북한 식량난과 핵정책 전환의 상관성 검토 - 베이즈주의 접근 -

초록

This study has two main objectives. First, it examines the policy analysis process that led to the decision that North Korea might abandon its nuclear weapons policy and return to the negotiating table if the South Korean government continued its blockade-oriented policy. This decision was based on information regarding a reported increase in starvation-related deaths in North Korea, collected since February 2023. Second, it analyzes the persuasiveness of the judgment that North Korea would only abandon its nuclear weapons policy if regime transition were to occur, based on the observation that the regime has clearly indicatedthrough leader directives, constitutional and legal revisions, and the symbolic elevation of its nuclear force-that it does not intend to use nuclear weapons as a means of negotiation. The study identifies factors that may increase the likelihood of such a transition and examines to what extent these factors support the earlier decision made by policymakers. This paper argues that the factors causing Type I, II, and III errors, combined with the distinctive characteristics of North Korea research, have resulted in failures in policy analysis. It employs a Bayesian approach, grounded in theories of authoritarian transition and dictatorship politics, to analyze how much the food crisis in North Korea has increased researchers’ belief in the likelihood of regime transition. The study finds that when a Bayesian analyst identifies an economic crisis such as a food shortage, their belief in the hypothesis that the North Korean regime will undergo a transition increases by approximately 5%. This result supports previous research showing that there is no single independent variable that causes the collapse of authoritarian regimes and highlights the importance of adopting a comprehensive approach in North Korea policy analysis.

키워드