The rural community development strategies of South Korea and Myanmar (1970-2010) : a comparative analysis

Abstract

This study compares rural community development efforts of Republic of Korea and Myanmar during 1960s to 2010. The research method is mainly descriptive based on historical and current situations. Primary data are collected in Myanmar to highlight the current level of rural community development through a survey on twenty villages. Villages were chosen from four geographically divided regions with sample random sampling basis. Republic of Korea and Myanmar share common characteristics. Both are located in Asia, started as poor countries, had been staying under military dictatorship for a number of years and egalitarian nature of people in rural areas Nowadays, Korea is one of the economically strong countries while Myanmar is one of the poorest countries in the world. The rural community development movement called Saemaul Undong has significantly changed rural scenes of Korea. During the same period there were no integrated effort towards rural development and many attempts to boost rural life of people were ended up at the cosmetic level in Myanmar. The findings from the experiences of South Korea show successful rural development remain on, agricultural marketing system, presence of incentive scheme for the development, the commitment of national leaders, community leaderships, cross institutional involvement, spiritual reform and finally stage by stage development with long-term orientation. The lessons from the study of rural development model of these two countries reveal that Korea model can be illustrated as proactive strategy and Myanmar’s is reactive strategy. The first model place rural sector development as the country’s priority while it was subordinate to the political stability of urban area in the second. Finally, the vision and real commitment of national leaders to develop their own country make a real difference in the fortunes of these countries.The empirical data from twenty villages under survey in Myanmar reveals two things. Firstly, there is negatively correlated between number of farmland in the village and economic wellbeing of the village. This information highlights interventions should be taken to remedy the economic situation of farm households. Secondly, there is positively correlated between the level of rural development as measured by four aspects (infrastructure, economic, social and environmental) and the level of integration among institutions that active in those areas. Myanmar can adopt the rural community development model of South Korea, at least certain extent, since the two countries experienced similar political structure and socio-economic situations in the past. Based on Korea’s experience, a model for rural community development of Myanmar has been suggested in the last part of the study.