Comparative Trade Potential of Northeast Asian Countries

ERI FEB RAS	Issue's contents	RUS
	Regionalistica 2024 Volume 11 number 4 pages 5-23

Title of the article	Comparative Trade Potential of Northeast Asian Countries
Pages	5-23
Author	Izotov Dmitry Aleksandrovich doctor of economics, leading research fellow Economic Research Institute FEB RAS 153, Tikhookeanskaya Street, Khabarovsk, Russia, 680042 This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. ORCID: 0000-0001-9199-6226
Abstract	The purpose of the study is to assess the comparative trade potential of Northeast Asian countries based on the border effect estimation. In general, intraregional trade in North-East Asia (NEA) was less intensive than NEA trade with other countries. This indicates high trade barriers between NEA countries. It was determined that the reduction of trade barriers between China, Japan and the Republic of Korea can increase the total trade turnover of NEA. It was found that access to the Chinese market, as well as the inflow of Chinese direct investment in cooperation projects, can significantly increase the foreign trade of Russia and Mongolia. The estimates of the border effect for the DPRK indicated the close relations of its economy with the Chinese market, as well as North Korea’s foreign trade could significantly increase in the event of reduction high trade barriers with the Republic of Korea. The assessments indicated the existence of economic conditions for expanding trade in NEA, and China is a «connecting link» between the NEA countries. However, political conflicts between some NEA countries, as well as the political and economic influence of other countries, significantly complicate the implementation of the existing trade potential of the sub-global region.
Code	339.9+339.5
DOI	10.14530/reg.2024.4.5
Keywords	trade, barriers, border effect, trade potential, North-East Asia, China, Japan, Republic of Korea, Russia, Mongolia, DPRK
Download	2024-04.5.pdf
For citation	Izotov D.A. Comparative Trade Potential of Northeast Asian Countries. Regionalistica [Regionalistics]. 2024. Vol. 11. No. 4. Pp. 5–23. http://dx.doi.org/10.14530/reg.2024.4.5 (In Russian)
References	1. Izotov D.A. Liberalization of Russia’s Trade with the European Union, BRICS, and Trans-Pacific Partnership Countries. Problemy prognozirovaniya [Studies on Russian Economic Development]. 2017. Vol. 28. No. 3. Pp. 338–345. http://dx.doi.org/10.1134/S1075700717030078 (In Russian) 2. Izotov D.A. Russia’s Trade with East Asian Countries: Comparative Costs and Potential. Prostranstvennaya ekonomika = Spatial Economics. 2022. Vol. 18. No. 3. Pp. 17–41. http://dx.doi.org/10.14530/se.2022.3.017-041 (In Russian) 3. Izotov D.A. Trade Interaction Between Chinese Regions and Russia: The Border Effect. Prostranstvennaya ekonomika = Spatial Economics. 2020. Vol. 16. No. 3. Pp. 24–51. http://dx.doi.org/10.14530/se.2020.3.024-051 (In Russian) 4. Park S.-C. Can Trade Help Overcome Economic Crisis? Vestnik mezhdunarodnykh organizatsiy = International Organisations Research Journal. 2017. Vol. 12. No. 2. Pp. 104–128. http://dx.doi.org/10.17323/1996-7845-2017-02-104 (In Russian) 5. Economic Cooperation Between the Russia Far East and Asia-Pacific Countries. Ed. by P.A. Minakir. Khabarovsk, 2007. 208 p. (In Russian) 6. Anderson J.E., van Wincoop E. Gravity with Gravitas: A Solution to the Border Puzzle. American Economic Review. 2003. Vol. 93. No. 1. Pp. 170–192. https://doi.org/10.1257/000282803321455214 7. Choi J. North Korea’s Tariff and Non-tariff System: Implications for Integration into the International Economy. World Economy Brief. 2024. Vol. 14. No. 29. Available at: https://www.kiep.go.kr/gallery.es?mid=a20301000000&bid=0007&list_no=11475&act=view (accessed August 2024). 8. Choi Y. Political Economy of Free Trade Agreements in China, Japan, and South Korea: Sectoral Politics of the FTA Wave, 1998–2016. Japanese Journal of Political Science. 2020. Vol. 21. No. 3. Pp. 145–157. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1468109920000031 9. Choi Y.-M. The Optimal Path of a China – Japan – Korea FTA: Multilateral Path or Sequential Path? Pacific Focus. 2013. Vol. 28. No. 3. Pp. 435–458. https://doi.org/10.1111/pafo.12018 10. Ganbaatar B., Huang J., Shuai C., Nawaz A., Ali M. Empirical Analysis of Factors Affecting the Bilateral Trade Between Mongolia and China. Sustainability. 2021. Vol. 13. No. 7. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13074051 11. Hastiadi F.F. Regionalism in East Asia: The Role of North East Asian Nations. American Journal of Economics and Business Administration. 2011. Vol. 3. No. 2. Pp. 242–253. https://doi.org/10.3844/ajebasp.2011.247.258 12. Hastings J.V., Wang Y. Informal Trade Along the China – North Korea Border. Journal of East Asian Studies. 2018. Vol. 18. No. 2. Pp. 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1017/jea.2018.4 13. Jackson K., Shepotylo O. Transforming East Asia: Regional Integration in a Trade War Era. Open Economies Review. 2023. Vol. 34. Issue 3. Pp. 657–672. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11079-022-09698-y 14. Jiang H., Yu M. Understanding RCEP and CPTPP: From the Perspective China’s Dual Circulation Economic Strategy. China Economic Journal. 2021. Vol. 14. Issue 2. Pp. 144–161. https://doi.org/10.1080/17538963.2021.1933055 15. Kaseda Y. Japan’s Power Shift and Its DPRK Policy. Pacific Focus. 2010. Vol. 25. No. 2. Pp. 237–256. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1976-5118.2010.01043.x 16. Kim J., Kim K., Park S., Sun C. The Economic Costs of Trade Sanctions: Evidence from North Korea. Journal of International Economics. 2023. Vol. 145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jinteco.2023.103813 17. Kim J.Y. Escaping the Vicious Cycle: Symbolic Politics and History Disputes Between South Korea and Japan. Asian Perspective. 2014. Vol. 38. No. 1. Pp. 31–60. https://dx.doi.org/10.1353/apr.2014.0001 18. Mayer Th., Zignago S. Market Access in Global and Regional Trade. Available at: http://www.cepii.fr/PDF_PUB/wp/2005/wp2005-02.pdf (accessed August 2024). 19. Moon J., Park J., Park S.-H. An Analysis on the Regional Integration of Northeast Asia by Developing Narci (Northeast Asia Regional Cooperation Index). https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4741477 20. Olivero M.P., Yotov Y.V. Dynamic Gravity: Endogenous Country Size and Asset Accumulation. Canadian Journal of Economics. 2012. Vol. 45. No. 1. Pp. 64–92. 21. Park C.-Y., Claveria R. Tracking Regional Integration in Northeast Asia: A Composite Index Approach. Available at: https://www.unii.ac.jp/erina-unp/archive/en/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/DP2106.pdf (accessed August 2024). 22. Santos Silva J.M.C., Tenreyro S. The Log of Gravity. Review of Economics and Statistics. 2006. Vol. 88. No. 4. Pp. 641–658. https://doi.org/10.1162/rest.88.4.641 23. Terada T. Northeast Asia’s Realism: Fated External Influences on Trilateral Economic Integration. East Asian Community Review. 2018. Vol. 1. Issue 1–2. Pp. 49–59. https://doi.org/10.1057/s42215-018-0006-4 24. Tochkov K. North Korea’s Trade and the Integration of Northeast Asia. Asia and the Global Economy. 2021. Vol. 1. No. 1. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aglobe.2021.100007 25. Xu Y., Yang X., Mai N. Impacts of Deep Trade Agreements on Trade and Welfare – An Application to China Joining the RCEP and CPTPP. The Journal of International Trade and Economic Development. 2024. Pp. 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638199.2024.2336022 26. Yilmaz S., Lyu M. Northeast Asian Regional Integration and the East Asian Community Making Process. Asian Perspective. 2020. Vol. 44. No. 3. Pp. 409–433. https://doi.org/10.1353/apr.2020.0018 27. Yotov Y.V., Piermartini R., Monteiro J.-A., Larch M. An Advanced Guide to Trade Policy Analysis: The Structural Gravity Model. Geneva: World Trade Organization, 2016. 142 p. https://doi.org/10.30875/abc0167e-en 28. Zhang M. The China – Japan – Korea Trilateral Free Trade Agreement: Why Did Trade Negotiations Stall? Pacific Focus. 2019. Vol. 34. No. 2. Pp. 204–229. https://doi.org/10.1111/pafo.12142
Financing
Date