동남아·대양주 유권자들의 보호무역주의 성향 연구와 시사점: 필리핀, 태국, 호주, 뉴질랜드를 중심으로(Voters’Attitudes toward Protectionism in Southeast Asia and Oceania: Evidence from the Philippines, Thailand, Australia, and New Zealand)

본 연구는 동남아·대양주 4개국(필리핀, 태국, 호주, 뉴질랜드) 유권자들의 보호무역주의 성향 결정 요인을 분석하고, 유권자들의 보호무역주의 성향이 투표행위와 연관이 있는지에 대해서 논한다. 유권자들의 보호무역에 대한 태도가 어떻게 형성되는지 이해하기 위해 국제경제학에서 연구되고 있는 내생적 무역정책 형성이론의 미시적 기초를 활용한다. 나아가 유권자들의 정당 지지가 그들의 보호무역정책에 대한 태도에 의해 설명될 여지가 있는지 살펴봄으로써 각국의 통상정책 기조의 변화가 정치경제적 배경에 의해 이해될 수 있음을 확인한다. 이번 연구의 분석 결과는 교역 상대국의 국내 정치경제 상황을 반영하여 통상교섭 전략을 고도화할 필요성을 반영한다. This research analyzes the determinants of voters’ attitudes towards protectionism in four Southeast Asian and Oceania countries (the Philippines, Thailand, Australia, and New Zealand) and discusses whether voters’ attitudes toward protectionism are related to their voting behavior. This study utilizes the endogenous trade policy formation theory in international economics to understand how voters’ attitudes toward protectionism are formed. Furthermore, by examining whether voters’ political party support can be explained by their attitudes toward protectionism, this study confirms that changes in each country’s trade policy orientation can be understood in the context of their domestic political-economic background. The main findings of this study are as follows: Voters in relatively labor-abundant countries such as the Philippines and Thailand prefer protectionist trade policies as their human capital attainment increases. In contrast, voters in relatively capital-abundant countries such as Australia and New Zealand prefer free trade policies as their human capital attainment increases. These findings align with the theoretical predictions of the Heckscher-Ohlin model-based factor endowment approach. However, since the factor endowment approach is based on the long-run assumption of free labor mobility across industries, it may deviate significantly from reality. To address this limitation, the analysis introduces a specific-factor approach that considers rigidities in the labor movement between industries to test whether there are differences in attitudes towards protectionism between voters in comparative advantage industries and voters in comparative disadvantage industries. The results of the analysis show that the theoretical predictions of the specific-factor approach did not have empirical validity for the voters in the four countries.(the rest omitted)