The effects of protection in cultural industries: the case of the Korean film policies

TLDR

The study evaluates whether protectionist Korean film policies have driven the industry’s success. It examines three policy mechanisms—import quotas, screen quotas, and subsidies—showing they limited film imports, failed to attract audiences, and had minimal impact. The analysis finds protectionist policies had little effect, even encouraging low‑quality productions, and recommends other countries reconsider protectionism as a cultural strategy.

Abstract

This paper assesses whether Korean film policies, particularly protectionist ones, have been instrumental in the success of the Korean film industry. The conclusion is, surprisingly at a first glance, that protectionist policies have played an insignificant role. First, the import quota regime (1956–1986) limited the number of films to be imported, but not the number of Korean audience to see these imported films. Furthermore, the import quota system strongly induced Korean filmmakers to produce bad quality movies and theaters to avoid showing Korean films. Second, the screen quota system, from 1966 until present, has not been effective because imposing a mandatory number of days for screening Korean movies does not ensure that the domestic audience will watch these movies. Finally, the subsidy policy was barely noticeable before the late 1990s and is now too late and too limited to be credited for any significant impact on the success of the Korean film industry which began from the early 1990s. The results of this paper are robust enough to suggest to policymakers in other countries to review their own policies that advocate merely protectionism as a way to make a more attractive national culture.