This study comprehensively analyzes cross-border investment and spillover effects of artificial intelligence (AI) technology in the era of the 21st century’s paradigm shift toward an intangible asset-centered economy, and proposes policy directions for enhancing Korea’s AI industrial competitiveness. The research particularly focuses on exploring effective response strategies that technology-follower countries like Korea can adopt in a situation where global AI investment is extremely concentrated in the United States and China.

Examining the research background, the proportion of intangible assets in the market value of major global companies has surged from 17% in 1975 to 90% in 2020, with global AI investment reaching approximately $252.3 billion in 2024, a 17-fold increase from 2013. However, while the United States accounts for over 60% of global AI investment, Korea represents merely 1.5-2.0%, revealing an extreme polarization of technological hegemony with 93% of AI-related patents concentrated in the US and China. In this context, although Korea possesses successful technology catch-up experience in manufacturing sectors from the past, the AI era’s technological competition presents fundamentally different challenges due to the characteristics of intangible assets—high initial development costs and near-zero marginal production costs.

Starting from this problem awareness, this study systematically conducted historical experience analysis, global AI investment status surveys, theoretical model construction, and empirical analysis using the GVAR model. Analysis of Korea’s past technology spillover experiences revealed that Samsung Electronics’ case of overcoming a 5.5-year technology gap in the memory semiconductor sector demonstrated the importance of systematic technology partnerships and continuous R&D investment. In the IT hardware sector, economic benefits related to productivity improvement increased approximately 3.7-fold from 76.4 trillion won to 286.4 trillion won during the 2000-2005 period.

Through theoretical model analysis, the study confirmed that when intangible asset investment spillovers occur from technology-leading countries to technology-adopting countries, the adopting countries can achieve higher utility while investing less. Furthermore, under an appropriate spillover royalty system, benefits can accrue to both leading and adopting countries; however, the findings suggest that adopting countries need to maintain continuous intangible asset investment to prepare for potential spillover cessation by leading countries due to narrowing technology gaps.

The empirical analysis using the GVAR model yielded particularly noteworthy results. When Korea experienced an AI-related FDI outflow shock, domestic real GDP increased by 0.33%, while FDI inflow shocks resulted in only a 0.19% increase, confirming that technology acquisition through overseas investment may show stronger economic correlations. Stock indices showed a positive response of 0.75% to FDI outflow shocks and a negative response of -1.61% to FDI inflow shocks, indicating that markets tend to positively evaluate overseas AI investment from the perspective of securing future competitiveness.

Synthesizing these analytical results, this study presents the following policy implications. First, considering that overseas AI investment shows stronger economic correlations than domestic investment attraction, it is necessary to establish an institutional foundation that supports Korean companies’ investments and joint ventures with global AI companies and facilitates the return of acquired technology and talent to Korea. Second, given the 83-fold investment gap with the United States, rather than competing in all AI fields, a strategy of selection and concentration in specific areas such as AI hardware-software convergence that leverages Korea’s strengths in manufacturing and IT hardware capabilities is required. Third, while effectively utilizing technology spillovers, Korea must maintain an appropriate level of independent intangible asset investment to prepare for potential technology blockades by leading countries. Fourth, Korea should pursue a balance between international cooperation and independent innovation by strengthening partnerships with the United States while also participating in the establishment of AI technology cooperation networks within the Northeast Asian region.

In conclusion, this study suggests that for Korea to bridge the technology gap in the AI era and secure sustainable competitiveness, it needs to reinterpret past success patterns to fit the characteristics of the AI era and adopt a differentiated approach through selection and concentration. Particularly, an integrated strategy linking technology acquisition through overseas investment with the construction of a domestic innovation ecosystem is required, along with the establishment of a flexible policy framework capable of responding to the rapidly changing global AI technology environment.

국문요약

제1장 서론
1. 연구의 배경
2. 연구의 목적
3. 선행연구 검토
4. 연구의 구성

제2장 선도국과 한국의 무형 기술 투자 정책의 현황과 방향
1. 도입
2. 과거 기술이전 및 스필오버(기술확산) 사례
3. 글로벌 무형자산 중 AI 투자 현황
4. 국가별 AI 정책
5. 정책적 시사점

제3장 무형자산 투자 스필오버 효과의 거시 모형
1. 서론
2. 두 국가 모형에서의 무형자산 투자 스필오버 효과
3. 스필오버와 내생적 무형자산 투자
4. 무형자산 스필오버 사용료와 기술 선도국 채택국 게임
5. 모수 설정 실험
6. 소결

제4장 A.I. 관련 FDI 충격의 다국가 파급효과 실증적 분석
1. 서론
2. 글로벌 벡터자기회귀(GVAR) 모형의 방법론
3. 실증분석 모형 설계 및 데이터
4. 실증분석 결과 및 정책적 시사점
5. 소결

제5장 결론
1. 연구 결과의 요약
2. 정책적 시사점
3. 연구의 의의와 기여 및 향후 연구 방향

참고문헌

부록
1. AI 관련 NACE Rev. 2와 US SIC 코드 분석
2. FDI Flow의 기술 통계(descriptive statistics)
3. 주요국의 FDI 유출입 흐름
4. 국가별 단위근 및 공적분 지속성 프로파일
5. GVAR 모형 추정의 나머지 결과: 한국과 미국

Executive Summary