What is it about?
This study is a comparative institutional analysis of pronatalist policies in South Korea and Hungary. It explores how both nations adopted similar policy instruments—such as cash transfers and parental leave—to combat ultra-low fertility, yet achieved divergent demographic outcomes. The research demonstrates that these disparate results stem from fundamental differences in governance structures, institutional logic, and implementation intensity, contrasting Korea's fragmented, technocratic approach with Hungary's centralized and ideologically framed strategy.
Featured Image
Photo by Joachim Schnürle on Unsplash
Why is it important?
The significance of this study lies in its challenge to traditional policy convergence theory. It reveals that benchmarking international "best practices" or similar policy instruments does not guarantee uniform social outcomes. For public administrators and policymakers, the findings offer a crucial lesson: the ultimate effectiveness of demographic interventions depends heavily on political context, institutional logic and implementation intensity, rather than the mere replication of policy tools.
Perspectives
The research employs a comparative institutionalist perspective. By utilizing policy convergence theory as an analytical lens, the study distinguishes between superficial "instrumental similarity" and substantive "institutional divergence."
Dr. M. Jin Lee
Read the Original
This page is a summary of: Convergence of Low‐Fertility Policies Beyond Policy Transfer: A Comparative Analysis of Korea and Hungary, Public Administration and Development, August 2026, Wiley,
DOI: 10.1002/pad.70115.
You can read the full text:
Contributors
The following have contributed to this page
