• The Journal of Fisheries Business Administration
• /
• v.34 no.2
• /
• pp.27-52
• /
• 2003

The object of this paper is to review the fisheries subsidies of the major FFG(Fish Friends Group) which argue the elimination and the phasing-out, to compare with Korea's subsidies category and provide the basic information for planning of fisheries subsidies policy and the negotiation strategy in the future. The result from the comparative analysis of the subsidies between the major FFG showed that WWF(World Wildlife Fund) fisheries subsidies categories, with the exception of Marketing and Price Support Program which is similar to Korea in terms of the supporting type and methods, differ from those of Korea. Also, The unique type of WWF Fisheries Subsidies, which is beyond Korea's subsidies, are Direct Payment for Fishermen and Fishery Wokers, Capital ＆ Infrastructure Support, Fishery Management and Protection, etc. In case of capital support and fisheries fuel, the payment method or other institutional backgrounds is somewhat different from each nation. On the base of this analysis, this paper is suggesting the direction of the Korea's Fisheries subsidies policy as follows ; First, developing new policy methods and supporting ways such as Direct Payment for Fisherman is needed. Second, Converting fisheries subsidies category expected to be classified to Red Amber into another type of non-negative subsidies should be carried out, demonstrating that these kinds of subsidies give no negative effect to the environment and the trade, Third, Reviewing the categorize system of Korea's subsidies and revising it according to international trends is necessary as well. In respect to WTO/DDA, the watchful analysis of Korea's fisheries program must be preceding in ahead of making the negotiation strategy. And Korea firstly need to stress the fact that, while the major FFG can directly pay for fisheries section, other nations have no choice but supporting in preferential tax or loan manner. Using this kind of strategy, it is may enlarge the negotiating power in the WTO/DDA to reflect fully Korea's position.

• The Journal of Industrial Distribution & Business
• /
• v.1 no.1
• /
• pp.13-21
• /
• 2010

Since Korea establish diplomatic ties with China in 1992, korea and China have had rapid progress in most of field as politic, economy, society and culture through basing on cultural commonality and geographical adjacency. Especially, China is the biggest trading partner to korea, and also Korea is third-biggest trading country to China. They become strategic cooperating relation in 2008. Currently, in terms of international trade relation, WTO/DDA negotiation is proceeding in difficulty, but FTA has been growing and extending in the world, and the two country, china and korea, have been competitively trying wide and active FTA negotiation promotion. After Financial crisis in 1997, according to the requirement of local economic cooperation, China has shown the interest to several countries since the conclusion of FTA treaty with ASEAN in 2005. China also makes the active afford to conclude FTA with Korea. Last May 28th, this was mentioned in the meeting between president Lee and Premier Wen Jiabao, so it is anticipated that the negotiation for FTA will be started in the near future. There are many political suggestions and concerns in terms of way of negotiation korea would choose. Some economist said that "'Continuous FTA aimed at long-term protocol should be promoted between korea and China and negotiated includingly'" However, this research claims that commodity exchange, service, and investment areas should be included and it has to be comprehensive package settlement style in negotiation. This research has found out the characteristics of China's negotiation and implications through the China's existed FTA negotiation examples. Currently, China has taken Continuous or a phase-negotiation method to ASEAN, Pakistan, Chile and some other developing country and to advanced countries like New Zealand or Singapore, comprehensive package settlement method is used in FTA negotiation. In consider of the FTA negotiation between Korea and China, Korea has some problems in the commodity change area in agriculture maket's opening. While, for china, the issues would happen in service trade area, especially when encountering finance and communication industries are opened, China's economy could be exposed to some risk. In result, Korea should expand its negotiation range from commodity trade to service trade, in order to exchange both issues, then the negotiation will be concluded more easily. In other word, for FTA, korea should follow comprehensive package settlement way that is similar to New zealand and Singapore case. Through this kind of method, Korea can expect effect of creating trade, conversion of it and preoccupancy of service field in china's market against the advanced countries like Usa, Europe and Japan. Also, to have a successful FTA negotiation, korea should find out china's policy for FTA negotiation. With this information, korea will be able to suggest the way to make a profit. Systematic analysis and comparison about previous negotiation cases of china are needed before the negotiation begin.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.38
• /
• pp.265-302
• /
• 2008

This paper intends to analyse some legal issues on "Zeroing" which is based on the article 2.4.2 under the WTO Anti-dumping Agreement. "Zeroing" stands for a specific methodology in calculating a general dumping margin for a product in question under which negative individual dumping margins are treated as zero (thus "zeroed") before aggregating all individual dumping margins. The article 2.4.2 of the Anti-dumping Agreement regulates three types of calculating methodology on dumping margin as first symmetrical method(average-to-average: A-A), second symmetrical method(individual-to-individual: I-I) and asymmetrical method(average-to-individual: A-I). However, this article does not have any provisions about the "Zeroing" practice. In their anti-dumping practices, the EC and the United-States calculated dumping margin based on the "Zeroing", but this methodology has been disputed in the Dispute Settlement Body(DSB) of the WTO. This paper analysed their legal problems with some WTO cases in particular concerning EC-Bed Linen, U.S.-Softwood Lumber Zeroing, U.S.-Zeroing(EC) and U.S.-Sunset Review(Japan) cases. On the basis of theses analysis, we can therefore ask some questions as follows; To begin with, although the article 2.4.2 of the WTO Anti-dumping Agreement does not clearly refer to the "Zeroing", how do some developing countries, as the U.S.A and the E.U. calculate dumping margin as the "Zeroing"? Secondly, what is the relationship between the symmetrical method and asymmetrical method to the dumping margin? And if we adopt the zeroing method, what is the different rate to anti-dumping margin? Thirdly, although the Panel decided that the zeroing methodology of dumping margin used by th U.S.A in administrative review between the U.S.A and the E.U, why does the Appellate Body made the decision that the american methodology is incompatible with the WTO Anti-dumping Agreement? Lastly, what will be affected the upper decision taken by the Appellate Body to the DDA negotiation of anti-dumping matters? Even though the WTO Appellate made a decision that the zeroing method is incompatible with the principles of the WTO law, this methodology contains a lot of problems. Some members of the WTO as the U.S.A and the E.U did not officially declare this methodology to abandon, and the debate concerned is arguing. Therefore this paper tried to present the adequate solution in order to promote the zeroing methodology in the international anti-dumping system and practices.

• Korean journal of communication and information
• /
• v.35
• /
• pp.36-86
• /
• 2006

The industrialization and globalization in the field of broadcasting are rapidly proceeded by extension of multilateral agreement as GATT and WTO, and by expansion of bilateral FTA. The broadcasting gets important in the industries according to the change of broadcasting environment grounded on industrial logic. As the broadcasting products become an important article of trade, broadcasting industry is the best bet in the cultural industries. In the international trade, the USA and Japan will treat cultural products the same as common goods and keep in the frame of free trade. On the contrary, the EU nations and Canada take a position that the cultural products are common goods and also public goods at the same time, and that therefore the cultural products will be excepted from the free trade. But this so called cultural exception, which is formed in the multilateral free trade agreement, is merely a temporal countermeasure, not a fundamental alternative especially in the present circumstances of DDA negotiation of WTO and of enlargement of FTA by the USA. So a nation shall carry out policies for cultural identity and cultural autonomy by the guarantee of Cultural Diversity Agreement of UNESCO, and organize a new cultural exchange order which substitutes the trade order by trade agreements.