Search

The Korean economy has been significantly affected by the emergence of China. It is now the largest market for Korean exports and a major supplier of its low-cost imports but has at the same time become a serious challenger to Korea in the world markets for manufacturing exports. This paper investigates changes in China's export structure and its effect on Korea, and bilateral trade between the two. It also examines the motives for Korean investment in China and its effect on bilateral trade and cross-border production networks. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper analyses the Trilateral Investment Agreement (TIA), the Bilateral Investments Agreements ("BITs") and the BIT programme concluded among China, Japan, and Korea. The relative weight of the outgoing direct investment among these three countries has continuously and sharply increased. Japanese and Korean BITs focus on seeking to liberalize as well as protect their overseas investment due partly to the relatively small domestic markets. China has largely embraced global norms of the treatment of foreign direct investment (FDI) but still takes a more defensive posture than Japan or Korea on the conclusion of BITs. While these three countries has taken an important, albeit symbolic, step for regionalism in deciding to conclude a trilateral investment agreement, BITs still play a very important role so far. This paper examines these three countries' substantive clauses on the protection of FDI under BITs and the TIA. It conducts a comparative and qualitative research, an approach not seen in existing literature, on the investment treaty protections offered by three East Asian countries. This research would be useful for the further development of IIAs or FTAs among these countries, especially for China in light of its relative weaker investment protection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Does economic interdependence generate and foster positive attitudes among people? Few studies in the existing literature deal directly with this question. To fill this gap, this paper examines the economic relationships among China, Japan and South Koreaandthe resulting public opinions. We find that economic interdependence in Northeast Asiahas negatively influenced public opinion and hence increased tension and conflict among these states. Then, we draw some important political and theoretical implications from our findings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In June 2010, the People's Republic of China and Taiwan signed the Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA), a preferential trade agreement, which is arguably the most important agreement between China and Taiwan. In this paper, we analyze ECFA and investigate its implications for South Korea since China is South Korea's largest trade partner and Taiwan is its sixth largest. We find that ECFA will have significant political and economic implications for South Korea due to China's role in East Asia and South Korea's competition with Taiwan in the China market. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The author comments on the article "Economic Impacts of Reunifications in Germany and in Korea," published within the issue. Topics discussed include the hypothetical reunification of South Korea and North Korea and its impact on the economic market, the expectations that total factor productivity (TFP) will transpire through ideas and technology transfer and the need for further research on the possible impact of some forms of economic cooperation between mainland China and Taiwan.

Research on the relationship between international economic and political relations has produced no consensus on the pacifying effects of trade. Rapid trade growth and enduring tensions characterize post--Cold War Asia's paradox. This study assesses the political effects of China-centered interdependence based on the China-South Korea case since 1992. Although trade may inhibit conflict in line with liberal expectations, its coercive potential limits its pacifying effects. When disputes arise, asymmetric interdependence generates strategic leverage and vulnerability, and amplifies the identity dimensions of conflict that shape societal preferences. China's combination of economic pressure and nationalist discourse induces accommodation primarily through coercion. By blending state-led and society-led retaliation, economic and accountability costs are minimized. China-South Korea political interactions have increased in quantity but not quality. The Asian case underscores qualitative changes in political relations (rather than just instances of conflict), the material and nonmaterial repercussions of asymmetric trade, and the regional security implications of China-led interdependence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

South Korea has signed at least three agreements with China covering investment, and it is currently negotiating two agreements covering investment. However, it is apparent that both South Korea and China did not envisage the situation of overlaps and conflicts of the treaties covering investment. International law currently provides for methods of resolving such conflicts including Articles 30 and 59 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, and the UN International Law Commission provided a helpful study on this issue. However, it is not 100% clear whether the treaties at issue cover the 'same subject matter' and the existing international rules may effectively resolve the conflicts. In this regard, Korea, China and Japan will need to draft a conflict clause in the China-Japan-Korea FTA that the investment chapter of one of the three prevails over the prior agreements covering the investment prior to the entry into force of that agreement. In addition, the role of the China-Japan-Korea Trilateral Cooperation Secretariat will be an appropriate forum to deal with this issue. Then, based on the conflict clause of the China-Japan-Korea FTA, the subsequent agreements such as the RCEP may have a helpful reference point. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Why has Korean migration policy been ethnicized? This research mainly aims to explain ethnic preference in Korea's immigration policy through the lens of Korean nationalism. The influx of ethnic Koreans in China (or Joseonjok) since the early 1990s has created a new dilemma for the South Korean government, which has long claimed to be the only legitimate polity of the Korean nation. The discrepancy between the legal citizenship and ethnicity of the Korean- Chinese workers in Korean society has forced the Korean state to redefine both legal and discursive national boundaries. This study analyzes the bifurcation of the Korean state discourses regarding Korean- Chinese workers in Korean society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In May 2012, China, Japan, and South Korea (CJK) signed a trilateral investment agreement-their first legal agreement on trilateral economic cooperation. This article argues that the diffusion of liberal investment rules in the trilateral agreement was circumscribed by China's market power. It examines the evolution of CJK policies on investment agreements and how these policies clashed in the negotiation of the trilateral deal. During the last decade, Japan and Korea have secured agreements with Southeast Asian nations that liberalize rules governing investment but they were unable to push China toward preestablishment liberalization in the trilateral agreement. As a result, there is a bifurcation of investment rules in East Asia with more liberal rules among Japan, Korea, and Southeast Asia than any that the three share with China. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article explores the economic calculations behind the recent initiatives for the Free Trade Agreement (FTA) between the Governments of China, Japan and South Korea (CJK) and clarifies the implications for future regional economic integration. First, the proposed trilateral FTA signifies an advancement of China-centered regional economic integration. Regional economic integration led by China may also increase its political clout at the global stage. Second, the Governments of South Korea and Japan seek greater involvement in China's huge domestic market, but the former is concerned that a trilateral FTA will worsen its trade deficit with Japan, and the latter is afraid of losing its market shares in China and America to its Korean rival. Japan, therefore, seeks membership of both the CJK FTA and the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). Third, China and the US' active involvement in regional economic integration will push the three countries to go forward towards greater economic cooperation. However, it will take longer for China-led Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) and America-led TPP to bear fruit because of the large number of countries involved. Therefore, the conclusion of CJK FTA will be an important boost for the further progress of both RCEP and TPP. It will also be an important stabiliser for the trilateral political relations in the future. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Why has South Korea accommodated China, instead of fearing its growth and balancing against it? This article makes two central arguments. First, concepts of balancing and bandwagoning are fundamentally difficult to test, and to the extent that the theory can be tested, it appears to be wrong in the case of South Korea. In fact, we observe many cases in which rising powers are neither balanced nor "bandwagoned" but are simply accommodated with no fundamental change either way in military stance or alignment posture. Second, the factors that explain South Korean foreign policy orientation toward China are as much about interests as they are about material power. South Korea sees substantially more economic opportunity than military threat associated with China's rise; but even more importantly, South Korea evaluates China's goals as not directly threatening. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article measures the impact of trade adjustment on the growth in the Korean economy. Using principal components trade adjustments are found to significantly explain the rate of growth over the period of 1989-2004. We also focused on the case of bilateral trade with China. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In Northeast Asia, historical legacies, a lack of common identity and great power politics impeded political cooperation and economic integration. However, China, Japan and South Korea have exhibited a growing interest in political and economic cooperation since the late 1990s. This article examines how the three Northeast Asian countries have developed political and economic cooperation by using the concept of 'multilayered intergovernmentalism'. It argues that despite political tensions between China and Japan, regional cooperation among China, Japan and South Korea has been promoted by talks and bargains among the heads of state and government who strengthened incentives for closer cooperation. Moreover, multilayered frameworks formed at the ASEAN Plus Three (APT) level, through the Track II mechanisms, and in issue-specific areas have provided valuable input into advancing regional cooperation initiatives. Whereas the APT framework offered incentives and opportunities to exchange views and information for closer trilateral cooperation, the outcomes of the research at the Track II were incorporated into the leaders' cooperative initiatives. The existence of issue-specific frameworks stirred talks and negotiations at the summit level. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Reviews recent trends in Sino-South Korean economic relations as well as provides prospects for future bilateral economic relations between them. South Korea's direct investment in China; Factors that may block further economic relations between the two countries; Concentration of Korea's investment in China.

Examines economic relations between China (Sino) and South Korea in the 1980s and speculates on the international and domestic factors which may influence economic relations between the two countries in the 1990s. Information on a potential increase in trade and economic interaction; Discussion on active economic cooperation across the Yellow Sea; Anticipation of economic links between China and South Korea.