Journal Search Engine
Search Advanced Search Adode Reader(link)
Download PDF Export Citaion korean bibliography PMC previewer
ISSN : 2233-4165(Print)
ISSN : 2233-5382(Online)
Journal of Industrial Distribution & Business Vol.9 No.1 pp.89-97

A Study on the Trade Structure between Korea and RCEP Participating Countries

Min-Soo Kim**
**Assistant Professor, Business Administration, Catholic Kwandong University. The Korea Chamber of Commerce & Industry, Korea. Tel: +82-1-6352-3988, E-mail:
December 14, 2017. December 26, 2017. January 15, 2018.


Purpose - The Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) among 16 countries including South Korea, the largest free trade agreement in the Asia-Pacific region, will be concluded next year. The participating countries decided to pursue a comprehensive and high –quality agreement, while ensuring flexibility considering development level of each country. In this study, trade structures between nations from 2005 through 2016 were examined to see the impact that this agreement will have on Korea and to come up with effective countermeasures.
Research design, data, and methodology - The method of analysis includes the analysis of the trade matrix, which is useful for identifying the dependency of the individual countries on the market in the region and the reciprocal dependency of the member countries on the market, and the index of intensity of trade, which is useful for figuring out the share of trade between the parties in total trade.
Results - The results showed that first, the international trade coefficients of Vietnam and Philippines are higher than those of China and Japan. Secondly, the international inducement coefficients between China and Japan were high, and that between Indonesia and Burma were low, indicating that Korea's exports did not have much effect on export increase of these countries. Third, as a result of analyzing Korea's trade intensity, it was found that export intensity and import intensity were greater than 1 in Vietnam and Philippines, which shows that there is a high degree of relational bond with these countries. India and Laos countries still have a low level of relational bond, which indicates that there is room for improvement in economic relations when the agreement is concluded. After the signing of the agreement in the future, more diverse industrial structures should be continuously studied.
Conclusions - The analysis of trade matrix, trade structure, trade inducement coefficient and trade intensity between Korea and RCEP participating countries shows that the majority of the countries have the high level of economic relationship with Korea. Korea should drive a harder bargain when negotiating the terms of the RCEP, in comparison with the level of the existing FTA agreement excluding Japan.

JEL Classifications: F13, F15, F52.

한국과 RCEP 참여국가와의 무역구조에 관한 연구



    Catholic Kwandong University Research Fund




    1. Cheong, I. K., & Cho, J. G. (2013). The Evaluation of East Asian Regionalism from APEC to RCEP, Journal of International Logistics and Trade, 11(1), 99-112.
    2. Chen, Y. J. (2016). Asia Pacific Regional Economic Integration: Competition vs. Conflict. Contemporary Chinese Political Economy and Strategic Relations: An International Journal, 2(1), 141-171.
    3. Chiang, M. H. (2013). The Potential of China-Japan-South Korea Free Trade Agreement. East Asia: An International Quarterly, 30(3), 199-216.
    4. Chung, J. W. (2017). A Study on Reasonable PSR Standard against RCEP for Korea’s Major Import and Export Goods. The Journal of Korea Research Society for Customs, 18(3), 57-82.
    5. Devadason, E. S. (2015). Framing China-Malaysia Trade Relations Beyond ASEAN: Factoring The Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership. The Journal of Developing Areas, 49(2), 39-56.
    6. Gao, H. (2012). Study on Changes and Development Trends of the Trade Structure between Korea and China, The East Asian Journal of Business Management, 2(1), 19-23.
    7. Hasrat, I. Z., & Nasrudin (2016). Determinants of Bilateral Foreign Direct Investment Intra-ASEAN: Panel Gravity Model. The East Asian Journal of Business Management, 6(1), 19-24.
    8. Hsu, K. (2013). The RCEP: Integrating India into the Asian Economy, Indian Foreign Affairs Journal, 8(1), 41-51.
    9. Kang, W. S. (2014). Mega-regional Economic Integration in the Asia-Pacific: Convergence of RCEP and TPP. Journal of Asia-Pacific Studies, 21(4), 25-30.
    10. Kim, Y. S., & Wee, J. B. (2010). Region al Trade Structure of the North-Eastern Asian Countries. Korea journal of Business Administration, 23(6), 3059-3081.
    11. Nguyen, T. D., Nguyen, A. T., & Do, P. T. T. (2017). The Role of Investment Attraction in Vietnamese Industrial Parks and Economic Zones in the Process of International Economic Integration. The Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business, 4(3), 27-34.
    12. Park, H. J., Jeon, H. G., & Kim, M. S. (2007). A Study on the Trade Structure among Korea and FTA Negotiating Countries, International Area Studies Review, 11(2), 494-518.
    13. Park, B. J., & Moon, Y. S. (2013). A study on the Trade Structures and International Competitiveness of the Korean Environmental Industry. International Commerce and Information Review, 15(2), 345-364.
    14. Petri, P. A. (2013). The New Landscape of Trade Policy and Korea's Choices. Journal of East Asian Economic Integration, 17(4), 333-359.
    15. Qazi, M. A., Hye, S, W., & Lau, W. Y. (2016). The Impact of Trade Openness on Economic Growth in China: An Empirical Analysis. The Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business, 3(3), 27-37.
    16. Shim, S. J. (2012). Trade Multiplier in Inter-regional Trade and Factor Decomposition Analysis. Journal of Korea Trade, 37(3), 195-216.
    17. Shon, B. H. (1997). Economic integration(2th ed.). Seoul, Korea: Bobmunsa Publishing.
    18. Yi, C. D. (2004). An Analysis on the International Trade Multipliers among East Asian Countries. Korea Trade Review, 29(5), 5-25.
    19. Zhang, M. L., & Lee, S. J. (2017). A Study of the Impacts on Electronic Distribution Industry after Korea-China FTA. The International Journal of Industrial Distribution & Business, 8(6), 33-40.