Politics at the water's edge: The presidency, Congress, and the North Korea policy of the United States

For all their efforts to avoid a nuclear North Korea, the Clinton and Bush administrations failed to achieve this goal, the most important policy objective of the United States in its relations with North Korea for decades, mainly because of inconsistencies in U.S. policy. This dissertation seeks to explain why both administrations ultimately failed to prevent North Korea from going nuclear. It finds the origins of this failure in the implementation of different U.S. policy options toward North Korea during the Clinton and Bush administrations. To explain the lack of policy consistency, the dissertation investigates how the relations between the executive and the legislative branches and, more specifically, different government types—unified government and divided government—have affected U.S. policy toward North Korea. It particularly emphasizes the role of Congress and partisan politics in the making of U.S. policy toward North Korea. This study finds that divided government played a pivotal role. Partisan politics are also central to the explanation: politics did not stop at the water’s edge. A divided U.S. government produced more status quo policies toward North Korea than a unified U.S. government, while a unified government produced more active policies than a divided government. Moreover, a unified government with a Republican President produced more aggressive policies toward North Korea, whereas a unified government with a Democratic President produced more conciliatory policies. This study concludes that the different government types and intensified partisan politics were the main causes of the inconsistencies in the United States’ North Korea policy that led to a nuclear North Korea.

A Case Study of Health Tourism in the Jeju Province, South Korea

The United States Census Bureau (2006) reported that in 2005 more than 46 million Americans lacked health insurance, and that by 2019 national spending for health care would exceed $4.5 trillion (Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, 2010). Because those numbers are expected to increase, health tourists are seeking better opportunities for low-cost, high-quality treatment in other countries, plus the added benefit of experiencing foreign cultures. Health tourism is a rapidly growing market in both advanced and developing countries. The purpose of this study was to develop an applicable model of health tourism, the Jeju-Style Health Tourism Model, for Jeju Special Self-Governing Province, in the Republic of Korea (South Korea) and to provide other cities and countries with its implications. This study employed a focus group, indepth interviews, and content analysis to discover important factors in developing the model. The results suggested that four major sources must be executed together to maximize the benefits of health tourism development. On a foundation of natural resources, knowledge-based resources were most important (54.5%), followed by artificial resources (25.7%), and expenses-based resources (19.8%).

Survivorship in International Chain Restaurant in Korea

Several western chains have done well in Korea, while others have withdrawn from the market. The authors summarize the current operational results of western chain restaurants in Korea, report positive impacts of western foodservice firms, and analyze the key elements leading to their survival and non-survival. Some lessons could be used as tools to establish entrance strategies of western chain restaurants in Korea as well as in other Asian markets