Issue Growth-engine policy must shift from top-down state selection to active corporate participation

Summary

The essay argues that government-led selection of growth engines worked in the past because global industrial and trade conditions were favourable, but top-down policy now faces hard limits. Firms' resources and innovation capabilities exceed those of the public sector, bureaucrats respond slowly to fast-moving technologies and markets, and growth engines that change every five years are poorly sustained. The state should instead trust market dynamism and create a favourable environment through regulatory innovation, standards and testbeds, while firms should press their ecosystem needs, even through a 'big deal' trading jobs and investment for regulatory reform. Government R&D behind growth engines needs strategic portfolios based on Korea's own capabilities, as with past display investments across LCD, PDP and OLED. Selected engines should be managed consistently across administrations, and Korea should secure comparative-advantage technologies as leverage for technology sovereignty in trade negotiations.