We analyze the effectiveness of capital control in 2000’s by using EPFR (Emerging Portfolio Fund Research) dataset. In the chapter 2, we first summarize the status of emerging countries’ capital control before and after 2000. International capital flows have been increased since 1990’s. The global financial crisis after Lehman Brother’s collapse has interrupted the international capital flows since 2008. The capital flows to emerging markets, however, have resumed after the global financial crisis. The two main reasons of increasing capital flows to emerging markets are the increased liquidity due to monetary easing during crisis and the relative resiliency of emerging countries’ growth. Brazil, Chile, Columbia, Malaysia and Thailand introduced capital controls in 1990’s and Brazil, Columbia, Croatia, Thai, Indonesia and Korea has used capital controls in 2000’s. In particular, the number of countries, that is imposing, capital controls, increased after the Global financial crisis due to emerging concerns about sudden stop’s of foreign capital flows.
In chapter 3, we analyze the capital flows before and after capital controls imposed in selected countries. We select the countries with enough time-series data after the capital controls in order to have meaningful analyses. They are Brazil, Columbia, Thailand, Indonesia and Korea. We find that capital inflows in our sample countries do not show any statistically meaningful changes after imposing the capital controls in general. The capital flows to bond funds of Columbia has been contracted after capital control, but the capital flows to other countries have even been increased after capital controls.
In Chapter 4, we analyze the effectiveness of capital controls with the controlling variables including international capital markets’ variations and domestic macroeconomic and financial market variations. We could not find the statistically meaningful effects of capital controls on the capital flows or the capital market variations. As an exception, the forward position regulation of Korea has reduced the capital flows to bond funds. All capital controls have not affected the volatility of stocks or foreign exchange markets. The international capital markets’ volatility has affected the capital flows in most countries. If the domestic capital market is less volatile than the international markets, then the international capital flows into that country.
The capital controls in general could not have not affected the capital inflows, so it is more important to reduce the domestic market’s volatility. We only find 2 cases of statistically meaningful regulations of capital controls out of 7 cases. Therefore, we recommend to focus on policies of the domestic market stabilization in order to stabilize the capital flows.

제1장 서 론
1. 연구의 필요성 및 목적
2. 선행연구와의 차별성
3. 연구방법 및 구성

제2장 국제 단기자본 유출입 및 규제 동향
1. 단기자본의 이동
가. 단기자본의 범위
나. 자본유입에 대한 기존 문헌 연구
2. 글로벌 금융위기 이후의 자본이동
가. 신흥국으로의 자본유입
나. 금융위기 이후 자본유입의 원인
3. 단기자본규제 사례
가. 자본규제 유형
나. 2000년대 이전 자본규제 사례
다. 2000년대 이후 자본규제 사례

제3장 국제단기자본 유입규제 전후 추세 분석
1. 분석대상
가. 신흥국의 자본규제
나. 분석 대상 사례
2. 자료 및 분석방법
가. 자료
나. 분석방법
3. 분석결과
가. 브라질
나. 콜롬비아
다. 태국
라. 인도네시아
마. 한국
4. 소결

제4장 국제 단기자본 유출입 결정요인 및 규제 효과 분석
1. 자본유입 결정요인
2. 자료 및 분석방법
가. 자료
나. 분석방법
3. 분석결과
가. 브라질
나. 콜롬비아
다. 태국
라. 인도네시아
마. 한국
4. 소결

제5장 결 론

참고문헌

Executive Summary