hankyoreh

The interior of a library in Cupertino, California, is quiet after the start of summer break on June 3. (Kim Ji-eun/The Hankyoreh)

So far, the Hankyoreh has taken a tour of the supply chain behind the global “application qualification” industry, with stops in San Jose, Gangnam, Kenya, and Pakistan. It includes US college entrance consulting with hefty price tags; South Korea’s international schools, where tuition alone can reach 45 million won a year (in the case of the high school curriculum at the Chadwick International school in Incheon); and ghostwriting of academic papers by educated people in low-income countries.

Student parents are pouring huge sums of money all through the global chain. It’s an industry precariously positioned on the borders of legality; the principles of “scholarship” are thrown out the window.

As we reach the end of this uncomfortable journey, there is still one question to be answered: what kind of demand has given rise to such a skewed industry? What are the forces that have turned the “qualification industry” into such a juggernaut?

The focus of the desires, the envy, and the frustration is status in a global elite defined by diplomas from top US universities. We listened to experts and looked at the statistics and research to find what sort of meaning the “global elite” holds in the South Korean society of 2022.

A degree from a prestigious overseas university no longer simply attests to the holder being a “global talent” — it paves the way for them to become a member of South Korea’s elite. For evidence, we can look at the academic histories of the people employed in management at major corporations.

The Hankyoreh examined the 30 countries that ranked highest for market capitalization as of late December 2021. The results showed that 33 out of 86 executive directors (38.4%) had an overseas university degree (bachelor’s, master’s, or doctoral) as their highest level of academic attainment. That percentage has been steadily rising over the past few decades, with rates of 19.7% (26 out of 132) in 2001 and 33% (29 out of 88) in 2011.

The situation was no different for senior government officials. Newstapa found that of the 17 Cabinet ministers confirmed or nominated under the Yoon Suk-yeol administration as of May 16, 10 of them (58.5%) had received master’s or doctoral degrees overseas, while 12 out of their 31 adult children collectively (38.7%) had matriculated at an overseas university at the undergraduate or graduate level.

The reason an overseas degree has become such a crucial step on the path toward joining the South Korean elite lies in the corporate and educational policies that have been pursued over the past three decades, and their veneration of the “global elite.”

In his New Year’s address to the South Korean public in 1994, then-President Kim Young-sam said, “We must not forget that each individual citizen is an actor in international competition. We must prevail.” The same year, Samsung began broadcasting advertisements with the slogan, “History only remembers first place: Global first class.”

From there, the trend only intensified. The rhetoric may have changed — with the Kim Dae-jung administration’s talk of a “knowledge-based society,” the Lee Myung-bak administration’s references to the “G20 generation,” and the Park Geun-hye administration’s references to the “creative economy and creative class” — but the consistent theme was that of a global elite operating across national borders as they steered the course of South Korean society.

International degrees have been a major force in certain areas, including US tech companies. But they have exerted even greater power in South Korea.

“There are issues with the fact that the US degrees that people earn through these manufactured ‘qualifications’ are intended for the most part for domestic use,” explained Kim Dong-choon, a professor of sociology at Sungkonghoe University.

South Korea’s particular brand of test-based meritocracy means that a few examinations — namely, those for admission into college and employment — are enough to ensure status for a lifetime. It’s the kind of society that enables steady, significant “rents” for those recognized as “global talents” based on their degrees.

There’s no denying the role that these global talents have played in globalizing South Korean business. But some have also shared messages of concern.

Analyzing the discourse surrounding “global talents” in South Korea in their 2013 paper “Becoming a ‘Global Talent’ in the Era of Unlimited Competition: A Critical Discourse Analysis of ‘Global Talent’ Discourse,” Hong Sung-hyun and Ryoo Woong-jae observed that “the rosy future portrayed in ‘global talent’ discourse ultimately applies only to an exceedingly small segment of society.”

According to their analysis, the desire to become part of a select number of “the global elite” with outstanding capabilities has covered up issues associated with the globalization era that cannot be resolved through individual effort alone, including labor instability and low wages.

As the key players in society, members of the global elite have been raking in more of its resources.

According to the World Inequality Database, the share of income for the top 1% of earners in the US rose from 14.7% in 1990 to 19.1% in 2021. In South Korea’s case, that rate climbed from 9.4% in 1990 to 14.7% as of 2021.

In contrast with unearned income, that skewed income distribution tends to attract envy rather than criticism. In his book “The Meritocracy Trap,” Yale Law School professor Daniel Markovits observes that the economic monopoly of the top 1% is achieved not only through assets, but also through “glossy” professions.

Hong Min-ki, a Korea Labor Institute senior research fellow who has analyzed the professions of the top 1% earners in South Korea and the US, explained, “Around one-quarter of [the top earners] in both South Korea and the US are executives and managers, with a large number of scientists and engineers.”

“In the case of the US, many of those ranked in the top 1% work are financial professionals and lawyers, while in South Korea’s case, many of them are physicians,” Hong added. All of these are professions that are considered “enviable.”

South Korea is quite tolerant when it comes to elites, with a 2018 Hankook Research survey on “perceptions of fairness in South Korean society” showing 66% of respondents agreeing that it was “better to have larger differences in compensations according to individual ability and effort.” Obviously, the assumption here is that “ability” is recognized based on academic history and profession.

Even for wealthy members of the upper class, “passing down” socially recognized rents by means of education and degrees is essential to maintaining their elite status.

Members of South Korea’s global elite have been assigned a leading role by globalization and recognized as legitimate thanks to meritocracy. But over time, the gateways to that status have been closing.

A recent study analyzing the incomes of parents and their offspring showed that while income mobility among generations remains relatively low for South Korean society as a whole, a very strong correlation was observed between the incomes of parents and offspring within the top 10% for income. (National Research Council for Economics, Humanities and Social Sciences, “Causes of Deepening Income Inequality and the Effects of Policy Responses 2,” 2019.) When it comes to elite members of the top 10% and thereabouts, status is passed down quite robustly from parents to children.

The repeated frustrations of the global “academic qualification industry” ultimately come down to upper-class parents and their children falling into a “league of their own.”

The college entrance consulting industry, which encourages illegal and questionably legal behavior, has been suffering a blow in the US after revelations of criminal activities, including astronomical amounts of under-the-table money amid demands for fees in the tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars. Those hoping to make inroads in joining “their league” need to spend huge amounts to do so.

The global elite positions that are of such growing importance for economic, political, and cultural monopolies — and the huge amounts that parents spend to achieve them for their children — are a source of frustration for the vast majority who don’t have the same options.

According to Kim Jong-young, a professor of sociology at Kyung Hee University, “When it comes to educational issues, we have to look at the ‘top’ rather than the average.”

“The members of the elite who dominate the upper tier have a major social voice and influence. People look at this tiny minority and feel both envy and frustration,” he explained. The league may be all their own, but the associated problems are not.

By Bang Jun-ho, staff reporter; Jung Hwan-bong, staff reporter

Please direct questions or comments to [english@hani.co.kr]