• KDI Journal of Economic Policy
• /
• v.32 no.4
• /
• pp.153-195
• /
• 2010

The recent global financial crisis has been the outcome of, among other things, the mismatch between institutions and the reality of the market in the current global financial system. The International financial institutions (IFIs) that were designed more than 60 years ago can no longer effectively meet the challenges posed by the current global economy. While the global financial market has become integrated like a single market, there is no international lender of last resort or global regulatory body. There also has been a rapid shift in the weight of economic power. The share of the Group of 7 (G7) countries in global gross domestic product (GDP) fell and the share of emerging market economies increased rapidly. Therefore, the tasks facing us today are: (i) to reform the IFIs -mandate, resources, management, and governance structure; (ii) to reform the system such as the international monetary system (IMS), and regulatory framework of the global financial system; and (iii) to reform global economic governance. The main focus of this paper will be the IMS reform and the role of the Group of Twenty (G20) summit meetings. The current IMS problems can be summarized as follows. First, the demand for foreign reserve accumulation has been increasing despite the movement from fixed exchange rate regimes to floating rate regimes some 40 years ago. Second, this increasing demand for foreign reserves has been concentrated in US dollar assets, especially public securities. Third, as the IMS relies too heavily on the supply of currency issued by a center country (the US), it gives an exorbitant privilege to this country, which can issue Treasury bills at the lowest possible interest rate in the international capital market. Fourth, as a related problem, the global financial system depends too heavily on the center country's ability to maintain the stability of the value of its currency and strength of its own financial system. Fifth, international capital flows have been distorted in the current IMS, from EMEs and developing countries where the productivity of capital investment is higher, to advanced economies, especially the US, where the return to capital investment is lower. Given these problems, there have been various proposals to reform the current IMS. They can be grouped into two: demand-side and supply-side reform. The key in the former is how to reduce the widespread strong demand for foreign reserve holdings among EMEs. There have been several proposals to reduce the self-insurance motivation. They include third-party insurance and the expansion of the opportunity to borrow from a global and regional reserve pool, or access to global lender of last resort (or something similar). However, the first option would be too costly. That leads us to the second option - building a stronger globalfinancial safety net. Discussions on supply-side reform of the IMS focus on how to diversify the supply of international reserve currency. The proposals include moving to a multiple currency system; increased allocation and wider use of special drawing rights (SDR); and creating a new global reserve currency. A key question is whether diversification should be encouraged among suitable existing currencies, or if it should be sought more with global reserve assets, acting as a complement or even substitute to existing ones. Each proposal has its pros and cons; they also face trade-offs between desirability and political feasibility. The transition would require close collaboration among the major players. This should include efforts at the least to strengthen policy coordination and collaboration among the major economies, and to reform the IMF to make it a more effective institution for bilateral and multilateral surveillance and as an international lender of last resort. The success on both fronts depends heavily on global economic governance reform and the role of the G20. The challenge is how to make the G20 effective. Without institutional innovations within the G20, there is a high risk that its summits will follow the path of previous summit meetings, such as G7/G8.

• Journal of the Korean Institute of Traditional Landscape Architecture
• /
• v.40 no.2
• /
• pp.1-13
• /
• 2022

This paper examined the history and development of Gyeongbokgung Palace's back garden based on historical materials and drawings such as Joseon Ilgi(Diaries of Joseon Dynasty), Joseon Wangjo Sillok(the Annals of the Joseon Dynasty), Doseongdaejido(the Great Map of Seoul), Bukgwoldohyeong(Drawing Plan of the Northern Palace), the Bukgung Palace Restoration Plan, Restoration Planning of Gyeongbokgung Palace and the following results were derived. First, it was confirmed that the Back Garden of Gyeongbokgung Palace was famous for its great location since the Goryeo Dynasty, and that it was named Namkyeong at that time and was a place where a shrine was built, and that castles and palaces were already built during the Goryeo Dynasty under the influence of Fengshui-Docham(風水圖讖) and Zhouli·Kaogongji(周禮考工記). Although the back garden of Gyeongbokgung Palace in the early Joseon Dynasty stayed out of the limelight as a back garden for the palace, it has a place value as a living space for the head of the state from King Gojong to the present. Second, in order to clearly identify the boundaries of back garden, through literature such as map of Doseongdo (Map of the Capital), La Coree, Gyeongmudae Area, Japanese Geography Custom Compendium, Korean Photo Album, JoseonGeonchukdoJip(The Illustration Book of Joseon Construction), Urban Planning Survey of Gyeongseong, it was confirmed that the current Blue House area outside Sinmumun Gate was built outside the precincts of Gyeongbokgung Palace. It was found that the area devastated through the Japanese Invasion of Korea in 1592, was used as a space where public corporations were combined through the process of reconstruction during the King Gojong period. In Japanese colonial era, the place value as a back garden of the primary palace was damaged, as the palace buildings of the back garden was relocated or destroyed, but after liberation, it was used as the presidential residence and restored the place value of the ruler. Third, in the back garden of Gyeongbokgung Palace, spatial changes proceeded through the Japanese Invasion and Japanese colonial era. The place with the greatest geographical change was Gyeongnongjae area, where the residence of the Japanese Government-General of Korea was built, and there were frequent changes in the use of the land. On the other hand, the current Gyeongmudae area, the forests next to the small garden, and the forests of Baekak were preserved in the form of traditional forests. To clarify this, 1:1200 floor plan of inner Gyeongmudae residence and satellite images were overlapped based on Sinmumun Gate, and as a result, it was confirmed that the water path originating from Baekak still exists today and the forest area did not change. Fourth, in the areas where the traditional forest landscape was inherited, the functional changes in the topography were little, and major old-age colonies are maintained. The old trees identified in this area were indicator tree species with historical value. Representatively, Pinus densiflora for. multicaulis Uyeki, located in Nokjiwon Garden, is presumed to have been preserved as one of Pinus densiflora for. multicaulis Uyeki planted next to Yongmundang, and has a historicality that has been used as a photo zone at dinners for heads of state and important guests. Lastly, in order to continuously preserve and manage the value of Gyeongbokgung Palace in Blue House, it is urgent to clarify the space value through excavation of historical materials in Japanese colonial era and establish a hierarchy of garden archaeology by era. In addition, the basis for preserving the historical landscape from the Joseon Dynasty to the modern era from Gyeongbokgung Palace should not damage the area of the old giant trees, which has been perpetuated since the past, and a follow-up study is needed to investigate all the forests in Blue House.