博士論文審査報告書

全文

(1)早稲田大学大学院アジア太平洋研究科. 博士論文審査報告書論原題名 Original Title. 英訳 In Japanese. 文. アセアンと経済統合―外貨投資資源の実効性に関する実証分析 ―. 申. 名. Name 学籍番号 Student ID. 目. ASEAN and Economic Integration: An Empirical Analysis on Effectiveness of Investment Sources as Foreign Exchange. 姓 Last Name. 氏. 題. 請. 者. Middle Name. YOO. 名 First Name. Jung-Geun 4008S315. ２０１７年６月. 0.

(2) 1. Overview of the dissertation The member countries of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) have achieved high economic growth in recent decades. As a result of high economic growth, ASEAN and its member countries have been attracting a lot of attention of many observers including policy makers, business people, media people, and researchers. Main drivers of rapid economic growth have been argued to be international trade and foreign direct investment (FDI), which grew rapidly in tandem and by interacting each other. Against this background this dissertation attempts to examine the patterns of foreign trade and FDI in ASEAN and to identify the factors affecting foreign trade and FDI. There are several important aspects that are focused in the study. One is institutional arrangement involving ASEAN. Specifically, free trade agreements (FTAs), which remove barriers on trade between the members, are taken up and their impacts on trade and FDI are analyzed in detail by applying various econometric methods. Another aspect that is included in the analysis is the role of official development assistance (ODA) in promoting trade and FDI and in achieving economic growth. Although ODA has been given an attention in discussing its possible importance in affecting economic growth, rigorous empirical examination of its role has been limited. Main findings of the study include the following. First, ASEAN’s dependence on intra-regional trade as opposed to extra-regional trade is more limited compared to other regional groupings such as the European Union (EU) and ASEAN+6 (China, Japan, South Korea, India, Australia, New Zealand). Second, the impacts of ASEAN’s FTAs, which include AFTA (intra-ASEAN FTA) and five ASEAN+1 FTAs (ASEAN’s FTAs individually/separately with China, Japan, South Korea, India, and Australia-New Zealand), on its trade are found to be mixed. Specifically, trade creation effect of ASEAN’s FTAs cannot be detected clearly, while strong trade diversion effect is found. Third, ASEAN’s FTAs are found to promote inflows of FDI for the members in early stage of development but not for other members. Fourth, for ASEAN NICs (Malaysia, the Philippines, and Thailand), ODA and FDI are shown to have contributed to their economic growth.. 2. Chapter Outline and Contents of Dissertation. The chapter outline of the dissertation is as follows:. Chapter I. Introduction Chapter II. Cultural and Economic Overview of ASEAN 1.

(3) Chapter III. Effectiveness Review of ASEAN Integration: Comparative Analysis with Other Major Economic Communities Chapter IV. An Empirical Analysis of ASEAN’s FTA Effects on Trade Flows Chapter V. An Empirical Analysis of ASEAN’s FTA Effects on Inward FDI to ASEAN Chapter VI. Official Development Assistance, Foreign Direct Investment, Exports and Economic Growth in Major ASEAN Countries Chapter VII. Summary and Conclusions.. Chapter I introduces the issues to be examined in the dissertation by providing their background and importance. This dissertation is aimed to examine the importance of ASEAN, a regional institution, in realizing economic growth for ASEAN member countries through the expansion of foreign trade, foreign direct investment (FDI), and official development assistance (ODA). A brief description of the history and evolution of ASEAN is presented, and theoretical underpinnings of the importance of trade, FDI, and ODA in their contribution to economic growth is discussed. Chapter II provides basic economic information of ASEAN member countries, in order to set the stage for a more detailed analysis to be conducted in later chapters. One of the important observations in this chapter is diversity among the ASEAN member countries in various aspects. Particularly, the wide differences in the economic size, economic structures, and the level of economic development are noted. Recognizing the differences, the author classified the ASEAN member countries into five groups based on their economic characteristics: diversified economy (Singapore), ongoing industrialization economy (Thailand, Malaysia, and the Philippines), incipient industrialization economy (Indonesia, Vietnam, and Cambodia), preindustrial economy (Laos, and Myanmar), and resource-rich economy (Brunei). Chapter III examines and compares the importance of foreign trade and the level of intra-regional dependence in trade among ASEAN, ASEAN+6, the EU and the North American Free Agreement (NAFTA) areas. The author finds that the trade to gross domestic product (GDP) ratio is highest for ASEAN, which is followed by ASEAN+6, the EU and the NAFTA, indicating that foreign trade plays an important role in determining economic performance for ASEAN. Turing to the intra-regional trade ratio, which is computed as the ratio of intra-regional trade to region’s overall trade, the value is highest for the EU, which is followed by ASEAN+6, ASEAN, and the NAFTA. A similar pattern of intra-regional dependence is found by using the trade intensity index, which is a more sophisticated measure than intra-regional trade ratio. These findings indicate the importance of non-ASEAN countries in affecting ASEAN’s economic performance. As for FDI inflows, the 2.

(4) author finds that FDI inflows to ASEAN increased continuously, similarly to the trends observed for other regions. Chapter IV undertakes an econometric investigation on the effects of ASEAN’s FTAs on ASEAN’s trade with FTA members, particularly focusing on the trade creation and diversion effects, by applying the gravity model. Using the data covering ASEAN and ASEAN’s 194 trading partners for the 28-year period for 1988-2015, the author conducted a panel regression method. The author finds that ASEAN’s FTAs in general did not promote ASEAN’s trade with FTA members except the case of Korea. In other words, the trade creation effect is not detected. These findings are not consistent with the findings from the previous studies. As for the trade diversion effect, the author finds statistically significant impacts. Chapter V analyzes the impacts of ASEAN’s FTAs on ASEAN’s FDI inflows, using the similar methodology as the one adopted in chapter IV. The author finds that ASEAN+1 FTAs had positive impacts on FDI inflows only for incipient industrialization economy, not for others. Many of the explanatory variables included in the analysis are shown to be not important in explaining FDI inflows to ASEAN. This finding is not consistent with the findings from the previous studies conducted for other groups of countries. Chapter VI examines causal relationship between/among GDP, FDI, exports, and ODA for ASEAN NICs (incipient industrialization economy) by applying the vector auto-regression (VAR) method. An analysis conducted using annual data of 12 years covering 2001-2012 finds that ODA and FDI contributed significantly to GDP, while exports’ contributions are limited. The author argues that these findings are consistent with the observations that East Asia’s rapid growth is attributable to an increase in productivity, which results from FDI inflows, and to the important role of the government in formulating and implementing appropriate policies. Chapter VII summaries the findings from the dissertation.. 3. Discussions of Oral Presentation An oral presentation of the dissertation by the author and the discussions were held on Wednesday, May 10, 2017 in room 314 of Building No. 19. Presentation and discussions lasted approximately two hours. Major points of the discussions are as follows. The author was requested to revise the dissertation with an understanding that the examiners would reexamine a revised version. Possible problems due to an omission of important variables in the analysis of the impacts of ASEAN’s FTAs on ASEAN’s trade in Section 4.5: In the analysis of ASEAN’s FTAs on ASEAN’s trade, the most important FTA, AFTA, was not treated 3.

(5) separately from FTAs in general. This treatment (mistreatment) of AFTA ignores one of the most important points of the analysis, that is, the impact of ASEAN’s economic integration on ASEAN’s trade. This problem was taken care of in a revised version. Possible problem of identification of the impacts of ASEAN’s FTAs in the case of the presence of plural FTAs involving ASEAN and its FTA partners in Section 4.5: Several ASEAN’s FTA partners have plural FTAs with ASEAN. For example, Japan has an FTA covering all ASEAN countries (ASEAN-Japan FTA) as well as bilateral FTAs with several countries such as Japan-Malaysia FTA. In such cases, the impacts of these two FTAs on Malaysia’s trade with Japan cannot be clearly identified. One way to overcome this problem is to obtain and use trade data, which explicitly indicate the FTAs used for trade. This approach was not adopted in the revised version due to the lack of availability of such information. The use of FDI stock variable as a dependent variable in the analysis of the impacts of ASEAN’s FTAs on ASEAN’s FDI inflows in Chapter 5 : FDI stock variable is used as a dependent variable in the analysis of the impacts of ASEAN’s FTAs on ASEAN’s FDI inflows, while explanatory variables are annual flow variables. For example, one important explanatory variable is GDP of the FDI host country for a particular year, say 2001. This information is used to test if GDP has any impacts on inward FDI stock at the end of 2001. Apparently, this does not make sense because inward FDI stock is cumulative value of FDI inflows over the years including 2001, 2000, 1999 and so on. How can one expect GDP in 2001 to have any impacts on FDI inflows in 2000? The author acknowledges the problem, but he pointed out that many previous studies, which are published in reputable economic journals, used FDI stock variable. Considering this point and the time which may be required for the revision using FDI flow variable, the examiners agreed that the current treatment is acceptable. Unit root test and cointegration test in Section 6.3: In the version of the thesis used for the oral defense, the results of unit root tests were reported unclearly and inconsistently. The examiners pointed out those problems, and the authors corrected them in the revised version. However, the current version contains unnecessarily detailed explanations regarding the selection of lag length and the form of the test equation. When the author submits the paper to a journal, it will be better to shorten that part and to simply report the test methods and results. Unit root test, cointegration test and System GMM estimation in Section 6.4: In the version of the thesis used for the oral defense, the panel unit root/cointegration test results were not clearly reported, but they are corrected in the revised version. In addition, it was not clear whether the estimation results were obtained from the system GMM or the OLS in the previous version. In the current version, the author made it clear that the reported 4.

(6) results were obtained by the system GMM. Insufficient explanations and discussions of the empirical results: There are a number of potentially interesting and important findings, but only reporting of the results by the author makes it impossible for these important contributions to be realized. Two examples are presented. In the analysis of the impacts of ASEAN’s FTAs on trade, the author finds significant trade diversion effect. This appears to indicate that ASEAN’s FTAs contribute negatively to world economic growth. Although the validity of this finding has to be tested carefully, this is a very important message for ASEAN as well as for the world. Another example is an interesting finding on the relationship between/among GDP, FDI, exports, and ODA. They differ among the countries examined, Malaysia, the Philippines, and Thailand. Possible reasons for these differences should be discussed. This point was not incorporated in the revision.. 4. Evaluation and the Result of Examination The examiners find that this dissertation makes a number of important and interesting contributions to the research of ASEAN’s foreign trade, FDI and economic growth. According to the examiners, two important contributions can be identified. One is a rigorous examination of ASEAN’s FTAs, particularly ASEAN+1 FTAs, on their impacts on ASEAN’s trade and FDI inflows using the gravity model. ASEAN+1 FTAs have not been rigorously analysed. Another contribution is an examination of the causal relationship between/among GDP, FDI, exports, and ODA for three ASEAN countries using the vector autoregressive model. Despite a strong interest in their relationships, only a few attempts have been made to test the relationships rigorously. Despite these contributions of the dissertation, there remain a number of points/issues that should be further examined, as indicated in section III. Considering the results of careful assessment of the revised dissertation, whose summary is presented in sections I and II of this report, the oral presentation of the dissertation, subsequent discussions and the revised version of the dissertation, the committee members came to a unanimous decision that Jung-Geun Yoo, the author of the submitted dissertation, should be granted a Ph.D.. 5.

(7) 申請者名：. YOO, Jung-Guen. 博士論文審査委員会主査. Chief Examiner：. 氏名 Name: 浦田秀次郎所属 Affiliation: アジア太平洋研究科職位 Ti t l e : 教授学位 D e g r e e : PhD. in Economics 取得大学専門分野 Specialty: 国際経済学副査. ㊞(Signature). Conferred by：. Stanford University. Head Deputy Examiner:. 氏名 Name: 不破信彦㊞(Signature) 所属 Affiliation: 東京大学公共政策大学院職位 Ti t l e : 教授学位 Degree: Ph.D. in Agricultural and Resource 取得大学 Conferred by： University of California, Berkeley 専門分野 Specialty: 開発経済学副査. Economics. Deputy Examiner:. 氏名 Name: 鍋嶋郁㊞(Signature) 所属 Affiliation: アジア太平洋研究科職位 Ti t l e : 准教授学位 D e g r e e : Ph.D. in Economics 取得大学 C o n f e r r e d b y ： University of California, Davis 専門分野 Specialty: 開発経済副査. Deputy Examiner:. 氏名 Name: BAAK, Saang Joon ㊞(Signature) 所属 Affiliation: 国際学術院職位 Ti t l e : 教授学位 Degree: Ph.D. in Economics 取得大学 C o n f e r r e d b y ： University of Wisconsin, Madison 専門分野 Specialty: 国際経済学. ２０１７年６月２４日 6.

(8)