IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/iie/pbrief/pb15-24.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

An Assessment of the Korea-China Free Trade Agreement

Author

Listed:
  • Jeffrey J. Schott

    (Peterson Institute for International Economics)

  • Euijin Jung

    (Peterson Institute for International Economics)

  • Cathleen Cimino

    (Peterson Institute for International Economics)

Abstract

Of all the free trade agreements (FTAs) concluded by Korea with its major trading partners since the turn of the century, the Korea-China FTA may be the largest in trade terms. It is, however, far from the best in terms of the depth of liberalization and the scope of obligations on trade and investment policies. Korea and China agreed to liberalize a large share of bilateral trade within 20 years, but both sides incorporated extensive exceptions to basic tariff reforms and deferred important market access negotiations on services and investment for several years. Political interests trumped economic objectives, and the negotiated outcome cut too many corners to achieve such a comprehensive result. The limited outcome in the Korea-China talks has two clear implications for economic integration among the northeast Asian countries. First, prospects for the ongoing China-Japan-Korea talks will be limited and unlikely to exceed the Korea-China outcome. Second, Korea and Japan need to strengthen their bilateral leg of the northeast Asian trilateral and the best way is by negotiating a deal in the context of the Trans-Pacific Partnership.

Suggested Citation

  • Jeffrey J. Schott & Euijin Jung & Cathleen Cimino, 2015. "An Assessment of the Korea-China Free Trade Agreement," Policy Briefs PB15-24, Peterson Institute for International Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:iie:pbrief:pb15-24
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.piie.com/publications/policy-briefs/assessment-korea-china-free-trade-agreement
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. C. Fred Bergsten & Gary Clyde Hufbauer & Sean Miner & Tyler Moran, 2014. "Bridging the Pacific: Toward Free Trade and Investment between China and the United States," Peterson Institute Press: All Books, Peterson Institute for International Economics, number 6918, October.
    2. repec:idb:brikps:publication-detail,7101.html?id=9307 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Stephan Haggard & Marcus Noland, 2012. "The Microeconomics of North--South Korean Cross-border Integration," International Economic Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(3), pages 407-430, September.
    4. Kati Suominen & Antoni Estevadeordal & Jeremy Harris, 2009. "Multilateralising Preferential Rules of Origin around the World," IDB Publications (Working Papers) 9299, Inter-American Development Bank.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ya. V. Demina, 2021. "Formats for Multilateral and Bilateral Economic Cooperation in Northeast Asia," Regional Research of Russia, Springer, vol. 11(2), pages 244-253, April.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Marcus Noland, 2019. "North Korea: Sanctions, Engagement and Strategic Reorientation," Asian Economic Policy Review, Japan Center for Economic Research, vol. 14(2), pages 189-209, July.
    2. Bernard Hoekman & Stefano Inama, 2017. "Rules of Origin as Non-Tariff Measures: Towards Greater Regulatory Convergence," RSCAS Working Papers 2017/45, European University Institute.
    3. Richard Baldwin & Masahiro Kawai, 2013. "Multilateralizing Asian Regionalism," Trade Working Papers 23553, East Asian Bureau of Economic Research.
    4. Ryan Rutkowski, 2015. "Service Sector Reform in China," Policy Briefs PB15-2, Peterson Institute for International Economics.
    5. Guillermo Perry, 2013. "Regional Public Goods in Finance, Trade and Infrastructure," Documentos CEDE 11888, Universidad de los Andes, Facultad de Economía, CEDE.
    6. William R. Cline, 2014. "Estimates of Fundamental Equilibrium Exchange Rates, November 2014," Policy Briefs PB14-25, Peterson Institute for International Economics.
    7. Jeffrey J. Schott & Cathleen Cimino-Isaacs, . "Assessing the Trans-Pacific Partnership, Volume 2: Innovations in Trading Rules," PIIE Briefings, Peterson Institute for International Economics, number PIIEB16-4, October.
    8. Theodore H. Moran, 2015. "Chinese Investment and CFIUS: Time for an Updated (and Revised) Perspective," Policy Briefs PB15-17, Peterson Institute for International Economics.
    9. C. Fred Bergsten, 2014. "Addressing Currency Manipulation Through Trade Agreements," Policy Briefs PB14-2, Peterson Institute for International Economics.
    10. Jeffrey J. Schott & Cathleen Cimino, 2014. "Should Korea Join the Trans-Pacific Partnership?," Policy Briefs PB14-22, Peterson Institute for International Economics.
    11. Hamzah, Hanny Zurina, 2012. "The Role of Japanese Automakers in Asean," Jurnal Ekonomi Malaysia, Faculty of Economics and Business, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, vol. 46(1), pages 173-180.
    12. Bala Ramasamy & Matthew C.H. Yeung, 2016. "China and the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement: Misfit or Missed Opportunity?," Agenda - A Journal of Policy Analysis and Reform, Australian National University, College of Business and Economics, School of Economics, vol. 23(1), pages 73-88.
    13. Honggue Lee, 2016. "Do Preferential Rules of Origin Reverse Trade Creation and Trade Diversion?," International Economic Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(4), pages 429-449, October.
    14. Peter A. Petri & Michael G. Plummer, 2020. "Should China Join the New Trans‐Pacific Partnership?," China & World Economy, Institute of World Economics and Politics, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, vol. 28(2), pages 18-36, March.
    15. Robert Z. Lawrence & Tyler Moran, 2016. "Adjustment and Income Distribution Impacts of the Trans-Pacific Partnership," Working Paper Series WP16-5, Peterson Institute for International Economics.
    16. Metivier, Jeanne & Di Salvo, Mattia & Pelkmans, Jacques, 2017. "Transatlantic Divergences in Globalisation and the China Factor," CEPS Papers 12584, Centre for European Policy Studies.
    17. Peter A. Petri & Michael G. Plummer, 2016. "The Economic Effects of the Trans-Pacific Partnership: New Estimates," Working Paper Series WP16-2, Peterson Institute for International Economics.
    18. Keck, Alexander & Lendle, Andreas, 2012. "New evidence on preference utilization," WTO Staff Working Papers ERSD-2012-12, World Trade Organization (WTO), Economic Research and Statistics Division.
    19. C. Fred Bergsten, 2018. "China and the United States: The Contest for Global Economic Leadership," China & World Economy, Institute of World Economics and Politics, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, vol. 26(5), pages 12-37, September.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:iie:pbrief:pb15-24. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Peterson Institute webmaster (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iieeeus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.