Beyond Predestined Failure: Reassessing Structural Determinism in South Korea's COVID-19 Response

Area of Science:

• Public Policy Analysis
• Health Economics
• Epidemiology

Background:

• Critiques the "predestined failure of the market mechanism" thesis for its structural determinism.
• Argues that government policy discretion and state actions significantly influence market outcomes.
• Highlights the need to consider empirical evidence over theoretical determinism in policy analysis.

Purpose of the Study:

• To challenge the market-failure framework in explaining public health crises.
• To propose an alternative model focusing on government policy and institutional legacies.
• To offer a falsifiable explanation for the ICU bed crisis and public health response dynamics.

Main Methods:

• Policy analysis of government mandates and public health strategies.
• Institutional analysis examining path dependency from historical outbreaks (e.g., MERS).
• Comparative critique of market-based versus government-driven crisis models.

Main Results:

• Identifies state mandates reallocating ICU beds as a key factor, contradicting the "powerless state" premise.
• Characterizes the ICU bed crisis as a state-driven demand issue stemming from an "isolate-for-all" strategy.
• Proposes a "competent but rigid" government model explaining crisis response effectiveness and limitations.

Conclusions:

• Government policy discretion, not inherent market failure, is central to understanding public health crises.
• Path dependency and institutional legacies (e.g., MERS response) create "success traps" influencing subsequent performance.
• Strategic rigidity within government structures offers a more accurate lens for analyzing public health response failures and successes.