韩国的贸易模式

J. Imbs, Laurent L. Pauwels
{"title":"韩国的贸易模式","authors":"J. Imbs, Laurent L. Pauwels","doi":"10.22904/SJE.2020.33.3.004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Imbs and Pauwels (2020) introduce a measure of openness based on indirect trade. This paper illustrates the differences in the Korean patterns of trade when openness is measured using conventional measures based on direct trade, and when it is measured using this measure of indirect trade, labeled Export Intensity (EI). According to EI, the Republic of Korea (Korea) has been following an upward trend in openness since 2000 and even after 2010. This stands in contrast with most other large trading countries, including China and Germany. We show this is a reflection of Koreas integration with a few partner economies, most notably China. Vertical integration is considerable between Korea and China, in manufacturing and in services alike. The extent of this integration would be invisible on the basis of conventional measures of openness.","PeriodicalId":137430,"journal":{"name":"Asian Law eJournal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-08-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Korea’s Patterns of Trade\",\"authors\":\"J. Imbs, Laurent L. Pauwels\",\"doi\":\"10.22904/SJE.2020.33.3.004\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Imbs and Pauwels (2020) introduce a measure of openness based on indirect trade. This paper illustrates the differences in the Korean patterns of trade when openness is measured using conventional measures based on direct trade, and when it is measured using this measure of indirect trade, labeled Export Intensity (EI). According to EI, the Republic of Korea (Korea) has been following an upward trend in openness since 2000 and even after 2010. This stands in contrast with most other large trading countries, including China and Germany. We show this is a reflection of Koreas integration with a few partner economies, most notably China. Vertical integration is considerable between Korea and China, in manufacturing and in services alike. The extent of this integration would be invisible on the basis of conventional measures of openness.\",\"PeriodicalId\":137430,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Asian Law eJournal\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-08-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Asian Law eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.22904/SJE.2020.33.3.004\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian Law eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22904/SJE.2020.33.3.004","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

Imbs和Pauwels(2020)引入了一个基于间接贸易的开放度量。本文说明了韩国贸易模式在使用基于直接贸易的传统指标来衡量开放程度和使用间接贸易指标(称为出口强度(EI))来衡量开放程度时的差异。据EI称,韩国自2000年以来,甚至在2010年之后,开放程度一直呈上升趋势。这与包括中国和德国在内的大多数其他大型贸易国家形成鲜明对比。我们认为,这是韩国与几个伙伴经济体(尤其是中国)一体化的反映。韩国和中国在制造业和服务业方面的垂直整合相当可观。根据传统的开放措施,这种一体化的程度是不可见的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Korea’s Patterns of Trade
Imbs and Pauwels (2020) introduce a measure of openness based on indirect trade. This paper illustrates the differences in the Korean patterns of trade when openness is measured using conventional measures based on direct trade, and when it is measured using this measure of indirect trade, labeled Export Intensity (EI). According to EI, the Republic of Korea (Korea) has been following an upward trend in openness since 2000 and even after 2010. This stands in contrast with most other large trading countries, including China and Germany. We show this is a reflection of Koreas integration with a few partner economies, most notably China. Vertical integration is considerable between Korea and China, in manufacturing and in services alike. The extent of this integration would be invisible on the basis of conventional measures of openness.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The Debate on Constitutional Standing and Greater Autonomy for Cities: Lessons from The Special Administrative Regions of Hong Kong and Macao Agility Over Stability: China’s Great Reversal in Regulating the Platform Economy The Governance Crisis in Myanmar: An International Law Perspective and International Society Response Towards Myanmar 2021 Coup D’ Etat. Vietnam: Data Privacy in a Communist ASEAN State India's Cartel Penalty Practices, Optimal Restitution and Deterrence
×
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