• The Journal of Fisheries Business Administration
• /
• v.38 no.1 s.73
• /
• pp.71-96
• /
• 2007

This study is aimed to investigate how the structure of Korean and Chinese fisheries has been changed since the Fisheries Agreement between Korea and China came into effect. This investigation was accomplished from a comparative point of view by using statistic data in the literatures published by both Korea and China. Results of this study are summarized as follows; First, it was revealed that the decreasing rate of fish production of marine capture fisheries in Korea was lowered more by 5.1%, while it was decreased by only 0.1% in China. Second, comparative results on changes in production of offshore fisheries showed that the production of Korean offshore fisheries in 2003 was reduced by 26% compared to that in 1999, while the production of China offshore fisheries was decreased by 22%. In addition, although the production of marine capture fisheries in the East region of China was reduced by 10%, on the contrary, the production of marine capture fisheries in Liaoning, Hebei, Tianjin, Jiangsu, Zhejiang, and Fujian that have mostly impacted by the Korea-China Fisheries Agreement was increased by 7%. Third, results on fishing capacity of marine fisheries indicated that the number of vessels and total horse power in Korea were increased by 1.2% and 44.9%, respectively, while total tonnage was reduced by 23.9%, For China, the number of vessels and total horse power were increased by 0.5% and 12.6%, respectively. Total tonnage was also increased by 11.7%. Finally, the production per Korean vessel was decreased by 17.8% in 2003 compared to that in 1999. On the contrary, the production per Chinese vessel was increased by 8.1% in 2003. The production per tonnage was increased by 3.2% in Korea, while it was reduced by 2.7% in China. In conclusion, it could be said that the Korea-China Fisheries Agreement has had a positive impact on the fisheries production of China, while it has had a negative impacts on that of Korea, relatively.

• Korea Trade Review
• /
• v.46 no.6
• /
• pp.21-38
• /
• 2021

China adopts the "Outline of the 14th Five-Year Plan for National Economic and Social Development of the People's Republic of China and the Long-Range Objectives Through the Year 2035" in the context of tremendous changes in the international environment. A new development paradigm is proposed to prioritize domestic circulation, reinforcing both domestic and international circulations. The industrial policies of China's "14th Five-Year Plan" will have an impact on Korea. Thus it is necessary for Korea to cooperate with China to actively respond to changes in the industrial chains and value chains in Asia and the world. Over the past 29 years since the establishment of diplomatic relation between China and South Korea, the two countries have enjoyed close economic and trade relations. China-ROK cooperation is critical to regional economic development in the Fourth Industrial Revolution and the era of remarkable changes in the world's political and economic structure. China is a robust developing country, while Korea is a developed one in with steady foothold in the world economy. China and South Korea should work together to contribute to the rapid recovery and development of the world economy instead of becoming competitors.

• East Asian Economic Review
• /
• v.26 no.1
• /
• pp.27-48
• /
• 2022

In the past decade, Korea and Japan have increasingly exhibited different strategic priorities in trade in face of China's rising global economic prowess and worsening US-China trade conflict. Japan's trade policy decisions have worked to reinforce its economic and security ties with the US as a means to counter China. Japan has used both bilateral and multilateral means to secure its ties with the US against China. In contrast, Korea's trade policy positions have been one of 'strategic ambiguity'. Korea has been more conciliatory towards China, reluctant to take actions that would counter China's interest. Korea has mainly resorted to bilateral channels to maintain favorable relations with both China and the US. Korea's reluctance to clearly ally with the US against China has been observed across different administrations with opposing political orientations. This paper examines Korea and Japan's diverging strategic priorities in trade through the 2017 World Trade Organization Ministerial Conference; the 2017 US imposition of Section 232 on steel; the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership, the Korea-US FTA renegotiation and the Korea-China FTA Phase Two Negotiation; and the 2019 Japan-US Trade Agreement.

• Journal of Korea Trade
• /
• v.26 no.1
• /
• pp.20-32
• /
• 2022

Purpose - This paper intends to make theoretical analysis and empirical test on the factors influencing China's export to South Korea, and draw conclusions about China's export efficiency and trade potential. Based on the conclusions, the reasons for China's trade deficit with South Korea are found, and a solution is put forward for solving the problem of China's trade deficit with South Korea. Design/methodology - Based on the data of 2004-2017 years in China, this paper uses the stochastic frontier gravity model to analyze the influencing factors of China's export to South Korea, as well as the export efficiency of each province and the export potential that can be explored. Findings - First, in terms of the factors affecting China's export trade to South Korea, the GDP of the provinces and cities in China, the FDI of South Korea to the provinces and cities in China, the GDP of South Korea, the population and education level of provinces and cities in China can significantly promote the export scale of Chinese provinces and cities to South Korea. The distance between Chinese provincial capitals and the South Korean capital significantly hinders Chinese exports to South Korea; Second, in terms of export trade efficiency, the trade exchange rate of the economically developed cities along the eastern coast of China and several provinces that are close to South Korea is higher than that of the cities in the central and western regions; Third, economic globalization makes trade more convenient, the average export trade efficiency of China's exports to South Korea showed an upward trend. However, under the influence of the 2008 global financial crisis, the export trade efficiency declined from 2008 to 2009, indicating that the impact of the financial crisis on the trade efficiency cannot be ignored. Originality/value - This paper finds out the influencing factors of China's export to South Korea, analyzes the export efficiency of different provinces and cities, excavates the export potential, and puts forward some suggestions for the balanced development of China and South Korea trade in the next step.

• Journal of Wellbeing Management and Applied Psychology
• /
• v.3 no.4
• /
• pp.1-4
• /
• 2020

Purpose: This research, based on the tariff reduction table negotiated by South Korea and China free trade area, the specific tariffs of the two countries in the implementation of the Korea-China Free Trade Agreement are calculated, and the global equilibrium model, the global trade analysis project (GTAP) model, is used to simulate and analyze the impact of the Korea-China free trade area on the output and trade of the two countries. Research design, data and methodology: The study conducted a survey on 2018 year GTAP 9.0data. After empirically analyzing the data, we believe that the Major industry in Korea and China will maintain its growth momentum. Results: This study shows that under the assumption that the average tariff of China and South Korea at the beginning of FTA was reduced to 20%, two scenarios were simulated. Two scenarios are simulated under the assumption that the average tariff of China and South Korea FTA will be reduced to 10%. Conclusions: This paper assumes that the average tariff of China-Korea FTA is set at 20%, 10% and zero tariff respectively in the early, middle and long term of the FTA construction. It considers the impact of China-Japan-Korea FTA on China- Korea FTA.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.23 no.1
• /
• pp.25-53
• /
• 2013

With the Korea-China FTA negotiations currently on the line, the importance of research into the FTA dispute settlement system has been increasing. In this paper, a comparison of Korea and China's FTA dispute settlement agreements concluded with ASEAN is contemplated, and implications for the future of the Korea-China FTA have been suggested. The FTA dispute settlement agreements with ASEAN concluded by both Korea and China provide perspectives on both sides. This agreement with ASEAN also provides a standard for the potential Korea-China FTA agreement. Specifically, the basis of these agreements with ASEAN is the same, although there are clear distinctions, described in a more detailed manner. A problem arises when there has been no discussion on dispute settlement agreements in Korea, especially of the agreement with ASEAN, whereas the opposite is true of the China counterpart. In this paper, Chinese academic FTA dispute settlement agreement studies have been also examined.

• The Journal of Industrial Distribution & Business
• /
• v.8 no.6
• /
• pp.33-40
• /
• 2017

Purpose - This study attempted to discover the impact of the Korea-China FTA(Free Trade Agreement) on electronic products distribution industry. Strategies will be provided to expand both countries' trade after the Korea-China FTA. Research design, data, and methodology - This study analyzed the differences before and after the Korea-China FTA, using an RCA(Revealed Comparative Advantage) index, TC(Technology Sophistication Index) index and TSI(Trade Specialization Index) that considered the FTA tariff situation. Data was collected from the International Trade Statistics Database and Korea, China Customs Service. Results - The results indicate that following the Korea-China FTA, China and Korea's bilateral trade of electronic products is expected to expand, and both countries will experience net welfare gains from the markets' expansion. Korea is competitive in several key products, although it faces competition from China. China's electronic products' competitiveness have indicated an increasing trend. Conclusions - The two countries should closely cooperate and communicate with each other. Ultimately, Korea should focus on high-tech, sophisticated techniques to gain market advantage. On the other hand, with the tariff decrease as well as the labor cost and labor force base, China will greatly be able to benefit from the manufacturing of medium- to low-end products in the future.

• Journal of Korea Port Economic Association
• /
• v.20 no.2
• /
• pp.53-71
• /
• 2004

The container throughput of China, after the joining in the WTO, has begun to increase notably. As a result, China is busy building new ports continuously. In accordance with China's situation Korea promote the development plans of ports and marketing strategy to attract the increasing cargo traffics with China, including transhipment cargoes. To build the competition strategy and the panning port for trading cargoes with China, an analysis on origin/destination is necessary. The cargo volume from/to the particular port(Korea/China) and origin/destination of traffic are important factors in the requirement for the port development. Therefore, in the era that trading with China is rapidly increasing, this study is performed to analyze the port's usage of transporting the cargos and the origin/destination of trading cargoes with china. Also this paper suggests to the competitive strategies of Pyungtaek Port to attract cargoes particularly from/to China.

• Asian Journal of Business Environment
• /
• v.2 no.1
• /
• pp.19-23
• /
• 2012

The economic exchanges have become increasingly frequent between China and Korea and the average annual growth rate of the total trade volume has increased by 30% since the establishment of diplomatic relations between the two countries. With the rapid economic growth and industrial upgrading of China, there are changes in the investment of Korea in China and domestic demand of China, and the trade structure of Sino- Korea has changed a lot in recent years. The changes have mainly manifested in the following aspects, including the increased proportion of high-tech products, raw materials and the intra-industry trade, the decreased proportion of consumer goods, the inter-industry trade and the trade deficit of China. With the development of the situation of international economy, the scale of Korea and China trade will continue to expand and the structure of Korea and China trade will also keep on changing in the long run.

• Journal of Contemporary Eastern Asia
• /
• v.18 no.1
• /
• pp.30-48
• /
• 2019

China has initiated a series of "economic sanctions" against South Korea, affecting Korean pop stars visiting China and Korean investments in China. Sanctions were imposed on South Korea in response to the decision of South Korea to deploy Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) in 2016. Furthermore, the Global Daily assembled local population to boycott Korean products and investments in China. However, the Chinese Foreign Ministry has never positively confirmed these activities as economic sanctions to South Korea related to the THAAD installation. In other words, the Chinese government singled a relatively weak message via these sanctions to South Korea. As a result, the THADD implementation continued in South Korea. In the paper, I interpret China's rationale to impost puzzling economic sanctions, which have a weak resolution, to South Korea and Taiwan. As signaling theory argues, economic sanctions with insufficient resolution, which are more likely to fail, is a more provocative foreign policy. By reviewing China's sanctions usage to South Korea and Taiwan, I propose arguments of bureaucratic competition to answer why China launched such sanctions to other countries: those are caused by domestic institutions who are seeking reward from the Communist Party of China. By comparing shifts of leadership between domestic agencies, the paper provides evidence to support the proposed argument. I also include two alternative explanations to strengthen the proposed argument, albeit connecting the paper with other two larger streams of research, which address analyses of China's aggressive foreign policies as well as the domestic politics of economic sanctions.