본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

역내포괄적경제동반자협정(RCEP) 가입 및 미(未)가입 요인의 분석 : 한국, 중국, 일본, 인도의 사례

An Analysis of Factors Behind Joining or Not Joining the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) : Cases of South Korea, China, Japan, and India

김현|서진희
한국정치사회연구소 (Korea Institute of Politics and Society)|2021.12|한국과 국제사회 (Korea and Global Affairs)|제5권 제6호|pp. 131-168|DOI 10.22718/kga.2021.5.6.006

0

조회

0

다운로드

3

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

신현실주의NeorealismRegional Comprehensive Economic Partnership역내포괄적경제동반자협정국제무역레짐다자적 자유무역협정신자유주의적 제도주의International Trade RegimeMultilateral FTANeoliberal Institutionalism
주제분류학제간연구

초록

이 논문의 목적은 2020년 11월에 타결된 역내포괄적경제동반자협정(RCEP)에 한국, 중국, 일본이 참여한 각각의 요인들과 인도가 가입하지 않은 요인들을 구체적으로 분석하여 국제레짐이론의 시각에서 설명하는 것이다. 첫째, 한국이 가입한 주요 요인은 신자유주의 이론의 설명대로 교역의 확대를 통한 경제적 이득을 예상했기 때문이다. 또한 신현실주의 이론에서 예상하듯이 아세안과의 포괄적 협력을 강화하여 역내에서 한국의 상대적 지위와 영향력을 높이려는 의도에서 비롯되었다. 둘째, 중국이 RCEP에 가입한 주요 요인도 경제적 이득인데 이는 신자유주의 이론의 설명과 부합된다. 또한 신현실주의 이론에서 예상하듯이 중국은 역내에서 주도적으로 다자적 통상협력의 틀을 구축함으로써 기존의 지위와 영향력을 증대하려는 것이다. 셋째, 일본도 신자유주의 이론이 예상하듯이 주로 경제적 이득을 고려하여 RCEP에 가입하였다. 또한 RCEP을 통해 수준 높은 다자적 자유무역 질서를 확립하는데 리더십을 발휘하기 위함이다. 이러한 요인은 신현실주의 이론으로 설명된다. 반면에 인도가 RCEP에 가입하지 않은 주요인은 중국에 대한 상대적인 경제적 손실이 예상되어 자국의 상대적 지위와 영향력이 저하될 것을 우려하였기 때문인데 이러한 요인은 신현실주의 이론에 의해서 적절히 설명된다.

Abstract

This paper aims to explain factors for South Korea, China, and Japan respectively to join the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), which was concluded in November 2020, as well as factors for India not to join it from the perspective of international regime theory. First, the main factor that South Korea joined was because it expected economic gains through trade expansion, as explained by neoliberalism. In addition, as predicted by the neorealist theory, another factor came from the intention of South Korea to enhance its relative position and influence by strengthening comprehensive cooperation with the ASEAN. Second, the main factor for China's accession to the RCEP was anticipated economic gains, which is consistent with the explanation of neoliberal theory. As predicted by the neorealist theory, China intended to increase its position and influence by taking the initiative in establishing a framework for multilateral trade cooperation in East Asia. Third, Japan joined the RCEP mainly in consideration of economic benefits, as predicted by neoliberalism. It also intended to demonstrate leadership in establishing a high-level multilateral free trade order through the RCEP. These factors are also consistent with a neorealist explanation. Fourth, the main reason that India did not join the RCEP was that it expected relative economic losses to China through the RCEP which, in turn, would weaken its relative position and influence in competition with China. This factor is adequately explained by the neorealist theory.

참고문헌 (75)

  1. "RCEP의 주요 합의 내용과 기대효과" (2020)[URL]
  2. 김희중, "RCEP 서명에 따른 CPTPP와의 협정문 주요 내용 비교 분석", 법학논총, 49, pp.141~175 (2021), 법학연구소[DOI]
  3. "RCEP의 경제적 타당성 평가 결과" (2013)[URL]
  4. "중국의 일대일로 전략과 한국의 대응 방안" (2017)[URL]
  5. "역내포괄적경제동반자협정(RCEP) 잠정타결: 의미와 시사점" (2019)[URL]
  6. 박창건, "일본의 아태지역 통상정책 : 다각적 양면-연계론으로 분석한 CPTPP과 RCEP의 정책 수렴", 일본공간, (28), pp.203~243 (2020), 일본학연구소[DOI]
  7. 역내포괄적경제동반자협정(RCEP) 잠정 타결 의미와 시사점, "오수현", 대외경제정책연구원, 1~16 (2019)
  8. "역내포괄적경제동반자협정(RCEP)의 주요 내용과 시사점" (2020), 오수현[URL]
  9. "모디 인도 정부의 신동방정책(Act East Policy)과 동아시아" (2018)[URL]
  10. "한·일 정치외교 갈등으로 교역량 –11.9%, 양국 경제 모두 타격" (2021)[URL]
  11. XING SIYAO, "아시아인프라투자은행(AIIB) 가입 및 미가입 요인 분석: 한국, 영국, 미국, 일본 사례를 중심으로", 아시아연구, 23(4), pp.95~112 (2020), 한국아시아학회[DOI]
  12. 양광수, "アジア太平洋地域の経済連携と日本の戦略", 일본근대학연구, (65), pp.347~362 (2019), 한국일본근대학회[DOI]
  13. "The RCEP Conundrum: Japan Awaits India’s Return" (2021)[URL]
  14. Axelrod, Robert, "Achieving Cooperation under Anarchy: Strategies and Institutions", World Politics, 38(1), pp.226~254 (1985)
  15. "Why did India betray RCEP?" (2019)[URL]
  16. Chow, Daniel, "Why China Established the Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank", Vanderbilt Journal of International Law, 49, pp.1255~1298 (2016)
  17. Drysdale, Peter, "RCEP: a strategic opportunity for multilateralism", China Economic Journal, 14(2), pp.128~143 (2021)
  18. "5 Reasons Why PM Modi Pulled Out of RCEP in Bangkok" (2019)[URL]
  19. Gaur, Pankhuri, "India’s withdrawal from RCEP: neutralising national trade concerns", Journal of the Asia Pacific Economy, pp.1~19 (2020)
  20. Glaser, Charles, "Realists as Optimists: Cooperation as Self-help", International Security, 19(3), pp.50~90 (1995)
  21. Grieco, Joseph, "Anarchy and the Limits of Cooperation: A Realist Critique of the Newest Liberal Institutionalism", International Organization, 42(3), pp.485~507 (1988)
  22. Grieco, Joseph, "Cooperation among Nations: Europe, America, and Non-Tariff Barriers to Trade" (1990), Cornell University Press
  23. Grieco, Joseph, "Neorealism and Neoliberalism: The Contemporary Debate", pp.301~338 (1993), Columbia University Press
  24. "Why India Refused to Join the World’s Biggest Trading Bloc" (2020)[URL]
  25. Hu, Weixing, "The US Indo-Pacific Strategy and China’s Response", The China Review, 20(3), pp.143~176 (2020)
  26. "Economic Impacts of the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership: Analysis Using IDE-GSM" (2021)[URL]
  27. Keohane, Robert, "After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy" (1984), Princeton University Press
  28. Keohane, Robert, "International Institutions and State Power: Essays in International Relations Theory", pp.1~21 (1989), Westview Press
  29. "The CPTPP and Its Implications for Japan" (2018)[URL]
  30. Kimura, Fukunari, "RCEP from the middle powers’ Perspective", China Economic Journal, 14(2), pp.162~170 (2021)
  31. Krasner, Stephen D, "International Regimes" (1983), Cornell University Press
  32. Krasner, Stephen D, "Regime Theory and International Relations", pp.139~167 (1993), Oxford University Press
  33. Krasner, Stephen D, "Neorealism and Neoliberalism: The Contemporary Debate", pp.234~249 (1993), Columbia University Press
  34. Leonard, Eric K, "The Onset of Global Governance: International Relations Theory and the International Criminal Court" (2005), Ashgate Publishing Company
  35. McGinnis, Michael, "Issue Linkage and the Evolution of International Cooperation", Journal of Conflict Resolution, 30(1), pp.141~170 (1986)
  36. "Japan's Entry into the Trans-Pacific Partnership: Domestic Priorities and Regional Dynamics" (2013)[URL]
  37. "CPTPP a booster for Japan’s regional trade leadership" (2018)[URL]
  38. "What will the TPP Mean for China?" (2015)[URL]
  39. Panda, Rajaram, "A Step Too Far: Why India Opted Out of RECP", Global Asia, 14(4) (2019)
  40. "East Asia Decouples from the United States: Trade War, COVID-19, and East Asia’s New Trade Blocs" (2020)[URL]
  41. "India’s Out of RCEP:What’s Next for the Country and Free Trade?" (2020)[URL]
  42. Seshadri, V. S, "RCEP and India: What Next?", Indian Foreign Affairs Journal, 14(2), pp.87~102 (2019)
  43. "View: By saying no to RCEP, PM Narendra Modi has kept India first" (2019)[URL]
  44. Shimizu, Kazushi, "The ASEAN Economic Community and the RCEP in the World Economy", Journal of Contemporary East Asia Studies, 10(1), pp.1~23 (2021)
  45. Singh, Surendar, "Domestic Sources of India’s Trade Policy Preferences in RCEP Negotiations", Journal of World Trade, 54(4), pp.503~530 (2020)
  46. Snidal, Duncan, "Neorealism and Neoliberalism:The Contemporary Debate", pp.170~207 (1993), Columbia University Press
  47. "RCEP Negotiations and the Implications for the United States" (2018)[URL]
  49. "RCEP Trade Deal: A Geopolitical Win for China" (2020)[URL]
  50. Wang Chao, "India's RCEP Dilemma with China: Beyond the Legal Texts", Pacific Focus, 36(1), pp.40~62 (2021), 국제관계연구소[DOI]
  51. Yoo, In Tae, "Way of Authoritarian Regional Hegemon? Formation of the RCEP from the Perspective of China", Journal of Asian and African Studies, pp.1~15 (2021)
  52. "Developing Your China Trade with Japan and South Korea Under RCEP" (2021)[URL]
  53. "역내 포괄적 경제동반자협정 (RCEP) 제1차 공식 협상 결과" (2013)[URL]
  54. "역내포괄적경제동반자협정(RCEP) 협정문 타결 선언" (2019)[URL]
  55. "세계 최대 FTA인 역내포괄적경제동반자협정(RCEP) 최종 서명" (2020)[URL]
  56. "Keynote Address by External Affairs Minister on ASEAN-India Partnership" (2017)[URL]
  57. "Brief on Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership(RCEP)" (2014)[URL]
  58. "The 4th Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) Summit and RCEP Agreement Signing Ceremony" (2020)[URL]
  59. "ＲＣＥＰ協定の経済効果分析" (2021), 일본 외무성[URL]
  60. "One of the world's largest economic partnerships, its significance and business opportunities" (2021)[URL]
  61. "Industrial Competitiveness Council" (2013)[URL]
  62. "The 13th IISS Asian Security Summit -The Shangri-La Dialogue - Keynote Address by Prime Minister Abe" (2014)[URL]
  63. "Address by Prime Minister Abe at the Seventy-Third Session of the United Nations General Assembly" (2018)[URL]
  64. "外交部部长助理刘建超在丝绸之路合作亚洲合作对话论坛开幕式上的讲话" (2014)[URL]
  65. "外交部长王毅就中国外交政策和对外关系回答中外记者提问" (2016)[URL]
  66. "아세안 관련 정상회의, 왜 중요할까요? 「아세안+3 동아시아정상회의 RCEP 정상회의」" (2019)[URL]
  67. "역내포괄적경제동반자협정(RCEP) 정상회의" (2020)[URL]
  68. "Indo-Pacific Strategy Report:Preparedness, Partnership, and Promoting a Networked Region" (2019)[URL]
  69. "India storms out of RCEP, says trade deal hurts Indian farmers.” The Hindu" (2019)[URL]
  70. "China has officially ratified RCEP deal: commerce" (2021)[URL]
  71. "Exporters, industry laud India’s decision to pull out of RCEP" (2019)[URL]
  72. "India decides to opt out of RCEP, says key concerns not addressed" (2019)[URL]
  73. "Not being part of RCEP will harm India's exports and investment flow, says CII" (2019)[URL]
  74. "RCEP trade pact seen boosting Japan/s GDP by 2.7%" (2021)[URL]
  75. "Why India pulled out of RCEP? Piyush Goyal defends govt’s controversial move" (2019)[URL]

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (15건)

질적 해석적 메타통합(QIMS)을 적용한 한국노인의 삶의 질에 대한 연구길태영pp. 5-36적극행정의 특성과 발전에 관한 탐색적 논의 : 역사적‧행정학적 접근을 중심으로김학만, 권정만pp. 37-58자사고 재지정과정에서 정책지지연합의 신념체계 분석양림pp. 59-79한국 언론에 나타난 러시아 국가 이미지 연구 : 러시아 관련 언론 보도 빅데이터 내용분석을 중심으로정세원pp. 81-106국제스포츠 경기대회 개최 시 군의 역할 분석 : 1988 서울올림픽 경기대회 및 2018 평창동계올림픽 경기 대회를 중심으로최정준pp. 107-130
원문 보기