A study of "Direct payment for rice farming" of South Korea: Review of the questionnaire survey

The 90s decade was the period when the wave of so-called agricultural products liberalization began to attack South Korea, and as mentioned above, the reduction of agriculture occurred very quickly. The self sufficiency of rice was the biggest objective of the South Korean agricultural policy at that time, which was aimed at keeping the supply and demand of rice stable. However, because the country agreed to accept the minimum access as a strategy for delaying the tariffication of rice in the Uruguay Round Agreement, its agricultural problems broke out. The political power at that time had to desperately search for the measures for agriculture to survive in order to keep the stable political system. One of the remarkable characteristics of the Korean agricultural policy of this period was the promotion of structural reform supported by financial budget and another was the introduction of the "Environment intimate Farming Policy " . The "Environment - intimate Farming Policy" was materialized after the establishment of the "Law for the Development of Environment-intimate Agriculture" inl997. Then in2001 the " Direct Payment for Rice Farming" system was introduced in order to maintain the functions of rice fields beneficial to the public good and to use rice fields in an environment - intimate way, which further strengthened the synergy with the " Environment - intimate Farming Policy" . Therefore, the issues this paper examines are based on responses to the questionnaire survey on " Direct Payment for Rice Farming" system in South Korea. When results of the questionnaire are considered, the farmers will be more giving to the high estimation of such a policy. Moreover, concern for sustainable agriculture and environmental preservation rose by progressing this policy to the farmers. The system will be reviewed in the direction where a large - scale farmer obtains the advantage or more through the revision of the payment upper bound of the subsidy in the future.