• East Asian Economic Review
• /
• 제21권4호
• /
• pp.343-384
• /
• 2017

We assess the outcomes for the negotiating parties in the Trans-Pacific Partnership if the remaining eleven parties go ahead with the agreement as negotiated without the United States, as compared to the outcomes under the original twelve-member agreement signed in October 2016. We find that the eleven-party agreement, now renamed as the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP), is a much smaller deal than the twelve-party one, but that some parties do better without the United States in the deal, in particular those in the Western Hemisphere - Canada, Mexico, Chile, and Peru. For the politically relevant medium term, the United States stands to be less well-off outside the TPP than inside. Since provisional deals can be in place for a long time, the results of this study suggest that the eleven parties are better off to implement the CPTPP, leaving aside the controversial governance elements, the implications of which for national interests are unclear and which, in any event, may be substantially affected by parallel bilateral negotiations between individual CPTPP parties and the United States.

• East Asian Economic Review
• /
• 제17권4호
• /
• pp.333-359
• /
• 2013

Two mega-regional negotiations are changing the landscape of Asia Pacific trade policy: an Asian track centered on ASEAN (the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership or RCEP), and a Trans-Pacific track centered on the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) among 12 economies, including the United States, which Korea is expected to join. Modeling results suggest that both would generate substantial benefits for Korea and the global economy. From Korea's viewpoint, the agreements would establish new FTAs with China, Japan and smaller economies, improve the utilization of FTAs by permitting the regional cumulation of inputs, and help to upgrade some Korean FTAs to more rigorous standards. By participating in these agreements, Korea could also help to guide them toward inclusive, high-quality regional outcomes. As one of the region's most open and agile economies, Korea has a large stake in regional integration and would be well advised to pursue both tracks.

• East Asian Economic Review
• /
• 제25권3호
• /
• pp.233-272
• /
• 2021

The Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) agreement, signed in November 2020, comes shortly after the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) entered into force and the US-China Trade War escalated. We use a computable general equilibrium model to assess the long-term effects of these three developments on income, trade, economic structure, factor returns and employment across the world, and especially in Asia-Pacific countries. The results suggest that RCEP could generate income gains that will be almost twice as large as those of the CPTPP, and that the two agreements together will largely offset the substantial negative effects of the US-China Trade War for the world as a whole. All three policy developments, but especially RCEP, will deepen East Asian production networks and will raise productivity and increase wages and employment in much of East Asia. At the sectoral level, regional trade in non-durable and durable manufactures will experience the most growth.

• East Asian Economic Review
• /
• 제18권2호
• /
• pp.163-186
• /
• 2014

This paper argues that the formation of regional integration frameworks can be best understood as a dominant state's attempt to create a preferred regional framework in which it can exercise exclusive influence. In this context, it is important to observe not only which countries are included in a regional framework, but also which countries are excluded from it. For example, the distinct feature of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) is its exclusion of China, and that of the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) is its exclusion of the United States (US). An exclusion of a particular country does not mean that the excluded country will perpetually remain outside the framework. In fact, TPP may someday include China, resulting from a policy of the US "engaging" or "socializing" China rather than "balancing" against it. However, the first step of such a policy is to establish a regional framework from which the target country of engagement is excluded.

• East Asian Economic Review
• /
• 제22권2호
• /
• pp.177-215
• /
• 2018

Trump's withdrawal from the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and his "America First" trade agenda ignite a second round of interest in mega-free trade agreements in the Asia-Pacific. Countries are evaluating alternative trade policy actions in a post-TPP era. Using national real GDP gains estimated by a modified GTAP model to construct "preference ordering" for 10 Association of Southeast Asian Nations members and their six regional dialogue partners, this paper comes up with several policy-oriented findings. First, when multilateral agreements are not possible, countries are better off with a regional trading agreement than without one. Second, the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership is likely to have higher beneficial impacts than the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership. Third, for dual-track countries, implementing both agreements is better than each separately. Fourth, impacts of open regionalism are likely to be higher than those of a closed and reciprocal one. Going forward, this paper argues that countries should adopt a "multi-track, multi-stage" approach to trade policy.

• 무역학회지
• /
• 제41권4호
• /
• pp.293-313
• /
• 2016

동아시아 지역은 FTA 확대로 인해 국경을 초월한 경제일체화가 진척되고 있고, 각국의 규제제도 개혁으로 기업활동의 자유는 높아지고 있으며, 국경을 초월한 공정간 분업이 진전되고 있는 등 무역네트워크의 고도화가 촉진되고 있다. 미국이 주도하는 다자간 FTA인 환태평양경제동반자협정(TPP)은 2016년 2월 4일 뉴질랜드 오클랜드에서 12개국이 협정문에 서명하였는데, 동아시아 무역네트워크의 변화가 예상된다. 본 연구에서는 TPP가 동아시아 무역네트워크에 미칠 영향에 관해 살펴보았다. 연구결과 TPP는 공급사슬의 글로벌화를 이끄는 규제 및 제도로써 공급사슬 구조를 변화시키고, 가치사슬에 긍정적인 효과를 야기한다. 이는 동아시아 무역네트워크에 상당한 영향을 미칠 것이며 참여기업의 경쟁력 강화로 이어질 것이다. 또한 TPP는 향후 아태자유무역지대(FTAAP)의 실현을 위한 토대가 될 것으로 보이는데, 무역의존도가 높은 한국은 이로 인해 변화할 동아시아 무역환경에 효과적으로 대처하기 위한 정책적 노력을 기울여야 할 것이다.

• 한국정보컨버전스학회논문지
• /
• 제6권1호
• /
• pp.25-36
• /
• 2013

본 글은 최근 동아시아 경제통합에 대한 필요성 제고 및 강대국 간 주도권 경쟁에 따른 동아시아 지역 내 TPP 추진, 특히 日의 환태평양동반자협정(TPP) 참여확정에 기반 한 경제대국간 역내 외 무역구조의 변화와 TPP에 관련된 주요국들의 참여배경에 대해 살펴보고, 동남아시아의 경제적 요충지로서의 부상으로 인한 향후 한국의 TPP 참여의 대응 과제에 대해 논하면서 TPP 참여선언추진을 촉구함에 글의 목적이 있다.

• East Asian Economic Review
• /
• 제20권1호
• /
• pp.3-35
• /
• 2016

This paper analyses the new discipline on state-owned enterprises contained in the recently concluded Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement, and evaluates various factors that influenced the shaping of its specific rules. The new discipline consolidates and strengthens related provisions in current trade regimes, reflects various aspects of trade disputes between China and the US, and adopts, as its general underlying rationale, the principle of competitive neutrality. The new discipline contains elements that may challenge the multilateral trade regime, and may serve as a role model in regulating state-owned enterprises, including subsidies in services trade in other on-going trade negotiations. The new regime makes us think hard about fundamental issues regarding enforcement of competition policy against state-owned enterprises, treatment of non-market economies, and how to deal with effects of subsidies in international trade, bringing competition issues back on the trade agenda.

• East Asian Economic Review
• /
• 제20권3호
• /
• pp.311-338
• /
• 2016

In the race for establishing trading architecture consistent with new landscape of the global economy, the US is ahead of the game by concluding the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement with 11 countries. To make it reality, the ratification is essential. In the battle for ratification in the US, declining globalism confronts rising protectionism. This paper models the ratification process as contest between globalism and protectionism, and analyzes the optimal timing for ratification. Based on this framework, various ratification scenarios are analyzed. The paper argues less likelihood for the lame-duck session passage and more likelihood for prolonged and protracted delay, due to changing political dynamics and declining intellectual support for globalism. Hence, the future of Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement may prove different, compared to the North American Free Trade Agreement and the Korea-US Free Trade Agreement, both of which were renegotiated and ratified eventually. Then, the US would lose the first move advantage. The paper also discusses strategic implications of delayed ratification on the evolution of trading architecture in East Asia.

• Ocean and Polar Research
• /
• 제45권1호
• /
• pp.23-31
• /
• 2023

The core of the foreign policy of the Yoon Suk-yeol government is the promotion of active economic and security diplomacy as indicated in Policy Tasks No. 98. To this end, economic consultative bodies such as Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement(RCEP), Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP), and Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF) are taking the initiative to respond to the formation of supply chain, human rights, environment, and digital-related norms, and actively support Korean companies' overseas expansion. Due to the nature of the Ministry of Oceans and Fisheries (MOF) as an organization established centered on the space of the ocean, the MOF faces difficulties in bringing the functions of other ministries into the space of the ocean. Considering the vision, objectives, and detailed plans of the MOF, the contribution of the MOF in the field of active economic security, one of the main foreign policies of the Yoon Suk-yeol government, is perhaps too obvious. However, since the re-launch of the MOF, the ODA budget for the oceans and fisheries sector is too small compared to other ministries, so even if new policy demands are discovered, there are many difficulties in implementing these policies in practice. Recognizing these problems, this paper examines the background and contents of foreign policies that have been promoted for the efficient promotion of RCEP, CPTPP and IPEF and introduces the areas of cooperation in the oceans and fisheries sector in these foreign policies.