Careful approach desperately needed for policy-making

The South Korean government is faced with criticism from consumers and political circles after quickly retracting a policy to ban direct purchases of 80 foreign products not certified with KC Certification. The policy was withdrawn just three days after its announcement, highlighting a recurring issue of hastily implemented unrealistic policies facing backlash and being quickly rescinded.

The presidential office apologized to the public regarding the direct purchase ban. Despite establishing a task force in early March and conducting over 20 meetings, the government neglected to include consumer feedback procedures, despite receiving warnings about potential backlash. Even the ruling People Power Party (PPP) criticized the policy, labeling it a half-baked policy that had been announced without proper consultations between the party and the government.

This misstep is not an isolated incident, but rather part of a recurring pattern of poorly conceived policies being retracted after encountering unforeseen obstacles. For instance, a proposal to extend weekly working hours to monthly, quarterly, semi-annual, and annual terms was withdrawn in March last year following labor union protests. Similarly, a plan to cut this year's research and development (R&D) budget by 14.8% faced strong opposition from the scientific community, prompting the government to significantly increase next year's R&D budget even by eliminating preliminary feasibility studies. Additionally, a proposal to lower the school starting age to five was shelved after parent protests led to the resignation of the education minister.

Analysts suggest that the government's sense of urgency, driven by a series of setbacks such as election losses, is contributing to these policy missteps. The issue of surplus Chinese goods flooding direct purchase platforms is not unique to South Korea; other advanced countries like the United States and the European Union are also grappling with it. However, unlike South Korea's premature and narrowly focused regulatory measures, these countries have yet to propose definitive solutions, considering potential consumer backlash and trade conflicts.

Policies affecting people’s everyday lives need thorough consideration of public acceptance and unintended consequences from the planning stage. In this incident, the decision-making process and sensitivity towards policy consumers demonstrated by the presidential office and government departments were disastrous, failing to befit South Korea’s standing as a top-tier global economy. Concerns remain on whether the government can effectively navigate domestic and international challenges with such amateur problem-solving skills.