Chaebol

Last updated

Chaebol

A chaebol ( UK: /ˈbəl,ˈbɒl/ CHAY-bəl, CHAY-bol, [1] [2] US: /ˈbl,ˈɛbəl/ CHAY-bohl, JEB-əl; [3] Korean : 재벌 [tɕɛbʌɭ] , lit.'rich family' or 'financial clique ') is a large industrial South Korean conglomerate run and controlled by an individual or family. [3] A chaebol often consists of multiple diversified affiliates, controlled by a person or group. [4] Several dozen large South Korean family-controlled corporate groups fall under this definition. The term first appeared in English text in 1972. [3]

Contents

Chaebol have also played a significant role in South Korean politics. In 1988, a member of a chaebol family, Chung Mong-joon, president of Hyundai Heavy Industries, successfully ran for the National Assembly of South Korea. Other business leaders were also chosen to be members of the National Assembly through proportional representation. [5] Hyundai has made efforts in the thawing of North Korean relations, despite some controversy. [6] Many South Korean family-run chaebol have been criticised for low dividend payouts and other governance practices that favor controlling shareholders at the expense of ordinary investors. [7]

Etymology

Chaebol is derived from the McCune–Reischauer romanization of the Korean word 재벌 (chaebŏl), without the breve above the o. In 2000, the South Korean Ministry of Tourism introduced a new system of converting the Korean language into the Roman alphabet called Revised Romanization. [8] Under the new transliteration style, 재벌 is written as jaebeol, not chaebol. Despite McCune–Reischauer being largely abandoned in South Korea, the term is still ubiquitously written as chaebol.

The word originates from the Sino-Japanese term zaibatsu (財閥), where means 'wealth' and means 'clan'. [9] The Japanese zaibatsu dominated their economy from 1868 until they were dissolved under the American Occupation of Japan in 1945. The rise and proliferation of the Korean chaebol resembles the Japanese zaibatsu at their peak.

The word has been loaned into English since at least 1972. [3]

History

The former headquarters of Hyundai in Seoul Hyundai Headquarter Building, Jongno-gu, Seoul.jpg
The former headquarters of Hyundai in Seoul

South Korea's economy was small and predominantly agricultural well into the mid-20th century. However, the policies of President Park Chung Hee spurred rapid industrialisation by promoting large businesses, following his seizure of power in 1961. The First Five Year Economic Plan [4] by the government set industrial policy towards new investment, and chaebols were to be guaranteed loans from the banking sector. The chaebol played a key role in developing new industries, markets, and export production, helping make South Korea one of the Four Asian Tigers.

Although South Korea's major industrial programs did not begin until the early 1960s, the origins of the country's entrepreneurial elite were found in the political economy of the 1950s. Very few Koreans owned or managed larger corporations during the Japanese colonial period. After the Japanese left in 1945, some Korean businessmen obtained the assets of some of the Japanese firms, several of which grew into the chaebols of the 1990s. [5]

The Japanese colonial government sometimes sought to co-opt local businessmen, and wealthy individuals often linked to land ownership, and a significant minority of industries were jointly owned by Japanese and Korean businesses. A few Korean chaebols such as Kyungbang came into existence during this era. [10]

The companies, as well as certain other firms that were formed in the late 1940s and early 1950s, had close links with Syngman Rhee's First Republic, which lasted from 1948 to 1960. It is confirmed that many of these companies received special treatment from the government in return for kickbacks and other payments. [5]

When the military took over the government in 1961, its leaders announced that they would eradicate the corruption that had plagued the Rhee administration and eliminate "injustice" from society. Some leading industrialists were arrested and charged with corruption, but the new government realized that it would need the help of entrepreneurs if the government's ambitious plans to modernize the economy were to be fulfilled. A compromise was reached, under which many of the accused corporate leaders paid fines to the government. Subsequently, there was increased cooperation between corporate and government leaders in modernizing the economy. [5] :152

Government-chaebol cooperation was essential to the subsequent economic growth and astounding successes that began in the early 1960s. Driven by the urgent need to turn the economy away from consumer goods and light industries toward heavy, chemical, and import-substitution industries, political leaders and government planners relied on the ideas and cooperation of chaebol leaders. The government provided the blueprints for industrial expansion; the chaebol realized the plans. However, the chaebol-led industrialization accelerated the monopolistic and oligopolistic concentration of capital and economically profitable activities in the hands of a limited number of conglomerates. [5]

Park used the chaebol as a means of economic growth. Exports were encouraged, reversing Rhee's policy of reliance on imports. Performance quotas were established. [5]

Chaebols were able to grow because of two factors: foreign loans and special favours. Access to foreign technology also was critical to the growth of the chaebol through the 1980s. Under the guise of "guided capitalism", the government selected companies to undertake projects and channelled funds from foreign loans. The government guaranteed repayment should a company be unable to repay its foreign creditors. Additional loans were made available from domestic banks. In the late 1980s, chaebols dominated the industrial sector and were especially prevalent in manufacturing, trading, and heavy industries. [5]

Chaebols experienced tremendous growth beginning in the early 1960s in connection with the expansion of South Korean exports. The growth resulted from the production of a diversity of goods rather than just one or two products. Innovation and the willingness to develop new product lines were critical. In the 1950s and early 1960s, chaebols concentrated on wigs and textiles; by the mid-1970s and 1980s, heavy, defence, and chemical industries had become predominant. While these activities were important in the early 1990s, real growth was occurring in the electronics and high-technology industries. Chaebols also were responsible for turning the trade deficit in 1985 into a trade surplus in 1986. The current account balance, however, fell from more than US$14 billion in 1988 to US$5 billion in 1989. [5]

Chaebols continued their explosive growth in export markets in the 1980s. By the late 1980s, they had become financially independent and secure, thereby eliminating the need for further government-sponsored credit and assistance. [5]

By the 1990s, South Korea was one of the largest newly industrialised countries and boasted a standard of living comparable to industrialized countries.

Former headquarters of the defunct Daewoo Group, once the second-largest conglomerate in South Korea Seoul Square.jpg
Former headquarters of the defunct Daewoo Group, once the second-largest conglomerate in South Korea

President Kim Young-sam began to challenge the chaebol, but it was not until the 1997 Asian financial crisis that the weaknesses of the system were widely understood. Of the 30 largest chaebols, 11 collapsed between July 1997 and June 1999. Initially, the crisis was caused by a sharp drop in the value of the currency and led to immediate cash flow concerns needed to pay foreign debts; however, the lower costs ultimately helped the stronger chaebols expand their brands to Western markets. Yet, the decline of nearby export markets in Southeast Asia, which had been fueling growth by incurring large debts, proved fatal to many.[ citation needed ] The remaining chaebols also became far more specialized in their focus. For example, with a population ranked 26th in the world, before the crisis, the country had seven major automobile manufacturers. Afterward, only two major manufacturers remained intact though two additional continued, in a smaller capacity, under General Motors and Renault. Chaebol debts were not only to state industrial banks but also to independent banks and their financial services subsidiaries. The scale of the loan defaults meant that banks could neither foreclose nor write off bad loans without themselves collapsing, so the failure to service these debts quickly caused a systemic banking crisis, and South Korea turned to the IMF for assistance. The most spectacular example came in mid-1999, with the collapse of the Daewoo Group, which had some US$80 billion in unpaid debt. At the time, it was the largest corporate bankruptcy in history. [11]

Investigations also exposed widespread corruption in the chaebol, particularly fraudulent accounting, and bribery.

Still, South Korea recovered quickly from the crisis, and most of the blame for economic problems was shifted to the IMF.[ why? ] The remaining chaebols have grown substantially since the crisis, but they have maintained far lower debt levels.[ citation needed ]

In 2019, the largest chaebol, Samsung, composed about 17% of the South Korean GDP [12] and held billions of dollars in cash. However, recent financial statements of these chaebols showed that chaebols are slowly losing power due to either international competition or internal disruptions from newly emerging startups.[ citation needed ] The net profit/income of South Korea's top conglomerates has decreased from 2012 to 2015.[ citation needed ]

Corporate governance

Management structure

Some chaebols are one large corporation while others have broken up into loosely connected groups of separate companies sharing a common name. Even in the latter case, each is almost always owned, controlled, or managed by the same family group.

South Korea's chaebols are often compared with Japan's keiretsu business groupings, the successors of the pre-war zaibatsu, but they have some major differences:[ according to whom? ]

The chaebol model is heavily reliant on a complex system of interlocking ownership. The owner, with the help of family members, family-owned charities, and senior managers from subsidiaries, has to control only three of four public companies, which control other companies that control subsidiaries. A good example of this practice would be the owner of Doosan, who controlled more than 20 subsidiaries with only minor participation in about 5 companies. [13]

Equity

The chairman of a typical chaebol possesses a small portion of the equity in the companies under the large umbrella of the chaebol but is very powerful in making decisions and controls all management. For example, Samsung owns 0.5% of the group's listed firms. That demonstrates a weakness in the rule of law. [4] The method that allows this type of possession is called cross-holding, which is a horizontal and vertical structure that enhances the control of the chairman. [14]

Workplace culture

The typical culture at one of these conglomerates is highly paternalistic. Much of the environment is defined by the chairman who acts as a "fatherly figure" to his subordinates. This can be traced back to the infusion of Neo-Confucian values that permeate Korean society.[ citation needed ] A chaebol head's demeanour towards his employee can be described as "loving" while maintaining "sternness and a sense of responsibility". Workers commit to long hours, most notably on weekends and holidays, to appease their superiors. [15] Company outings and drinking sessions tend to be compulsory to foster a sense of family and belonging among employees. Employers believe that enhancing a common bond between them would translate into prosperity and productivity for the company. Other practices that would be uncommon for Western workplaces to engage in include gift-giving to employees and arranging dates for workers in search of relationships or marriage.[ citation needed ]

Chaebols are notoriously hierarchical. As such, it is unusual for an individual to challenge or question the decision-making of his or her boss. This dynamic adds to the culture that orients itself around whoever is in charge but can lead to undesirable circumstances. For example, the Asiana flight 214 crash led critics to speculate that cultural factors prevented a pilot on board from aborting the low-speed landing and thus straying from his superior's commands. [16] Promotion is rarely merit-based. Rather, it is through the order of age and time served to the conglomerate. This is reflected by the fact that most executives are far older than their employees. If a worker does not attain an executive or senior-management role by the age of fifty, he or she is commonly forced to resign. Again, this is attributable to the age-hierarchy dynamics in Korean Confucian culture. A typical firm heavily emphasizes loyalty to the firm, as demonstrated in the standard recruiting process. Newly acquired employees undergo an intense initiation that includes activities such as training camps and singing company-unique songs that reiterate the production goals of the firm. [15]

Emergence and inflation

The origins of the chaebol system in South Korea come as a consequence of the Korean War. The war resulted in much destruction and halted industrial production, which led the government to print money to pay for the war and meet the requirements of the United Nations forces for the Korean currency,[ clarification needed ] all of which caused mass inflation. This inflation caused many commodity prices to double every six months.

The government had to react and so devised a plan in providing strong financial incentives to private companies between the 1960s and 1970s. These included the government's choosing to select various family businesses to distribute the incentives (imported raw materials, commodities, bank loans). The impact was immediate, and most of the businesses flourished rapidly. The protection of infant companies allowed them to develop because of the highly regulated market, which prevented foreign companies from entering. [17] Many companies that were not in the circle of businesses saw the system as flawed and corrupted. [4] Corruption scandals have occurred periodically in all chaebols. Such incidents suggest a form of "crony capitalism" which is common in developing countries.

Internal market transactions accountability

Because the government gave out incentives to help businesses, it had a lot of control over them. However, there was no way to ensure the businesses would use the incentives effectively and efficiently. [4] In other words, there was no external monitoring system to monitor chaebols and ensure that they were efficient in the allocation of resources. [18] All businesses undertake internal market transactions, which constitute "purchase and sale of intermediate inputs, the provision and receipt of loan collaterals, and the provision and receipt of payment guarantees among member firms in a business group". [19] There is the question of efficiency, especially in production and management. Therefore, the chaebol system was not very transparent. Behind the scenes, businesses were provided with subsidiary financing and intragroup transactions. This allowed them easy loans to cover their deficits, and before the 1997 Asian financial crisis, huge debts had accumulated, many of which were hidden. That gave the illusion that the system was flourishing into the 1990s. [4]

Relationship with foreign investors

According to the Defense Language Institute Foreign Language Center, the majority of South Korea's economy is driven by exports. [20] South Korea is one of the leading exporters worldwide. Additionally, the majority of investors in the Korean stock market are foreign investors. Out of 711 listed companies in the Korean stock market, approximately 683 have shares that are held by foreign investors. [21] Nearly a third of the market's value is owned by foreigners, a trend that is expected to continue.

Because of their major role in the Korean stock market, foreign investors play a massive part in whether or not chaebol conglomerates remain financially successful. Foreign investors tend to avoid chaebols, especially those that displayed heavy political influence in South Korea, like Samsung and Hyundai. Investors are reluctant to invest in large control-ownership disparity businesses because these companies tended to cheat shareholders to have higher personal financial gain. [21] This information is extremely helpful, especially when it comes to determining how these corrupt conglomerates are still heavily supported, considering foreign investors show little interest in them. A study published in the Journal of the Japanese and International Economies found that after the 1997 Asian financial crisis, foreign investment behavioural patterns changed drastically. While foreign investors like to hold shares in large companies with high profit and liquidity margins, they do not show any particular interest in either chaebol or non-chaebol companies. [22] Nonetheless, chaebols are still able to survive, highlighting just how much power and aid they receive from the Korean government.

"Too big to fail"

During the 1997 Asian financial crisis, bankers feared that chaebols would go bankrupt so they allowed these businesses to roll over their loans each time they were unable to repay their debts. Many did not believe that the chaebols were capable of collapsing and that the more they borrowed, the safer they were.

However, the theory was proven wrong when many businesses collapsed during the crisis. Since they were linked through debt guarantees, many of the companies fell into a chain reaction. [4] The focus on capacity expansion created debt that was manageable when the economy was growing. However, when the economy stalled, debt-to-equity ratios became a huge problem. [23]

Since the crisis, chaebols had less debt and were less vulnerable to similar crises, as was demonstrated in the 2008 crisis. With the growth of the fewer remaining chaebols, however, each of them occupies a larger portion of the economy, with the largest chaebols making up (by sales revenue) a substantial portion of South Korea's GDP. [24] [25] [26]

Monopolistic behavior

The protectionist policies and preferable government treatment granted chaebols the ability to exhibit monopolistic behaviour. The absence of a market free of intervention meant that "true competition" became a rarity in South Korea. Especially in the era before the 1997 Asian financial crisis, the only products available to the Korean people were those made by chaebols. Therefore, the social fabric of the country lacked a welcoming culture toward entrepreneurship. The intensity and extent of market concentration became evident as 80% of the country's GDP is derived from chaebols. The largest of the group, Samsung, exports 20% of South Korea's goods and services alone. Although no longer financially supported by the government, these firms have attained economies of scale on such a massive level that it is extremely difficult for a startup or small or medium enterprise (SME) to surmount the high barriers to entry. A majority of these smaller companies ended up becoming acquired by the chaebols, thereby further stacking their size and economic dominance. During recent years a growing trend to scale globally has increased among aspiring Korean entrepreneurs. [27] Conversely, chaebols have also been moving money abroad with the tacit endorsement of the South Korean government and investing in commercial enterprises, particularly in Koreatown Manhattan, New York City. [28]

To this day, chaebols maintain dominance across all industries. Reductions in tariffs and the removal of trade regulations designed to protect Korean conglomerates have led to increased competition from abroad. However, among domestic firms, chaebols have kept their market share intact. Most notably, Apple's entry into the smartphone market pressured rival Samsung into diversifying its revenue streams from overseas. All but 3 of the top 50 firms listed on the Korean Stock Exchange are designated as chaebols, [15] and despite chaebols only accounting for just over 10 per cent of the country's workers, the four largest chaebols hold 70 per cent of total market capitalization, and all chaebols together holding 77 per cent as of the late 2010s. [29] Consequently, chaebols have more bargaining power and often take pricing action that squeezes both suppliers and consumers. Typically the firms down the supply chain fail to increase their profit margins enough to expand and thus never see growth. Collusion among chaebols is commonplace. Price-fixing acts mean consumers expect to pay an inflated value for most goods and services. [15] For instance, in 2012 Samsung and LG Electronics were fined for colluding to raise prices for home appliances. [30]

Government ties, corruption, and abuse of power

South Korean President Park Geun-hye at a breakfast meeting with business magnates Lee Kun-hee and Chung Mong-koo Korea President Park Business Leaders 20130508 01.jpg
South Korean President Park Geun-hye at a breakfast meeting with business magnates Lee Kun-hee and Chung Mong-koo

Since the inception of the chaebol, the government has been closely involved in its affairs. Many of the reforms enacted over the years, especially those under President Kim Dae-Jung, have cracked down on kickbacks and preferential treatment. Moreover, the state is no longer a majority shareholder of any chaebol. [15] But their sheer size and wealth have been used to gain influence. For the most part, the government sees the function of chaebols as crucial to the Korean economy. When President Lee Myung-Bak took office, he pardoned Samsung Group chairman Lee Kun-Hee for tax evasion. President Lee then proceeded to champion pro-chaebol deals, including a nuclear energy contract with the city of Abu Dhabi, and loosened laws preventing the conglomerates from owning financial services companies. [31] Samsung's leader is not the only chaebol chairman to be excused from a criminal conviction. Choi Tae-Won of SK Group, Chung Mong-Koo of Hyundai, Kim Seung-Youn of Hanwha, and Shin Dong-bin of Lotte [32] are a few examples of chairmen who have been charged, convicted, or are currently serving a prison sentence for white-collar crime. Accusations include bribery, tax evasion, accounting fraud, embezzlement, and violent crime. [33] Typically chaebol chairmen are pardoned. In the rare case that an executive is sentenced to prison, as the CEOs of SK and CJ group were, it is typically a relatively light punishment of up to 4 years depending on the charge. [34]

Collusion between chaebol members and the government granted preferential statuses to the companies. A chaebol would funnel bribes to politicians and bureaucrats through slush funds and illegal donations. This could help maintain the government's position of power, allowing them to secure contracts for major government projects and provide favourable treatment to the donor firm. [35] Examples of this type of corruption were widespread in the years leading up to the 1997 financial crisis. Many of the firms that benefited from this relationship were too indebted, had poor corporate governance, and were inefficient. There was a huge inflow of capital and a bending of regulation in favour of these problematic firms. Hanbo Group, formerly South Korea's second-largest steel-maker, is a good example of this. In the 1990s the company paid for special arrangements with high-ranking politicians so that it could secure contracts for large government projects over its competitors. Hanbo went bankrupt in 1997 after defaulting on debt payments along with other governance issues. Numerous chaebol companies had similar private agreements with the government in this fashion. It would be most common in companies dealing with heavy industries or projects that involved government procurement and urban planning. In the past, most successful political elections were won with chaebol support. Each time a new administration or regime stepped in, it would gear its policy platform towards chaebol revitalization. [35] This was under the claim that to be a competitive economy more power must be given to the chaebols. In recent years, the leading political parties of South Korea have shifted their focus from supporting large corporations to promoting economic diversification.

Reforms

Different reforms have been proposed or enacted to deal with the influence, power, and corruption associated with the chaebols, though it has been questioned whether real reform is possible. [36]

IMF agreement

Under Kim Dae-Jung and in the wake of the 1997 Asian financial crisis, many reforms were made to the chaebols. Most of these changes pertained to corporate structure, transparency in financial reporting, cuts in government subsidies, corporate governance, and debt stabilization. [37] In 1997, the IMF provided a bailout loan of $60 billion conditional on revision. [15] Distressed financial institutions were to be closed down and those that were deemed viable were to be restructured and recapitalized by the levels it set forth. This affected the chaebol because it severely restricted its easy access to financing which led to over-leveraged balance sheets. [38] Lenient accounting practices and disclosure rules were to be strengthened and standardized for international practice. Hence, transparency was increased to what would be expected from a public company. The chaebols agreed to be subject to independent auditors and were obligated to provide consolidated financial statements regularly. [35]

Government-led reforms and the 2008 crisis

Kim Dae-Jung enacted what is known as the "Five Principles of Corporate Governance". [38] These were the enhancement of management transparency, strengthening owner-manager accountability, elimination of cross-debt guarantees among chaebol affiliates, improvement of capital structures, and consolidation of core business areas. In his plans, debt-to-equity ratios was to be below 200%. Chaebol subsidiaries that were debt-laden or on the verge of bankruptcy were instructed to be either liquidated, sold, or put up for merger. Each chaebol-holding group had to break up its subsidiaries and operations so that they were more manageable. [35] By the end of 1997, each had an average of 26.8 subsidiaries. It was hoped that if there were fewer activities, the quality of the remaining businesses would see improvement. Many unrelated branches to their core competencies were swiftly shed. If any of the conglomerates failed to meet the conditions by the set deadlines, strict sanctions would be passed against them. During the 2008 financial crisis, many of these reforms ensured chaebols' quick recovery. [38] Having had exposure to a massive recession before, they learned to cope better than those in foreign countries. With significantly healthier balance sheets and higher cash reserves, the chaebols were able to avoid any liquidity issues. Moreover, with fewer subsidiaries, they were less exposed to the full scope of the crisis and thus helped keep the Korean economy afloat. [35]

President Roh Moo Hyun pushed for even more extensive reform. [38] His administration passed stringent regulations on fraudulent accounting, stock manipulation, and irregular wealth succession. Chaebols were forced to improve objectivity on their board of directors. Rather than having the decision-makers be insiders, affiliates, or family members, chaebols were expected to hold representation that reflected the interests of investors, especially minority shareholders who gained a significant number of rights. As a result, it became easier for chaebols to raise capital through equity rather than riskier debt. This is because the new transparency laws and restructuring boosted investor confidence from abroad. [15]

Regulation

Some competition laws were passed to attempt to limit the expansion of chaebol:

Formally, the Korea Fair Trade Commission announces a limited chaebol list every year by size of industrial assets (not including financial companies). [39]

Chaebols with limited assurance (상호출자제한기업집단;相互出資制限企業集團).

YearChaebolsAffiliatesAssets
2007621,196 Ent979.7 trillion won (Not including bank and financial group by South Korean law)
2008791,680 Ent1,161.5 trillion won (more than 2 trillion won)
2009481,137 Ent1,310.6 trillion won (more than 5 trillion won)
Samsung Group's total assets are 317 trillion won, but the FTC recognizes only 174 trillion won which excludes the financial subsidiaries.

Chaebols by category

The following charts list chaebols in order by different categories.

List of major chaebols by family group
Family groupOperating groups
Lee Byung-chul family group Samsung Group, Shinsegae Group, CJ Group, JoongAng Group, BGF Group, Hansol Group, and others
Chung Ju-yung family group Hyundai Motor Group, Hyundai Heavy Industries Group, Hyundai Department Store Group, Hyundai Marine & Fire, Hyundai Sungmoo Holding, Halla Group, HDC Group, HL Mando, KCC Corporation, and others
Koo In-hwoi family group LG, GS Group, LS Group, LX Group, LIG Group, Ourhome Corp, LF Group, LT Group, Heesung Electronics, and others.
Shin Kyuk-ho family group Lotte Group, Nongshim, Pulemil, and others.
Cho Choong-hoon family group Hanjin Group, Meritz Financial Group, and others.
Park In-chon family group Kumho Asiana Group, Kumho Petrochemical, Kumho Tire and others.
Other chaebols SK Group, Hanwha Group, Doosan Group, Hankook Tire, HiteJinro, POSCO, Kakao Corporation, Naver, Amorepacific Corporation, E-Land Group, Kyobo Life Insurance, Samyang Group, KG Group, OCI Group, Celltrion, Hyosung Group, Daelim Group, Young Poong Group, Dongwon Group, Korea Investment Holdings, DB Group, Kolon Industries, Taekwang Group, Seah Holdings, SeAh Steel Holdings, Dongkuk Steel, Aekyung Group, Eugene Group, Iljin Group, Booyoung Group, Harim Group, Taeyoung Engineering, Hoban Construction, etc.
Business area: chaebols that have several monopolies
GroupNumber of affiliatesMajor businesses
Samsung Group 60Electronics, semiconductors, batteries, IT Solutions, construction, shipbuilding, insurance
SK Group 186Energy, chemicals, telecom, semiconductors, batteries, trading, biopharmaceuticals
Hyundai Motor Group 57Automobiles, auto parts, steel, construction, logistics, credit card
LG 73Electronics, batteries, chemicals, telecom, display, food, cosmetics
Lotte Group 85Retail, food, entertainment, hotels, chemicals, construction, tourism
Hanwha Group 91Explosives, aerospace, energy, insurance, chemicals, hotels, construction
GS Group 93Energy, retail, hotels, construction, trading
Hyundai Heavy Industries Group 36Shipbuilding, engineering, heavy industries, construction equipment, energy, robotics
Shinsegae Group 53Retail, food, hotels, entertainment, fashion
CJ Group 85Food, retail, logistics, biopharmaceuticals, entertainment
Hanjin Group 33Aviation, logistics, transportation, hotels, info systems, airports
List of well-known chaebol affiliates (revenue and assets in 2021)
UnitParentRevenue (KRW)Total assets (KRW)Industries
Samsung Electronics Samsung Group 279.6 trillion426.6 trillionElectronics, semiconductors, smartphones, appliances
Samsung Life Insurance Samsung Group 35.1 trillion341.4 trillionInsurance
Samsung C&T Samsung Group 34.5 trillion55.2 trillionConstruction, trading, hotels
Samsung Fire & Marine Insurance Samsung Group 24.4 trillion94.9 trillionInsurance
Samsung SDI Samsung Group 13.6 trillion25.8 trillionBatteries
Samsung SDS Samsung Group 13.6 trillion10.5 trillionIT Solutions
Samsung Electro-Mechanics Samsung Group 9.7 trillion9.9 trillionElectronics, electronic components
Hotel Shilla Samsung Group 3.8 trillion2.6 trillionHotels, duty-free, entertainment
Hyundai Motor Company Hyundai Motor Group 117.6 trillion233.6 trillionAutomobiles
Kia Hyundai Motor Group 69.9 trillion66.8 trillionAutomobiles
Hyundai Mobis Hyundai Motor Group 41.7 trillion51.5 trillionAuto parts
Hyundai Steel Hyundai Motor Group 22.8 trillion37.1 trillionSteel
Hyundai Engineering & Construction Hyundai Motor Group 18.1 trillion19.6 trillionConstruction
Hyundai Glovis Hyundai Motor Group 21.8 trillion12.2 trillionLogistics
SK Hynix SK Group 42.9 trillion96.3 trillionSemiconductors
SK Innovation SK Group 46.8 trillion49.5 trillionEnergy, batteries,
SK Telecom SK Group 16.7 trillion30.9 trillionTelecom
SK Networks SK Group 11.1 trillion9.4 trillionTrading, logistics
LG Electronics LG Group 74.7 trillion53.5 trillionElectronics
LG Chem LG Group 42.7 trillion51.1 trillionChemicals
LG Display LG Group 29.8 trillion38.2 trillionDisplay
LG Energy Solution LG 17.9 trillion23.8 trillionBatteries
LG Uplus LG 13.9 trillion19.4 trillionTelecom
Lotte Shopping Lotte Group 15.6 trillion33.4 trillionRetail
Lotte Chemical Lotte Group 18.1 trillion22.9 trillionChemicals
Lotte Hotels & Resorts Lotte Group 4.2 trillion18.3 trillionHotels
Lotte Life Insurance Lotte Group 3.5 trillion18.9 trillionInsurance
Lotte Chilsung Lotte Group 2.5 trillion3.6 trillionFood
Hanwha Corporation Hanwha Group 52.8 trillion202.3 trillionDefense systems, explosives, aerospace
Hanwha Life Insurance Hanwha Group 27.1 trillion163.6 trillionInsurance
Hanwha Solutions Hanwha Group 10.7 trillion20.0 trillionRenewable energy
GS Caltex GS Group 34.5 trillion23.6 trillionEnergy
GS Construction GS Group 9.1 trillion15.2 trillionConstruction
GS Retail GS Group 9.8 trillion9.5 trillionRetail
Hyundai Heavy Industries Hyundai Heavy Industries Group 8.3 trillion13.8 trillionshipbuilding, heavy industries
Hyundai Mipo Dockyard Hyundai Heavy Industries Group 2.9 trillion4.3 trillionshipbuilding, heavy industries
Hyundai Samho Heavy Industries Hyundai Heavy Industries Group 4.1 trillion5.0 trillionshipbuilding, heavy industries
Hyundai Oilbank Hyundai Heavy Industries Group 20.6 trillion18.2 trillionEnergy
Shinsegae Shinsegae Group 6.3 trillion13.6 trillionRetail, duty-free, department stores
E-mart Shinsegae Group 24.9 trillion31.2 trillionRetail, food
Josun Hotels & Resorts Shinsegae Group 310.7 billion1.6 trillionHotels
CJ CheilJedang CJ Group 26.3 trillion26.9 trillionFood, biochemicals
CJ Daehan Express CJ Group 11.3 trillion8.9 trillionLogistics
CJ E&M CJ Group 3.6 trillion7.9 trillionEntertainment
CJ CGV CJ Group 736 billion3.8 trillionMovie theaters
Korean Air Hanjin Group 9.1 trillion26.7 trillionAirlines
Asiana Airlines Hanjin Group 4.3 trillion13.1 trillionAirlines
Hanjin Hanjin Group 2.5 trillion3.9 trillionLogistics

Like many other conglomerates across the world, Korean chaebols have a presence in popular media. There are a large number of K-dramas that feature chaebols and chaebol family members. Some of these shows, including A Business Proposal , Coffee Prince , What's Wrong with Secretary Kim , King the Land , and The Heirs , portray the lifestyles of chaebol family members in a comedic manner. Other dramas, however, portray chaebol family members being materialistic and arrogant, including Innocent Defendant , Remember , Vincenzo , Reborn Rich , and Big Mouth , reflecting the huge income inequality and political corruption related to chaebols in South Korea.

In addition, many chaebol family members have taken to social media outlets like Instagram and Twitter, where they publish snippets of their personal lives. Some chaebols also partake in popular social media trends like mukbangs, as is seen on the popular YouTube channel 햄연지 YONJIHAM. Some have suggested that these attempts at humanizing chaebols are purely financial strategies. [40]

See also

Related Research Articles

A keiretsu is a set of companies with interlocking business relationships and shareholdings that dominated the Japanese economy in the second half of the 20th century. In the legal sense, it is a type of business group that is in a loosely organized alliance within Japan's business community. It rose up to replace the zaibatsu system that was dissolved in the occupation of Japan following the Second World War. Though their influence has shrunk since the late 20th century, they continue to be important forces in Japan's economy in the early 21st century.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Economy of South Korea</span>

The economy of South Korea is a highly developed mixed economy. By nominal GDP, the economy was worth ₩2.24 quadrillion. It has the 4th largest economy in Asia and the 14th largest in the world as of 2024. South Korea is notable for its rapid economic development from an underdeveloped nation to a developed, high-income country in a few generations. This economic growth has been described as the Miracle on the Han River, which has allowed it to join the OECD and the G20. It is included in the group of Next Eleven countries as having the potential to play a dominant role in the global economy by the middle of the 21st century. Among OECD members, South Korea has a highly efficient and strong social security system; social expenditure stood at roughly 15.5% of GDP. South Korea spends around 4.93% of GDP on advance research and development across various sectors of the economy.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Conglomerate (company)</span> Large company involved in many industries

A conglomerate is a type of multi-industry company that consists of several different and unrelated business entities that operate in various industries. A conglomerate usually has a parent company that owns and controls many subsidiaries, which are legally independent but financially and strategically dependent on the parent company. Conglomerates are often large and multinational corporations that have a global presence and a diversified portfolio of products and services. Conglomerates can be formed by merger and acquisitions, spin-offs, or joint ventures.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Zaibatsu</span> Former business conglomerates in Japan

Zaibatsu is a Japanese term referring to industrial and financial vertically integrated business conglomerates in the Empire of Japan, whose influence and size allowed control over significant parts of the Japanese economy from the Meiji period to World War II. A zaibatsu's general structure included a family-owned holding company on top, and a bank which financed the other, mostly industrial subsidiaries within them. Although the zaibatsu played an important role in the Japanese economy beginning in 1868, they especially increased in number and importance following the Russo-Japanese War, World War I, and Japan's subsequent attempt to conquer East Asia and the Pacific Rim during the interwar period and World War II. After World War II, they were dissolved by the Allied occupation forces and succeeded by the keiretsu. Equivalents to the zaibatsu can still be found in other countries, such as the chaebol conglomerates of South Korea.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">1997 Asian financial crisis</span> Financial crisis of many Asian countries during the second half of 1997

The 1997 Asian financial crisis was a period of financial crisis that gripped much of East and Southeast Asia during the late 1990s. The crisis began in Thailand in July 1997 before spreading to several other countries with a ripple effect, raising fears of a worldwide economic meltdown due to financial contagion. However, the recovery in 1998–1999 was rapid, and worries of a meltdown quickly subsided.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Daewoo</span> Defunct South Korean conglomerate

Daewoo also known as the Daewoo Group, was a major South Korean chaebol and automobile manufacturer.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Financial services</span> Economic service provided by the finance industry

Financial services are economic services tied to finance provided by financial institutions. Financial services encompass a broad range of service sector activities, especially as concerns financial management and consumer finance.

SsangYong Group was a South Korean chaebol. Tracing its origins to 1939, by the 1970s it was one of the largest enterprise groups in the country, before disintegrating in the wake of the 1997 Asian financial crisis. Internationally, the group was best known as the parent of Ssangyong Engineering and Construction, SsangYong Cement, SsangYong Paper, Ssangyong Oil Refining, Ssangyong Investment & Securities, and SsangYong Motor Company among its many interests.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Economy of Asia</span>

The economy of Asia comprises about 4.7 billion people living in 50 different nations. Asia is the fastest growing economic region, as well as the largest continental economy by both GDP Nominal and PPP in the world. Moreover, Asia is the site of some of the world's longest modern economic booms.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Miracle on the Han River</span> Rapid economic growth of South Korea

The Miracle on the Han River was the period of rapid economic growth in South Korea, following the Korean War (1950–1953), during which South Korea transformed from one of the least developed countries into a developed country.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Japanese economic miracle</span> Period of rapid economic growth in Japan from the 1950s to 1990s

The Japanese economic miracle refers to Japan's record period of economic growth between the post-World War II era and the beginning of the global Oil Crisis (1955-1973). During the economic boom, Japan rapidly became the world's third-largest economy, after the United States and the Soviet Union. By the 1970s, Japan was no longer expanding as quickly as it had in the previous decades despite per-worker productivity remaining high.

Developmental state, or hard state, is a term used by international political economy scholars to refer to the phenomenon of state-led macroeconomic planning in East Asia in the late 20th century. In this model of capitalism, the state has more independent, or autonomous, political power, as well as more control over the economy. A developmental state is characterized by having strong state intervention, as well as extensive regulation and planning. The term has subsequently been used to describe countries outside East Asia that satisfy the criteria of a developmental state. The developmental state is sometimes contrasted with a predatory state or weak state.

A corporate group, company group or business group, also formally known as a group of companies, is a collection of parent and subsidiary corporations that function as a single economic entity through a common source of control. These types of groups are often managed by an account manager. The concept of a group is frequently used in tax law, accounting and company law to attribute the rights and duties of one member of the group to another or the whole. If the corporations are engaged in entirely different businesses, the group is called a conglomerate. The forming of corporate groups usually involves consolidation via mergers and acquisitions, although the group concept focuses on the instances in which the merged and acquired corporate entities remain in existence rather than the instances in which they are dissolved by the parent. The group may be owned by a holding company which may have no actual operations.

Sogo shosha are Japanese wholesale companies that trade in a wide range of products and materials. In addition to acting as intermediaries, sōgō shōsha also engage in logistics, plant development and other services, as well as international resource exploration. Unlike trading companies in other countries, which are generally specialized in certain types of products, sōgō shōsha have extremely diversified business lines, in which respect the business model is unique to Japan.

The East Asian model, pioneered by Japan, is a plan for economic growth whereby the government invests in certain sectors of the economy in order to stimulate the growth of specific industries in the private sector. It generally refers to the model of development pursued in East Asian economies such as Japan, South Korea, Hong Kong and Taiwan. It has also been used by some to describe the contemporary economic system in Mainland China after Deng Xiaoping's economic reforms during the late 1970s and the current economic system of Vietnam after its Đổi Mới policy was implemented in 1986. Generally, as a country becomes more developed, the most common employment industry transitions from agriculture to manufacturing, and then to services.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Kim Young-sam</span> President of South Korea from 1993 to 1998

Kim Young-sam, often referred to by his initials YS, was a South Korean politician and activist who served as the 7th president of South Korea from 1993 to 1998.

This article is intended to give an overview of the trade policy of South Korea. In 1945 Korea was liberated from the Empire of Japan at the end of World War II. A destructive drought in 1958 forced Korea to import large amounts of food grains. In 1950, the Korean War broke out, which destroyed more than two-thirds of the nation's production facilities and most of its infrastructure. Trade policy of South Korea has taken many shifts, from import substitution to globalization and there has been significant impact on the economy for the same.

South Korea and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) partner together to assist the country in managing its financial system. South Korea's economy is considered fundamentally sound because of the balance of their banking sector and their aim toward a zero structural balance without compromising their ability to sustain debt. The IMF Board in 2019 assessed that the policy framework and financial system in place are sturdy and firmly set.

South Korea is 5th largest export economy in the world and the 6th economic complexity according to Economic Complexity Index (ECI) with the top export destinations centralized in China with a total population of 51,324,823 in 2019.

The South Korean International Monetary Fund Agreement was implemented when South Korea, which was in a foreign exchange crisis, signed a memorandum of understanding with the International Monetary Fund on December 3, 1997. The country's chaebols, or large conglomerates, had engaged in poor business management and overborrowing, and the government had been supporting the chaebols' financial practices when the Asian financial crisis began. The IMF required the introduction of a range of policies as conditions for the bailout. The South Korean government under Kim Young-sam accepted those conditions to stave off a crisis. As a result, corporate bankruptcies, mass unemployment, and a crisis in the real economy accelerated.

References

  1. "chaebol". Oxford Dictionaries . Oxford University Press. Archived from the original on 27 September 2016. Retrieved 15 August 2017.
  2. "CHAEBOL". Cambridge Dictionary . Cambridge University Press . Retrieved 29 April 2024.
  3. 1 2 3 4 "Chaebol". Dictionary by Merriam-Webster . Merriam-Webster. Archived from the original on 13 June 2018. Retrieved 30 August 2011.
  4. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Jung, Dong-Hyeon (August 2004). "Korean Chaebol in Transition". China Report. 40 (3): 299–303. doi:10.1177/000944550404000306. S2CID   154720682.
  5. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 PD-icon.svg This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain .Savada, Andrea Matles, ed. (1992). South Korea: A Country Study (4th ed.). Washington: Federal Research Division, Library of Congress. ISBN   0-8444-0736-4.
  6. "Hyundai's $500 Million Payments to North Korea: A Bribe or Business Deal?" (PDF). Korea WebWeekly. 9 February 2003. Archived from the original (PDF) on 5 September 2021. Retrieved 7 August 2012.
  7. Lee, Joyce (30 October 2017). "Samsung Electronics names new-generation leaders as profit soars". Reuters. Archived from the original on 31 October 2017. Retrieved 31 October 2017.
  8. "Romanization of Korean". Korea.net . Ministry of Culture & Tourism. July 2000. Archived from the original on 16 September 2007. Retrieved 9 May 2007.
  9. "Where have you been, Chinese Characters? 72. Chaebol". Incheon Ilbo  [ ko ]. 10 June 2020. Retrieved 17 January 2024.
  10. Kohli, Atul (1994). "Where do high growth Political economies come from? The Japanese lineage of Korea's "Developmental State"". World Development. 22 (9): 1269–1293. doi:10.1016/0305-750X(94)90004-3.
  11. Newsweek Staff (29 October 2006). "Daewoo: Surviving a Bust-Up". Newsweek. Archived from the original on 30 January 2022. Retrieved 20 January 2022.
  12. "South Korea's Lee Kun-hee, who made Samsung a global powerhouse, dies at 78". CNBC. Reuters. 26 October 2020. Retrieved 15 June 2023.
  13. Kim, Dong-Woon (April 2003). "Interlocking Ownership in the Korean Chaebol". Corporate Governance: An International Review. 11 (2): 132–142. doi:10.1111/1467-8683.00014.
  14. Moskalev, Sviatoslav; Park, Seung Chan (March 2010). "South Korean Chaebols and Value-Based Management". Journal of Business Ethics. 92: 49–62. doi:10.1007/s10551-009-0138-5. S2CID   154121368.
  15. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Tudor, Daniel (2012). Korea: The Impossible Country. UK: Tuttle.
  16. "Asiana Airlines seeks cockpit culture changer after U.S. crash". Reuters. 10 February 2017. Archived from the original on 30 December 2020. Retrieved 1 December 2016.
  17. Beck, Peter M. (November 1998). "Revitalizing Korea's Chaebol". Asian Survey. 38 (11): 1018–1035. doi:10.2307/2645683. JSTOR   2645683.
  18. Park, Seung-Rok; Yuhn, Ky-hyang (2012). "Has the Korean Model of Chaebol Succeeded?". Journal of Economic Studies. 39 (2): 260–274. doi:10.1108/01443581211222680.
  19. Park, Seung-Rok; Yuhn, Ky-hyang (April 2011). "Has the Korean chaebol model succeeded?". Journal of Economic Studies. 39 (2): 260–274. doi:10.1108/01443581211222680.
  20. "South Korean Cultural Orientation". fieldsupport.dliflc.edu. Archived from the original on 5 August 2021. Retrieved 5 August 2021.
  21. 1 2 Lee, Youkyoung; Cho, Myeonghyeon (July 2016). "Does control-ownership disparity matter to foreign investors in Korea?". International Review of Economics & Finance. 44: 219–231. doi:10.1016/j.iref.2016.04.007. ISSN   1059-0560. Archived from the original on 28 September 2022. Retrieved 5 August 2021.
  22. Joe, Denis Yongmin; Oh, Frederick Dongchuhl (December 2017). "Foreign investor behavior in Korea after the 1997 Asian financial crisis". Journal of the Japanese and International Economies. 46: 69–78. doi:10.1016/j.jjie.2017.10.002. ISSN   0889-1583. Archived from the original on 28 September 2022. Retrieved 5 August 2021.
  23. Akaba, Yuji; Budde, Florian; Jungkiu Choi (1 December 1998). "Restructuring South Korea's Chaebol". McKinsey Quarterly (4): 68–79. Retrieved 13 February 2013.[ permanent dead link ]
  24. Premack, Rachel (21 August 2017). "South-koreas-conglomerates". South Korea's Conglomerates (PDF). SAGE Publishing. doi:10.1177/237455680324.n1.
  25. Aghion, Philippe; Guriev, Sergei; Jo, Kangchul (9 January 2022). "Chaebols and firm dynamics in Korea". Economic Policy. 36 (108): 593–626. doi: 10.1093/epolic/eiab016 . ISSN   0266-4658.
  26. Fukagawa, Yukiko (1997). "East Asian Development Experience: Economic System Approach And Its Applicability". East Asian Development Experience: Economic System Approach and Its Applicability = East Asian Development Experience: Economic System Approach and Its Applicability. Institute of Developing Economies: 79–103. doi:10.20561/00025460.
  27. Ernst & Young. "EY G20 Country Report 2013 South Korea" (PDF). Ernst & Young. Archived (PDF) from the original on 1 December 2016. Retrieved 1 December 2016.
  28. Sam Kim, photography by Gary He (31 July 2018). "NYC's K-Town Isn't What It Used to Be". Vox Media. Archived from the original on 30 December 2020. Retrieved 21 November 2018. Most mom-and-pops are gone, and 32nd Street is now dominated by chains due to high rents and policies in Korea itself.
  29. Albert, Eleanor (4 May 2018). "South Korea's Chaebol Challenge". Council on Foreign Relations. Retrieved 15 June 2023.
  30. "LCD makers fined $388 million for alleged price fixing". CNET. Archived from the original on 1 December 2016. Retrieved 1 December 2016.
  31. "Return of the overlord". The Economist. 31 March 2010. ISSN   0013-0613. Archived from the original on 24 April 2017. Retrieved 1 December 2016.
  32. Sang-hun, Choe (19 October 2016). "Family Behind Korean Conglomerate Lotte Is Indicted in Corruption Case". The New York Times . ISSN   0362-4331. Archived from the original on 30 December 2020. Retrieved 1 December 2016.
  33. Fickling, David (7 July 2016). "Don't Fret Over the Chaebol". Bloomberg Gadfly. Retrieved 1 December 2016.
  34. "To those that have". The Economist. 18 April 2015. ISSN   0013-0613. Archived from the original on 30 December 2020. Retrieved 1 December 2016.
  35. 1 2 3 4 5 Lee, Phil-Sang (2000). "Economic Crisis and Chaebol Reform in Korea". APEC Study Center. Discussion Paper Series, Columbia Business School.
  36. Vaswani, Karishma (24 April 2017). "Is real reform possible at South Korea's chaebols?". BBC News. Archived from the original on 30 December 2020. Retrieved 30 December 2020.
  37. "South Korea's Chaebol Challenge". Council on Foreign Relations. Archived from the original on 1 September 2022. Retrieved 24 August 2022.
  38. 1 2 3 4 Chekan, Kate. "Korea and the Great Recession: The Effects of Chaebol Reform on South Korea's Recovery from the 2008 Financial Crisis" (PDF). Johns Hopkins University. Archived from the original (PDF) on 10 February 2014.
  39. S. Lew (17 December 2013). The Korean Economic Developmental Path: Confucian Tradition, Affective Network. Springer. pp. 106–. ISBN   978-1-137-34729-9. Archived from the original on 30 December 2020. Retrieved 18 October 2017.
  40. Korea's chaebol on social media: Pure communication or marketing tool?, archived from the original on 8 November 2021, retrieved 5 August 2021

General and cited references