• Journal of Distribution Science
• /
• v.13 no.8
• /
• pp.5-14
• /
• 2015

Purpose - This study undertakes to examine the automotive trade structure between Korea and Russia to accelerate economic cooperation and pinpoint trade discrepancies to increase trade volume through improved policies, eventually finding ways for trade expansion. Research design, data, and methodology - To analyze trade decision factors for both countries, the Index of trade specialization invented by trade specialization theory, is used. Although specific factors should materialize in the trade decision analysis, realistically, concrete explanations are difficult as many unsolved factors are involved as well as their complexities Results - First, to assess comparative market competitiveness, the Index describes A value/B value, representing the Korean versus the Russia market share and the Korean market share versus the world. Second, the index shows that Korea is taking comparative advantage of its export specialization. Third, the RCA indices show considerable improvement compared to 2000. Conclusions - This research used a quantitative approach to examine trade specialization and examined a comparative advantage index of market share to see how inter-trade relations have changed over the past 10 years.

• Journal of Distribution Science
• /
• v.11 no.11
• /
• pp.33-40
• /
• 2013

Purpose - This study, in seeking to understand the trade structure of both Korea and China, aims to strengthen Korea-China economic cooperation; it examines trade impediments by analyzing the problems affecting trade and addressing these problems, thereby discovering ways to expand trade between these countries. Research Design, Data, and Methodology - The index of trade intensity developed by the trade intensity theory (Kruger, 1997) is used to analyze the trade decision factors of both countries. Although specific factors should have materialized from the analysis of trade decision factors, determining concrete explanations is difficult in reality, as there are many unsolved and diverse factors. Results - First, the index of A value/B value is the index of Korean versus Chinese market share/Korean versus world market share, which is a measure of comparative market intensity. Second, Korea has a comparative advantage in export specialization and, conversely, China has a comparative advantage in import specialization. Third, compared to 2000, the revealed comparative advantage (RCA) indexes are considerably improved. Conclusions - This study used quantitative measurement for analysis, applying trade intensity theory, trade specialization, and RCA indexes to gauge how inter-trade relations have changed between Korea and China during the past 10 years (2000, 2005, and 2012).

• International Commerce and Information Review
• /
• v.8 no.4
• /
• pp.45-69
• /
• 2006

First, the trade competitiveness of the textile industries in South Korea has been weakening, whereas, the counterpart in China has been growing as the main export industries. Second, the trade competitiveness of the mechanics industries in South Korea has been increasing and appearing as the new promising strategic export industries. And, the counterpart in China also shows that it has been rising, while the country’s level of the imports specialization index has been weakening. Third, the trade competitiveness of the transportation industries in South Korea has been rising as the export-oriented and at the same time, privileged industries. And, China has also been rising as South Korea has been in the case, whereas, imports specialization index has been weakening. Fourth, the trade competitiveness of the electrical and electronic industries in South Korea has relatively been at the very high level, giving rise to the core export-privileged industries in the South Korea. And, China has been emerging as the new strategic export industries, as its industry structure has been shifted from the import- specialization and export-specialization industries. Fifth, it is indicated that the trade in the both South Korean and Chinese industries of fable materials, mechanics goods for computer & office, and goods for electric mechanics has been going favorable and brisk.

• Journal of Distribution Science
• /
• v.12 no.2
• /
• pp.105-112
• /
• 2014

Purpose - This research undertakes to understand the trade structures of both China and Japan to strengthen Sino-Japan economic cooperation and examines impediments to trade between the 2 countries to analyze causes which affect trade and to examine improvements in these areas to find out ways of trade expansion. Through this survey of a defined period of time, we can identify the structural factors of trade dependence in the relationship between China and Japan. Research design, data, methodology - The data were collected from Korea Traders Association, Korea Customs Office and UN Comtrade, from which whole table indexes are calculated by author. This research methodology uses trade related indexes to focus on analyzing comparative advantages based on time-series analysis statistics data (2000~2012), by using the analysis index of Trade Intensity Index (TII), Revealed Comparative Advantage Index (RCA) and Trade Specialization Index (TSI). Results - The export ratio for China against Japan was a little higher in 2000 at 2.867 and the export ratio for China against Japan was sustained in 2005. However, it diminished gradually and reached 1.263 in 2012. During the whole period of 2000~2012, the indexes were maintained without any significant change. However, they are still moving closer to -1. Especially, in 2012 it is the closest it has been to -1. Therefore, Japan has a comparative advantage toward export specialization. On the other hand, China has a comparative advantage toward import specialization. For the whole research period, all indexes were much smaller than 1, which means that China has comprehensively had a comparative disadvantage against Japan for the past 10 years when compared to other industries, even though it had improved in 2000. Conclusions - The summary of conclusions based on empirical analysis research are as follows: First, per the Trade Intensity Index of industries between the 2 countries, we can conclude that export ratio index is 2.867, based on the formula, in 2000, which means the export ratio of China against Japan is a little bit higher. Furthermore, the ratios of 2.259 and 1.263 are indicated in 2005 and 2012 respectively which mean the export ratio of China against Japan was maintained in 2005 but was diminishing gradually as the index is 1.263 in 2012. Second, per the Trade Specialization Index of the shipping industry between China and Japan, -0.379 is indicated in 2000, -0.368 in 2005 and -0.568 in 2012. Looking at the whole period of 2000~2012, the indexes were maintained without any significant change. However, they are still moving closer to -1. Especially, in 2012 it is the closest it has been to -1. Third, per the Revealed Comparative Advantage Index of the automobile industry between China and Japan, the RCA indexes in 2005 and 2012 are 0.246 and 0.306 respectively which are still far from 1 even though the index is improved compared to 2000's value of 0.0001. Therefore, the Chinese automobile industry is very much at a comparative disadvantage to that of the Japanese automobile industry.

• Journal of Distribution Science
• /
• v.12 no.7
• /
• pp.37-44
• /
• 2014

Purpose - This study reviews changes in the automobile export-import structure between Japan and USA through a trade related index, and focuses on analyzing comparative advantage based on time-series analysis of statistical data (2000, 2005, and 2012) by using the trade intensity index (TII), revealed comparative advantage index (RCA), and trade specialization index (TSI). Research design, data, and methodology - Japan and USA have mutually complementary economic phase characteristics. Therefore, this study aimed to understand each country's trade structure, to strengthen Japan-USA economic cooperation and aimed to examine trade drawbacks to analyze causes affecting trade and ways to improve it to facilitate its expansion. Results - These two economies have immense complementary potential and, further, significantly greater profits are assured from trade between them, as compared to any other integrated regional economic community. Conclusion - Economic cooperation between these two powers can provide opportunities for industry technology cooperation through partnerships against the backdrop of accelerating competition among industries, by identifying opportunities to secure stable resource suppliers and enlarge the export market.

• International Commerce and Information Review
• /
• v.12 no.4
• /
• pp.327-344
• /
• 2010

This study intends to analyze the trade competitiveness of Korean films in international markets. Under environmental of film industry, Korean films could be doing better. But the Key success factors Korean films in the foreign markets are the improvement of contents Quality and the diversification of trade market. Namely, Our films is mainly exporting Japanese market and the import depends upon American films. In case the trade specialization index(TSI), The international competitiveness of Korean films shows lower import specialization, by virtue of export increasing of Japan, Europe and other markets in 2000's. On the other hand, The Export Market Share has shown similar pattern to main markets except Japanese market, and the import was almost similar to trend in foreign markets except American films. Consequently the present film strategies and polices that delight limited markets will not be compete in global markets, Korean films or contents is merely called by that name.

• Journal of Distribution Science
• /
• v.12 no.6
• /
• pp.21-29
• /
• 2014

Purpose - This research undertakes to understand the competitiveness of the steel distribution industry of both Korea and China to strengthen Korea-Sino economic cooperation, examines impediments to trade between the two countries to analyze causes which affect trade, and examines improvements in these areas to identify means of trade expansion. Through this survey of a defined period, we can identify the structural factors of trade dependence in the relationship between Korea and China. Research design, data, and methodology - The data were collected from the Korea Traders Association, the Korea Customs Office, and UN Comtrade, from which whole table indexes are calculated. The research methodology uses trade-related indexes to focus on analyzing comparative advantages based on time-series analysis statistics data (2000-2012) by using the analysis index of trade intensity index (TII), the revealed comparative advantage index (RCA), and the trade specialization index (TSI). Results - The export ratio for Korea to China was slightly higher in 2000 at 2.867, and the export ratio for Korea to China was sustained in 2005. However, it diminished gradually, reaching 1.263 in 2012. During the period 2000-2012, the indexes were maintained without any significant change. However, they still remain close to -1. In particular, in 2012 it is the closest it has ever been to -1. Therefore, China has a comparative advantage in export specialization. On the other hand, Korea has a comparative advantage in import specialization. For the research period, all indexes were much lower than 1, which means that Korea has consistently had a comparative disadvantage against China for the past 10 years when compared to other industries, even though it experienced improvement in 2000. Conclusions - The summary of conclusions based on empirical analysis research are as follows: First, per the trade intensity index of industries between the two countries, we conclude that the export ratio index in 2000 is 2.867, which means the export ratio of Korea to China is slightly higher. Furthermore, the ratios of 2.259 and 1.263 held in 2005 and 2012, respectively, meaning that the export ratio of Korea to China was maintained in 2005, but was diminishing gradually as the index in 2012 was 1.263. Second, per the trade specialization index of the steel distribution industry between Korea and China, the value was -0.379 in 2000, -0.368 in 2005 and -0.568 in 2012. Looking at the whole period of 2000-2012, the indexes remained without any significant change. However, they are still moving closer to -1. In particular, in 2012 it is the closest it has ever been to -1. Third, regarding the revealed comparative advantage index of the steel distribution industry between Korea and China, the RCA indexes in 2005 and 2012 are 0.246 and 0.306, respectively, which are still far from 1, even though the index has improved compared to the 2000's value of 0.0001. Therefore, the Korean steel distribution industry is at a significant comparative disadvantage to that of the Chinese steel distribution industry.

• Journal of Distribution Science
• /
• v.13 no.6
• /
• pp.35-44
• /
• 2015

Purpose - To accelerate economic cooperation, this study investigates trade structures of Korea and the United States and identifies trade discrepancies. Such discoveries can lead to increases in trade volume by improving policies, eventually uncovering ways for trade expansion. Research design, data, and methodology - The Index of trade intensity, from trade intensity theory, is used to analyze the trade decision factors. Even though specific factors should materialize in the analysis, realistically, concrete explanations are difficult as there are so many unsolved factors and diversifications. Results - First, the Index of A value/ B value positions Korean against the United States in terms of market share and Korea against world market share, which thereby reveals comparative market intensity. Second, Korea is taking comparative advantage of export specialization. Third, real comparative advantage indices are considerably improved since early 2000. Conclusions - This study uses quantitative measurements and trade intensity theory and trade specialization to come up with a comparative advantage index to see how inter-trade relations between Korea and the United States have changed over the past 10 years.

• Journal of Distribution Science
• /
• v.12 no.3
• /
• pp.25-32
• /
• 2014

Purpose - This study reviews changes in the steel export-import structure between Korea and Japan using a trade related index; it focuses on analyzing comparative advantage based on time-series analysis statistics data using the trade intensity index (TII), revealed comparative advantage index (RCA), and trade specialization index (TSI). Research design, data, and methodology - In terms of their economic phase, Korea and Japan have a mutually complementary character. Therefore, this study aims to understand each country's trade structure to strengthen Korea-Japan economic cooperation, examine trade drawbacks, analyze factors that affect trade, and identify ways to improve and expand trade. Results - The results indicate immense potential for mutual cooperation and complementariness, which will yield guaranteed adequate profits comparable to those of any regional economic integrated community. Conclusion - From our viewpoint, Northeast economic cooperation can facilitate industry technological cooperation with Japanese partners in the prevailing environment that is characterized by increasing competition among industries and the need to secure stable resource supplies as well as the expansion of the export market and diversification, which can have significant positive implications.

• International Commerce and Information Review
• /
• v.9 no.2
• /
• pp.161-182
• /
• 2007

The objective of this paper is to examine the competitiveness of Korean export firms in EU market. In this study, market share index, RCA index, trade specialization index, and market competitiveness index were used as an analytical tool. On the market share index, Korea had a large market share in the SITC section 7(machinery and transport equipment) market in EU. On the RCA index, Korea appeared to have high export competitiveness in the electrical machinery, apparatus and appliances, n.e.s.(not elsewhere specified[stated]), and electrical parts thereof (77), travel goods, handbags and similar containers(83), textile yarn, fabrics, made-up articles, n.e.s., and related products(65), and iron and steel(67) division. On the trade specialization index, however, Korea appeared to tend to decline generally. On the market competitiveness index, Korea appeared to have competitive advantage in the iron and steel(67), machinery specialized for particular industries(72), office machines and automatic data-processing machines(75), electrical machinery, apparatus and appliances, n.e.s., and electrical parts thereof(77), road vehicles(78), and other transport equipment(79) division; but in 29 divisions, the index indicates that Korean firms' competitiveness was low. Finally, the authors discuss the implications of these findings and offer directions for future study.