[Initial Perspective] Reform Requires Empathy Free from Bias

Heuristics, a concept originally used in psychology but now a major topic in behavioral economics, refers to the errors of bias that people tend to fall into when they must make judgments without thorough verification due to lack of time or limited relevant information. It is considered one of the useful concepts for explaining various phenomena arising from irrational judgments and decision-making errors.

A commonly observed bias is the anchoring heuristic. This refers to the tendency to naturally find strengths in things one likes while avoiding looking for weaknesses, and to focus more on weaknesses than strengths in things one dislikes. As a result, completely different judgments and behaviors unfold toward the same object.

In the new year of the Year of the Black Rabbit (Gyemyo), the Yoon Seok-yeol administration is expected to accelerate various reform drives that began last year. The Yoon government has declared labor reform, education reform, pension reform, health insurance reform, and service reform as tasks based on the slogan of establishing fairness, common sense, and the rule of law. In particular, President Yoon has repeatedly expressed his determination to prioritize labor reform and break through head-on.

President Yoon argued that labor laws are based on legislation from the factory era of the 1960s and 1970s, presenting it as an indispensable task for future generations. In November last year, he added the rationale of preventing corruption and enhancing transparency, riding on negative public opinion about the Cargo Solidarity Union strike. The education reform he proposed emphasized ‘autonomy’ and ‘strengthening competitiveness,’ while health insurance reform was championed under the banner of ‘anti-populism.’

However, despite the strong will for reform, public consensus seems to fall short. Although the government and ruling party interpret rising approval ratings in various opinion polls as positive, there are still concerning voices as nearly 50% of the public (according to a Realmeter survey on December 26, 2022) evaluate the government’s performance as very poor. This is because, rather than going through sufficient persuasion and deliberation via dialogue and communication, the government has used negative images to drive reform by focusing on the behaviors and cases of specific groups.

Above all, the focus was placed on illegal acts of the reform targets under the banner of the rule of law. Voices opposing restructuring and demanding collective bargaining were labeled as ‘political illegal acts,’ and regarding health insurance reform, the moral hazard of a minority of medical consumers and the fact that foreigners are free-riding on the system were highlighted. The behaviors and cases of a minority have thus operated as ‘tail risks’ shaking the entire system, increasing the likelihood of drifting in a direction far from the average perspective.

Consequently, the discourse on reform has naturally flowed into controversies over ‘suppression,’ ‘69-hour workweeks,’ and ‘reduction of coverage.’ As the psychological resistance of the majority to reform is highlighted, the discourse is expected to become even more intense. Decisions based on heuristics fail to garner broad consensus and ultimately lead to other biases, multiplying social costs caused by conflicts and confrontations. It is a critical time for mutual empathy and communication processes that minimize predictable conflicts and clashes.