Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T11:59:53.911Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Determinants on utilization of the Korea–ASEAN free trade agreement: margin effect, scale effect, and ROO effect

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 November 2013

KAZUNOBU HAYAKAWA ,
HANSUNG KIM  and
HYUN-HOON LEE
KAZUNOBU HAYAKAWA
Affiliation:
JETRO Bangkok, Japan External Trade Organization, Thailand
HANSUNG KIM
Affiliation:
Department of Economics, Ajou University, South Korea
HYUN-HOON LEE*
Affiliation:
Department of International Trade and Business, Kangwon National University, South Korea
*
* Corresponding author. Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this paper we empirically examine the determinants on utilization of the Korea–ASEAN Free Trade Agreement (KAFTA) by employing a database provided by the Korea Customs and Trade Development Institute. We find that, although three effects, namely preferential margin (margin effect), rules of origin restrictiveness (ROO effect), and average export volume (scale effect), contribute to determining the utilization of the FTA, the scale effect has the greatest impact. Our results suggest that, since firms with relatively small volumes of trade are usually small and medium-size enterprises (SMEs), policy assistance for reducing administrative costs should be geared toward SMEs. Our results further indicate that policymakers should also try to negotiate more extensive tariff reductions on products not only where MFN rates are high but also where shipments are large.

Type
Review Article
Information
World Trade Review , Volume 13 , Issue 3 , July 2014 , pp. 499 - 515
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ahn, C., Cheong, I., Fukagawa, Y., and Ito, T. (2005), ‘Korea–Japan FTA: Toward a Model Case for East Asian Economic Integration’, KIEP Working Paper 05-01.Google Scholar
Bureau, J., Chakir, R., and Gallezot, J. (2007), ‘The Utilisation of Trade Preferences for Developing Countries in the Agri-food Sector’, Journal of Agricultural Economics, 58(2): 175–198.Google Scholar
Cadot, O. and de Melo, J. (2007), ‘Why OECD Countries Should Reform Rules of Origin’, World Bank Research Observer, 23(1): 77–105.Google Scholar
Cadot, O., Carrere, C., De Melo, J., and Tumurchudur, B. (2006), ‘Product-specific Rules of Origin in EU and US Preferential Trading Arrangements: An Assessment’, World Trade Review, 5(2): 199–224.Google Scholar
Choi, N. (2009), ‘Determinants of Staging Categories for the Tariff Elimination in the FTA Negotiation’, KIEP Working Paper 09-01.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Demidova, S. and Krishna, K. (2008), ‘Firm Heterogeneity and Firm Behavior with Conditional Policies’, Economics Letters, 98(2): 122–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Estevadeordal, A. (2000), ‘Negotiating Preferential Market Access: The case of the North American Free Trade Agreement’, Journal of World Trade, 34: 141–200.Google Scholar
Estevadeordal, A. and Suominen, K. (2004), ‘Rules of Origin in FTAs in Europe and in the Americas: Issues and Implications for the EU–Mercosur Inter-Regional Association Agreement’, INTAL-ITD Working Paper 15.Google Scholar
Francois, J., Hoekman, B., and Manchin, M. (2006), ‘Preference Erosion and Multilateral Trade Liberalization’, World Bank Economic Review, 20(2): 197–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hakobyan, S. (2010), ‘Accounting for Underutilization of Trade Preference Programs: US Generalized System of Preferences’, mimeo, University of Virginia.Google Scholar
Hansen, B. (2000), ‘Sample Splitting and Threshold Estimation’, Econometrica, 68(3): 575–604.Google Scholar
Hayakawa, K. (2011), ‘Measuring Fixed Costs for Firms’ Use of a Free Trade Agreement: Threshold Regression Approach’, Economics Letters, 113(3): 301–303.Google Scholar
Keck, A. and Lendle, A. (2012), ‘New Evidence on Preference Utilization’, Staff Working Paper ERSD-2012-12, World Trade Organization.Google Scholar
Kim, H. and Cho, M. (2010), ‘Impact of Rules of Origin on FTA Utilization in Korean FTAs’, KIEP Working Paper 10-08.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, J. and Oh, Y. (2007), ‘Determinants of Intra-FDI Inflows in East Asia: Does Regional Economic Integration Affect Intra-FDI?’, KIEP Working Paper 07-01.Google Scholar
Manchin, M. (2006), ‘Preference Utilisation and Tariff Reduction in EU Imports from ACP Countries’, The World Economy, 29(9): 1243–1266.Google Scholar
Papke, L. E. and Wooldridge, J. M. (1996), ‘Econometric Methods for Fractional Response Variables with an Application to 401(k) Plan Participation Rates’, Journal of Applied Econometrics, 11(6): 619–632.Google Scholar