• Journal of the Korean association of regional geographers
• /
• v.12 no.1
• /
• pp.154-171
• /
• 2006

By comparing to Chinese American banks, this research shows the uniqueness of Korean American banks. This article argues that instead of the cultural attributes and/or informal financial institutions, formal financial institutions, such as the ethnic banks studied here, are responsible for the business success of Asians abroad. However, ethnic banks have different development trajectories depending on their respective ethnic communities. Korean American banks are notably different from Chinese American banks in terms of growth, profitability, and banking strategies. Although both ethnic banks exercise relationship banking strategies in their loan portfolios, their deposit compositions are very different and cause significant differences in financial performance. The focus on business loans and high rates of non-interest deposits allow for higher growth rates in Korean American banks. Therefore, relationship banking does not adequately explain the differences of ethnic banks. This research attempts to understand the underlying factors in choosing banking strategies by mainly focusing on the unique examples found in Korean and Chinese immigrant societies. For Chinese Americans, the heterogeneity of their population composition and foreign influence dominate their bank structures. On the other hand, Korean American homogeneity and business orientation are distinctly different. The influence of Korean capital is not significant when compared to overseas Chinese capital.

• Journal of the Economic Geographical Society of Korea
• /
• v.13 no.4
• /
• pp.641-662
• /
• 2010

Through the comparative studies on Korean and Chinese ethnobanks in the U.S., this research finds the difference in the social capital between Korean and Chinese American economy and reinterprets the social capital in overseas Chinese. In many ethnic studies, the ethnobanks in the U.S. are thought as the main drive of the economic prosperity in the ethnic communities. For the success of these ethnobanks, the relationship banking of these ethnobanks are contrasted with the arms-length banking of the mainstream U.S. banks. However there are the differences both in performance and business strategies even among different ethnobanks. Contrary to the Korean ethnic banks having much portion of business loans, Chinese ethnic banks have stressed real-estate loans in their loan portfolio. This research regards the differences of business strategies and performance of these ethnobanks as the result of the different social, cultural contexts in each ethnic community. From these finings, we can improve the understanding of the concept of social capital in overseas Chinese economy.

• Strategy21
• /
• s.42
• /
• pp.224-257
• /
• 2017

As the Trump administration withdraws the Paris Climate Agreement and shows its antipathy toward free trade, the U.S.'s soft power is most likely to weaken and its behaviors could be perceived as acts to surrender the U.S. hegemonic leadership in the world stage. Hegemonic stability theory notes that the existence of a hegemonic power contributes to international stability in the sense that it provides international public goods. A lack of the U.S's leadership in international politics, however, could be recognized as its denial of a hegemonic status. Is it intentional or accidental? The U.S's denial of hegemonic roles is the byproduct of the Trump administration's "American First" policy, not the showcase of its intention to transit hegemony to others. What is noteworthy is that China targets a niche market of hegemony as the U.S. denies its roles as the international leader. Put it another way, China attempts to ride hegemony for free when the U.S. denies its hegemonic roles accidentally. Faced with a niche market of hegemony, China has begun to accelerate its national strategy to make "Chinese Dream" come true. To that end, China promised again to keep the Paris Climate Agreement and attempts to play more active its roles in Shanghai Cooperation Organization(SCO), Asia Infra Investment Bank(AIIB), and "One Belt, One Road". Despite all these efforts, the U.S. is most likely to withdraw its denial of hegemony any time soon. The U.S's resumption of Freedom of Navigation Operations(FONOPs) could be a precursor of the return to a hegemonic power's willingness. In this vein, it is noteworthy that the South China Sea serves as a quasi-war zone for hegemonic conflict.