Can China Sustain Its Growth in the Future? The Structure of the Bottlenecks between Energy Supply and Demand in China and Their Implications on East Asian International Politics

본 연구는 미국에너지정보청(EIA), 국제에너지기구(IEA), 일본에너 지경제연구소(IEEJ), 중국국무원 발전연구중심, BP 등 세계적 주요에 너지기관들의 데이터와 전망치들을 비판적으로 검토함으로써 2010년, 2020년의 중국의 석유 및 천연가스 수급상황을 예측하였다. 검토결과 두 개의 자원모두 국내생산의 한계 ─ 석유는 원천적 공급의 한계, 천연 가스는 인프라 부족으로 인한 공급의 한계 ─ 로 해외자원에의 의존도 가 급증할 수밖에 없음이 확인되었다. 이로 인해 중국의 거대에너지수 요는 세계시장과 자원을 둘러싼 국가간 관계에 커다란 압력요인이 될 것으로 판단되었다. 이리하여 석유와 천연가스 모두에 있어서 현재의 고수요가 지속될 것으로 판단되는 2010년 시점에 커다란 수급병목이 야기될 것으로 보인다. 석유는 비탄력적 국제시장과의 긴장된 상호작용 이 이루어질 수밖에 없으며, 천연가스는 공급 인프라의 부족으로 국내 외로! 부터의 공급제약이 현저해질 것이다. 그리하여 이미 2010년 시 점에 가격 및 공급안정성 모두에 걸쳐 한 차례의 에너지파동이 중국을 중심으로 발생할 가능성이 아주 높다. 특히 중국의 석유수요는 국제시장구조의 변용 ─ 비 OPEC 생산확대 의 비탄력성과 OPEC 판매자시장으로의 전화 ─ 과 더불어 중국의 성 장을 둔화시키는 커다란 정치적, 경제적 압력요인이 될 것으로 보인다. 특히 문제는 대외적 영역에서 더욱 증폭될 가능성이 크다. 즉 상시적인 대외적인 공급핍박과 자원을 둘러싼 정치적 갈등은 그 만큼 커질 것이 다. 에너지공급원, 해상수송로 등의 안정적 확보를 둘러싼 갈등은 더욱 커질 것으로 보이는데, 동아시아도 갈등의 예외는 되지 못할 것이며 특히 해상수송로와 해양자원을 둘러싸고 갈등은 더욱 커질 것이다. 이러 한 점에서 중국자신을 포함해 미국, 일본 등 거대 에너지소비국들은 해 외 에너지의 안정적 공급선을 확보하기 위해에너지안보전략을 본격 화하고 있다. 그러나 여기에서 한 가지 지적해 두어야 할 점이 있다. 즉 에너지안보혹은 에너지 문제가 중심이 되는 동아시아안보경쟁이 초래할 수밖에 없는 딜레마가 그것이다. 이러한 점에서 중국에너지 문 제에 대한 국민국가 차원의 안보적 대응은 문제의 해결이 아니라 문제 를 보다 복잡하고 해결하기 어려운 국면으로 악화시키게 될 것이다. 결 국 이 딜레마를 피하려면 동아시아경제의 안정적 발전에 가장 중요한 기초자원인 에너지 분야를 중심으로 하는 기능적 협력과, 중국의 지속 성장 및 동아시아경제의 안정적 발전을 가능하게 할 동아시아국가간의 경제정책협조를 연계하는 포괄적 지역협력과 같은 실천적 방안이 필요 하다

Foreign Direct Investment and "Trilateral" Industrial Policy: Japan"s Foreign Direct Investment Policies toward the ASEAN in the 1980s

This paper is analyzing the characteristics of Japan"s foreign economic policies, particularly foreign direct investment policies in the 1980s that had deepened the asymmetric relations between Japan and the Southeast Asian nations. These policies, which can be called "trilateral" industrial policy, indicate the coherent industrial policies pursued in the relations between Japan"s government and domestic industries, and Japan-based subsidiaries in the ASEAN, and finally the ASEAN governments as the host government. The processes of the policies may demonstrate that with the large-scale foreign direct investment of private corporations in the 1980s, Japan" state-industry relation characterized as the industrial policy relation was also positively internationalized. This paper argues three points as follows. First, Japan" FDI in the ASEAN during the 1980s was politically induced within the framework of Japan"s industrial policy and by its networks rather than voluntarily evolved in the respect of choosing the host countries. Second, Japan"s . government guided the operation of Japan-based subsidiaries with the mechanisms of the industrial policy(administrative guidance and subsidy systems, etc.) for their smooth adaptation in the region. Third, for the successful transformation of its own domestic economy(the upgrade of domestic production and the promotion of FDI of the standardized production) and the facilitation of the local production of Japan-based subsidiaries, Japan"s government gave rise to structural restrictions in the ASEAN government"s option of the policies by intervening in the local economic policies as well as by trying to transplant Japanese industrial policy to this region. These arguments show that FDI of Japanese corporations in the ASEAN during the 1980s was promoted within the framework of the "collusion" with its home-country"s policies, and for this reason the ASEAN economies, as a base of foreign production/export deeply dependent on Japan"s national interest, may face serious structural problems

Energy Transition and International Natural Gas Order: Shale Gas and U.S. Hegemony of Gas

기후변화 국제체제의 논의가 보편화되면서 탈석유 에너지이행의 목표가 분명해지고 있고, 국제석유시장도 지금까지 4개의 주기(週期)를 거쳐 정치경제적인 석유정점효과 (peak oil effect)를 보이고 있다. 한편 에너지이행은 20세기 미국 석유패권, 즉 자유시장 국제석유질서를 쇠퇴하도록 하고 전세계에 걸쳐 에너지지정학 질서를 야기하고 있다. 한편 에너지이행의 근본목표로 원자력이나 재생가능에너지가 주목되고 있다. 그러나 원자력은 그 위험성과 실질적인 고비용으로, 그리고 재생가능에너지는 기술적 상용화의 어려움으로 대안에너지가 될 수 없다. 이 상황에서 당면한 가교연료(bridge fuel)로, 화석연료지만 배출부담이 작고 매장량이 풍부한 천연가스가 주목받고 있다. 그러나 전통(conventional) 가스는 러시아 및 중동의 자원민족주의 카르텔의 고가격정책으로 적극적 역할을 하지 못하고 있다. 이 상황에서 게임 체인저로 등장한 것이 미국의 셰일가스(shale gas)개발이다. 현재 셰일가스는 미국과 메이저들에 의하여 개발이 주도되고 있다. 막대한 매장량으로 볼 때 미국의 후원 하에 메이저들이 전세계적인 개발을 한다면, 세계에너지질서가 크게 변화할 것이다. 특히 석유패권을 상실한 미국은 셰일가스개발로 새 에너지패권을 창출하려고 하는데, 기본적으로 천연가스 자유시장질서를 추구한다. 그러나 21세기 미국 가스패권은 20세기 석유패권과 구조가 다르다. 그 하위 체계로서 러시아 등 자원보유국 카르텔, 그리고 중국 셰일가스의 개발을 위한 미·중 간협력적 거버넌스를 포함할 수 있기 때문이다. The destination of energy transition from oil and fossil fuel has become a lot lessambiguous as an international system has been widely considered as a measure to cope with climate change. International oil market also seems to show politico-economic peak oil after four cycles. Energy transition from oil has begun. On the one hand, it has brought about fundamental and global geopolitical change by bringing decline of free marketinternational oil system, that is, decline of the oil hegemony of the U.S. in the 20th century. On the other hand, more attention has been given to atomic or renewable energy resources as the ultimate destination of energy transition. However, neither could be a viable alternative due to enormous risk and incredibly high practical-costs or due to technological barriers in the universal use. Natural gas has been, accordingly, considered as bridge fuelbecause of its abundant reserves and less emission of greenhouse gases. Conventional natural gas, however, cannot play a positive role as bridge fuel due to high price policies of cartelized resources nationalism of Russia and the Middle East countries. The development of shale gas by the U.S. has emerged as a game changer in these conditions. The U.S. and international energy majors have been initiating shale gas development. Considering the enormous reserves of shale gas, global development of shale gas by energy majors under the sponsorship of the U.S. could drastically change the landscape of international energy supply. The U.S., which has lost its oil hegemony, tries to create a new energy hegemony through shale gas development. The U.S. basically favors 'natural gas free market.' The structure of American gas hegemony in the 21st century will be different from that of American oil hegemony of the 20th century; The structure perforce includes, as substructures, cartels of resource rich countries including Russia. There should exist a free market of governance including cooperative governance between the U.S. and China for the development of Chinese shale gas.이 논문은 2011년 정부(교육과학기술부)의 재원으로 한국연구재단의 지원을 받아 수행된 연구임(NRF-2011-330-B00033)

일본의 '새로운 아시아주의': 그 사회경제적 기반과 성격

This paper analyses the socio-economic basis of Japanese "New Asianism (NA)" caused after the 1990s. To sum up, the results of this analysis are as below. First, NA is defined as the trend of diplomatic ideas that lowers the significance of the strategic alliance between U.S. and Japan in the post-war era, and regards Asian region as a focal strategic option of Japan. Second, NA is characterized by the following: ① it stems from the ideas of "economic nationalism," intending to maintain Japan in the position of global economic power and to maximize her own national interests through regional economic integration, ② its actual, nearly complete representation is the type of so called "ribeinyua(離米入亞), which means "gradually separating Japan from U.S. influence and, putting Japan in Asia," ③ it includes two logically rival understandings on the scope of "Asian region" based on different attitudes to China, and ④ it is grounded on a Neo-Mercantilist ideas, the so called "flying geese model" that places Japan in structurally salient position apart from Asia in the hierarchy of Asian division of labor, and includes intention to change Asian region to an exclusive market or overseas production base of Japanese industries. Third, NA is established by the following three international conditions: ① Japan"s strategic response to rapid neoliberal globalization, ② the mismatch and the strengthening conflict in the level of governments" or ruling parties" orientation between U.S. and Japan ③ the restricted political options of Asian countries and their growing reliance on Japan"s proactive supportive role during Asian economic crisis. Finally, NA has its own socio-economic basis, the support of Japanese industries and the structural effect of international networks of Japanese industries. In the point of industries" support, ①the actual integration of Asian region by a huge sum of Japanese foreign direct investment(FDI) and immense financing of Japanese private banks in 1980s and 1990s gave rise to the general trends of NA in Japanese domestic politics, ② NA evolves to the concrete policies, "the internationalization of Yen" and "Free Trade Agreements", by distinct demands on institutionalization of economic integration from the overall leading industries, followed by the "more harmed industries" , i.e., steel, automobile, chemistry, and machinery for minimizing the risk of global economy in the situation of Asian economic crisis. Furthermore, the structure of intra vertical networks of Japanese industries between Japan and Asian region, formed in the mid 1990s, influence NA to strengthen its Neo-Mercantilist nature

Globalization and the Dilemma of Japanese Production System?: The Globalization Strategy of Japanese Automobile Industry and Toyota Case

본 논문은 토요타자동차를 중심으로 일본자동차산업의 세계화전략을 살펴보았다. 1990년대후반부터 본격화된 일본자동차산업의 세계화전략은 크게 세 개의 국면으로 구별된다. 본 논문은 세계화에 대한 일본형 (생산양식적) 대응이야말로 일본자본주의의 강점을 잘 보여주는 전략이었다고 본다. 최근 토요타 실패의 경우는 그 반증(反證)이다. 즉 토요타의 사례는 지나치게 빠른 속도로 세계제패전략을 추구한 나머지, 영미형 경영기법과 대기업주의로 스스로의 강점인 토요타주의, 계열생산 등 일본형 생산양식을 부정한 경우이다. 결국 대기업주의적인 토요타의 실패 사례야말로 세계화와 일본형 생산방식의 잠재적 정합성을 보여주는 것이며, 토요타의 실패는 스스로가 제2국면에 천작했던 진정한 제조업주의(사상)로 복귀했을 때 정정 가능할 것이다. 이와 관련하여 토요타와 함께 제2국면을 만들어낸 혼다의 사례는 주목할만하다. 즉 혼다는 불확실성과 불안정성 속에서도 세계화에 성공적으로 안착하고 있다. 혼다는 무리한 세계제패전략을 추구하지 않았고, 나름의 속도와 규모기준을 유지하면서 일본형 생산양식을 차분히 적용, 확대해간 경우이다. 위기요인을 상시적으로 내포한 세계화에 대한 보다 강한 적응력은 단기적 양적, 이익기준에 따르는 영미형 시장 자본주의보다, 생산네트워크간의 효괒거인 소통과 탄련적 조정을 전제로 하는 협력적 자본주의에서 발견된다. This study examines the globalizalion strategy of Japanese automobile induslty with the special focus on Toyo1a case. Japanese automobile industry has actively engaged in The globalizalion of produclion networks since the late 1990s, but with distinct phases. Toyolas globalization strategy has evolved from the emphasis on the Japanese way of production 10 the negotiation of it through the adoption of the Anglo-Saxon cosmopolitan model. Yet，the abandonment of Japanese way of production has led 10 the significant failure of Toyotas global production strategy which is readily observable in recent events. Toyota's failure is in sharp contrast to the Honda case, which has been successfully able to globalize itself by keeping and expanding the Japanese way of production. This different trajectory of Japanese automobile firms reveals that the Japanese cooperative capitalism, which emphasizes thc communication among and mutual adaptability of production networks, enjoys better resilience than the Anglo-Saxon market capitalism in dealing with the uncertainty of global production.이 논문은 2008년 정부(교육과학기슬부)의 재원으로 한국학술진흥재단의 지원을 받아 수행된 연구임(KRF-2008-B00005

Japan, and the Southeast Asian Regionalism : A Historical Perspective

Closely allying with Japan, the ASEAN countries have come to the fore as an active player in international politics since the mid-1980s. This article tries to address one of the recent characteristics of the Southeast Asian regionalism (the Japan depended integrative tendency) by historically analyzing the general patterns of Japan"s ASEAN policies, the correlation between Japan"s Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) and the political-economic process of the ASEAN economic integration, the development of multi-layer relationship between the two regions into political alliance, and finally the characteristics and outlook of this alliance in the context of the Asia-Pacific international politics. This article argues that the Japan-ASEAN relations consist of the triple-layer political-economic structures. First, Japan"s foreign (economic) policies toward the ASEAN have been strategically pursued in crucial foreign policy areas, i. e., mutual confidence building/interchange, the cooperation over political-security issues, official aid (ODA) and FDI. Second, the ASEAN governments" efforts for regional economic integration, having resulted in the collective political tendencies for development of this region, have relied on Japan from the late 1970s. Third, on the basis of the two above aspects, the political alliance between the two regions has systematically grown in the international political arena (regional security issues, the politics in the APEC processes, etc.). This article also points out that the Japan depended Southeast Asian regionalism may encounter fundamental problems, due to the possibility of inter-region cleavage springing from the dynamics of the economic basis (FDI of Japan) of this political alliance, and to the contradiction of Japan"s regional strategy deepened by the rapidly changing international politics within the APEC

Japan`s "expansionist" neomercantilist strategy and foreign direct investment policies : Japan`s transformation of industrial structure and foreign direct investment in the ASEAN during the 1980s

학위논문(박사)--서울大學校 大學院 :政治學科,1996.Docto

The Political Economy of the North American Free Trade Agreement: its Characters and Achievements

This study examines the historical background of the NAFTA of 1994, negotiation targets and strategies of each country involved, its impact on the world economy as a whole, and its successes and failures over the past three years. While the three North American countries succeeded in establishing a free trade area based on reciprocity in the context of deepening economic competition in the world economy, the objectives of each country in this process slightly differ each other: The United States places more emphasis on a political objective-the stabilization of Mexico; Mexico is more interested in obtaining financial resources for remolding the existing economic development model; and Canada tried to avoid the possible economic disadvatages due to the boycott. After the three year economic experiment, the effect of trade creation within the trade area and intra-industry trade have been enhanced, whereas the trade disputes among the members still remain high. But the possibility of developing the NAFTA into the AFTA seems to be modest at the moment