By Kang Hyun-kyung Staff Reporter Korean voters have been found to be more apt to change their political orientations than American voters, according to survey results in both countries. A Yeoido Institute (YDI) poll, conducted early this year, indicated that there is a meaningful shift in voters' political philosophy over the last decade: The ratio of middle-of-the-road voters has increased by 14.6 percentage points since 1997. The institute is a think tank of the conservative Grand National Party. The survey found that 36.9 percent of the respondents are moderates, 30.3 percent conservatives and 27.1 percent liberals. Yeoido pollsters asked the question: ``How would you describe your own political philosophy: conservative, moderate or liberal?'' to respondents in two separate surveys conducted in 1997 and 2007. The institute conducted its first survey in 1997 and the results showed that moderates accounted for 22.3 percent of the total, conservatives 41.5 percent and liberals 36.2 percent. The past decade saw 14.6 percent of once-liberals and conservatives move toward the center to moderate voters. The trend is dramatic, given that the ratio of moderates in America remained virtually unchanged during the past 35 years. The Harris Poll found the ratio of American moderates has not changed over four decades. Harris pollsters asked the same question as the YDI pollsters to their respondents and the survey was conducted every decade since the 1970s. Results showed that moderates account for about 40 percent during the same period. Asked what has caused Koreans to be more inclined to change in self-assessment of their political ideology than their American counterparts, Prof. Lee Hyeon-woo of the Political Science Department of Sogang University in Seoul told The Korea Times of two possible explanations. Lee said that a shift by 14.6 percent of the population toward a moderate voters' group could be a reflection of the sudden social transformation over the past decade, which largely affected the political orientations of Koreans. The Asian financial crisis hit the nation in late 1997 and the negative fallout of the regional economic malaise has lingered on the following years. Youth unemployment soared dramatically and job security was threatened. A variety of unstable job types such as part-time jobs and short-term contracts began replacing the traditional life-long, permanent positions. A recent Hankook Ilbo poll found that 52.8 percent of Koreans perceived that the financial crisis had dealt the most fatal blow to Korean society over the last two decades. These respondents said that they recognize that the pro-democracy movement in 1987 is the second most significant event that has occurred in the country for the last 20 years. About 10.9 percent of the respondents said the pro-democracy movement mostly dealt a blow to society. The same survey also found that the ratio of Koreans who said their living standard has improved since the financial crisis is almost the same to that of respondents who said it has been undermined. Some 57.5 percent of the respondents said the quality of life has improved since 1987, while 20.8 percent said it has worsened. However, those who said their quality of life has been better since the financial crisis in 1997 accounted for merely 35 percent, and the figure is almost the same as those that feel it has worsened (32.1 percent). Political scientist Lee indicated that the intense social transformation that followed the 1997 crisis could have greatly influenced Koreans' belief system. ``Another possibility still holds true,'' the professor said. ``Many Koreans tend to have misconceptions about their political philosophy and it is a result of misleading criteria.'' According to Lee, people's stance on North Korea and human rights are the two major criteria that can distinguish the conservatives from the liberals. ``There are no other policy areas that could discern conservative from liberals in the country,'' Lee stressed. Many opinion polls still use five major policy areas _ stance on North Korea, economy, social policy, environmentalism and globalization and human rights issues _ to measure voters' political ideology. Therefore, he indicated, Koreans' self-categorization of conservatives, liberals and moderates could be different from what they really are. Misconception could have led them to misdiagnose their political orientation, he indicated. ``Mainly due to the possible misconception, academics in Korea are very careful when they use the term moderate voters,'' he added. Power of Moderate Voters Winning campaign strategies boil down to a simple formula: lock your traditional supporters into your campaign vision and work on moderates to win the election. Indeed, those who are running for elective offices consider moderate voters as important for they believe that these voters will put them in the elective position that they are seeking. Prof. Orit Kedar of the Political Science Department at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) in Cambridge, U.S., said in an email interview with The Korea Times that the bulk of voters in many countries are moderates. ``They want policies in a certain direction either right or left, but not very far from the center, not extreme,'' she said. Lee of Sogang University said these voters are more sensitive to ethical issues and presidential candidates' personal qualities than their extreme counterparts of liberals and conservatives. He said, ``Extreme voters tend to have a strong sense of affiliation with their supporting parties and candidates. Therefore they tend not to withdraw their support easily for a particular party for minor reasons.'' Prof. Kedar pointed out in some races that political parties take a risk by leaving the center ``uncovered,'' because by doing so their rival party can absorb these voters. In the 2000 U.S. presidential election, the political strategists working for Republican candidate George W. Bush coined the term ``compassionate conservatism'' as a core campaign strategy. Prof. Kedar said, ``Mr. Bush was not a moderate in any way,'' but these strategists worked hard to portray Bush as a candidate who successfully embraced social values into his vision for the nation. Kedar made the point that the campaign strategy designed to curry favor with moderate voters has both benefits and costs: Parties and candidates can get votes from these moderates by using the moderate voters-friendly campaign strategy. At the same time, she said, the strategy could end up losing credibility by ``sneaking'' to the center. The political scientist indicated that voters might conclude that a political party attempting to portray itself as a party for all classes could be perceived as the one that does not serve anyone's interest. In her empirical research from 2005, Kedar found that these voters often tend to support the candidate whose positions are more extreme than their own. Center-right voters tend to vote for a conservative party candidate, center-left for a liberal one. ``Voters are concerned with policy outcomes and hence incorporate the way institutions convert votes to policy into their choices,'' she said. Kedar said policy is a result of multiparty bargaining and votes are therefore watered down by power-sharing in the government and the parliamentary system. ``Therefore, voters often compensate for this watering-down by supporting parties whose positions differ from their own,'' she said. hkang@koreatimes.co.kr