보호무역주의의 원인에 관한 정치-경제학적 실증연구: Eurobarometer의 거시 데이터를 통한 분석
An Empirical Study on the Causes of Protectionism from Political and Economic Perspective: Analyzing Macro-Level Data from Eurobarometer
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
국가 차원의 정치･경제적 요인은 무역정책의 방향에 대한 선호도에 영향을 미치는가? 이 문제에 답변하기 위해 이 연구는 국가 단위에서 형성되는 무역에 관한 여론에 영향을 줄 수 있는 결정요인을 유럽연합(EU) 회원국의 거시 데이터를 통해 고찰했다. 이를 위해 거시경제적 요인과 국가별 무역 및 산업구조, 거버넌스 관련 지표들을 설명변수를 선정했고, 이 변수들이 무역에 대한 여론에 어떠한 영향을 미치는지를 실증 분석했다. 분석 결과 거시경제적 상황은 자유무역에 대한 긍정적 인식에 비교적 명확한 영향을 미치는 것으로 나타났다. 경기 상승기에는 자유무역에 대한 지지도가 상승하고, 경기 하락 시에는 반대 현상이 나타나는 것을 확인할 수 있었다. 무역 및 산업구조 또한 자유무역에 대한 거시적 차원의 여론 형성과 연관관계가 있는 것으로 나타났다. 또한 정치기관에 대한 신뢰도 자유무역에 대한 지지 여부와 관련되는데, 정부에 대한 신뢰가 증가하면 자유무역에 대한 선호도가 높아지는 것으로 나타났다. 이 연구를 통해 얻을 수 있는 시사점은 다음과 같다. 첫째 보호무역주의 움직임이 등장하는 것은 저성장과 실업률 증가 등 경기적 요인과 관련이 깊다. 이 과정에서 겪는 고용 불안감, 빈부격차의 확대 등의 문제는 보호무역 조치를 옹호하는 정치적 환경을 조성할 가능성이 크다. 경기변동에 따른 충격을 완화할 수 있는 제도는 개방 기조의 무역정책을 유지하는데 기여할 수 있다. 둘째, 자유무역에 기반을 둔 통상정책을 유지하기 위해서는 역설적으로 정치기관에 대한 전반적인 신뢰를 얻을 필요가 있다. 저성장에 대한 돌파구로서 자유무역과 투자유치 등 개방형 무역･투자정책이 추진되기 위해서는 고용 창출을 위한 국내 정책과 함께 거버넌스 개선을 통한 사회･제도적 발전이 필요하다.
Abstract
Do political and economic factors at the national level influence preferences for the direction of trade policy? This study aims to answer this question by examining the determinants that can influence public opinion on free trade at the national level, using macro data from EU member states. The study selected macroeconomic factors, trade and industrial structures by country, and governance-related indicators as explanatory variables, and empirically analyzed how these variables affect public opinion on trade. The analysis reveals that macroeconomic conditions have a relatively clear effect on the positive perception of free trade. It was observed that support for free trade increased during economic upswings, while the opposite phenomenon occurred during downturns. Trade and industrial structure were also found to be related to the formation of public opinion on free trade at the macro level. Additionally, trust in political institutions was found to be associated with support for free trade, with an increase in trust leading to an increase in preference for free trade. The implications drawn from this study are as follows. Firstly, the emergence of protectionist movements is closely linked to cyclical factors such as low growth and rising unemployment. Issues such as job insecurity and the widening wealth gap during this process are likely to foster a political environment that supports protectionist trade measures. Therefore, implementing a system that can mitigate the shocks caused by economic fluctuations could contribute to maintaining an open trade policy. Secondly, building public trust in political institutions is crucial for maintaining a favorable environment for free trade. Enhancing transparency, accountability, and governance mechanisms can foster trust and provide a solid foundation for promoting open trade policies. In conclusion, this empirical study highlights the importance of macroeconomic factors and political trust in shaping protectionist tendencies. By understanding these underlying causes, policymakers can develop effective strategies to counter protectionism and foster a climate conducive to free trade.
참고문헌 (43)
- 신보호무역주의정책의 경제적 영향과시사점, "김종덕", KIEP, ~, pp.KIEP 연구보고서, 19-13 (2019)
- 세계 무역둔화의 구조적 요인 분석과 정책 시사점, "최낙균", KIEP, ~, pp.KIEP 연구보고서, 17-5 (2017)
- Aslam, Aqib, "The Slowdown in Global Trade: A Symptom of a Weak Recovery?", IMF Economic Review, (66), pp.440~479 (2018)
- Bagwell, Kyle, "Protection and the Business Cycle", Advances in Economic Analysis & Policy, 3(1), pp.1~43 (2003)
- Baker, Andy, "Who Wants to Globalize? Consumer Tastes and Labor Markets in a Theory of Trade Policy Beliefs", American Journal of Political Science, 49(4), pp.924~938 (2005)
- Barattieri, Alessandro, "Protectionism and the Business Cycle", Journal of International Economics, 129, pp.103417~ (2021)[DOI]
- Beaulieu, Eugene, "Who Supports Free Trade in Latin America?", World Economy, 28(7), pp.941~958 (2005)
- International Trade, Labour Turnover and the Wage Premium: Testing the Bhagwati-Dehejia Hypothesis for Canada, "Beaulieu, Eugene", CESifo, ~, pp.CESifo Working Paper Series, No. 1149 (2004)
- Bown, Chad P., "Import Protection, Business Cycles, and Exchange Rates : Evidence from the Great Recession", Journal of International Economics, 90(1), pp.50~64 (2013)
- Caplanova, Anetta, "Eastern European Attitudes to Integration with Western Europe", Journal of Common Market Studies, 42(2), pp.271~288 (2004)
- Constantinescu, Cristina, "The Global Trade Slowdown: Cyclical or Structural?", The World Bank Economic Review, 34(1), pp.121~142 (2020)
- Crowley, Meredith A., "Split Decisions in Antidumping Cases", The BE Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, 10(1) (2010)
- Trade Imbalances and the Rise of Protectionism, "Delpeuch, Samuel", CEPR, ~, pp.CEPR Discussion Paper, No. DP15742 (2021)
- Denslow, David, "Consumer Attitudes toward Trade Liberalization", Applied Economics Letters, 3(3), pp.179~182 (1996)
- Doyle, Orla, "Who Favors Enlargement?: Determinants of Support for EU membership in the Candidate Countries Referenda", European Journal of Political Economy, 22(2), pp.520~543 (2006)
- Eichengreen, Barry, "The Slide to Protectionism in the Great Depression: Who Succumbed and Why?", The Journal of Economic History, 70(4), pp.871~897 (2010)
- Eichengreen, Barry, "What’s the Problem with Protectionism?", Project Syndicate, ~ (2016)
- Eurobarometer, "Eurobarometer 85.2 (ZA6694)", ~ (2016)
- Eurobarometer, "Eurobarometer 88.3 (ZA6928)", ~ (2017)
- Eurobarometer, "Eurobarometer 90.3 (ZA7489)", ~ (2018)
- Eurobarometer, "Eurobarometer 91.5 (ZA7576)", ~ (2019)
- Eurobarometer, "Eurobarometer 94.3 (ZA7780)", ~ (2021)
- Eurobarometer, "Eurobarometer 95.3 (ZA7783)", ~ (2021)
- Eurobarometer, "Eurobarometer 97.5 (ZA7902)", ~ (2022)
- The Evolution of Non-Tariff Measures and their Diverse Effects on Trade, "Ghodsi, Mahdi", wiiw, ~, pp.wiiw Research Report, No. 419 (2017)
- "IMF World Economic Outlook: A Rocky Recovery" (2023)[URL]
- Kim, Seokwoo, "How Trade Liberalization Affects the Political and Economic Performance of Developing Countries: The Application of a Two-Stage Game Model", Asian Perspective, 20(1), pp.163~184 (1996)
- Causes of the Global Trade Slowdown, "Lewis Logan T.", Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, ~, pp.Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, No. 2016-11-10 (2016)
- Macdonald, David, "Political Trust and American Public Support for Free Trade", Political Behavior, pp.1~19 (2023)
- Mansfield, Edward D., "Support for Free Trade : Self-Interest, Sociotropic Politics, and Out-Group Anxiety", International Organization, 63(3), pp.425~457 (2009)
- Mayda, Anna Maria, "Why are Some People (and Countries) More Protectionist than Others?", European Economic Review, 49(6), pp.1393~1430 (2005)
- Melgar, Natalia, "Explaining Protectionism Support: The Role of Economic Factors", International Scholarly Research Notices, 2013 (2013)
- O’rourke, Kevin H., "The Determinants of Individual Attitudes towards Immigration", European Journal of Political Economy, 22(4), pp.838~861 (2006)
- Global Attitude Survey 2018, "Pew Research Center", ~ (2019)
- Putnam, Robert. D., "Diplomacy and Domestic Politics : the Logic of Two-Level Games", International organization, 42(3), pp.427~460 (1988)
- Rodrik, Dani, "Has Globalization Gone Too Far?", Challenge, 41(2), pp.81~94 (1998)
- Sanz, Ismael, "Skill and Support to Globalization in the EU", Applied Economics Letters, 15(4), pp.271~275 (2008)
- Scheve, Kenneth F., "What Determines Individual Trade-Policy Preferences?", Journal of International Economics, 54(2), pp.267~292 (2001)
- Shinoda, Tomohito, "Two-level Game Analysis of Japan in the TPP Negotiations", Asian Journal of Comparative Politics, 5(4), pp.337~350 (2020)
- "wiiw NTM Data"[URL]
- "World Bank Open Data"[URL]
- "World Bank Worldwide Governance Indicator"[URL]
- Zhan, James X., "GVC Transformation and a New Investment Landscape in the 2020s: Driving Forces, Directions, and a Forward-looking Research and Policy Agenda", Journal of International Business Policy, 4(2), pp.206~220 (2020)[DOI]