Search

Begin New Search Topic Economics Content Type Policy Brief Publication Year within 5 Years

41. The online gig economy’s impact is not as big as many thought

Author:
Lee G. Branstetter
Publication Date:
07-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Peterson Institute for International Economics
Abstract:
The explosive global growth of online ride-hailing platforms raised concern (and, in some quarters, optimism) that similar growth in other platforms could rapidly disrupt traditional labor arrangements on a large scale in advanced economies. But the evidence to date suggests no significant changes in the overall importance of “gig” work in the US labor market nor a significant decline in the importance of traditional employment relationships. Online platforms may play a growing role (relative to traditional “brick-and-mortar” intermediaries) in connecting gig workers to their customers, but that alone does not guarantee a large increase in the importance of gig work. Branstetter reviews this evidence, noting the gaps in labor market data series that make the measurement of this phenomenon so difficult. Even if traditional employment relationships are not likely to decline significantly in the near future, the rise of online gig work nevertheless highlights longstanding inadequacies of labor market regulations, which recognize employees and truly independent contractors but struggle with the intermediate kinds of worker-firm relationships the online platforms enable. Branstetter summarizes proposals for regulating gig economy work and the lessons policymakers in South Korea and other economies can learn from the literature he reviews in this Policy Brief.
Topic:
Economics, Employment, Labor Market, and Gig Economy
Political Geography:
Global Focus

42. South Korea should prepare for its exposure to US-China technology tensions

Author:
Mary Lovely and Abigail Dahlman
Publication Date:
07-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Peterson Institute for International Economics
Abstract:
The stated goal of the US-led Indo-Pacific Economic Framework for Prosperity (IPEF) is to create standards that enhance and elevate regional trade and investment flows, but it is clearly aimed at reducing the role of China in global supply chains. As China is Korea’s largest trading partner, US policy discouraging Chinese participation in supply chains has immediate detrimental implications for Korean manufacturers. The United States is the second-most important destination for Korean exports. Given the values of these triangular trade flows, Lovely and Dahlman assess South Korea’s exposure to US demands to remove or reduce Chinese participation in the manufacture of exports destined for the US market. The reliance of the proposed framework on certain standards will likely reduce Chinese participation in IPEF trade networks. Korea may benefit from this trend, but IPEF could also increase production costs for Korean companies, especially in the electronics sector, a problem that would worsen if China retaliates against these companies. To reduce these risks, Korea might find it prudent to reduce its reliance on intermediate goods from China for products it produces for export to the United States. The Korean government should also seek to better understand its exposure to US–China trade tensions and diversify its trade relations. Korean firms should start preparing for supply chain disruptions, perhaps by making investments at home. Korea could also help other IPEF members reduce supply chain disruptions while addressing security concerns over China.
Topic:
Economics, Science and Technology, Supply Chains, and Competition
Political Geography:
China, Asia, South Korea, North America, and United States of America

43. China's CPTPP bid spurs South Korea to act on Asia-Pacific trade pacts

Author:
Jeffrey J. Schott
Publication Date:
06-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Peterson Institute for International Economics
Abstract:
China’s sudden application to join the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) in September 2021 has broad implications for South Korea’s economic relations with China, Japan, and the United States. In the past, Korea frequently debated but invariably postponed deciding whether to participate in negotiations on the CPTPP, despite the substantial benefits to be gained from doing so. However, China’s application has prompted Korean officials to get off the fence and apply as well. As China moves to deepen its ties to regional partners, Korea needs to follow suit, complementing the ongoing implementation of the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) with expedited negotiations to join the CPTPP and participation in the US-led Indo-Pacific Economic Framework for Prosperity (IPEF). Korean participation in the RCEP, CPTPP, and IPEF is desirable and mutually reinforcing and should allow Korea to sustain its strong commercial interests in both the US and Chinese markets.
Topic:
Economics, International Trade and Finance, Treaties and Agreements, and Trade
Political Geography:
China, South Korea, and Asia-Pacific

44. The Assault of Austerity: How prevailing economic policy choices are a form of gender-based violence

Author:
Dana Abed and Fatimah Kelleher
Publication Date:
11-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Oxfam Publishing
Abstract:
This briefing paper argues that austerity measures are a form of gender-based violence against women, girls and non-binary people, and lays out clear examples of how fiscal consolidation affects them. Its core argument is that ending austerity must be a priority. The policies that deliver austerity’s deadly consequences can no longer be marketed as the ‘logical’ and ‘inevitable’ economic options that they have been for decades, and certainly not by any government that claims a commitment to gender equality or ending gender-based violence. Austerity takes away from those who need it most, while ignoring common-sense ways to improve both revenue and prosperity. The paper goes on to share feminist economic alternatives offer pathways that can protect the Majority World from completely avoidable suffering.
Topic:
Economics, Gender Based Violence, Identity, and Gender
Political Geography:
Global Focus

45. The Effects of Online Export Promotion Policies for SMEs in Korea

Author:
Kyong Hyun Koo
Publication Date:
10-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Korea Institute for International Economic Policy (KIEP)
Abstract:
This study explores the impact of participating in five major online export support programs currently being implemented by the Ministry of SMEs and Startups on online exports of SMEs in 2018-20. The main findings show that the online export support program appear to significantly have improved the online export-related performance of participating SMEs in a short period of time. In addition, the online export support program’s online export enhancement effect tend to be relatively greater when the participating SMEs have relatively little experience with online export and low sales volume. Manufacturers also appear to benefit from support programs more than resellers. In summary, the findings suggest that Korea's online export support policy has had a significant impact in providing incentives for SMEs to start/increase online exporting.
Topic:
Economics, Business, Exports, and Manufacturing
Political Geography:
Asia and South Korea

46. The Emergence of African Continental Free Trade Area Agreement and Lessons from the Asia-Pacific Trade Agreement

Author:
Samuel Igbatayo
Publication Date:
10-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Korea Institute for International Economic Policy (KIEP)
Abstract:
Africa’s regional integration agenda arrived at a cross roads in 2019, with the adoption of the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) agreement. The AfCFTA framework came into force on 30th May, 2019, with its ratification by The Gambia, which brought the total number of African Union (AU) member state ratifications to twenty-two, the minimum threshold for AfCFTA implementation (Baker McKenzie 2019). As of May; 2022, forty-three of the 55 African countries have ratified the AfCFTA agreement (African Union 2018). The 12th Extraordinary Session of the Assembly of the African Union in Niamey on 7th July; 2019, witnessed the launching of AfCFTA’s operational phase, which is governed by five instruments, namely: the rules of origin, the online negotiating forum, the monitoring and elimination of non-tariff barriers; a digital payment system and the African Trade Observatory. In addition, the beginning of trade under the terms of the agreement was set for July 1, 2020 (TRALAC 2020). A free trade agreement (FTA) can be aptly described as a pact between two or more countries on areas in which they agree to lift most or all tariffs, and other barriers to imports and exports among them (Barone 2019). Under a free trade framework, goods and services can be traded across international borders, with little or no government tariffs, quotas, subsidies, or prohibitions to inhibit their exchange. The theory of free trade Agreements is rooted in classical economics, dating back to the era of Adam Smith. During this period, David Ricardo (1772-1823), a British political economist, was acknowledged with pioneering thoughts on free trade as a key instrument for wealth accumulation. The evolution of preferential trade agreements is traceable to the rise of European countries after World War II, with the establishment of the European Coal and Steel Community in 1951, a development that eventually culminated in the creation of the European Union (EU) (Johnston 2019). Spurred by the success of regional bodies with free trade agreements and Africa’s poor trading performance; estimated at a paltry 3% of annual global trade, the African Union embarked upon the creation of the AfCFTA agreement as a tool for Intra-Africa trade and regional integration.
Topic:
Economics, Treaties and Agreements, Regional Integration, and Free Trade
Political Geography:
Africa and Asia-Pacific

47. Understanding Hainan Free Trade Port: China's Efforts to Explore High-level Opening-up

Author:
Wenfeng Wei
Publication Date:
10-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Korea Institute for International Economic Policy (KIEP)
Abstract:
On 13 April 2018, upon the 30th anniversary of Hainan province, Chinese President Xi Jinping announced to build Hainan into a free trade port. According to the Master Plan for the Construction of the Hainan Free Trade Port released by the State Council on 1 June 2020, China aims to build this southern island province into a high-level free trade port with global influence by the middle of the century. As China's largest special economic zone, Hainan is expected to become the frontline of China's integration into the global economic system. Noting that the world is facing a new round of major development, changes and adjustment, with protectionism and unilateralism on the rise and economic globalization facing greater headwinds, it was also a strategic decision of Chinese authorities based on the domestic and international landscapes. As such, Hainan Free Trade Port (HNFTP) is more than a regional development initiative, and it has a much bigger role to play in China’s reform and opening endeavors.
Topic:
Development, Economics, Special Economic Zones, and Free Trade
Political Geography:
China and Asia

48. Digital Divide in Latin America and Opportunities for South Korea-Spain Cooperation

Author:
Angela Sagnella
Publication Date:
09-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Korea Institute for International Economic Policy (KIEP)
Abstract:
The purpose of this brief report is to sketch the current characteristics of the digital divide in Latin America, especially following the effects generated by the spread of the Covid-19 pandemic, in an attempt to understand its crucial aspects and possible outlooks. In this regard, South Korea-Spain future cooperation on digitalization in Latin America will be discussed, as the two countries – by virtue of the long diplomatic tradition that unites them – are developing new horizons of cooperation to fill digital gaps in Latin America.
Topic:
Economics, Science and Technology, COVID-19, and Digital Cooperation
Political Geography:
South Korea, Latin America, and Spain

49. The Export Effect of Servitization of Manufacturing

Author:
Hyunsoo Kim, Jungu Kang, Hyeyoon Keum, and Jae Wook Jung
Publication Date:
09-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Korea Institute for International Economic Policy (KIEP)
Abstract:
This study examines the status and characteristics of Korea’s servitization of manufacturing and its impact on business performance and exports. In particular, we focus on servitization in manufacturing, which can be seen as a part of servicification in manufacturing. It is the phenomenon of manufacturing firms producing more services as final goods and provide them to the market with their products. Looking at the status of servitization in the manufacturing sectors focusing on the service sales generated by manufacturing firms, the servitization in manufacturing in Korea has gradually increased. Sales in service sectors, which stood at 4.5% of the total sales of manufacturing firms in 2012, surged to 15.9% in 2017, and then decreased to 6.9% in 2019. Based on the stylized fact that servitization in manufacturing in Korea has gradually increased, we empirically analyze the effect of servitization in manufacturing on the business performances and exports. The result suggets that the servitization in manufacturing is progressing in the direction of improving firm’s productivity, profitability, and exports.
Topic:
Economics, Business, Manufacturing, and Services
Political Geography:
Asia and South Korea

50. Korea's Economic Presence in Iran under Trump and Its Prospects during the Biden Presidency

Author:
Shirzad Azad
Publication Date:
10-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Korea Institute for International Economic Policy (KIEP)
Abstract:
On July 14, 2015, when Iran and the 5+1 group (the United States, Russia, China, France, Britain, and Germany) ultimately agreed over the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), the Republic of Korea (ROK) was practically one of the top three trade partners of the Persian Gulf country. In early May 2016 and only a few months after the nuclear deal was carried through, the then Korean President, Park Geun-hye, made an official visit to Iran where the two countries vowed to ratchet up their economic relations from roughly $6 billion to more than $18 billion in the years to come. Accompanied by “the largest business delegation in the history of Korean presidential trips,” Park’s high-profile trip to Iran persuaded many interested experts and observers to believe that the East Asian country was really determined to shore up its economic weight in Iran by drawing certain policies relevant to the long-term presence of Korean businesses in the Middle Eastern country (Choi 2016). Despite all those upbeat expectations about the ROK’s future economic and technological role in Iran, however, various data and statistics coming out indicate that over the past several years nearly all well-known Korean brands and products have increasingly lost their market share in the Mideast country to brands and goods supplied by other competitors. As a matter of fact, in the late 1990s and early 2000s the East Asian nation emerged as one of the Persian Gulf country’s top trading partners in the world, outstripping a number of Tehran’s traditional trading partners from the West. And while Korea managed to even expand its economic presence in Iran in the heydays of sundry international sanctions levied against the Middle Eastern country over its contentious nuclear program a couple of years before the JCPOA was eventually agreed in 2015, the ROK has been doing relatively poor in Iran during the past years (Azad 2018). Such lackadaisical performance, epitomized by abandoning the long-established pattern of significant trade in energy with Iran, has critically influenced a sharp decline in the total volume of two-way commerce between the two countries. While the plummeting share of Korean brands and goods in Iranian markets had indubitably something to do with certain policies pursued by the Moon Jae-in-led Korean government, however, the main culprit turned out to be the Trump administration’s unilateral withdrawal from the nuclear deal in May 2018. The crippling sanctions which Washington under Trump subsequently imposed on Iran played a pivotal role in reshaping the scope and size of Korean commercial connections to the Persian Gulf country, though some unprecedented diplomatic and political troubles involving Seoul and Tehran during the past years have also had a lot to do with those punitive economic and financial measures targeting the Iranians. How did then the Koreans respond to those unique circumstances rendered largely by Trump’s approach toward the Persian Gulf country? What are going to be the prospects of a Biden administration’s policy shift for Korea’s economic performance in Iran? This study seeks to shed some light on Trump’s Iran policy with regard to Korea, its repercussions for the East Asian nation’s economic relationship with the Middle Eastern country, and potential solutions to chip away at those impediments under a Democrat administration in Washington led by Joe Biden.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Economics, Donald Trump, JCPOA, and Joe Biden
Political Geography:
Iran, Asia, South Korea, and United States of America