MétaCan
Menu
← Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2808850138 · doi:10.31203/aepa.2010.7.3.003

An Analysis on Macroeconomic Effects of Free Trade Arrangements of Korea, China, and Japan Using the GTAP CGE Model

2010· article· en· W2808850138 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Beom-Cheol Cin

Notice bibliographique

Revuenon disponible
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
ThématiqueGlobal trade and economics
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésComputable general equilibriumChinaEconomicsInternational economicsInternational tradeEconometricsMacroeconomicsGeography

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

East Asian countries including Korea were mainly interested in multilateral cooperation trade policy under the GATT/WTO system in early 1990s. Due to Asian financial crisis of 1997-1998, however, their interests were changed toward bilateral and regional free trade arrangements, development of regional financial arrangements, and regional crisis prevention and management capability. Korean government, since the Korean financial crisis in 1997, has emphasized more on regional cooperation trade policy rather than multilateral cooperation so as to minimize negative effects caused by other FTAs. As the first bilateral free trade arrangements, the Korea-Chile FTA(free trade agreement) were effective from 2004, three more FTAs, with Singapore, EFTA, and ASEAN, have come into effect and Korea has been further negotiating free trade arrangements with Mexico, Peru, Australia, New Zealand, GCC, and Canada. Korean government has considered FTAs among Korea, China and Japan very important not only because the free trade area of them, if it were built, would be the third largest economic bloc in the world in terms of their GDPs but also they are increasingly interdependent, economically and politically. Both China and Japan are major trading partners to Korea. In 2008, China and Japan is the first and the second largest export market to Korea and the first and third largest importing partner. Furthermore, Korea is also one of major foreign investors in China and the third largest importing partners to Japan. Despite the importance of either bilateral or trilateral FTAs among Korea, China and Japan, their economic effects have not been evaluated enough yet in contrast with much debate on the Korea-U.S. FTA or the Korea-EU FTA. In particular, as most of studies did not take into account the impacts of worldwide tariff cuts due to free trade arrangements pervasive in the 2000s, especially among East Asian countries, and thus the macroeconomic effects of the Korea-China-Japan FTA would be incorrectly estimated. It has been argued that the economic effects of the Korea-China-Japan FTA would not be fully examined for lack of information about the content and negotiation process between them, which should have been provided by government. This paper critically examines the macroeconomic effects of the free trade area among Korea, China and Japan and bilateral FTAs between them using the GTAP CGE model under various scenarios including both the Korea-Chile and the Korea-ASEAN FTAs which are currently in effect. In simulating economic effects of such free trade arrangements, the paper uses the GTAP static CGE model based on a new GTAP data set. The paper comparatively analyzes the macroeconomic effects of the bilateral and regional free trade arrangements of the three countries can be caused by either tariff reduction or elimination. Most of all, the GTAP CGE simulated results show that under the assumption of the full elimination of tariffs in all agricultural and manufacturing sectors except the service industries, Korea's real GDP would be expected to increase by 0.28~0.65% due to the Korea-China FTA or the Korea-Japan FTA and by 0.07~0.60% due to the free trade arrangement of the three countries. The results indicate that Korean government might overestimate the macroeconomic effects of the FTAs among the three East Asian countries and therefore it should re-examine the FTA policy strategies. Second, the CGE simulation results indicate that the economic effects of the Korea-China FTA in terms of a change of GDPs are expected to be larger than those of the Korea-Japan FTA. Next, the simulation results show that both the Korea-China FTA and the Korea-Japan FTA would not be complementary. The economic effects of the Korea-China FTA would be offset by the Korea-Japan FTA. This implies that there is no robust evidence for government argument that both the FTAs should have complementary effects.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,001
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Simulation ou modélisation · Signal consensuel: Simulation ou modélisation
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,076
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,150

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0010,003
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,002
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,001
Communication savante0,0020,001
Science ouverte0,0010,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,002
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0060,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,026
Tête enseignante GPT0,221
Écart entre enseignants0,195 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSimulation ou modélisation
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations1
Publié2010
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même sujetGlobal trade and economics→Travaux en français237 207→