IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/eaae08/44207.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

In Search of a Breakthrough for the Korea-EU FTA Negotiations

Author

Listed:
  • Lee, Yong-Kee
  • Song, Joo Ho

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to seek a breakthrough for the Korea-EU FTA negotiation in agriculture which started last year, but has not made much progress yet. The EU has been asking Korea to open its agricultural market to the same extent that was agreed upon in Korea’s free trade agreement with the U.S. while the Korean government firmly opposes the EU’s request, saying that FTA negotiations differ from multilateral trade talks as in the WTO. An examination of agricultural trade among Korea, the EU, and the U.S. shows that there may be many niche markets of which the EU can take advantage over other agricultural exporting countries including the U.S. Also, it is expected that the EU could gain much from its agricultural trade with Korea through an FTA, even without a market access level equal to one stipulated in the Korea-U.S. FTA accord. As far as agriculture is concerned, the slower does the talk proceed, the better to Korea, with the EU losing huge expected trade gains. It is suggested that the EU needs to be more flexible in the talks by focusing on a new strategy that can maximize trade diversion effects stemming not only from price but from non-price factors, rather than simply asking for the same level of market opening as in Korea-U.S. FTA. This would be the better way for the EU to become a winner in the battle for Korean agricultural market.

Suggested Citation

  • Lee, Yong-Kee & Song, Joo Ho, 2008. "In Search of a Breakthrough for the Korea-EU FTA Negotiations," 2008 International Congress, August 26-29, 2008, Ghent, Belgium 44207, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:eaae08:44207
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://purl.umn.edu/44207
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kahneman, Daniel & Ritov, Ilana & Schkade, David A, 1999. "Economic Preferences or Attitude Expressions?: An Analysis of Dollar Responses to Public Issues," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 19(1-3), pages 203-235, December.
    2. Wendy Proctor & Martin Drechsler, 2006. "Deliberative multicriteria evaluation," Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, Pion Ltd, London, vol. 24(2), pages 169-190, April.
    3. Giuseppe Munda, 2003. "Social Multi-Criteria Evaluation (SMCE)," UHE Working papers 2003_04, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Departament d'Economia i Història Econòmica, Unitat d'Història Econòmica.
    4. Cook, Wade D., 2006. "Distance-based and ad hoc consensus models in ordinal preference ranking," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 172(2), pages 369-385, July.
    5. Spash, Clive L., 2007. "Deliberative monetary valuation (DMV): Issues in combining economic and political processes to value environmental change," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(4), pages 690-699, September.
    6. Cookson, Richard, 2000. "Incorporating psycho-social considerations into health valuation: an experimental study," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 369-401, May.
    7. Munda, Giuseppe, 2004. "Social multi-criteria evaluation: Methodological foundations and operational consequences," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 158(3), pages 662-677, November.
    8. Peter A. Diamond & Jerry A. Hausman, 1994. "Contingent Valuation: Is Some Number Better than No Number?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(4), pages 45-64, Fall.
    9. Richard B. Howarth & Matthew A. Wilson, 2006. "A Theoretical Approach to Deliberative Valuation: Aggregation by Mutual Consent," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 82(1), pages 1-16.
    10. Wade D. Cook & Moshe Kress, 1985. "Ordinal Ranking with Intensity of Preference," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(1), pages 26-32, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Korea-EU FTA; Agricultural Trade; Trade Diversion Effects; International Relations/Trade;

    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:ags:eaae08:44207. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (AgEcon Search). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/eaaeeea.html .

    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.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.