Search

Begin New Search Topic International Trade and Finance Political Geography South Korea Content Type Policy Brief Publication Year within 10 Years

1. Green New Deal for Carbon-neutrality and Open Trade Policy in Korea

Author:
Jukwan Lee, Jongduk Kim, Jinyoung Moon, Jyun-Hyun Eom, Ji Hyeon Kim, and Jungmin Suh
Publication Date:
05-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Korea Institute for International Economic Policy (KIEP)
Abstract:
This study focuses on Korea’s Green New Deal policy and global response measures to climate change that affect international trade. A trade policy perspective and approach have been applied while reviewing the carbon-neutral policy pursued by the Green New Deal. We attempted through an empirical analysis to determine whether the expansion of openness helps reduce carbon emissions and simulate the impact of a carbon-neutral policy, such as the EU's carbon border adjustment, on the global economy under global production networks. In addition, the amount of financial support from Korea's Green New Deal needed to offset the negative economic effects of other countries’ independent carbon-neutral policies was derived. This study finally suggests that the effect of the Green New Deal can be expanded through the restoration of openness and global cooperation.
Topic:
Climate Change, International Trade and Finance, Economy, Trade, Carbon Emissions, and Green New Deal
Political Geography:
Asia and South Korea

2. Is South Korea vulnerable to EU and US carbon border restrictions?

Author:
Jeffrey J. Schott and Megan Hogan
Publication Date:
07-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Peterson Institute for International Economics
Abstract:
South Korean exports, especially carbon-intensive products like steel, are increasingly vulnerable to both the European Union’s proposed carbon border adjustment mechanism (CBAM)—set to begin on January 1, 2023—and the proposed Clean Competition Act (CCA) before the US Congress. Schott and Hogan caution that Korean exporters should not count on Korea’s decade-old EU and US free trade agreements (FTAs), nor on the multilateral trading rules of the World Trade Organization (WTO), to protect them from new carbon-based import barriers in key foreign markets. The WTO and the FTAs have broad and loosely defined exemptions for environmental protection. Nor is Korea likely to be shielded by its own cap-and-trade emissions trading system (the K-ETS), because of extensive use of free allowances and large differences between EU and Korean carbon prices. While the threat the EU CBAM poses to Korean exports is imminent, passage of the CCA faces major legislative obstacles. But US imports of Korean steel and other carbon-intensive goods are still subject to climate-related duties at the US border under US unfair trade statutes. The US Department of Commerce has ruled that free allowances issued under the K-ETS (and EU ETS) are implicit subsidies that can be offset by countervailing duties. These charges are in addition to the harsh tariff-rate quotas on imported Korean steel applied under the “national security” authority of Section 232 of US trade law, which are more restrictive than measures imposed against European and other steel exporters. The authors suggest relaxing these US barriers, as they have been for shipments from Europe, in return for Korean participation in the nascent US-EU talks to establish a “Global Arrangement on Sustainable Steel and Aluminum.”
Topic:
Economics, International Trade and Finance, European Union, Exports, and Carbon Emissions
Political Geography:
Europe, Asia, South Korea, and United States of America

3. China's CPTPP bid spurs South Korea to act on Asia-Pacific trade pacts

Author:
Jeffrey J. Schott
Publication Date:
06-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Peterson Institute for International Economics
Abstract:
China’s sudden application to join the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) in September 2021 has broad implications for South Korea’s economic relations with China, Japan, and the United States. In the past, Korea frequently debated but invariably postponed deciding whether to participate in negotiations on the CPTPP, despite the substantial benefits to be gained from doing so. However, China’s application has prompted Korean officials to get off the fence and apply as well. As China moves to deepen its ties to regional partners, Korea needs to follow suit, complementing the ongoing implementation of the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) with expedited negotiations to join the CPTPP and participation in the US-led Indo-Pacific Economic Framework for Prosperity (IPEF). Korean participation in the RCEP, CPTPP, and IPEF is desirable and mutually reinforcing and should allow Korea to sustain its strong commercial interests in both the US and Chinese markets.
Topic:
Economics, International Trade and Finance, Treaties and Agreements, and Trade
Political Geography:
China, South Korea, and Asia-Pacific

4. The Impact of Intellectual Property Protection through FTA on International Trade

Author:
Hyunsoo Kim, Sangjun Yea, Hyeyoon Keum, and Min Ji Kang
Publication Date:
08-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Korea Institute for International Economic Policy (KIEP)
Abstract:
The importance of intellectual property rights (IPRs) for innovation has grown and the protection of intellectual property in international trade has also been strengthened. AI-related patent applications have been increasing rapidly and many AI patents are being filed in various industries. Intellectual property also represents one of the main controversies of U.S.-China trade relations in the past three decades and remains one of the core issues behind the two countries’ recent trade conflicts. As a result, global protection for IPRs has been expanded in recent decades. This article investigates changes in the trend regarding the IP protection level in FTA and how the IP protection through FTAs has affected the composition of aggregate trade flows of member countries in order to provide basic findings necessary to formulate the FTA policies regarding the protection of IPRs in Korea.
Topic:
International Trade and Finance, Intellectual Property/Copyright, Economy, and Artificial Intelligence
Political Geography:
China, South Korea, and United States of America

5. The Crisis of the WTO and New Direction for Negotiation Strategies of Korea

Author:
Jin Kyo Suh, Cheon-Kee Lee, Jukwan Lee, Ji Hyeon Kim, and Myeonghwa Jung
Publication Date:
06-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Korea Institute for International Economic Policy (KIEP)
Abstract:
The WTO is facing a historical crisis. Its main functions ‒ namely, providing a negotiating forum, administrating WTO trade agreements and monitoring national trade policies, and resolving trade disputes ‒ have been significantly paralyzed. Although the cause of the crisis is partly institutional, higher uncertainty is also a considerable problem aggravating the fate of the multilateral trading system. Such uncertainty comes from two factors: rising protectionism, and trade frictions between developed and developing countries including those between the United States and China. Meanwhile, the WTO also needs to respond to rapid structural changes in global trade. The center of the world’s trade is shifting towards trade in services. The development and spread of information and communication technology (ICT) are making it easier to supply services across borders. The regionalization or localization of global value chains (GVCs) continues and GVCs are shifting towards knowledge-based goods. Therefore, the WTO faces a historical challenge it is highly unlikely to survive without proper reflection on the new trends of global trade. With Korea no longer claiming for preferential treatments as a developing country, it could take relatively firm negotiating positions at the WTO concerning market expansion and improved access towards foreign markets. Moreover, Korea could contribute as a mediator to speak for balancing the interests of both developed and developing countries on conflicting issues, such as the developing country status. Korea also needs to establish a more precise give-and-take negotiation strategy in future WTO negotiations on agriculture, non-agriculture, and service sectors to maximize its national interests. In particular, Korea should put stress on services and TRIPs negotiations to ensure its international competitiveness on those sectors. Trade in services and IP will dominate trade in goods. Korea also should focus on how to raise the efficiency and stability of the East-Asian regional value chains by strengthening its co-operation with China, Japan, and Southeast Asia. At the same time, Korea needs to consider ways to become the bridgehead connecting East Asia’s value chains to either North America’s value chains or the EU’s value chains utilizing given FTAs with those economies. Finally, Korea should prepare for the emergence of various forms of plurilateral negotiations and where appropriate, take lead and reflect its national interests on the final outcome.
Topic:
Development, International Trade and Finance, Negotiation, Trade Policy, and WTO
Political Geography:
South Korea

6. Potential Implications of Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership to India-South Korea Bilateral Trade Ties

Author:
Surendar Singh
Publication Date:
01-2020
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Korea Institute for International Economic Policy (KIEP)
Abstract:
India and South Korea enjoy strong economic and trade relations, shaped by a significant convergence of interest, mutual good will and high-level diplomatic exchange. Bilateral trade between the two countries has also increased after signing the Comprehensive Economic Partnership (CEPA). However, the overall trade balance is in favor of South Korea due to superior comparative advantage of Korea in manufacturing as compared to India. South Korean exports are high technology-intensive while India’s exports are low-value raw material and intermediate products. Both countries are members to a mega regional trade pact – the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership. Though India has decided to not join the RCEP at this stage it will continue the discussion to explore possible ways to join it. Assuming that India will join the RCEP sooner or later, it is important to analyze the potential impact of the RCEP to India-South Korea bilateral trade ties. This short policy paper compares the proposed provisions of the RCEP and CEPA. It shows that the RCEP is much more comprehensive an agreement compared to the CEPA, both in terms of coverage and scope. It also provides some insights on the likely implications of the RCEP, especially from the perspective of trade with China factored against the bilateral trade ties between India and South Korea.
Topic:
International Trade and Finance, Bilateral Relations, Partnerships, and Economic Cooperation
Political Geography:
South Asia, India, Asia, and South Korea

7. Going Beyond Economic Engagement: Why South Korea Should Press the North on Labor Standards and Practices

Author:
Marcus Noland
Publication Date:
04-2014
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Peterson Institute for International Economics
Abstract:
In recent years, despite a history of enmity and armed conflict that never really ended after the Korean War more than 60 years ago, South Korea has been a major investor in North Korea, and South Korean firms have employed more than 50,000 North Korean workers. South Korea's stated goal has been to encourage sufficient economic progress by North Korea, emboldening it toward establishing a meaningful basis for reconciliation and, ultimately, national unification. The expectation, or at least the hope, has been to use economic engagement to lessen the North's direct state control over the economy and to encourage the development of a middle class that might demand greater internal opening. The goal, as enunciated by former South Korean President Kim Dae-jung, has also been to foster a rise of interest groups with an enhanced stake in peaceable external relations.
Topic:
Economics, Human Rights, International Trade and Finance, and Bilateral Relations
Political Geography:
Asia, South Korea, and North Korea