Eun Sang Jun, Lee Jin Yong, Jung Hye-Min, Lee Jin-Seok
Department of Preventive Medicine, Chungnam National University School of Medicine, Daejeon, Republic of Korea.
Public Health Medical Service, Seoul National University Boramae Medical Center, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
PLoS One. 2016 Oct 6;11(10):e0163763. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0163763. eCollection 2016.
This study aimed to identify the factors influencing South Korean voters' attitudes towards increasing public expenditure on health and to identify whether the issue of healthcare expenditure influenced candidate choice in the 2012 Korean presidential election. The study used the data from a survey conducted by the Institute of Korean Politics at Seoul National University immediately following the 2012 presidential election. The survey was completed by a nationwide sample of 1,200 people aged 19 or over using a face-to-face interview method and proportional quota sampling based on sex, age, and region. About 44.3% of respondents had a positive attitude toward increasing public health expenditure. There was no significant difference by the candidate they supported (conservative Park Geun-hye or liberal Moon Jae-in). In particular, even 44.9% of conservative supporters agreed with more spending. Politically neutral respondents (OR = 1.76, 90% CI 1.22-2.54) and strong conservative party supporters (OR = 1.53, 90% CI 1.05-2.25) were more likely to support public health expenditure increase compared to strong liberal party supporters. Also, respondents who believed that the economic gap in the country was widening were 1.91 times more likely to support an increase in public health expenditures. However, the issue of health expenditure had no influence on voters' choice of presidential candidates, and in particular no negative effect of choice of the ruling (conservative) party's candidate. Our results should be interpreted with care; one possible reason for this lack of effect might be that constituents voted along partisan lines regardless of their attitude to the welfare issue; another possible explanation might be the success of the "left click strategy" of the conservative party. That is, the conservatives did not reject economic democratization or social welfare expansion. Further research should be done to explain why attitudes to health spending did not directly affect choice of candidate.
本研究旨在确定影响韩国选民对增加公共卫生支出态度的因素,并确定医疗保健支出问题是否在2012年韩国总统选举中影响了候选人的选择。该研究使用了首尔国立大学韩国政治研究所于2012年总统选举后立即进行的一项调查数据。该调查通过面对面访谈方法,并基于性别、年龄和地区的比例配额抽样,对全国范围内1200名19岁及以上的人进行。约44.3%的受访者对增加公共卫生支出持积极态度。他们所支持的候选人(保守派朴槿惠或自由派文在寅)之间没有显著差异。特别是,甚至44.9%的保守派支持者也同意增加支出。与坚定的自由党支持者相比,政治中立的受访者(OR = 1.76,90%CI 1.22 - 2.54)和坚定的保守党支持者(OR = 1.53,90%CI 1.05 - 2.25)更有可能支持增加公共卫生支出。此外,认为国家经济差距正在扩大的受访者支持增加公共卫生支出的可能性要高出1.91倍。然而,卫生支出问题对选民选择总统候选人没有影响,特别是对选择执政(保守)党候选人没有负面影响。我们的结果应谨慎解读;这种缺乏影响的一个可能原因可能是选民不论其对福利问题的态度如何,都按照党派路线投票;另一个可能的解释可能是保守党的“左键策略”取得了成功。也就是说,保守派并不拒绝经济民主化或社会福利扩张。应该进行进一步的研究来解释为什么对卫生支出的态度没有直接影响候选人的选择。