This report examines recent EU industrial and trade policy in relation to Net-Zero strategic technologies and analyzes their impact on the global supply chains. The introduction section places the recent return of industrial policy in historical context and emphasizes the importance of EU policies as a major player in global supply chains. Against this background, this report introduces the recent status of EU policies in Chapter 2, analyzes and compares supply chains of Net-Zero strategic industries in Korea and the EU in Chapter 3, conducts an empirical analysis of policy effects in Chapter 4, and finally draws implications for Korea in Chapter 5.

Chapter 2 introduces the EU's industrial and trade policies related to Net-Zero strategic technologies and compares them with those pursued in major countries. As the EU seeks to transform its entire socio-economic structure to achieve climate neutrality by 2050, it is seeking to strengthen the competitiveness of related industries within the EU while reducing offshore dependence through the Green Deal Industrial Plan. To this end, the government has put forward policies to (1) foster domestic companies such as the Net-Zero Industry Act (NZIA), Critical Raw Materials Act, and temporary subsidy deregulation, and (2) regulate overseas supply chains such as the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism, Foreign Subsidy Regulation, and Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive. Among these, the Net-Zero Industry Act designated Net-Zero strategic technologies in 19 fields, including renewable energy, batteries, hydrogen, and carbon capture, and set local production targets for designated technologies. To achieve this, it provides support measures such as simplifying regulations, creating industry clusters, and fostering human resources. Also, regulating policies require companies to meet the EU’s environmental, labor, human rights, and competition standards before they can trade or partner with EU companies. Similar policies are in place in other major countries around the world, including the United States, China, and Japan, making the measures to combat climate change a trade barrier for other countries.

Chapter 3 then analyzes import and export data by production stage to compare the current status of supply chains in the EU and Korea. We selected 499 items directly or indirectly related to the EU’s Net-Zero strategic technologies and analyzed the overall status of imports and exports, export competitiveness, and import supply chains for each item. While the EU remains competitive in the capital goods sector, it is highly dependent on raw materials and intermediate goods, and the shift in dependence from other countries to China over the past decade has been pronounced. Korea’s supply chain of climate-neutral strategic technology imports is also highly dependent on China, which exposes supply chain vulnerabilities. In particular, the concentration of imports in intermediate and capital goods is getting worse, and the dependence on China for key raw materials for batteries is very high. For both the EU and South Korea, reducing import dependence on specific countries for climate-neutral strategic technologies has emerged as a key challenge.

Chapter 4 utilizes a gravity model to identify the impact of EU policies on bilateral imports and exports of climate neutral strategic technologies. Due to data limitations, the analysis is limited to the period from 2008 to 2021 and does not include the effects of the more recent policies reviewed in Chapter 2. Nevertheless, the results show that the EU’s subsidies, import and export controls, trade defense measures, and government procurement regulations promote intra- EU trade and reduce extra-EU trade. This effect is particularly pronounced in ICT and strategic industries. The above analysis suggests that the EU’s upcoming climate neutrality policies are likely to strengthen intra-EU trade and weaken extra-EU trade. This means that South Korea, a country outside the EU, could also be affected by the EU’s climate neutrality policy.

Finally, Chapter 5 draws policy implications based on the above analysis. While developing countermeasures to minimize the impact of major countries’ industrial and trade policies on the Korean economy, Korea should select and focus on key domestic industries to maintain competitiveness in the global market. In addition, Korea should take full advantage of cooperation opportunities with like-minded countries to build stable supply chains. Specifically, the report suggests policy alternatives such as (1) establishing a control tower led by the Prime Minister to establish an inter-ministerial coordination system; (2) establishing a high-level industrial and trade strategy that encompasses core industries, trade policies, and supply chains; (3) setting targets for local production and diversification of domestic companies and providing support policies; (4) establishing policies for training and exchanging experts in the strategic industry; and (5) cooperating with international allies through bilateral channels. As a mid-sized country, Korea needs both insight into the big picture of global economic flows and wisdom in formulating detailed policies to maintain stable economic growth. We hope that this report will be utilized as a reference for the development of Korean industrial policies.

국문요약

제1장 서론
1. 연구의 배경
2. 연구의 목적, 연구방법론과 구성

제2장 EU의 산업ㆍ통상 정책의 특징
1. EU의 주요 전략 및 정책
2. 주요국 관련 정책과의 비교
3. 최근 동향과 전망

제3장 기후중립 전략기술 공급망 분석
1. 분석 자료 및 방법
2. EU의 기후중립 전략기술 공급망 분석
3. 한국의 기후중립 전략기술 공급망 분석
4. 한국-EU 비교분석

제4장 기후중립 전략기술 육성 정책이 글로벌 공급망에 미치는 영향
1. 분석 모형
2. 분석 자료
3. 분석 결과
4. 소결

제5장 결론 및 시사점
1. 연구 결과 요약
2. 정책 시사점

참고문헌

부록
1. 강건성 검증 실증분석 결과
2. 기후중립 전략산업 품목(ICT, 핵심광물, 전략산업 제외)

Executive Summary