself internationally as a formidable newly advanced economy by overcoming the global financial crisis from 2007-2008 (which resulted in the threat of total collapse of large financial institutions, the bailout of banks by national governments, and the downturns in stock markets around the world) with notable speed and effectiveness. Since South Korea has already became a developed country with remarkable economic power, I wonder what factors might cause challenges for South Korea’s economy in the future and what the government can do to overcome these upcoming obstacles? The two articles, “The Challenge of Innovation and Technology for Korea as a Newly Advanced Economy Revisited” by Jorg Mahlich and Werner Pascha, as well as, “Implications for South Korea’s Economic Growth” by Deok Ryong Yoon, conduct conscientious research and answer my discourse question. The writers of these two articles are all authoritative in the field of economics. Yet, the authors of each article have distinct perspectives of South Korea’s growing economic strength and the challenges the country is facing. The writers of each article also launch their expertise into the discourse community at a different level. Broadly speaking, the first article, “The Challenge of Innovation and Technology for Korea as a Newly Advanced Economy Revisited,” discusses the challenge of innovation and technology for South Korea as a newly advanced economy while the second article, “Implications for South Korea’s Economic Growth,” investigates how North Korea’s unstable regime can threaten South Korea’s economy. Mahlich and Pascha proposes that the government of South Korea should diversify the nation’s industries and Yoon suggests that putting Northeast Asia into a secure community can help to develop a better economy for the two Koreas. Mahlich and Pascha approach the central question from the perspective of the country’s technology industry, while Yoon approaches from the perspective of the political tension between North and South Korea. Although the authors of both articles present convincing evidence, and at the same time participate in the discourse community with solid researches, I consider Mahlich and Pascha’s ideas to be a better contribution to the discourse topic. Their research proposes a more probable solution to resolve the future challenges in South Korea than Dr. Yoon’s ideas because Yoon’s proposal suggests the government of North Korea to cooperate with the surrounding capitalist countries, which is very unlikely to accomplish in its communist and unstable regime. Besides the comparison of each authors’ proposals, Mahlich and Pascha’s research is more suitable within the discourse community and its defining characteristics. These characteristics are broached by John Swales, a professor who is proficient in the filed of linguistics and academic English. Swales proposes six defining criteria for a discourse community, including: a broadly set of common goals, participatory mechanisms, information exchange, community specific genres, specialized terminology and a high general level of expertise1 (475 Swales). The authors of both works successfully fulfill these conventions and participate in the discourse community. Yet, Mahlich and Pascha’s contribution of information exchange and participatory mechanisms again surpass...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document