• Asian Journal of Business Environment
• /
• v.6 no.1
• /
• pp.19-24
• /
• 2016

Purpose - This paper aims to find and analyze factors that determine the flows of bilateral foreign direct investment in intra-ASEAN. It specifically focuses on the dimension of macro-economic, natural resources, human resources, and the quality of governance. Research design, data, and methodology - Data were collected from 64 bilateral relations between ASEAN nations from 2002 to 2013. Panel gravity model was utilized to find factors that determine the flows of bilateral foreign direct investment. Results - Significant factors were identified that determine the flows of bilateral foreign direct investment: GDP home country, GDP host country, real interest rate, distance, and total natural resources rent. Unexpectedly, natural resources have a negative effect. Conclusions - In a situation of increasing the flow of FDI among the countries of ASEAN, the government should control the interest rates and maintain good relations with nearby countries. The negative effect of total natural resource rents implies that ASEAN countries should not depend on their natural resources to attract foreign investments.

• The Southeast Asian review
• /
• v.24 no.2
• /
• pp.35-79
• /
• 2014

This study examines the measures for the activation and the growth of intra-regional trade in Southeast Asia taking a look at the four dimensions of tariff rates, non-tariff barriers, trade facilitations, and trade infrastructures. Utilizing a gravity model, we performed empirical analysis and discussed the policy implications with the priorities to implement. To expand the intra-regional trade in Southeast Asia it would be necessary to enhance the level of trade facilitations and provide trade infrastructures, such as ports and airports as well as cutting the tariff rates and eliminating the non-trade barriers. In particular, in the case of exports of ASEAN6 to ASEAN6 the infrastructure is the important factor. Also, in the case of the exports of ASEAN6 to CLMV(Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar, and Vietnam), it is expected that eliminating non-tariff barriers and enhancing trade facilitations may play important roles in the progress of intra-regional trade. These results may provide the important implications for Southeast Asian countries, which are trying to promote intra-regional trade ahead of the constitution of ASEAN Economic Community by 2015. Southeast Asian countries could be evaluated to achieve a certain level of trade liberalization and economic integration through the formation of AFTA. But in order for Southeast Asia to develop to advanced economic integrated region it requires mutual cooperations and policy harmonizations among regional countries. Also, for the elimination of non-tariff barriers, promoting trade facilitations, and providing infrastructures, the administrative, legal, and institutional measures would have to be fulfilled in advance. In addition, capital investment for constructing infrastructures would be necessary to realize the intra-regional trade expansion. However, to achieve the goal, it would require a large capital investment and highly mandated policy considerations and harmonizations among Southeast Asian countries in terms of further trade liberalization and economic integration.

• Journal of the Economic Geographical Society of Korea
• /
• v.6 no.2
• /
• pp.355-375
• /
• 2003

Since the mid 1980s, the emergence of the Newly Industrialized Countries has been the most remarkable mutation in the foreign direct investment. This emergence is creating the new international spacial flows constituted by the developed country, the newly industrialized country and the developing country. According to the active foreign direct investment of the Asia Newly Industrialized Countries (ANICs) into East Asia from the middle of the 1980s, the intra-East Asia direct investment flow has a observable structure hierarchic composed of Japan, ANICs, ASEAN and China. In the inflow of intra-East Asia direct investment, Japan and ANICs flows from the extra-developed country and Japan, AESAN from ANICs, Japan, and China from the ANICs. In the outflow, Japan flows relatively into the ANICs and ASEAN, ANICs into ASEAN and China, ASEAN and China into the ANICs. In conclusion, the emergence of ANICs and theirs role intermediate in the East Asian economy causes the intra-East Asia direct investment flows to make a hierarchical structure.

• Korea Trade Review
• /
• v.46 no.4
• /
• pp.95-112
• /
• 2021

The Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) signed by the 15 Asian countries in 2020 forms the world's largest free trading bloc. Using data for the period 2001 - 2019, this study evaluates global value chains (GVCs) among the RCEP members, with a primary focus on GVC backward participation which involves imports intermediates embodied in exports. This study finds that the RCEP's intra-regional linkages, particularly with the ASEAN members, are significantly higher than its extra-regional linkages in trade and GVC backward participation. Among the individual RCEP member countries, Korea is found to have a particularly strong intra-regional linkages with the ASEAN members in both trade and GVC participation.

• Korea Trade Review
• /
• v.41 no.1
• /
• pp.159-186
• /
• 2016

This study analyzes the degree of dependency and comparative advantage of each country for intermediate goods trade in East Asia, which predicts the comparative advantage of the intermediate goods trade and fragmentation in East Asia when the FTA arrangement in East Asia is implemented. The results are as follows. First, the share of intra-regional trade in the intermediate goods in East Asia has increased over time, implying the deepening of interdependency in intermediate goods trade within the East Asia. Second, Korea is a net exporter in intermediate goods trade for China and ASEAN, whereas it is a net importer for Japan. Japan is a high net exporter for all East Asia, while China is a net importer for Korea, Japan and ASEAN. If FTA arrangement in East Asia is implemented, Japan and Korea will be key suppliers of the intermediate goods for East Asia, while China and ASEAN will play a role of the manufacturing factory through the import of intermediate goods. Third, Korea has a comparative advantage in intermediate trade of electric and electronics and transport vehicle industry in East Asia. Japan has a comparative advantage in all of electric and electronics, transport vehicle, precision instrument, general machinery industry, whereas China has a comparative advantage only in electric and electronics intermediate trade in East Asia. The intra-industry trade of the intermediate goods in precision instrument, general machinery industry is expected to grow among Korea, Japan and China.

• East Asian Economic Review
• /
• v.19 no.2
• /
• pp.117-142
• /
• 2015

This paper uses a 53-country 15-industry computable general equilibrium model of trade to analyze the effects of the Korea-China free trade agreement on the Korean economy, the manufacturing sector in particular. The model is based on Yaylaci and Shikher (2014) which uses the Eaton-Kortum methodology to explain intra-industry trade. The model predicts that the Korea-China FTA will increase Korea-China manufacturing trade by 56%, manufacturing employment in Korea by 5.7% and China by 0.55%. The model also predicts significant reallocation of employment across industries with the Food industry in Korea losing jobs and other industries there gaining jobs, with the Medical equipment industry gaining the most. There will be some trade diversion from the ASEAN countries, as well as Japan and the United States.