The political economy of agricultural trade liberalization in Northeast Asia: comparisons with the West and between Japan and Korea

IF 2.3 2区 社会学 Q1 AREA STUDIES Pacific Review Pub Date : 2021-09-17 DOI:10.1080/09512748.2021.1977684
W. Moon, Takumi Sakuyama
{"title":"The political economy of agricultural trade liberalization in Northeast Asia: comparisons with the West and between Japan and Korea","authors":"W. Moon, Takumi Sakuyama","doi":"10.1080/09512748.2021.1977684","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This paper contrasts agricultural protection of Japan and Korea with the West and identifies major differences between them. It characterizes agricultural protection of Japan and Korea (net heavy food importers) as “tariff-based and scarcity-sensitive” aimed at promoting survival and the West (net food exporters) as “subsidy-based and surplus-inducing” aimed at enhancing farm income. We then identify factors underlying the coevolution and divergence in the extent of agricultural trade liberalization between Japan and Korea since the launch of the Uruguay Round in 1986. Korea accepted deep cuts in agricultural tariffs in bilateral FTAs with the US and EU during the 2000s while Japan continued to protect farm interests by concluding low levels of FTAs with politically sensitive products excluded from tariff concessions. The two countries’ stances reversed since 2013 with Japan becoming proactive in pursuing high levels of FTAs with major agricultural exporting countries and Korea decelerating its opening of agricultural markets. To explain such divergences, this paper develops a political economy framework in which the incumbent political leadership would consider both national interests and sectoral (farm as import competing industries and business/manufacturing as exporting industries) special interests. Our analysis shows that President Roh (2002–2007)’s embracing of neoliberal paradigm in formulating foreign trade policies that would promote national interests underlies the unprecedented level of agricultural trade liberalization in Korea during the 2000s, while Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s determination not to be outcompeted by the rising China and Korea’s ambitious FTA strategies underlies Japan’s proactive bilateral and mega-FTA drives since 2013.","PeriodicalId":51541,"journal":{"name":"Pacific Review","volume":"36 1","pages":"463 - 493"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pacific Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09512748.2021.1977684","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AREA STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract This paper contrasts agricultural protection of Japan and Korea with the West and identifies major differences between them. It characterizes agricultural protection of Japan and Korea (net heavy food importers) as “tariff-based and scarcity-sensitive” aimed at promoting survival and the West (net food exporters) as “subsidy-based and surplus-inducing” aimed at enhancing farm income. We then identify factors underlying the coevolution and divergence in the extent of agricultural trade liberalization between Japan and Korea since the launch of the Uruguay Round in 1986. Korea accepted deep cuts in agricultural tariffs in bilateral FTAs with the US and EU during the 2000s while Japan continued to protect farm interests by concluding low levels of FTAs with politically sensitive products excluded from tariff concessions. The two countries’ stances reversed since 2013 with Japan becoming proactive in pursuing high levels of FTAs with major agricultural exporting countries and Korea decelerating its opening of agricultural markets. To explain such divergences, this paper develops a political economy framework in which the incumbent political leadership would consider both national interests and sectoral (farm as import competing industries and business/manufacturing as exporting industries) special interests. Our analysis shows that President Roh (2002–2007)’s embracing of neoliberal paradigm in formulating foreign trade policies that would promote national interests underlies the unprecedented level of agricultural trade liberalization in Korea during the 2000s, while Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s determination not to be outcompeted by the rising China and Korea’s ambitious FTA strategies underlies Japan’s proactive bilateral and mega-FTA drives since 2013.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
东北亚农产品贸易自由化的政治经济学——与西方和日韩的比较
本文将日本和韩国的农业保护与西方进行了比较,并指出了它们之间的主要区别。它将日本和韩国(粮食净进口国)的农业保护描述为旨在促进生存的“基于关税和对稀缺性敏感”,将西方(粮食净出口国)描述为旨在提高农业收入的“基于补贴和诱导盈余”。然后,我们确定了自1986年乌拉圭回合启动以来,日本和韩国之间农业贸易自由化程度共同演变和分歧的潜在因素。2000年代,韩国在与美国和欧盟的双边自由贸易协定中接受了大幅削减农业关税的做法,而日本则继续通过缔结低水平的自由贸易协定来保护农业利益,将政治敏感产品排除在关税减让之外。自2013年以来,两国的立场发生了逆转,日本积极主动地与主要农产品出口国达成高水平的自由贸易协定,韩国则放慢了农产品市场的开放速度。为了解释这种差异,本文提出了一个政治经济学框架,在该框架中,现任政治领导层将考虑国家利益和部门(农业作为进口竞争产业,商业/制造业作为出口产业)的特殊利益。我们的分析表明,卢武铉总统(2002-2007)在制定促进国家利益的对外贸易政策时采用了新自由主义范式,这是2000年代韩国农业贸易自由化达到前所未有水平的基础,而日本首相安倍晋三(Shinzo Abe)决心不被崛起的中韩雄心勃勃的自贸协定战略所压倒,这是日本自2013年以来积极开展双边和大型自贸协定运动的基础。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Pacific Review
Pacific Review Multiple-
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
14.30%
发文量
30
期刊介绍: The Pacific Review provides a major platform for the study of the domestic policy making and international interaction of the countries of the Pacific Basin. Its primary focus is on politics and international relations in the broadest definitions of the terms, allowing for contributions on domestic and foreign politics, economic change and interactions, business and industrial policies, military strategy and cultural issues. The Pacific Review aims to be global in perspective, and while it carries many papers on domestic issues, seeks to explore the linkages between national, regional and global levels of analyses.
期刊最新文献
The ‘Blue Pacific’ strategic narrative: rhetorical action, acceptance, entrapment, and appropriation? Beyond the ‘North’-’South’ impasse: self-effacing Japan, emancipatory movements of the Global South and West-Engineered aid architecture Deter together or deter separately?: time horizons and peacetime alliance cohesion of the US-Japan and US-ROK alliances The Technopolitics of THAAD in East Asia Informal governance and China’s influence in the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1