The year 2011 marked the 10th anniversary of the free trade agreement (FTA) between Korea and the European Union (EU). The Korea-EU FTA was Korea’s first FTA with a major trading partner and the first case of the EU’s “next generation”FTAs.At the 10th anniversary of its entry into force, this report looks back on the meaning of the Korea-EU FTA and analyzes its impact on the bilateral economic relationship between the two economies.

Followingthe entry into force of the FTA, Korea’s export to the EU stagnated, while Korea’s import from the EU increased, particularly during the eurozone crisis in 2011-2013. Among the EU member countries, Korea’s major export partners include not only large Western European countries such as Germany, United Kingdom and the Netherlands, but also the Central and Eastern European Countries (CEECs) such as Poland, Slovakia and Czech Republic.In particular, Korea’s export to the latter countries increased substantially after the FTA enteredinto force.Also, Korea’s import from the CEECs more than tripled after the entry into force of the FTA, though Western Europe’s share still remained much larger. Industrial products take a large share both in Korea’s export to and import from the EU, while consumer products and high-tech equipment also take a big share in Korea’s import from the EU. Both Korea’s export to and import from the EU diversified after the entry into force of the FTA.

The EU is the second largest (about 14 percent) foreign investor in Korea and the largest destination (about 41 per cent) of Korea’s investment abroad. The EU’s investment in Korea was larger than investment the other way around before the FTA, but the opposite becametrue after the FTA. Western Europe receives most of Korea’s investment in the EU, but Poland and Hungary’s share is rapidly increasing in recent years. The EU’s investment in Korea comes mostly from Western Europe and Malta. While Korea’s investment in the EU is concentrated in services (about 62 per cent), manufacturing’s share is rapidly increasing in recent years. The EU’s investment in Korea is more balanced between services (about 53 per cent) and manufacturing (about 44 per cent).

This report’s econometric analyses show that the FTA increased Korea’s aggregateexport to and investment in the EU, especially in the CEECs. The FTA is estimated to have reduced Korea’s export to the EU in some industries, which can be explained by Korean manufacturers’ relocation abroad, including to the EU.As for Korea’s import from the EU, the FTA is estimated to have increased the volume from western Europe and diversity from the CEECs. This latter effect is likely to have lowered the import price and strengthened the supply chain of Korea.

This report presents four industries as showcases of the FTA’s role in strengthening the bilateral economic relationship between Korea and the EU, namely the automotive, battery for electronic cars, semiconductor and pharmaceutical industries. In the automotive industry, intra-industry trade has increased substantially after the FTA. Korea’s import of final products (e.g., cars) has increased, and Korean car makers’ production in the EU, especially in the CEECs, has increased, which is reflected in the increase of Korea’s intermediate goods, resulting in an increase of Korean car makers’ market share in the EU. In the electronic-car battery industry, where the rapidly increasing demand and short supply in the EU leaves a substantial excessive demand, Korean manufacturers fill the gap, not only by exporting the final product, but also building production facilities in the EU. This likely contributes to the European Green Deal. In the semiconductor industry, where Korea’s sourcing of capital goods and inputswas heavily concentrated, suppliers from the EU helped Korea to diversify its supply chain. In pharmaceuticals, Korea’s fast reaction to the surge in demand for the necessary equipment in the EU during the COVID-19 pandemic helped the EU’s fight against the pandemic.

To shed some light on the future development of the Korea-EU FTA, this report analyzes three recent trade agreements entered into bythe EU, namely the EU-Canada Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA), EU-Singapore FTA and EU-Japan Economic Partnership Agreement(EPA). CETAtook a balanced approach in market liberalization in agriculture, abolished tariffs on manufactured goods and liberalized services and public procurement. Unlike in Canada’s other trade agreements which adopted investor-state dispute settlement(ISDS) clauses, CETA adopted the EU’s Investment Court System (ICS) as its investment dispute settlement mechanism. During the ratification process of the EU-Singapore FTA, the European Court of Justice decided that investment is a shared competence, not the EU’s exclusive competence. This led to separate agreements for trade and investment. The EU-Singapore FTA allows for cumulation of ASEAN in its rules of origin. It is also the first of the EU’s FTAs to include provisions on corporate social responsibility (CSR).The main interest of the EU in the EU-Japan EPA was to lower the non-tariff barriers (NTBs) withinJapan.The EPA took a gradual approach in market liberalization in agriculture, abolished tariffs on manufactured goods and substantially reduced the NTBs. It is also the first trade agreement to incorporate the Paris Agreement. As for investor protection, it failed to come to an agreement due to the difference in preference between the EU (ICS) and Japan (ISDS). The two parties also agreed to continue discussion on digital trade and data protection. Considering the features of these agreements, the Korea-EU FTA may, in the future, include more normative features such as the Paris Agreement, CSR and ESG (Environment, Social, Governance). Also, the EU is likely to push for the ICS as the investment dispute settlement mechanism.

This report also analyzes some of the EU’s requests for revision of the FTA, namely on direct transport and re-entry after repair. On direct transport, the EU requested to change the current, single consignment criterion to non-manipulation criterion to allow separate transport from third countries. The EU requested to abolish tariffs on goods re-entering after repair, especially for aircrafts. The EU argues that Korea will benefit from the increased competition in the market for such services. These issues are likely to be raised again in the future.

Within the framework of the TSD chapter of the FTA, the EU argued that Korea’s domestic legislations violated the ILO principles and that Korean government did not makedue efforts to ratify the ILO core conventions. The two sides started official discussions on this issue in January 2019, and an expert panel was requested in July 2020. To resolve this issue, Korea made major changes in the corresponding legislations and ratified the ILO core conventions.

This report finishes with proposals infour areas for further deepening the economic cooperation between Korea and the EU beyond the FTA, namely hydrogen economy, digital economy, start-up and audio-visual co-production.