신통상정책에 나타난 EU의 FTA 추진전략과 시사점 (EU's FTA Strategies in Its New Trade Policy Initiatives and Policy Implications)

Korean Abstract: 2015년 10월 EU는 신통투자전략을 발표하여 2006년 이래 지속되어온 통상정책의 새로운 기조를 이어나갔다. EU 차원에서 보다 강력하고 광범위한 통상투자정책의 수단을 구사하여 해외시장 접근성을 강화하고, EU의 이해가 걸려 있는 비관세, 서비스, 지재권, 지속가능발전 이슈 등을 상대국에 관철시켜나가고자 한다. EU의 이러한 움직임은 EU 규범의 글로벌화를 촉진하고, 신통상정책의 주요 수단인 FTA를 통해서 역내 고용과 성장에 큰 도움을 주고자 하는 분명한 목표를 갖고 있다. 이 연구는 EU 신통상정책을 심도있게 분석하여 EU의 이러한 의도가 어떻게 구현되고 있는지를 살펴보고 있다. 아울러 EU의 신통상정책이 한국의 통상정책의 방향과 내용에 주는 시사점을 찾고자 하였다. English Abstract: Since the Global Europe Initiative in 2006, the EU has conducted active trade policy measures to contribute to economic growth, job creation and social cohesion in the community. One of the conspicuous features of the new trade policy is that the EU does its best to support EU companies to benefit from better market access through new trade policy tools. Comprehensive and high-leveled bilateral FTA initiatives, among others, have rapidly emerged as a major tool of the new trade policy to achieve the goals. The aim of the research is to illuminate how the goals of the new trade policy have been achieved through EU's FTA strategies. To do this, this research focuses on the three topics of EU standards, evaluation process of market openness and the global value chain (GVC), that is, how much EU's FTA strategies have contributed to achieving globalization of EU standards, job creation through careful evaluation processes and economic growth of the community by utilizing GVCs. First, the EU has made tremendous efforts to export its standards to other countries through various FTAs. Within its Community, the EU has tried to introduce unified technical and sanitary standards, but after little progress was observed, revised its standardization strategy to adopt a narrower harmonization area, leaving more flexibility in the area of general conformity. Since 1989, the EU has conducted international standardization of its community standards, and the process has been accelerated through bilateral FTAs after the new trade policy was initiated in the mid-2000s. The Korea-EU FTA was one of the best examples of EU's efforts in standard internationalization, which was also adopted in the EU-Canada CETA and the EU-Vietnam FTA. In the mega-FTAs, EU's efforts to export its standards do not seem to be so successful, not only because the EU faced big confrontation against the U.S. throughout the TTIP negotiations, but because uncertainties have grown after Brexit and a variety of standards have sprung up in the world recently. Second, it is utmost important that the FTA evaluation process should be carefully designed and conducted properly, in order to assess any impact of FTAs on community labor markets. EU has set out four stages for this evaluation process: impact assessment (IA), sustainability impact assessment (SIA), economic assessment of the negotiated outcome, and ex post evaluation. These assessments not only encompass aspects of quantitative economic analysis, but also qualitative economic analysis and social impacts such as broad impacts on the labor market, SMEs, competitiveness, income distribution, environment, human rights, etc. The trade sustainability impact assessment (SIA), among others, is particularly interesting with regards to the impacts of FTAs on employment. In the EU-Korea FTA SIA report, it is revealed that the Korea-EU FTA would bring about positive impacts on agriculture and services employment, but minor negative impacts on the manufacturing labor market. The dairy industry, with the exception of pork, would win in the case of a EU-Canada CETA, and manufacturing including automobiles would gain in employment in the case of an EU-Vietnam FTA. The TTIP may lead positive impacts on employment through a mutual investment boom, the TTIP SIA argues. Third, the FTAs pursued by the EU make full use of expansion of GVCs. The EU has set out global standards, prevailed competition in the services market, moved to high value-added stages in GVCs, strengthened market access not only in final goods but in the intermediate goods market. In addition, EU has increased forward linkage participation, provided better protection for IPRs, facilitated e-commerce, financial services supply and mode 4. Based upon the EU's FTA strategies revealed in its new trade policy, the following policy implications would follow: First, as for standard internationalization, we need to scrutinize various regulations and standards into several categories, and deal with them to the purposes. In case the standards would be helpful to globalize Korean standards, then we need to introduce them, which would help Korea lead the standard competition in East Asia. In newly emerging areas including IT, environment, and new technologies related to the fourth industrial revolution, it would be strongly recommended to lead platform competition. In this regard, we need to examine Chinese standards as they have rapidly emerged as a new competitor in the area of international standards. Second, Korea has its own assessment system in FTAs, but we need to cover a wider range of assessment fields such as social impacts and qualitative and institutional areas. A four-stage assessment system would be much more recommendable to conduct careful assessment of market opening. A stricter assessment process would be much helpful in maintaining public support to further FTA initiatives. Third, in order to make full use of GVCs, it is much desirable to upgrade value chains, and strengthen market access in East Asia in all stages of process. We need to focus more on the issues how to lift NTBs, widen services market opening, and persuade our trade partners to conduct enactment and enforcement of IPR protection. A single market for e-commerce and services must be established in East Asia. In order to harmonize different rules of origin among FTAs in East Asia, special dialogue channels must be created in RCEP or Trilateral FTA. More importantly, cooperative bodies for the East Asia Regulatory Dialogue can be utilized.