Human Capital Policies in Korea

Human Capital Policies in Korea

Prof. Ju-Ho Lee, KDI School of Public Policy and Management

A Response Article by Andi Kurniawan

Refer to statistical figure extended in presentation, it is very admiring that South Korea’s educational level has attained remarkable extent. The average years of schooling, average scores of reading and number of researcher show how Seoul is capable of competing with other developed countries, including Japan, Germany, the United Kingdom and the United States. However, the certain quantity progress in education sector in fact is not parallel with the development of education quality.

Prof. Ju-Ho Lee employed some terms to describe this phenomenon, education bubbles and over education. Education bubble a phrase used to highlight the significant amount of spending in education motored by social and psychological motivation. Meanwhile, over-education a term used to indicate imbalance figure between number of school graduates and number of school graduates who are hired by industries. Colleges and universities then become popular destination for high school graduates.

Prof. Lee introduced an approach called education diversification to ameliorate this condition. It comprises a number of reform programs to enhance non-cognitive curricula and teaching methods in high schools and higher education. Prior to the reform, education system emphasized merely cognitive approach while ignoring the importance of non-cognitive skills. As the results, there has been a mismatch between education and industry needs and university graduates have been paid cheaper than their juniors from high schools. In addition, people spend much in private tutoring in order to attain higher scores and get enrolled in prestigious schools and universities (Lee, September 2014).

Among South Korean policy reforms in education are to change teaching and assessment methods by including creativity and character skills, to strengthen industry-university cooperation by supporting their specialization, to increase number of vocational high schools namely Meister high schools which are financially supported and securely find employment. To make these reforms work, according to Prof. Lee there are two main strategies, the first one is the crisis management strategy accommodating the prevailing crisis in particular related to the 2008 economic recession, and the other strategy is to open up the education sector by widening people and private sector participation in education institutions such as the assignment former top CEOs as school principals aimed at adapting the existing curricula with the industry demands.

As a student living in a developing country, I am very impressed with South Korea’s awareness of significant education role in development. Despite its economic miracle and well-developed education system, South Korea still considers the significance of education reform. However, I think education reform is insufficient to answer the prevailing crisis. Although it supports graduates to get employed easily, it is not same as providing people with equal economic opportunity. Educated in vocational schools or specialized senior high schools, graduates will only be workers, while top management who earns much profit and revenue remains controlled by families or relatives who are well educated. I assume this hypothesis needs further academic research, but the current figure shows how Korean economic is still dominated only by several conglomerates that we can name it.

In the case of Indonesia, we are still lag behind. Our current challenge is still how to distribute equally education development in provinces outside Java island. Albeit lawmakers have passed a bill requiring government to allocate 20 percent of State Budget for education, education development in rural districts remains questioned.  Furthermore, private sector participation in this sector is still merely concentrated in capital cities like Jakarta, Bandung and Surabaya. They have opened some universities specialized in business, management and some engineering studies. Since they are relatively new, their contribution to education development will need more review. The other key problem is we have less significant policy instruments to strengthen linkage between industries and universities. There are many good quality researches produced by public universities like University of Indonesia, Bandung Institute of Technology or Surabaya Institute of Technology which are unused due to this issue.

References:

Lee, Ju-Ho. (2015). Human Capital Policies in South Korea: Education Expansion and Bubble. A Presentation Material in South Korean Human Capital Policy Seminar Series. KDI School of Public Policy and Management. Retrieved from www.gdln.or.kr

Lee, Ju-Ho. (September, 2014).  Making Education Reform Happen: Removal Education Bubble Through Education Diversification. KDI School Working Paper Series 14-05. Retrieved from www.kdevelopedia.org

Diplomasi Ekonomi Indonesia dan Thailand terhadap Pasar Timur Tengah

Abstract

Economic diplomacy as an instrument has been employed by Thailand to boost its export performance to partner countries, including to the Middle East region. Unlike Thailand, Indonesia the region’s largest Moslem country remains unable to capitalize on friendly relation with Middle East to boost its foreign trade. This study brought these facts into a research aimed at enriching the literatures of Indonesia’s economic relations with Middle East. Research method used in the study was qualitative approach. It concluded that despite cultural differences, Thailand is relatively successful in conducting economic diplomacy to promote its top commodities to this market.

Keywords

foreign economic policy; market access; public-private collaboration; policy harmonization; regulatory framework; kebijakan ekonomi luar negeri; akses pasar; kolaborasi pemerintah-swasta; harmonisasi kebijakan; kerangka aturan

Menjelang Indonesia-China FTA

Menjelang Indonesia-China FTA
Jum'at, 25 Desember 2009 18:59

Implementasi kerjasama perdagangan bebas Indonesia-Cina adalah rangkaian kerjasama perdagangan organisasi kawasan ASEAN dengan Republik Rakyat Cina (RRC) yang ditandatangani pada Nopember 2004, ASEAN-China Free Trade Area (ACFTA). Hal ini tentunya akan berdampak terhadap perekonomian dalam negeri, khususnya industri-industri dalam negeri yang belum siap berkompetisi secara bebas dengan Cina, seperti industri tekstil, industri besi dan baja, serta industri elektronik. Di industri tekstil, menurut Asosiasi Pertekstilan Indonesia (API), sepanjang tahun 2007, volume import garmen mencapai 950,000 ton atau hampir 80 persen dari total konsumsi garmen di dalam negeri yaitu 1,220,000 ton. Pada tahun 2008, API juga menyebutkan bahwa 70 persen pangsa pasar tekstil domestic sudah dikuasai oleh produk-produk impor yang sebagian besar diimpor secara illegal dan diduga dari Cina. Di industri besi dan baja, menurut Indonesia Iron and Steel Industry Association (IISIA), sebelum implementasi perdagangan bebas Indonesia-Cina Januari mendatang, produk-produk besi dan baja Cina telah menguasai proyek pembangkit listrik tenaga uap (PLTU) 10,000 megawatt yang sedang dikerjakan oleh Pemerintah. Di industri elektronik, Electronic Marketer Club (EMC) menilai banjir impor produk elektronik, terutama dari Cina, akan terus berjalan, bahkan dengan harga yang lebih murah daripada harga produk-produk eletronik buatan dalam negeri. Dengan kondisi ini maka tidak mengherankan apabila Indonesia telah mengalami neraca perdagangan (balance of trade) negatif dalam sector non-migas dengan Cina sejak 2005. Neraca perdagangan ini bahkan terus memburuk dengan melonjaknya impor non-migas dari Cina pada tahun 2008 yang mencapai US$14.9 milyar, atau hampir 80 persen lebih besar daripada impor non migas dari Cina pada tahun 2007 yaitu US$7.9 milyar. Lalu apa yang bisa kita lakukan untuk mencegah semakin terpuruknya industri dalam negeri?

Tiga pemain utama harus bersinergi untuk mengatasi persoalan ini yaitu Pemerintah, produsen, dan konsumen. Pemerintah, sebagai penyelenggara negara, harus bertanggungjawab penuh atas permasalahan ini, karena telah memutuskan untuk terus merealisasikan perdagangan bebas dengan Cina. Pemerintah harus berupaya membantu produsen untuk memproduksi dengan ongkos produksi yang lebih murah, sehingga harga jual produk juga bisa lebih murah. Banyak cara yang bisa dilakukan oleh pemerintah mulai dari insentif pajak hingga mengembangkan investasi di industri bahan baku untuk mengurangi ketergantungan bahan baku impor yang acapkali dipengaruhi oleh fluktuasi rupiah terhadap mata uang asing. Faktor harga seringkali menjadi alasan mengapa produk-produk impor dari Cina lebih laku di pasaran.

Selain Pemerintah, produsen juga harus membuat terobosan-terobosan strategi pemasaran yang lebih jitu dalam bersaing dengan produk-produk dari Cina. Namun, strategi apapun yang digunakan produsen untuk menjual produknya bisa jadi sia-sia apabila produsen masih terus berfikir untuk meraih keuntungan sebesar-besarnya dari penjualan produknya. Cara berfikir seperti ini merupakan alasan utama para produsen untuk menjual produknya dengan harga jauh lebih tinggi daripada harga produksi. Hasilnya, produk-produk buatan Indonesia akan tetap dianggap lebih mahal dari produk-produk buatan Cina yang dianggap ‘murah meriah’. Di sisi lain, menurunkan target keuntungan bukan berarti harus menurunkan kualitas suatu produk karena produsen harus terus menjaga dan meningkatkan kualitas untuk berkompetisi di pasar yang sangat terbuka nanti.

Terakhir dan yang terpenting adalah konsumen, karena tanpa ada pembelian, produsen bisa merugi. Oleh sebab itu, rasa nasionalisme kita diuji untuk saling membantu dan menolong dengan membeli produk negeri sendiri. Jangan hanya karena factor harga, lalu kita lebih memilih produk-produk buatan Cina, tetapi juga pikirkan masa depan industri dalam negeri dan jutaan pekerja beserta keluarga mereka yang bergantung hidup dari industri-industri ini. Dampaknya bahkan bisa meluas menjadi masalah sosial seperti pengangguran dan kemiskinan.

Semoga bangsa Indonesia bisa menghadapi kompetisi ini.

Andi Kurniawan
Staf Pengajar Fisip Universitas Jakarta

Dikutip dari:Berita Kota
http://www.beritakota.co.id/berita/opini/22473-menjelang-indonesia-china-fta.html