1 point by slswlsek 2 months ago | flag | hide | 0 comments
A Comparative Analysis of Societal Challenges: Lessons from Global Experiences I. Executive Summary South Korea is currently grappling with a complex array of societal issues, notably a persistently high suicide rate, a low national happiness index, a pervasive perception of a money-centric society, a significant erosion of mutual trust among its citizens, pronounced political polarization, and concerns regarding the integrity and influence of its media landscape. These challenges are not isolated but reflect deep-seated systemic pressures. This report undertakes a comparative analysis, identifying countries such as Japan, the United States, Hungary, and Lithuania that share similar struggles, albeit with their own unique historical and cultural contexts. By examining their experiences, the aim is to understand the underlying processes that perpetuate these issues. In contrast, nations like Norway, Sweden, and Germany are highlighted as examples of resilience and progress, offering valuable perspectives on policies and societal approaches that foster well-being, social cohesion, and trust. The analysis uncovers common threads, including the social repercussions of rapid economic growth, the critical role of social capital, and the profound impact of media on public discourse. Recommendations advocate for holistic, multi-pronged strategies, emphasizing the strengthening of social safety nets, comprehensive investment in mental health infrastructure, promotion of critical media literacy, and the cultivation of inclusive, trust-based governance. II. Introduction: South Korea's Societal Landscape South Korea, a nation celebrated for its remarkable economic development and technological advancement, paradoxically faces profound internal societal challenges that belie its material prosperity. These issues are multifaceted and deeply intertwined, impacting the overall well-being of its citizens. One of the most pressing concerns is the nation's persistently high suicide rate and notably low happiness index. South Korea consistently registers one of the highest suicide rates globally, with 27.5 suicides per 100,000 population in 2021, a figure that stands out even among developed nations.1 Concurrently, its position in the 2024 World Happiness Report is notably low at 53rd overall, indicating a significant disparity between material prosperity and subjective well-being.3 This phenomenon, where economic success does not translate into proportional increases in happiness, is often referred to as a "prosperity paradox." The user's observation of a "money-centric society" resonates with discussions about intense competition, particularly evident in the exorbitant property prices in urban centers like Seoul. This environment fosters immense pressure to succeed economically, often at the expense of personal well-being and a healthy work-life balance.4 Such an economic focus can lead to a relentless pursuit of wealth, potentially overshadowing other aspects of life that contribute to overall happiness and social health. A significant challenge also lies in the lack of mutual trust among citizens and in public institutions. Public trust in South Korean institutions is a notable concern, with trust in the national government, political parties, national parliament, and news media falling below the OECD average.5 This suggests a broader societal trust deficit that impacts social cohesion and the collective ability to address shared problems effectively. When trust erodes, social bonds weaken, and collective action becomes more difficult. Furthermore, South Korea is identified as one of the countries experiencing the most intense partisan conflicts, with approximately nine-in-ten adults perceiving strong divisions between political factions.7 This deep ideological chasm often hinders consensus-building and effective governance, as political discourse becomes more confrontational and less collaborative. The media landscape also contributes to societal divisions. Concerns arise regarding problematic media behavior, particularly through social media platforms. Studies indicate that political content on YouTube channels in South Korea heavily favors opinion over facts (87% vs. 10%) and frequently uses hateful language, reinforcing existing biases and creating "echo chambers".9 This environment can exacerbate polarization by limiting exposure to diverse viewpoints and solidifying entrenched positions. This report seeks to provide a broader context for South Korea's challenges by drawing on international comparisons. By examining other nations grappling with similar issues and those that have successfully navigated them, the aim is to identify universal patterns, unique contextual factors, and actionable strategies that could inform future policy and societal initiatives in South Korea and beyond. III. Countries Facing Similar Societal Challenges A. Japan: The Weight of Tradition and Economic Strain Japan, a nation renowned for its economic prowess and rich cultural heritage, has long grappled with profound societal challenges that bear striking resemblances to those faced by South Korea. These issues are often rooted in a demanding work culture, evolving social dynamics, and the lingering effects of economic shifts. Japan has historically faced high suicide rates, ranking third globally for a decade after Hungary, with approximately 30,000 deaths annually.10 While a decline began in 2012, these rates remain significant.11 A particularly stark manifestation of the nation's intense work ethic is the emergence of "overwork suicide," or karoshi, as a recognized phenomenon. This term underscores the extreme work-life imbalance and stress prevalent in Japanese society, highlighting a societal issue where dedication to work can lead to fatal outcomes.10 The Japanese work culture is characterized by intense commitment, long working hours, strict hierarchies, and a strong emphasis on group success over individual performance.10 This culture, deeply rooted in the nation's post-World War II economic revival, can lead to lower nominal salaries compared to Western counterparts, with promotion often tied to seniority rather than merit, contributing to employee dissatisfaction and stress.13 Beyond the workplace, social integration issues have also contributed to distress. The 1990 Asian financial crisis, for instance, led to a surge in suicides, particularly among middle-aged men (40-59). For these individuals, losing their jobs often meant losing their crucial workplace-based social support systems, which were central to their identity and social fabric.11 For youth, the increasing adoption of individualistic values often clashes with the persistent collectivist social structures, especially within the school system. This tension can result in a decrease in perceived social support and a strong stigma against seeking psychological help, leaving young people feeling isolated and unable to cope with distress.11 While traditionally less polarized than the U.S., Japan has also seen increasing polarization in media coverage of controversial political issues. Major newspapers have adopted sharply critical or supportive stances towards the government, indicating a shift from a more uniform media landscape.14 This trend raises concerns about the erosion of a "middle ground" in public discourse, potentially hindering national dialogue and consensus-building. The processes contributing to these challenges are deeply embedded in Japan's economic and cultural history. The prolonged economic recession since the 1990s significantly contributed to high suicide rates.10 Culturally, suicide was historically "normalized" as an act of individual freedom or a way to take responsibility, often romanticized as a "suicide of resolve" ( kakugo no jisatsu).10 However, the alarming scale of the issue has prompted its re-conceptualization as a genuine mental illness, fostering a new partnership between government and psychiatry to confront this urgent bio-psycho-social issue.10 Émile Durkheim's theory of anomie, which suggests that periods of societal transition force individuals to adapt and restructure their lives, provides a framework for understanding the impact on middle-aged men who lost their social group and support upon unemployment.11 This loss of social support, a critical buffer against life stressors, made the impact of job loss more detrimental, affecting not only financial stability but also their social networks and self-esteem. For young people, the tension between adopted individualistic ideas (often from Western cultures) and the deeply ingrained collectivist nature of Japanese society has led to a decrease in perceived social support, making it difficult for individuals to navigate distress.11 The 1980s marked a period of "rampant consumerism" and "excessive materialism" in Japan, as the nation embraced its financial and material affluence.15 While Japanese consumerism uniquely blends traditional values with modern aspirations, the cultural emphasis on hierarchy can conflict with consumerism's inherent individualism.16 The fleeting satisfaction derived from material purchases often challenges the notion of self-realization through consumption, leading to a complex and sometimes unsatisfying relationship with materialism.16 A critical observation from Japan's experience is the presence of an "economic-cultural trap" for mental health. The research highlights Japan's high suicide rates in conjunction with a demanding work culture and a historical cultural tendency to normalize suicide as an act of "resolve" rather than a mental health crisis.10 This suggests that economic pressures, such as recession, long working hours, and perceived low pay, are exacerbated by a cultural framework that historically did not provide adequate avenues for addressing mental distress, leading to phenomena like "overwork suicide." The recent "medicalization" of suicide indicates a shift in recognition, but the deep-seated cultural and economic drivers remain potent. For South Korea, which shares high suicide rates and a demanding work culture, this pattern is highly relevant. It suggests that purely economic or legislative solutions may be insufficient; a profound cultural shift in societal perceptions of work, success, and mental health is also necessary to address the root causes of distress. Another significant observation pertains to the erosion of traditional social safety nets in modernizing societies. Japanese society is characterized by collectivism, with workplaces traditionally serving as strong social support systems.11 However, the economic crisis led to mass unemployment, which for middle-aged men meant losing not just their jobs but also this critical social network, leading to feelings of anomie and increased suicide.11 Similarly, among youth, the adoption of Western individualism conflicts with persistent collectivist structures in schools, resulting in a lack of perceived social support and a strong stigma against seeking formal psychological help.11 This indicates that rapid economic and cultural shifts can inadvertently dismantle traditional, informal social safety nets, leaving individuals vulnerable and isolated when formal support systems are either inadequate or stigmatized. South Korea, also a rapidly modernizing and historically collectivist society, likely faces similar challenges where traditional community and family structures may be weakening under modern pressures. Policy solutions must therefore consider how to rebuild or create new forms of social integration and actively work to destigmatize formal mental health support services to fill the void left by weakening informal networks. B. United States: Digital Divides and Eroding Trust The United States, a global economic powerhouse, faces its own set of profound societal challenges, many of which are exacerbated by digital transformation and a shifting social landscape. These issues, including declining happiness, eroding trust, and deep polarization, offer important parallels and lessons for other developed nations. Happiness among adult Americans has been on a slow decline since 2000, failing to rebound to 1990s levels even after economic improvements following the 2009 recession.17 More alarmingly, indicators of low psychological well-being, including depression, suicidal ideation, and self-harm, have sharply increased among adolescents since 2010, particularly affecting girls and young women.17 The overall U.S. suicide rate was 15.6 per 100,000 in 2021.1 Pervasive consumerism and materialism are deeply embedded in American society, promoting the idea that well-being and happiness are intrinsically linked to the acquisition of goods and material possessions.18 While some argue it fuels economic growth, critics contend that hyper-consumerism contributes to individual anxiety, depression, and the erosion of social fabric, ultimately failing to deliver genuine happiness.18 The U.S. stands out globally for its deepening political polarization, characterized by a growing "chilly chasm of negative sentiment" between Democrats and Republicans.20 Americans are almost as likely as South Koreans to perceive strong partisan conflicts within their society.7 This intense political division often permeates social interactions and public discourse. The evolution of the U.S. media landscape, particularly with the advent of cable news and social media in the 21st century, has intensified concerns about polarization, misinformation, and declining public trust in news sources.21 Social media platforms, in particular, are identified as major sources of bias, enabling the spread of extreme views and contributing to a fragmented media diet.21 Approximately half of Americans believe national news organizations intentionally mislead or persuade the public.21 A critical underlying issue is the eroding social trust. The proportion of U.S. adults who believe "most people can be trusted" has significantly declined from 46% in 1972 to 34% in 2018/2023-24.22 This decline is notable because it has occurred despite institutional stability, making the U.S. an international outlier.23 Lower social trust is correlated with lower education and income levels, racial and ethnic differences, and a general lack of confidence in institutions such as news organizations, law enforcement, and the federal government.22 The processes contributing to these challenges are deeply intertwined with technological and social shifts. The sharp increase in low psychological well-being among adolescents since 2010 is strongly correlated with the widespread adoption of digital media, including smartphones, social media, and texting. This has displaced traditional face-to-face interaction, non-screen activities, and adequate sleep, all of which are crucial for social connection and mental well-being.17 Digital media can directly affect well-being through phenomena like upward social comparison (e.g., viewing curated "highlight reels" on social media) and cyberbullying, both linked to depression. Indirectly, it reduces happiness by displacing activities known to foster well-being.17 The societal emphasis on continuous acquisition and material possessions, while framed as an economic driver, has been empirically shown to induce anxiety and depression, ultimately failing to contribute to genuine happiness.18 This highlights a fundamental disconnect between material accumulation and subjective well-being. Political polarization is exacerbated by a media environment where individuals increasingly seek out news that confirms their existing views. Social media platforms amplify extreme biases and misinformation, creating "echo chambers" that reinforce an "us versus them" mentality, making constructive dialogue difficult.21 This fragmentation of information contributes to a polarized public sphere where common ground is hard to find. A crucial observation from the U.S. experience is the digitalization of social disconnection and its mental health implications. The data clearly establishes a strong correlation between the rise of digital media (smartphones, social media) since 2010 and the decline in happiness and sharp increase in youth depression, suicidal ideation, and self-harm.17 The core mechanism appears to be the displacement of face-to-face interaction and other non-screen activities, which are crucial for social connection and mental well-being.17 This suggests that while technology offers unprecedented connectivity, it can paradoxically lead to increased social isolation and a reduction in vital social capital, directly impacting psychological health. This phenomenon aligns with the "Easterlin Paradox," where despite economic improvements, happiness does not necessarily increase.17 For South Korea, a highly digitalized society with similar concerns about youth well-being and social trust, this pattern is profoundly relevant. It underscores that technological advancement, while driving economic benefits, can have significant negative externalities on social cohesion and mental health if not proactively managed. This highlights the urgent need for comprehensive digital literacy programs, initiatives to promote offline social engagement, and robust strategies to address cyberbullying and online harassment. Another significant pattern is the vicious cycle of eroding trust and amplified polarization. The decline in general social trust in the U.S. is deeply intertwined with escalating political polarization.20 The media landscape, particularly social media, acts as a critical amplifier in this cycle by facilitating the spread of extreme bias and misinformation, leading to the formation of "echo chambers" and reinforcing an "us versus them" outlook.21 This creates a detrimental feedback loop: low trust makes individuals more susceptible to populist rhetoric and less confident in established institutions 22, which in turn is strategically exploited by political actors to deepen societal divisions and undermine democratic processes.20 South Korea's similarly high levels of partisan conflict and concerns about media conduct 7 suggest it is also caught in this self-reinforcing cycle. Addressing polarization effectively therefore requires not only political solutions but also a concerted effort to rebuild fundamental social trust and to enhance media literacy across the population to counteract the spread of misinformation and the fragmentation of public discourse into isolated echo chambers. C. Hungary: Transitions, Inequality, and Controlled Narratives Hungary's societal challenges are largely shaped by its post-communist transition, which brought both economic liberalization and new forms of social strain, compounded by a media landscape increasingly influenced by the state. Historically, Hungary recorded nearly the highest suicide rate in the world in the decades leading up to its 1989 social system transition.25 While rates saw a radical decrease post-transition, they remain significant.1 The post-communist transformation led to a shift from a relatively egalitarian society to one with increasing class stratification and significant income disparities. The living standards for approximately one-third of the population declined to below subsistence levels by the mid-1990s.26 Poverty rates, while appearing low by median income standards, are higher when adjusted for purchasing power, and guaranteed minimum income benefits are inadequate.27 While not explicitly detailed as "low social trust" in all provided data, the context strongly implies a low-trust environment. The rapid and often corrupt privatization process during the transition, where state assets were secretly funneled to political figures, likely significantly eroded public trust.26 Broader European trends also indicate a decline in trust 28, and widespread concern about democratic values and media integrity in Hungary 29 further suggests a general lack of confidence in institutions and fellow citizens. A defining characteristic of Hungary's contemporary challenges is its government-influenced media bias and polarization. The Orbán government has systematically consolidated its control over state-run, conservative, and even independent media through legislative reforms and acquisitions, enabling it to disseminate its own narrative, including disinformation.30 This results in a media landscape that prioritizes government-favorable opinions, leading 44% of Hungarians to believe there is no free and independent media.29 This control contributes to a highly polarized public discourse, even if the underlying public opinion is less divided than the rhetoric suggests.29 The processes underlying these problems are deeply rooted in Hungary's recent history. The radical decrease in suicide rates following the 1989 transition directly correlated with a marked increase in emigration. This emigration is interpreted as an "escape from entrapment" and a "constructive rite of passage" for individuals who felt stifled by the rigid communist system.25 The introduction of the "world passport" in 1988 and later EU accession facilitated this outward migration, offering an alternative path for those seeking to escape difficult circumstances.25 While economic reforms brought some stability, they were accompanied by significant social costs, particularly widespread corruption during the privatization process. This led to the rapid creation of wealth disparities and a more class-structured society, dismantling the previous cradle-to-grave social welfare system.26 The government's strategic control over media outlets and funding allocations has effectively shaped public opinion and reinforced pro-government narratives, contributing to a highly polarized information environment. This has created a segment of "Hard Fidesz" followers who uncritically consume and believe pro-government media, contributing to the perceived societal division.29 In the vacuum left by the collapse of traditional civil society institutions (family, community, church) under the pressures of "unlimited freedom of liberalism," consumer materialism has emerged as a dominant cultural factor.32 This has fostered a "consumption search engine" mindset, where continuous acquisition becomes a primary life goal, potentially leading to an "unhappy consciousness" and a nihilistic pursuit of artificial needs.32 This suggests that without strong social structures or shared values, individuals may turn to material consumption as a substitute for meaning and fulfillment. A significant observation from Hungary's experience is the role of emigration as a societal pressure release valve. Hungary's dramatic reduction in suicide rates post-communism is strongly correlated with increased emigration.25 The study explicitly frames emigration as a "constructive rite of passage" and an "escape from entrapment" from a previously rigid system.25 This suggests that for a population experiencing immense social and economic pressures, the ability to emigrate can function as a crucial psychological and societal pressure release, potentially diverting individuals from suicidal ideation by offering a perceived alternative or hope for a better future elsewhere. While emigration is not a direct "solution" to underlying domestic problems, it can inadvertently mask the true severity of internal societal issues by removing a portion of the distressed population. For countries like South Korea, which also faces intense societal pressures and high suicide rates, this highlights the importance of providing genuine avenues for hope and perceived "escape," whether through internal reforms that improve living conditions and opportunities, or by recognizing the role of international mobility in managing population-wide stress. Another critical pattern is the weaponization of media and its impact on democratic health. The Hungarian government's systematic control and manipulation of media 30 create a highly biased and often disinformative information environment, leading a significant portion of the public to believe there is no free press.29 This goes beyond mere media bias; it is a deliberate strategy to shape public discourse, amplify "culture war" narratives, and reinforce political divisions.29 While the underlying citizen sentiment might be less polarized than the rhetoric suggests 29, the controlled narrative erodes trust in democratic values and institutions, making genuine social dialogue and consensus-building exceptionally difficult. This serves as a stark warning for South Korea, which already experiences significant media bias and polarization concerns.9 It demonstrates how strategic media control, even within a nominally democratic framework, can severely undermine social trust and the health of democratic processes by prioritizing political narratives over factual reporting and fostering an environment where critical thinking is suppressed. D. Lithuania: Rapid Change and Persistent Social Gaps Lithuania, a nation that has undergone a rapid and profound transformation from a post-Soviet state to a modern European economy, presents a compelling case study of how swift economic progress can coexist with persistent social challenges. Lithuania consistently has the highest suicide rate in the EU and the second highest in the OECD (after South Korea) as of 2021, despite a decreasing trend since its 1995 peak.33 This indicates deeply entrenched issues that economic growth alone has not resolved. The country also struggles with high income inequality, ranking among the highest in the European Union.34 This disparity is attributed to factors like a limited progressive tax system, a significant shadow economy, and uneven opportunities for quality education and well-paid employment.34 Wealth disparity is particularly pronounced between urban centers and rural areas, creating a noticeable divide in living standards and opportunities.36 High rates of alcoholism are identified as a contributing factor to the high suicide rates, often linked to traditional masculinity norms and a prevailing stigma against seeking psychological help.33 Furthermore, there is a noted lack of sufficient psychological services and comprehensive suicide prevention efforts across many municipalities, particularly in rural populations, leaving many vulnerable individuals without adequate support.33 The media landscape in Lithuania also faces significant challenges. Political actors are identified as major sources of public opinion manipulation, fabricating and disseminating misinformation to mobilize support and foment discontent, leading to a general distrust of media.37 Trust in media has reached record lows, and journalists face online and physical harassment.37 Populist alternative media plays a significant role in reinforcing polarized beliefs, further fragmenting public discourse.31 The processes contributing to these challenges are deeply rooted in Lithuania's post-Soviet trajectory. The nation's rapid socioeconomic transformation from an impoverished state to a high-income country in just 25 years 38 has had complex social impacts. Research suggests that economic deprivation experienced during childhood can have a "lagging effect," predicting higher materialism later in life for youth.38 A striking paradox exists in Lithuania: young people (under 30) report being among the happiest on Earth, a stark contrast to older generations who endured Soviet rule and the difficult 1990s.36 This youth happiness is linked to the country's economic prosperity, a vibrant tech and finance hub, affordable education, and a more open-minded social environment. However, this happiness is not uniformly distributed due to significant wealth disparity and the urban-rural divide.36 Traditional masculinity norms, often associated with excessive alcohol consumption and a cultural stigma surrounding seeking psychological help, are identified as contributing factors to the disproportionately high male suicide rates.33 This highlights the need for culturally sensitive interventions to address mental health. A significant observation from Lithuania's experience is the paradox of rapid economic growth and persistent social ills. Lithuania's journey from poverty to a high-income country in a short span 38 has brought about a unique situation where its youth are among the happiest globally 36, yet the nation continues to grapple with exceptionally high suicide rates and severe income inequality.33 This suggests that rapid economic growth, while improving overall living standards and creating opportunities for some, does not automatically resolve deep-seated social problems such as alcoholism, mental health crises, and wealth disparities.33 The stark generational divide in happiness further illustrates that the benefits and burdens of rapid societal change are distributed unevenly across different demographic groups and over time. This is a crucial lesson for South Korea, which has also experienced rapid, intense economic growth. It highlights that national prosperity, measured by economic indicators, does not guarantee societal well-being or happiness for all. Instead, it underscores the vital need for targeted and sustained interventions in areas of mental health, comprehensive strategies to address wealth disparity, and proactive measures to tackle specific social issues like alcoholism and lack of access to psychological services, even amidst economic success. Another important pattern is the vulnerability of social capital in rapidly shifting societies. Lithuania's high income inequality is linked to structural factors like a less progressive tax system and uneven educational and employment opportunities.34 The COVID-19 pandemic reportedly led to a decrease in social interactions and, consequently, social capital.34 This, combined with low social trust and pronounced anti-media sentiment 37, paints a picture of a society where social bonds and collective trust are either fragile or under active attack. The observation that vulnerable segments of the population are more susceptible to materialism 38 further indicates a breakdown in social resilience and a search for fulfillment in material possessions when other forms of social support are lacking. For South Korea, which also struggles with social trust and faces rapid societal changes, this emphasizes the critical importance of actively investing in and rebuilding social capital and community cohesion. Policies need to extend beyond economic indicators to foster interpersonal trust, create a more tolerant and supportive social environment, and mitigate the divisive effects of misinformation and political manipulation, especially in the context of rapid modernization and digitalization. IV. Countries Demonstrating Progress or Resilience A. Norway: A Blueprint for Well-being and Social Cohesion Norway consistently stands out in global rankings as a nation that has successfully fostered high levels of happiness and social cohesion. Its approach offers a compelling model for countries grappling with complex societal challenges. Norway consistently ranks among the top countries in global happiness reports, holding the top spot in 2017 and maintaining a strong position at seventh in 2023.3 This sustained high level of well-being is a testament to its societal model, which prioritizes collective welfare. A fundamental cornerstone of Norway's success is its robust social welfare system. This includes universal healthcare, free education (extending to higher education), and generous social benefits, all of which significantly alleviate financial stress and ensure that all individuals, regardless of income, have access to essential services.39 This extensive safety net fosters an inclusive society where people feel secure during times of need. Norwegians exhibit a high degree of confidence in their transparent and efficient public institutions, which are characterized by low corruption and good governance.39 This pervasive mutual trust extends beyond the government to everyday interactions, fostering strong community bonds and a sense of collective support. The comprehensive social welfare system is largely funded by a progressive taxation system, which plays a crucial role in maintaining low levels of income inequality.39 This equitable distribution of wealth is frequently cited as a significant factor in global happiness studies. Furthermore, Norwegian society places a strong emphasis on balancing professional life with personal time. This is reflected in flexible working hours, substantial paid vacation time, and generous parental leave policies for both mothers and fathers.39 The cultural concept of "friluftsliv" (open-air living), which encourages regular immersion in nature, further embodies this balance, contributing to overall well-being.39 Norway's policies and practices provide a clear roadmap for fostering well-being. Key policy interventions focus on strengthening income redistribution through highly progressive taxation and enhanced social transfers, including cash benefits, pensions, and subsidies for essential services.40 Education at all levels, from preschool to PhD studies, is tax-financed and free, ensuring broad access to quality learning. Universal health insurance covers the entire population for all health issues except dental care, providing high-quality and accessible services.41 The government maintains transparent and efficient public institutions, characterized by low corruption, which is a key factor in fostering public trust.39 Strategic investments in job creation, upskilling programs, and improved access to early childhood education are designed to boost opportunities for all, particularly targeting individuals with low socioeconomic status.40 Finally, Norwegian policies strongly prioritize equality and non-discrimination, evident in initiatives promoting gender equality and legislation ensuring non-discrimination online.39 Despite its overall success, Norway faces evolving challenges. There has been a gradual increase in the proportion of individuals living in low-income households (from 8.1% to 10.1% over the past decade).40 This disproportionately affects immigrant populations, with over 30% at risk of poverty or social exclusion in 2022, compared to just under 15% for native-born Norwegians.40 Child poverty has also regrettably increased.40 The upcoming parliamentary elections in September 2025 suggest a potential shift in leadership. The rise of the right-wing Progress Party, if it secures power, could lead to a deprioritization of poverty reduction due to its focus on healthcare competition, privatization, and tax exemptions for the wealthy.40 A fundamental observation from Norway's experience is the interdependence of economic equality and social trust. Norway's consistently high happiness is deeply and causally linked to its low income inequality and high social trust.39 The progressive taxation system directly funds comprehensive universal services (healthcare, education, social benefits), which significantly alleviates financial stress and ensures equitable access to essential resources for all citizens.39 This creates a virtuous cycle: economic policies that actively reduce inequality directly build and reinforce trust in public institutions and among citizens, as people perceive a fair and supportive system that benefits everyone. This fosters a collective sense of security and belonging. For South Korea, which struggles with both high economic inequality and low social trust, Norway's model provides a compelling case. It suggests that addressing wealth disparities through robust social welfare programs, funded by progressive taxation, could be a foundational and highly effective step towards rebuilding societal trust and significantly improving overall national happiness and well-being. Another important consideration is the dynamic nature of societal well-being and the need for continuous adaptation. While Norway is often presented as a "blueprint" for well-being, the recent increase in poverty, particularly among immigrant populations 40, and the looming concern of potential political shifts that could alter policy priorities 40 highlight that societal well-being is not a static achievement. Even highly successful models face evolving challenges (e.g., integrating new demographics, adapting to global economic shifts) and require ongoing policy vigilance, flexibility, and adaptation. Prosperity does not inoculate a nation against new forms of inequality or social fragmentation. This emphasizes that there is no "final solution" for complex societal problems. Countries like South Korea can certainly learn from Norway's successful framework and foundational principles. However, they must also internalize the lesson that societal well-being requires continuous monitoring, proactive anticipation of new demographic and economic pressures, and a commitment to ensuring that policies remain inclusive and responsive to the needs of all segments of the population, thereby preventing new disparities from undermining overall progress. B. Sweden: Navigating Polarization with Openness Sweden, another Nordic nation often lauded for its strong social fabric and democratic values, offers a nuanced case study in navigating the complexities of modern political polarization, particularly in the context of high openness and transparency. Sweden, similar to its Nordic neighbor Norway, exhibits very high levels of interpersonal trust, with over 60% of survey respondents indicating that they trust most people.42 This high social capital contributes significantly to societal stability and the smooth functioning of its democratic institutions. Furthermore, Sweden is renowned for its exceptionally strong public transparency mechanisms, including the principle of public access to official documents ("offentlighetsprincipen") which dates back to 1766, ensuring an unparalleled level of governmental openness.46 This is complemented by robust press freedom, which is a cornerstone of its democratic governance. The "offentlighetsprincipen" ensures governmental openness by granting citizens the right to access virtually all public documents, including details on civil servant expenses, government projects, and even public officials' salaries. This mechanism is designed to foster accountability and trust by making government actions visible to the public.46 While specific policies are not detailed, the broader context of addressing polarization suggests that efforts to rebuild community engagement and foster interpersonal trust are crucial.24 Sweden's historical consensus culture provides a foundation for such efforts, emphasizing dialogue and collective problem-solving.47 Despite its history of consensus, Sweden now exhibits particularly high levels of affective polarization, comparable to the U.S. in some contexts.48 This has resulted in a severe polarization of public discourse, where debates often devolve into "right or wrong" standpoints, and community identity is increasingly defined by collective distance from those holding opposing views.47 Paradoxically, Sweden's robust transparency mechanisms have been strategically exploited by populist radical-right parties (e.g., the Sweden Democrats). These parties leverage publicly available information and digital media (including alleged "troll factories") to expose political scandals, erode trust in traditional elites, and amplify anti-elite populist narratives.46 This effectively "weaponizes" transparency, turning a tool intended for accountability into one for delegitimizing democratic institutions.46 The advent of the internet and social media has fragmented Sweden's once stable media landscape. Opinion journalists have gained prominence over news journalists, contributing to the polarization of public conversation. Social media platforms, in particular, reward emotional news and fuel polarization through fake news, bots, and organized troll accounts, creating an environment where facts are secondary to strong, polarized beliefs.47 This shift makes it harder for citizens to access unbiased information and fosters echo chambers. A critical observation from Sweden's experience is the concept of the double-edged sword of transparency and openness. Sweden's high social trust and strong transparency laws 42 are generally considered pillars of a healthy democracy. However, the research reveals a critical paradox: these very mechanisms have been "weaponized" by populist parties. By strategically using publicly available information and digital media, these parties amplify scandals and erode trust in traditional institutions, turning transparency into a tool for generating distrust rather than accountability.46 This highlights that while transparency is essential, its impact is contingent on the broader information environment and the actors within it. For South Korea, which faces significant concerns about media conduct and political polarization, this observation is crucial. It suggests that simply having a free press or transparent government is insufficient. There is a pressing need for comprehensive media literacy education, robust critical thinking skills among citizens, and potentially regulatory frameworks to counter the deliberate manipulation of information and the pervasive spread of disinformation, especially on social media, to prevent transparency from inadvertently deepening societal divides. Another important pattern is the shift from ideological to affective polarization. The research on Sweden's polarization indicates that "affective polarization"—characterized by pervasive negative attitudes and hostility toward opposing parties—is particularly high.48 This signifies a shift where political divisions are no longer solely about policy differences but are increasingly driven by deep-seated dislike and distrust of "the other side".47 This emotional component is exacerbated by social media algorithms, which tend to reward negativity and reinforce existing biases, thereby creating and deepening echo chambers.47 South Korea's documented "strong partisan conflicts" 7 likely involve a significant affective component, similar to Sweden. Addressing this type of polarization requires strategies that extend beyond traditional policy debates. It necessitates efforts to rebuild empathy, promote genuine cross-group interaction, and actively mitigate the negative feedback loops created by social media that amplify animosity and prevent constructive dialogue. This involves fostering a culture of respectful disagreement and shared national identity. C. Germany: Sustaining Stability Amidst Modern Pressures Germany, a major European power, offers a valuable perspective on how a developed nation can work to sustain social stability and trust amidst contemporary pressures, including economic uncertainty, political fragmentation, and the challenges of digitalization. Germany demonstrated stable levels of in-group and out-group trust, as well as prosocial attitudes, even during the challenging COVID-19 pandemic.49 While sociability orientations decreased and society was perceived as less solidary during this period, the core elements of trust remained relatively stable. This resilience suggests a foundational strength in its social capital. Germany also maintains a stable midfield position in the IW Trust Index, which measures trust across political, economic, and social systems. It ranked 8th overall in both 2015 and 2022 compared to other European countries, indicating a consistent level of institutional confidence.28 The country is actively engaged in measures designed to strengthen trust and democratic resilience, including enhancing democratic institutions through political education and promoting transparent decision-making processes.28 Germany's policies and practices reflect a proactive approach to maintaining social cohesion. A crucial measure identified for strengthening trust is educating the public on how to critically evaluate and deal with fake news and disinformation, recognizing the pervasive influence of digital media.28 Fostering social dialogue is also considered essential for counteracting political polarization and social fragmentation, encouraging constructive engagement across differing viewpoints.28 A distinctive policy is Germany's maintenance of a strong "Brandmauer" (firewall) against the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) party. Mainstream parliamentary blocs have largely refused to govern in coalition with the AfD, a stance deeply rooted in the country's historical experience with Nazism.50 This has, to a significant extent, contained the political influence of extremist parties and prevented extreme polarization from fully entering mainstream governance. Despite its relative stability, trust in Germany is under pressure from multiple crises, including economic uncertainty, political polarization, and the pervasive effects of digitalization.28 Only 14% of Germans believe the next generation will be better off than the current one, indicating underlying anxieties about the future.28 The far-right AfD explicitly aims to foment U.S.-style polarization, seeking to create a "duel between two irreconcilably opposed camps".50 The political landscape is further fragmented by the emergence of new populist parties, contributing to a more complex and potentially divisive political environment.51 Social media continues to undermine trust in established institutions by creating "filter bubbles" (where algorithms confirm existing views) and facilitating the rapid spread of disinformation, making it challenging for citizens to access balanced information.28 A key observation from Germany's experience is the importance of proactive measures against polarization, even in stable democracies. Germany, despite its relative stability in social capital and trust 28, actively acknowledges and implements measures to counter the threats of political polarization and disinformation, particularly from the far-right.28 This demonstrates that even robust democracies cannot afford complacency; continuous and proactive efforts in political education, media literacy, and fostering social dialogue are necessary to maintain stability and trust in a dynamic environment. The unique "firewall" against the far-right is a historically-informed policy choice that has, to some extent, prevented extreme polarization from fully taking hold in mainstream politics.50 For South Korea, this emphasizes the critical need for proactive and sustained efforts to counter polarization and misinformation, rather than waiting for these issues to escalate to crisis levels. Investing in comprehensive civic education, promoting media literacy across all demographics, and actively fostering inclusive public discourse are crucial preventative measures that can build long-term societal resilience. Another important pattern to consider is the role of historical context in shaping societal resilience. Germany's exceptionally strong stance against the far-right, manifested in its "Brandmauer" or "firewall" 50, is explicitly and deeply rooted in its traumatic Nazi past. This historical experience has instilled a profound collective societal aversion to extreme political divisions and the rise of authoritarian movements. This suggests that a nation's historical experiences can profoundly shape its collective values, institutional frameworks, and policy responses to contemporary challenges, potentially making it more resilient to certain threats by embedding a collective memory and commitment to democratic principles. While South Korea's historical context is distinct, understanding how its own past experiences—such as rapid industrialization, periods of authoritarian rule, and the enduring division with North Korea—might shape its current societal issues and influence the feasibility and effectiveness of potential solutions is crucial. Leveraging historical lessons to foster national unity, promote democratic values, and address deep-seated societal divisions could be a powerful and culturally resonant approach. V. Cross-Cutting Analysis: Shared Patterns and Divergent Paths The comparative analysis of South Korea and other nations reveals both common underlying factors contributing to societal challenges and divergent paths taken in addressing them. Understanding these shared patterns and successful strategies provides valuable insights for navigating complex national issues. A recurring theme across South Korea, Japan, and Lithuania is that rapid economic growth, while bringing prosperity, has often come at significant social costs. These include heightened competition, severe work-life imbalance, the erosion of traditional social structures, and rising income inequality.4 South Korea's "money-centric" society and Japan's "overwork suicide" are direct manifestations of these intense pressures, where societal values become heavily skewed towards material success. A consistent and alarming pattern among the troubled nations (South Korea, U.S., Hungary, Lithuania) is a decline in general social trust and a weakening of mutual reliance among citizens.5 This erosion is exacerbated by perceptions of corruption 26, the fragmentation of traditional social bonds 11, and the divisive influence of media. When people trust each other and their institutions less, social cohesion diminishes, making it harder to address collective problems. The widespread adoption of digital media, while offering unprecedented connectivity, paradoxically contributes to social isolation 17, significantly amplifies political polarization, and facilitates the rapid spread of misinformation.9 This creates pervasive "echo chambers" and fosters an "us vs. them" mentality, undermining reasoned public discourse and making it difficult for citizens to engage with diverse viewpoints. South Korea, the U.S., Hungary, and Sweden all exhibit significant political polarization.7 This often translates into deep societal division, a pervasive sense of distrust, and a tendency to focus on "culture war" issues, which actively hinders constructive dialogue and consensus-building on critical national challenges. Conversely, countries demonstrating resilience employ effective strategies. Norway's model clearly demonstrates how comprehensive universal healthcare, free education, and generous social benefits, funded by progressive taxation, can effectively alleviate financial stress, significantly reduce inequality, and foster high levels of social trust.39 This creates a strong societal safety net and a pervasive sense of security among citizens. Norway's commitment to flexible working hours, substantial paid vacation time, and generous parental leave policies contributes significantly to its high happiness levels and overall societal well-being.39 Its consistently low corruption levels and transparent public institutions are fundamental to fostering high public trust.39 While Sweden's transparency has been strategically exploited by populists, the underlying principle of openness, when combined with media literacy, remains a crucial democratic strength. Germany's concerted focus on promoting media literacy, fostering social dialogue, and maintaining a "firewall" against extremist political parties 28 underscores the critical importance of active intervention to preserve social cohesion in the face of modern information challenges. The negative experiences of Japan, Lithuania, and the U.S. implicitly emphasize the critical need for accessible and destigmatized psychological services, alongside concerted efforts to rebuild social integration and community support. The analysis unequivocally demonstrates that these societal issues are deeply interconnected and cannot be addressed in isolation. Economic pressures, such as inequality and demanding work cultures, directly impact mental health and erode social trust. Political polarization and problematic media behavior further exacerbate this erosion of trust and actively prevent effective collective action or consensus-building on national issues. Conversely, successful countries illustrate that integrated approaches, where economic policies actively support social well-being and political systems are designed to foster trust, dialogue, and accountability, are paramount for achieving genuine societal resilience and happiness. One significant observation is the "prosperity paradox" and the limits of GDP as a well-being indicator. South Korea, Japan, and Lithuania have all achieved significant economic prosperity and are classified as advanced economies with high GDPs.10 Yet, they simultaneously struggle with persistently high suicide rates and low happiness indices.1 In contrast, Norway, also with a high GDP, consistently ranks among the happiest nations.39 This stark divergence indicates that raw economic output or national wealth, while providing resources, does not automatically translate into societal well-being or happiness. The "prosperity paradox" suggests that the distribution of wealth, the prevailing work culture, and the strength of social safety nets are far more critical determinants of a nation's happiness and mental health than mere economic growth. This observation fundamentally challenges a purely economic-centric view of national success. For South Korea, it implies that continued singular focus on economic growth without parallel and substantial investment in social infrastructure, comprehensive mental health initiatives, and equitable distribution of wealth will likely perpetuate its current array of profound societal problems, despite any further economic gains. Another crucial pattern is the critical role of social capital as a buffer against modern stressors. Countries that exhibit high levels of social trust (e.g., Norway, Sweden, Germany) generally report higher happiness and demonstrate greater resilience to political polarization and social fragmentation.24 Conversely, nations experiencing declining social trust (e.g., U.S., South Korea, Hungary, Lithuania) consistently struggle with intensified polarization and other pervasive social ills.7 Social capital, defined as the networks of relationships among people that enable society to function effectively, acts as a vital buffer against economic shocks, rapid social change, and the divisive forces of modern media. When this social capital erodes—whether due to the atomizing effects of digital media, the pressures of rapid societal transformation, or deliberate political manipulation—societal problems tend to intensify and become more intractable. Rebuilding and strengthening social capital should be a foundational and primary policy objective for countries like South Korea. This involves a multi-faceted approach: actively fostering community engagement and civic participation, ensuring fair and transparent governance, and proactively mitigating factors that erode trust, such as the spread of misinformation and the escalation of extreme partisan rhetoric. Investing in social cohesion is as crucial as investing in economic growth for long-term national well-being. VI. Recommendations and Pathways Forward Addressing the complex, interconnected societal challenges requires a holistic and multi-pronged approach, drawing lessons from both the struggles of similar nations and the successes of resilient ones. For South Korea, a nation at a critical juncture, these recommendations offer pathways toward enhanced well-being and social stability. Strengthening Social Safety Nets and Reducing Inequality The experience of Norway demonstrates the profound impact of a comprehensive universal welfare state. To mitigate the social costs of rapid economic development and address existing disparities, South Korea should consider emulating Norway's commitment to robust social safety nets. This involves implementing universal healthcare and expanding free education systems from early childhood to higher education to alleviate financial burdens and ensure equitable access to essential services.39 A key component to funding these robust social benefits and ensuring a more equitable distribution of wealth is increasing progressive taxation, thereby actively reducing income disparities.39 A thorough review and reform of the current tax system to enhance its progressivity would be a crucial first step. Furthermore, prioritizing expanded access to affordable housing, quality public services, and educational opportunities nationwide, specifically targeting and addressing the significant urban-rural disparities that contribute to inequality, can foster a more equitable society. Investing in Mental Health and Well-being The severe consequences observed in Japan, Lithuania, and the U.S. underscore the critical importance of addressing mental health. South Korea can learn from these experiences by implementing national strategies to actively acknowledge, destigmatize, and integrate mental health issues into public discourse. This necessitates significantly increasing funding and improving accessibility for psychological and psychiatric services, ensuring they are available not only in major urban centers but also in rural areas and for particularly vulnerable populations.11 Launching sustained national campaigns to shift cultural perceptions surrounding mental illness and seeking professional help is vital. Additionally, integrating comprehensive mental health support and counseling services directly into workplaces, schools, and community centers, making them easily accessible and a normal part of life, can foster a more supportive environment. Promoting Healthy Work-Life Balance Norway's commitment to a balanced life offers a valuable model for South Korea's demanding work culture. Adopting policies and fostering cultural shifts that encourage a healthy balance between work and personal life is essential. This includes promoting flexible working hours, ensuring substantial paid vacation time, and implementing generous parental leave policies for both parents.39 Implementing and rigorously enforcing legislation on maximum working hours can combat the pervasive "overwork" culture, while encouraging companies to adopt flexible work arrangements and prioritize employee well-being can foster a more sustainable and happier workforce. Fostering Social Cohesion and Trust Rebuilding and strengthening social capital is a foundational objective for South Korea. The success of nations like Norway, Sweden, and Germany in maintaining high social trust, even amidst challenges, provides a compelling blueprint.28 This requires actively fostering community engagement and civic participation through local initiatives and supporting civil society organizations. Ensuring fair and transparent governance, characterized by low corruption and accountability, is paramount for rebuilding public confidence in institutions.39 Mitigating factors that erode trust, such as the spread of misinformation and the escalation of extreme partisan rhetoric, is also crucial. Promoting intergroup dialogue and shared national identity can help bridge divides and foster a greater sense of collective belonging. Enhancing Media Literacy and Countering Disinformation The experiences of the U.S., Hungary, and Sweden highlight the profound impact of media on polarization and trust. South Korea must enhance media literacy across all demographics to empower citizens to critically evaluate information and identify bias and disinformation.21 This can involve educational programs in schools and public awareness campaigns. Supporting independent journalism and diverse media outlets can counteract the formation of echo chambers and ensure a more balanced information environment. Potentially, exploring regulatory frameworks that encourage platform accountability for the spread of harmful misinformation, while upholding freedom of expression, could also be considered. Cultivating Inclusive Political Discourse To address deep political polarization, South Korea can draw lessons from Germany's proactive stance and Sweden's challenges with affective polarization. This involves actively fostering a culture of respectful political debate that prioritizes issue-based discussions over personal attacks and "culture war" narratives.28 Promoting civic education that emphasizes democratic values, critical thinking, and the importance of compromise can build a more resilient political culture. Encouraging cross-party collaboration and seeking common ground on national challenges, rather than solely focusing on partisan victories, is essential for effective governance and reducing societal friction. VII. Conclusions South Korea stands at a critical juncture, facing a complex interplay of high suicide rates, low happiness, a money-centric society, eroding trust, and deep polarization. These challenges are not unique, with nations like Japan, the United States, Hungary, and Lithuania experiencing similar struggles rooted in rapid economic development, digital transformation, and shifting social dynamics. The analysis reveals that while economic prosperity provides resources, it does not automatically translate into societal well-being. Instead, the distribution of wealth, the strength of social safety nets, and the health of social capital are far more critical determinants of national happiness and resilience. Conversely, countries like Norway, Sweden, and Germany demonstrate that proactive, holistic approaches can foster greater well-being and social cohesion. Their successes underscore the vital role of robust social welfare systems, transparent governance, a focus on work-life balance, and concerted efforts to counter disinformation and polarization. The experiences of these nations highlight that societal well-being is a dynamic achievement requiring continuous adaptation and vigilance. Ultimately, addressing South Korea's multifaceted challenges demands a comprehensive and integrated strategy that extends beyond purely economic metrics. It necessitates a profound societal commitment to strengthening social safety nets, investing in mental health, promoting a healthy work-life balance, rebuilding social trust, enhancing media literacy, and fostering inclusive political discourse. By learning from global experiences and implementing targeted, long-term interventions, South Korea can cultivate a society where prosperity is matched by genuine happiness, trust, and collective well-being for all its citizens. 참고 자료