• Journal of Urban Science
• /
• v.7 no.1
• /
• pp.11-21
• /
• 2018

Abstract: Korea has designated free economic zones to build the foundation for national economic development by setting up special economic zones to be more competitive in cities. On August 5, 2003, the government designated Songdo, Yeongjong and Cheongna districts in Incheon as free economic zones. But while the development should have been completed nearly three years before the end of the development, the development has been slow and the population, foreign direct investment and other business results are far from the initial plan. Therefore, in this study, we will investigate the various problems occurring in the Incheon Free Economic Zone, investigate the causes of the problem, and then compare and analyze the Incheon Free Economic Zone and China's special economic zones. The two institutions share similar characteristics in many areas, but the Incheon Free Economic Zone system has yet to be settled, as the special economic zone has played a significant role in economic development in China. Therefore, the study is expected to find a solution to the problems of the free economic zones in Incheon and provide directions for future development.

• The Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business
• /
• v.9 no.2
• /
• pp.15-27
• /
• 2022

The paper addresses the importance of redesigning strategies for resilient and sustainable regional economic development - by applying strategic approaches to free economic zones for the digital economy. The purpose of the paper is to provide a broad comparative perspective on developed versus developing country efforts to use free economic zone programs to enhance various economic and social objectives. First, the paper introduces the chronicle experiences of free economic zone programs in South Korea and mainland China - developed versus developing economies. The main results of the analysis indicate that (1) achieving the goals and objectives of free economic zones is challenging over time; (2) trying to upgrade the technical component, develop knowledge-based and eco-friendly new industries, or value-added to the economy through free economic zone policies is even challenging; and (3) incentives and other program-specific variables are highly context-specific and not structurally correlated with free economic zone performance. In addition, the paper shows that the initial conception of the role of free economic zones has undergone significant change as individual countries have tried to enhance the contributions and avoid damages from incorporating free economic zones into their development strategy respectively, over time.

• Journal of the Korea Safety Management & Science
• /
• v.22 no.4
• /
• pp.87-100
• /
• 2020

Economic Development Zone(EDZ) in the province is one of the foreign policy for economic development of North Korea. North Korea has promulgated 27 Economic Development Zones(5 EDZs as central level and 22 EDZs as provincial level) to promote economic growth through the expansion of external opening policy. EDZs of the provinces play an important role in North Korea's national and regional economic growth. The purpose of this study is to select analytical criteria that can be quantified when considering the location conditions of North Korean economic development zones when domestic companies advance into North Korea according to the progress of inter-Korean economic cooperation, and derive the relative importance between the criteria. After that, based on this, we intend to quantify the evaluation of the location priority of the economic development zone. In this study, through AHP analysis results, when domestic companies enter North Korea, we derive the importance and preference of location selection factors when considering the location conditions of North Korean economic development zones. Taking into account the reality of North Korea when the Korean company entered the North economic development zone following location for evaluation. That is, logistics and transportation, industrial infrastructure, competitiveness, and management incentives. And 14 sub-factors were selected and AHP analysis was performed.

• Journal of the Economic Geographical Society of Korea
• /
• v.17 no.1
• /
• pp.86-97
• /
• 2014

Incheon Free Economic Zone is the first free economic zone specified in 2003 in Korea. Previous research on the Free Economic Zone has focused on the activation of the free economic zone or foreign investment issue at the level of the national economic plan. Related to the development of a free economic zone, studies are currently insufficient on the relevance of the local economy, the development of linkages with hinterland, and the balanced regional development. Therefore, this study tried to investigate the impact of Incheon Free Economic Zone to the local economy through analyzing the causes and characteristics of the imbalance between the regions in Incheon by comparing before (1996~2002) and after (2003~2009) of the Incheon Free Economic Zone legislation (2003). The result shows that development of the free economic zone has not been connected to the local economy activation and the ripple effect on the old town in Incheon. Further, the construction of a large apartment and infrastructure in the free economic zones have increased the disparity between the free zones and the old town.

• Journal of Korea Port Economic Association
• /
• v.20 no.1
• /
• pp.123-140
• /
• 2004

With the globalization of economy, there is keen competition among rountries to be a logistics hub and companies are striving to be first in establishing logistics system centering on advantageous sites, especially airport and seaports, to perform supply, production and distribution. Korea competing with Northeast Asia countries is also working out strategies in order to make Korea peninsula a logistics center of Northeast Asia taking advantage of its geographical strength. Gwangyang port has designated as Free Economic Zone together with Pusan and Jinhae, Incheon from October 24th, 2003. However, the introduction of Free Economic Zone in Korea lagged behind other major countries and it has a lot of operational problems. Approximately 600 areas worldwide are designated and operated as a Free Economic Zone and Gwangyang port and its surrounding area has several points to be settled as one of FEZ. First one is its limited functions and related laws. Next is imperfection on development, investment and management system of the hinterland. Lark of promotion activities could be one of the problems. This paper analyzes the above problems and presents various measures to activate Gwangyang Port and Gwangyang Free Economic Zone as follows Benchmarking to promote Gwangyang Free Economic Zone as follows Benchmarking other countries' system, governmental support, introduction & logistics functions, early development of the hinterland, supply of effective one-stop service, investment attraction into the area and diversified promotion & marketing activities.

• Journal of Korea Port Economic Association
• /
• v.21 no.1
• /
• pp.111-132
• /
• 2005

With the globalization of economy, there is keen competition among countries to be a logistics hub and companies are striving to be first in establishing logistics system centering on advantageous sites, especially airport and seaports, to perform supply, production and distribution. Korea competing with Northeast Asia countries is also working out strategies in order to make Korea penninsula a logistics center of Northeast Asia taking advantage of its geographical strength. Gwangyang port has designated as Free Economic Zone together with Pusan and Jinhae, Incheon from October 24th, 2003. However, the introduction of Free Economic Zone in Korea lagged behind other major countries and it has a lot of operational problems. Approximately 600 areas worldwide are designated and operated as a Free Economic Zone and Gwangyang port and its surrounding area has several points to be settled as one of FEZ. First one is its limited functions and related laws on Gwangyang Bay. Next is imperfection on development, investment and management system of the FEZ. Lack of promotion activities could be one of the problems. If we want to activate the FEZ, we must induce investment at Gwangyang Bay. This paper analyzes the above problems and presents various measures to activate Gwangyang Free Economic Zone by inducing investment for innovation cluster as follows Benchmarking to promote Gwangyang Free Economic Zone as follows Benchmarking other countries' system, governmental support, introduction & logistics functions, early development of the hinterland, supply ofeffective one-stop service, investment attraction into the area and diversified promotion & marketing activities.

• Journal of Korea Port Economic Association
• /
• v.22 no.1
• /
• pp.17-38
• /
• 2006

This paper suggests the development device of Busan-Jinhae free Economic Zone(BJFEZ) to strengthen the competitiveness of the Port of Busan and promote the regional development in Busan. It deals with the securable feasibility of necessary sites and development costs and financial resources, the foreign investments figure, and the structure of the BJFEZ Authority. In addition, to evaluate the background, process, and contents of 'Special Purpose Local Government', the paper looks into the amendment proposal of 'Act on designation and management of free economic zones' suggested by the central government from the regional view of point. As proposals to promote and activate BJFEZ, it is recommended in the paper that it is required, first, to draw the detailed political methods to guarantee sound and sustainable development project and investment environment in accordance with regional characteristics prior to marketing, second, to develop and implement differentiated policy means to facilitate foreign investment, third, to strengthen specialty of the BJFEZ authority, and finally, to set up the supporting role and cooperation of both the central and local governments.

• Journal of the Korean Institute of Rural Architecture
• /
• v.7 no.3
• /
• pp.1-8
• /
• 2005

Decrease in Population and graying of rural area by industrialization and urbanization are gone continuously. This makes happened various rural problems and the differential of standard of living with is arising day by day. Government is unfolding rural supporting project to solve continuously these problems. Recent Projects which are choosing not top-down process by government leading but bottom-up process through village inhabitants' participation and expert consultant get positive estimation. But those have difficulties because the support is attained only in the beginning step not continuously and inhabitants' number by graying is decreasing. The Special Economic Zone for Regional Development Policy is new access that regulation can differ according to special quality of each area depending on Localization Age. Through this transfer the competence that can mitigate or reinforce various regulations according to special quality of area in local government. So, back and maintain activation systematically so that each area could be developed specially. The purpose of The Special Economic Zone for Regional Development Policy is the activation of regional economy through development that regional specific character is. And there is characteristic that local government plans and takes the lead in all project contents, government gives regulation benefit by appointing the special economic zone and do not support finance and various tax remissions. Through investigation of such new policy, I wish to recognize what long-term plan and method could be possible to success rural activation continuously.

• Journal of Agricultural Extension & Community Development
• /
• v.17 no.4
• /
• pp.799-825
• /
• 2010

The purpose of the present study is to provide policy implications for successful development of the metropolitan economic zone in Korea followed by in-depth case studies on the US Metropolitan Economic Region. This study looked into diverse experiences of the US mega regions investigating their key strategies, requirements and standards, etc. Urban areas in the US are designated based on CBSA, a standard for statistical area since 1950. The US has a clear standard to define rural and suburban area and is trying to reflect urban structural changes including suburbanization. The US annexation system is relatively simple to operate. Furthermore, the system helps the growth of rural areas by gradually incorporating rural areas into urban areas. We found that action plans of the US mega regions facilitate strategic growth and development for balanced territorial development, incorporating multi-dimensional and comprehensive approaches. We also found that the US mega regions are designated with regard to the local natures. Couple of policy implications were extracted from the US experiences. First, since the construction of mega regions in Korea concerns less on the inter-regional connections with other regions, we need to incorporate diverse standards to divide the regions with respect to the spatial and local characteristics. Second, local governments should collaborate with each other for successful economic development of the metropolitan economic zones. Administrative districts renovation can be a immediate and effective solution to facilitate the collaboration. We recommended to consider consolidating administrative areas to construct successful metropolitan economic zones.

• World Technopolis Review
• /
• v.2 no.1
• /
• pp.32-42
• /
• 2013

Science and Technology Park (STP) is perceived to be a vehicle in promoting innovation-based economic growth within the framework of regional and national innovation systems. STP is a tool to encourage regional innovation and competitiveness in increasing contribution of science and technology in economic development. STP can also be a leading sector in creating conducive environment for local community's technopreneurship. In relation to the vision outlined in the 2025 Indonesian Master Plan of Acceleration and Expansion of Indonesia's Economic (MP3EI), STP is stated to be an important element in creating innovation within the framework of Special Economic Zone among six Economic Corridors. Hence, the government of Indonesia continues to encourage the development of STPs in Indonesia by involving local governments, universities, business players and stakeholders surround the area. Ultimately, STP is a platform in developing National Innovation System (NIS) and Regional Innovation System (RIS).