KIEP: World Economy Brief (WEB) (Topic)最新文献

{"title":"Two Years On: Achievements and Challenges in Trade Sector of Korea-India CEPA","authors":"Woong Lee, Young Chul Song, C. Cho","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2320332","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2320332","url":null,"abstract":"Since the Korea-India CEPA (Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement) entered into force in January 2010, Korea’s trade volume with India has been increasing at a faster rate than that of Korea with the world. - Korea’s exports to India in 2010 amounted to approximately USD 11.4 billion, recording a 42.7% increase from the same period in 2009, which is higher than the rate of increase in Korea’s exports to the world (28%). Korea’s imports from India in 2010 stood at USD 5.6 billion, an increase of 37% from 2009, which is higher than the rate of increase in Korea’s imports from the world (31.6%). - As a result, India became Korea’s 7th largest trading partner in 2010, overtaking Germany.Despite an increase in the bilateral trade volume after the completion of the Korea-India CEPA, the following challenges remain. - As of November 2011, there are quite a few items for which the CEPA preferential rate is higher than the MFN rate (around 17.3% of Korea’s exports, and 1.5% of India’s exports). Therefore, the actual concession rates have been lower, and the trade imbalance has been worsening. The governments on both sides need to look into an early upgrading of CEPA preferential rates (tariff reduction) in earnest so as to address the aforementioned problems. - If both countries lower the CEPA preferential rates to the same level, the number of items for which the MFN rate is lower than the CEPA preferential rates will be reduced, which is expected to lead to a substantial increase in actual concessions and India’s exports. - In particular, if both countries can further reduce the CEPA preferential rates it is expected to be better in terms of addressing India’s trade deficit. - It is so because the majority of India’s export items to Korea consist of price-sensitive raw/semi-finished materials while Korea’s main export items to India are more sensitive to local demand. In addition, both Korea and India should increase the target for trade volume to USD 30 billion, set to be achieved by 2014. - Since 1993, the bilateral trade volume steadily increased by 14.5% on average annually, and should it continue at this rate, the trade volume is expected to reach USD 34 billion by 2015, and USD 68 billion by 2020 even if the effect of CEPA preferential rates are not factored in. - With the tariff reduction effect, the trade volume would increase even more, and it is expected that the trade deficit, a main concern of India, would be reduced with a further lowering of tariff rates.","PeriodicalId":141085,"journal":{"name":"KIEP: World Economy Brief (WEB) (Topic)","volume":"10 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2011-12-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129625157","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The Prospect and Transmission Dynamics of China's Inflation to Korea","authors":"Young-joon Park, Dong‐Eun Rhee, Eunjung Kang","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2320310","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2320310","url":null,"abstract":"Korea's consumer prices have increased beyond the inflation target (3.0±1%), which has resulted in growing concerns over inflation. - The increase is attributable to price run-ups in agricultural and livestock products, driven by a sharp increase in global commodity prices, extreme weather, and the spread of foot and mouth disease. The upward trend of major price indices in China, Korea's largest trading partner, is heightening worries over price instability. - The significant rise in Chinese consumer prices is due to surges in housing rents and food expenses (agricultural and livestock products). - In addition, increases in the prices of international raw materials and in the wages of Chinese workers are adding to supply-side inflationary pressure. Given the large amount of Korea's imports from China, a rise in production costs in China can result in inflation in Korea. - Higher production costs in China, stemming from accelerated commodity prices and the policy to raise minimum wages, will push up the price of imported goods to Korea, and thus affect Korea's consumer prices. - The appreciation of the yuan is also driving up Chinese export prices. It is found that Chinese inflation in 2010 preceded inflation in Korea by about seven months. - China entered a high inflation phase in February 2010; Korea began experiencing a high inflation regime in September of the same year. Empirical analysis reveals that Chinese inflation had no significant impact on Korea's inflation rate in the 1990s, while it became one of the main external causes of Korea's inflation along with oil prices in the 2000s. - A 1 percent rise in Chinese inflation results in a 0.13 to 0.15 percent increase in Korea's inflation rate after three months and has persistent effects in Korea. As other emerging economies have also been suffering from rising prices since the second half of 2010, measures to ward off global inflation are necessary. - When there are signs of price instability, micro-policy measures targeting specific markets are required to curb inflation expectations and contingency plans should be devised to stabilize prices as well.","PeriodicalId":141085,"journal":{"name":"KIEP: World Economy Brief (WEB) (Topic)","volume":"35 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2011-05-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121192380","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Evaluation of a Decade of Korea's FTA Policy","authors":"Young gui Kim","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2771088","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2771088","url":null,"abstract":"We analyze Korea’s FTA policy based on the outcomes of recent bilateral FTAs, in terms of achieving policy objectives. While many previous studies mainly focused on trade impacts under bilateral FTAs, this study analyzes the overall economic impact of FTAs in terms of growth and welfare, as changes in bilateral trade may affect global trade and the general economy in a variety of ways. In order to analyze the overall effect of FTAs, we adopt the Computable General Equilibrium (CGE) approach. With a CGE model, the macro economic impacts of FTAs can be calculated taking into account the complicated interactions among economic agents and industries. The growth effect in the EU shows the high-est results, followed by 0.9% growth and an additional 0.43% and 0.11%, in the ASEAN and Chile respectively. In addition, by com-paring the overall growth effect of FTA on total economic growth in 2013, the growth impact of FTAs accounted for 1.19% among 3% of total economic growth in Korea. This implies that Korea, as one of the most open economies in the world, could sustain positive growth rates due to FTAs such as the Korea-ASEAN FTA, despite the trade collapse during the global financial crisis.","PeriodicalId":141085,"journal":{"name":"KIEP: World Economy Brief (WEB) (Topic)","volume":"17 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122205133","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}