By Bernard Rowan
Korea is nearing a three-year anniversary of the Sewol tragedy. This past week's raising of the vessel's hull marks an important moment, but that moment isn't impeaching and removing Park Geun-hye. It isn't the presidential candidates' intent to "get to the bottom" of various allegations. I think most facts already are available for all to understand.
No, the moment of this two-year anniversary marks sluggish action by Korean lawmakers, liberal and conservative. The morass of bad decision-making that stands behind the ferrying industry in South Korea needs control. The poor disaster readiness of Incheon and Coast Guard authorities wants reforms to inspections and procedures. I think a lot more vehemence should occur around pressing the interim and next governments to strengthen rules governing the industry.
Many stories focus on the anguish of families, in particular those still looking for their loved ones. Others concern alleged cover-ups of information and reopening the investigation. I see little discussion of increasing oversight of the ferrying vessels or of introducing new kinds of inspections, checking, and disaster readiness.
This loss of life shouldn't have occurred. A retrofitted vessel exceeding proper capacity took the passengers into danger. Lack of controls and lack of enforcement made this possible. An aging vessel with mechanical flaws and changes to increase carrying capacity and gorge extra profits made any journey on the Sewol a risk at best.
A crew that lacked experience, training, and drilling for disasters joined a national coast guard and emergency staff ill-equipped and sluggish to respond. Port authority protocols for inspections were lax and poorly carried out. Whoever took a trip with these increased human capital problems was taking a risk before they stepped on the vessel.
Among many excellent discussions, the posts on a site called "Ask A Korean!" (askakorean.blogspot.kr) provide excellent summaries of this horrible event's causes. They point to the legal and other reforms needed to prevent another Sewol. What's the legacy of Sewol?
Neoconservative ideologies of "free market economics" fascinate South Koreans. I'd argue some ills in Korea arise from copying it. If ever an incident proved the need for industrial regulation, the Sewol tragedy does so. No one can read the accounts of what had happened to prepare this tragedy and consider deregulation and profit-making not among the chief causes. The public good of safety for passengers and property shows governments must limit the "free" actions of shipbuilders, owners, and port authorities to protect the public interest and consumers.
South Korea carried out such wonders in development last century. The public and the government should develop 21st standards and carry out best practices for this industry. Continuing to leave it to politics and scapegoating of one captain, one ferry company owner, one disgraced president, and the like doesn't assure safety. It likely guarantees a future reoccurrence.
Creating a Ministry of Public Safety and Security is a beginning. However, Korean passengers deserve better standards and investments in trained staff. Regulating ferry crews needs more public and private budgeting. Airline pilots are no more important than crews of ferrying vessels. However, they're better-trained, better-paid, and better-regulated in their work.
I once wrote (Korea Times, 4/29/2014) that Korea should consult the International Maritime Organization and Interferry for construction and operating protocols that none rival. Since South Korea's government needs to operate ferry transport for passengers and cargo, the public must insist on safe operation of ferries. Creating this legacy can expiate the failings of the Sewol. Korean lawmakers and candidates should speak more to this national interest.
Bernard Rowan is associate provost for contract administration and professor of political science at Chicago State University. He is a past fellow of the Korea Foundation and former visiting professor at Hanyang University. Reach him at browan10@yahoo.com
.jpg/dims/resize/740/optimize) |
No, the moment of this two-year anniversary marks sluggish action by Korean lawmakers, liberal and conservative. The morass of bad decision-making that stands behind the ferrying industry in South Korea needs control. The poor disaster readiness of Incheon and Coast Guard authorities wants reforms to inspections and procedures. I think a lot more vehemence should occur around pressing the interim and next governments to strengthen rules governing the industry.
Many stories focus on the anguish of families, in particular those still looking for their loved ones. Others concern alleged cover-ups of information and reopening the investigation. I see little discussion of increasing oversight of the ferrying vessels or of introducing new kinds of inspections, checking, and disaster readiness.
This loss of life shouldn't have occurred. A retrofitted vessel exceeding proper capacity took the passengers into danger. Lack of controls and lack of enforcement made this possible. An aging vessel with mechanical flaws and changes to increase carrying capacity and gorge extra profits made any journey on the Sewol a risk at best.
A crew that lacked experience, training, and drilling for disasters joined a national coast guard and emergency staff ill-equipped and sluggish to respond. Port authority protocols for inspections were lax and poorly carried out. Whoever took a trip with these increased human capital problems was taking a risk before they stepped on the vessel.
Among many excellent discussions, the posts on a site called "Ask A Korean!" (askakorean.blogspot.kr) provide excellent summaries of this horrible event's causes. They point to the legal and other reforms needed to prevent another Sewol. What's the legacy of Sewol?
Neoconservative ideologies of "free market economics" fascinate South Koreans. I'd argue some ills in Korea arise from copying it. If ever an incident proved the need for industrial regulation, the Sewol tragedy does so. No one can read the accounts of what had happened to prepare this tragedy and consider deregulation and profit-making not among the chief causes. The public good of safety for passengers and property shows governments must limit the "free" actions of shipbuilders, owners, and port authorities to protect the public interest and consumers.
South Korea carried out such wonders in development last century. The public and the government should develop 21st standards and carry out best practices for this industry. Continuing to leave it to politics and scapegoating of one captain, one ferry company owner, one disgraced president, and the like doesn't assure safety. It likely guarantees a future reoccurrence.
Creating a Ministry of Public Safety and Security is a beginning. However, Korean passengers deserve better standards and investments in trained staff. Regulating ferry crews needs more public and private budgeting. Airline pilots are no more important than crews of ferrying vessels. However, they're better-trained, better-paid, and better-regulated in their work.
I once wrote (Korea Times, 4/29/2014) that Korea should consult the International Maritime Organization and Interferry for construction and operating protocols that none rival. Since South Korea's government needs to operate ferry transport for passengers and cargo, the public must insist on safe operation of ferries. Creating this legacy can expiate the failings of the Sewol. Korean lawmakers and candidates should speak more to this national interest.
Bernard Rowan is associate provost for contract administration and professor of political science at Chicago State University. He is a past fellow of the Korea Foundation and former visiting professor at Hanyang University. Reach him at browan10@yahoo.com
![[INTERVIEW] Putin uses summit with NK leader to stop Seoul from helping Ukraine: expert](https://img.koreatimes.co.kr/upload/thumbnailV2/a943fc209add47cf8ea82d3a78faf9b3.jpg/dims/resize/178/optimize)
