중국 수산물의 국제 경쟁력 분석 및 제고 방안에 관한 연구

Abstract

Aquatic products account for an insignificant share of China's total trade volume. However, since it is a food industry, its importance will not need to be mentioned again. This study aims to analyze whether China's aquatic products industry has competitiveness compared to other countries. The purpose of this study is to make appropriate policy recommendations based on the implications of the results of this analysis. For the purpose of the study, a comparative study was conducted between Norway and Vietnam, which have a lot of seafood trade with China. A comparative study was also conducted with Korea, where the trade volume is small at present, but trade volume may increase in the future. It is very important to define the scope of aquatic products. In this study, the international competitiveness of Chapter 03, heading 1604, and heading 1605, which have a high proportion of trade with China, was examined. MS, RCA, SRCA, and TSI were used to examine international competitiveness. As a result of the analysis, China's aquatic products are highly competitive compared to other countries. However, HS0302.70, HS0303.79, HS0305.59, HS1604.15, HS1605.10 and HS1605.20 had lower export competitiveness compared to Norway and Vietnam. In this way, policy suggestions were presented to strengthen the competitiveness of low-competitive items and to strengthen the competitiveness of all marine products in China. The policy recommendations presented in this study were based on the “notice” and “opinion” presented by the Chinese government. Although the legal force is insufficient, it was judged that it was sufficient data to examine the direction. It is very difficult to present implications and policy recommendations based on the analysis results. In this study, it was also difficult to find policy data that accurately fit the analysis results. However, the “notice” and “opinion” presented in this study are the direction of China's seafood policy. Therefore, there are some research achievements. In addition, there is a difference because Norway and Vietnam, which were not previously studied, were selected as research subjects. However, it is a limitation that the international competitiveness index, which has already been widely used without using various analysis methods, is not a policy proposal suitable for the item. In future studies, we plan to conduct research using other international competitiveness index.