본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기
kiep logo

Contents

Citation

Citation
No Title

Abstract

Korea and the United States declared the start of negotiations for the establishment of a free trade agreement. The FTA will include investment chapter. That means the Korea-US BIT (Bilateral Investment Treaty) talk, which has been deadlocked since 1998, resumes as a part of FTA negotiations. The FTA investment chapter will be based on the US model BIT, which has been updated in 2004. The updated BIT version includes labor clause which provides that parties should not weaken labor standards in an effort to attract foreign investment. This clause is grounded on the criticism raised by labor groups which asserts that competition among countries to attract foreign investment leads to bidding wars in labor standards. No solid evidence is found in support of the hypothesis that foreign investors favor countries with lower labor standards. Nonetheless, some countries have offered special incentives to investors that limit labor rights in the belief that doing so would help attract foreign investment, especially in export processing or special economic zones. In this regard, the Korea's Act on free economic zones which provides exceptional labor standards to foreign invested enterprise in those zones may become an issue in reaching the FTA. This article contemplates the “not lowering labor standards” provision in the US BIT model and its implications on the FTA talks with the US.

JEL classification: F1, F10, F13

Keywords

Bilateral Investment Treaty, FTA, Race to the bottom, Labor Standards, Free Economic Zones

Language

Korean

References

  1. Kim, K.-H. 1998. “Bilateral Investment Treaties of the United States: Implication and prospects of the BIT between Korea and the U.S.” Working Paper 98-03, Seoul: Korea Institute for International Economic Policy. (in Korean)
  2. Hur, J. J. 2003a. “FTA, Labor Standards, and Labor Market,” Korea Review of Applied Economic, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 41-71. (in Korean)
  3. Hur, J. J. 2003b. “An Analysis on Articles of Working Conditions and Labor-Management Relations in the Act on Designation and Management of the Free Economic Zones,” Monthly Labor Bulletin, vol. 2003, no. 22, pp. 53-67. (in Korean)
  4. Korean Confederation of Trade Unions. 2002. A Critical Assessment of the Proposition on Designation and Management of the Free Economic Zones, Seoul: Korean Confederation of Trade Unions. (in Korean)
  5. International Labor Office. 2001. Follow-up and Promotion on the Tripartite Declaration of Principles concerning Multinational Enterprises and Social Policy. Geneva.
  6. Kucera, David. 2001. "The effects of core workers rights on labor costs and foreign direct investment: Evaluating the conventional wisdom." Discussion paper No. 130. Geneva: ILO.
  7. Moran, Theodore H. 2003. Reforming OPIC for the 21st Century. Washington, D.C.: Institute for International Economies.
  8. OECD. 1996. Trade, Employment, and Labor Standards: A Study of Core Workers' Rights and International Trade. Paris.
  9. OECD. DAFFE/MAI/RD(96)49.
  10. OECD. DAFFE/MAI/RD(96)54.
  11. OECD. Multilateral Agreement on Investment: Consolidated Text and Commentary (DAFFE/MAI(98)7). Paris.
  12. OECD. 2000. International Trade and Core Labor Standards. Paris.
  13. Rodrik, Dani. 1996. "Labor standards in international trade: Do they matter and what do we know about them." In R. Lawrence, D. Rodrik and J. Whalley (eds.) Emerging Agenda for Global Trade: High Stakes for Developing Countries. Washington, D.C.: Overseas Development Council.
  14. UNCTAD. 2002. World Investment Report 2002. Geneva.
  15. INTERNET SITE. www.naftaclaims.com CrossRef
  16. INTERNET SITE. www.ilo.org/public/english/dialogue/sectors/themes/epz.htm CrossRef