We are So Late as Always, but Not That Much: Fabrication of Underpinning Discourse in the Case of AI Governance in South Korea

In the development of emerging technologies, the role of government cannot be overemphasized in South Korea where gross domestic spending on R&D reaches 4.55% (OECD 2019). ICT is one of the most emblematic examples of governmental support. Not only has the field been championed by the government since the late 1980s (Shin 2019), which has arguably made the industry internationally competitive, but also, the promotion of ICT, notably AI and Data Science, is still at the center of the national agenda set up by the Presidential Committee on the Fourth Industrial Revolution. However, although the country has become a global leader in the field, the ICT governance in South Korea has not been sufficiently analyzed, partly due to the language barrier. Moreover, Korean scholars have been mostly interested in general research policy instead of focusing on a particular domain. Since the steering power of the Korean government has been taken for granted, scholars have rarely paid attention to how underpinning arguments are produced for a specific governance based on different imaginaries. From this perspective, this proposal intends to demonstrate how the dynamics between two discourses – “we are so late” and “we can do it” – have shaped the current AI governance in South Korea. South Korea being a latecomer in global competition, on the one hand, the sense of inferiority has been the dominating attitude of policymakers and the general public regarding the developed countries. However, on the other hand, the country has achieved great economic progress, especially in ICT fields. Together, as will be discussed in detail, these two situations have largely nurtured nationalism in South Korea. First, how the two contradictory discourses have engendered a particular ICT environment in South Korea will be outlined. The focus will be on the development of policy and public understanding of high technologies. Second, the recent evolution of discourse and governance of AI will be examined. Especially, the “Fourth industrial revolution” discourse will be highlighted as its catalyzer. It will be argued that, by stimulating nationalism, the two discourses have justified governance choices, such as a weakened regulation or concentration of governmental support. From a more general perspective, it will also be asserted that the progressive governments have more actively drawn upon the nationalistic discursive strategy than the conservative governments, which will reveal a particular place of emerging technologies in the political sphere in South Korea. To this purpose, this proposal adopts an interpretative approach rooted in discourse analysis, relying on policy documents and newspapers. As such, this study will provide a novel understanding of AI governance while bridging the gap in the existing body of studies on emerging technologies.