National Roles of Fisheries: Political-Economic Meaning and Interpretation of the Constitution

수산업에 대한 국가 역할: 헌법의 정치경제학적 의미와 해석

  • Received : 2006.09.26
  • Accepted : 2006.11.09
  • Published : 2006.12.30

Abstract

The main objective of this study aims at analyzing the national roles of fisheries in the global economy from the constitutional view point. Globalization provides general firms and businessmen with great opportunities that allow them to be able to plan and operate their business strategies beyond the national boundaries. WTO and FTA negotiations must be important facilitators of such globalization. However, Korean primary industries like fisheries under comparative disadvantage have a high probability that there may have to be the trade-offs between the primary and the industrial sector to maximize national benefits in the process of bilateral and/or multilateral international trade deals. Since, moreover, fishermen face strong binding constraints under which they hardly carry out fishing operations standing aloof from national boarders, they have to manage fishing businesses within their own national territory, to maintain and develop fisheries culture, and to explore their own destiny for themselves. Because of such reasons, the constitution imposes upon the State the duty to support and develop fisheries and fishing villages. Considering its article and spirit associated with fisheries(i.e. article 123), it seems unnecessary at this point in time that Korean society makes debates over national consensus for supporting fisheries. The reason is because the explicit provisions of the constitution do not allow their arbitrary interpretation depending upon interests or policy situations. However, where national support to the particular sector could not meet the expected social value system, there would be a great deal of chance to invite serious societal debates over such national commitment to the fisheries. Therefore, whether using it efficiently and realizing the socially expected policy goals must be a responsibility of both fisheries administration and fishing industries.

Keywords

References

  1. 국제신문, 오징어 TAC 시행 연기될 듯: 소형채낚기 어민들 (전국오징어생산자)연합회 불신임 등 반발 심해, 2006. 05. 31(14면)
  2. 김명규, 헌법학원론, 법영사, 2006
  3. 김철수, 헌법학신론, 박영사, 2005
  4. 농어업.농어촌특별대책위원회, 일본 수산업.어촌의 다원적 기능, 2005
  5. 서광문, 수산업협동조합의 본질과 이익단체론, 거성글미디어, 2001
  6. 수산업협동조합중앙회, 수협 40년사, 선문사, 2002
  7. 성낙인, 헌법학, 법문사, 2003
  8. 정명생, 한미 FTA가 한국 수산업에 미칠 영향, 한국해양수산개발원, 2005
  9. 정종섭, 헌법학원론, 박영사, 2006
  10. 해양수산부, 연근해어선 감척사업 투자효과 분석, 2003
  11. 한스 피터 마틴.하랄트 슈만(강수돌 옮김), 세계화의 덫, 영림 카디널, 1996
  12. Cortner, Hanna J. and Margaret A. Moote. The Politics of Ecosystem Management, Island Press, 1999
  13. Gasgupta, P. S. and G. M. Heal, Economic Theory and Exhaustible Resources, Cambridge University Press, 1979
  14. Knutson, Ronald D., J. B. Penn and William T. Boelm, Agricultural and Food Policy, Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 1983
  15. Lawson, Rowena M., Economics of Fisheries Development, Praeger Publishers, 1984
  16. Ostrom, Elinor, Governing the Commons, Cambridge University Press, 2003
  17. Paarlberg, Don, American Farm Policy, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, 1964
  18. Shewfelt, Robert L. and Stanley E. Prussia, Postharvest Handling: A System Approach, Academic Press Inc. San Diego, 1993