DOCSLIB.ORG

Korea's Economy

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

2014 Overview and Macroeconomic Issues Lessons from the Economic Development Experience of South Korea Danny Leipziger The Role of Aid in Korea's Development Lee Kye Woo Future Prospects for the Korean Economy Jung Kyu-Chul Building a Creative Economy The Creative Economy of the Park Geun-hye Administration Cha Doo-won The Real Korean Innovation Challenge: Services and Small Businesses KOREA Robert D. Atkinson Spurring the Development of Venture Capital in Korea Randall Jones ’S ECONOMY VOLUME 30 Economic Relations with Europe KOREA’S ECONOMY Korea’s Economic Relations with the EU and the Korea-EU FTA apublicationoftheKoreaEconomicInstituteof America Kang Yoo-duk VOLUME 30 and theKoreaInstituteforInternationalEconomicPolicy 130 years between Korea and Italy: Evaluation and Prospect Oh Tae Hyun 2014: 130 Years of Diplomatic Relations between Korea and Italy Angelo Gioe 130th Anniversary of Korea’s Economic Relations with Russia Jeong Yeo-cheon North Korea The Costs of Korean Unification: Realistic Lessons from the German Case Rudiger Frank President Park Geun-hye’s Unification Vision and Policy Jo Dongho Kor ea Economic Institute of America Korea Economic Institute of America 1800 K Street, NW Suite 1010 Washington, DC 20006 KEI EDITORIAL BOARD KEI Editor: Troy Stangarone Contract Editor: Gimga Group The Korea Economic Institute of America is registered under the Foreign Agents Registration Act as an agent of the Korea Institute for International Economic Policy, a public corporation established by the Government of the Republic of Korea. This material is filed with the Department of Justice, where the required registration statement is available for public inspection. Registration does not indicate U.S. Government approval of the contents of this document. KEI is not engaged in the practice of law, does not render legal services, and is not a lobbying organization. The views expressed in this publication are those of the authors. While this monograph is part of the overall program of the Korea Economic Institute of America endorsed by its Officers, Board of Directors, and Advisory Council, its contents do not necessarily reflect the views of individual members of the Board or of the Advisory Council. Copyright © 2015 by the Korea Economic Institute of America. Printed in the United States of America. All Rights Reserved. ISSN 0894-6302 CONTENTS KEI Board of Directors ................................................................................................................................. II KEI Advisory Council .................................................................................................................................. III Preface ........................................................................................................................................................V Overview and Macroeconomic Issues Lessons from the Economic Development Experience of South Korea ..............................................................1 Danny Leipziger The Role of Aid in Korea’s Development .......................................................................................................................7 Lee Kye Woo Future Prospects for the Korean Economy .................................................................................................................27 Jung Kyu-Chul Building a Creative Economy The Creative Economy of the Park Geun-hye Administration ..........................................................................35 Cha Doo-won The Real Korean Innovation Challenge: Services and Small Businesses .....................................................................47 Robert D. Atkinson Spurring the Development of Venture Capital in Korea ....................................................................................55 Randall Jones Economic Relations with Europe Korea’s Economic Relations with the EU and the Korea-EU FTA .....................................................................65 Kang Yoo-duk 130 years between Korea and Italy: Evaluation and Prospect ..........................................................................73 Oh Tae Hyun 2014: 130 Years of Diplomatic Relations between Korea and Italy ...................................................................81 Angelo Gioe 130th Anniversary of Korea’s Economic Relations with Russia ..................................................................................87 Jeong Yeo-cheon North Korea The Costs of Korean Unification: Realistic Lessons from the German Case .....................................................93 Rudiger Frank President Park Geun-hye’s Unification Vision and Policy ..............................................................................101 Jo Dongho KOREA’S ECONOMY 2014 - I KEI BOARD OF DIRECTORS Yoon-Shik Park George Washington University David Steinberg Georgetown University Tae Soo Kang, Ph.D. Former Bank of Korea Official Danny M. Leipziger George Washington University OFFICER The Honorable Donald Manzullo President & CEO iv - KOREA’S ECONOMY Vol. 30 KEI ADVISORY COUNCIL Mr. Bradley Babson His Excellency Tae-sik Lee U.S.-Korea Institute at SAIS Former ROK Ambassador to the U.S. Dr. Claude Barfield Dr. Young-Sun Lee American Enterprise Institute Yonsei University Dr. John Bennett Dr. Wonhyuk Lim Former KEI President Korea Development Institute Dr. Thomas Cargill Mr. Paul McGonagle University of Nevada, Reno Consultant His Excellency Yoon-je Cho The Honorable Mark C. Minton Former Ambassador of the ROK to the UK The Korea Society Dr. Nicholas Eberstadt Dr. G. Mustafa Mohatarem American Enterprise Institute General Motors Corporation Mr. Robert Fallon Dr. Chung-in Moon Phosplatin Therapeutics, LLC Yonsei University Mr. Gordon Flake Dr. Hugh T. Patrick Maureen and Mike Mansfiled Foundation Columbia University The Honorable Thomas Hubbard The Honorable Ernest Preeg McLarty Associates/The Korea Society Advisory Council member The Honorable James A. Kelly Dr. Mitchell Reiss EAP Associates, LLC Washington College Dr. Abraham Kim Mr. Alan Romberg The Maureen and Mike Mansfield Center Henry L. Stimson Center Mr. Andrew B. Kim Dr. Jeffrey R. Shafer Sit/Kim International JRSHAFER Insight Mr. Spencer Kim His Excellency Joun-yung Sun CBOL Corporation UN Association of the ROK Mr. Bruce Klingner Mr. Robert Warne The Heritage Foundation Former KEI President The Honorable James T. Laney Mr. Joseph Winder Emory University Former KEI President Dr. Kirk Larsen Brigham Young University KOREA’S ECONOMY Vol. 30 - v PREFACE December 2015 Dear Readers, We are honored to present to you the 30th edition of Korea’s Economy. Over the past 30 years, this landmark jour- nal has documented the remarkable transformation of the Korean economy and its rapid industrialization as one of Asia’s four “tigers” that began in the 1960s. The raw statistics from the World Bank1 showing a mammoth increase in Korea’s Gross Domestic Product (from $100 billion in 1984 to $1.41 trillion in 2014) and its Gross National Income (on a per capita basis from $2,360 in 1984 to $27,090 in 2014) during the lifetime of this journal do not scratch the surface of the implications of Korea’s rise from the ashes of a devastating war for both the United States and the rest of the world. We trust that this journal has been important in broadening the perspective of individuals interested in the growing role Korea has played in the world economy. For the American audience, the Korea Economic Institute of America (KEI) has also long been in the forefront in drawing back the curtain of the opaque North Korean society and documenting various opportunities and challenges that face possible unification of the Korean Peninsula. This year, the volume contains 12 noteworthy articles written by scholars from both inside and outside of Korea. In light of this milestone edition, the papers discuss Korea’s post-war economic history and implications for the future; key factors needed to foster an environment in Korea that encourages entrepreneurship and innovation to keep this “Miracle on the Han River” growing well into the future; Korea’s deeper economic relations with Europe; and the vi- sion for a united Korean Peninsula and the economic lessons learned from the German reunification experience. KEI, created in 1982, is a U.S.-based non-profit educational organization partnered with the Korea Institute for International Economic Policy (KIEP) dedicated to promoting dialogue and understanding between the Republic of Korea and the United States on economic, policy and security relations. KEI accomplishes its mission through a combination of 10 signature programs and academic journal publications, such as Korea’s Economy, special events, and our website (www.keia.org) and social media presence. For over 25 years, KEI has also sponsored papers at our yearly academic symposium, which are subsequently published in KEI’s annual Joint U.S.-Korea Academic Studies journal. In addition, KEI conducts a wide range of conferences, seminars, and roundtables. These include programs in Washington, D.C., which often feature distinguished thought-leaders from Korea, as well as programs throughout the United States that include scholars, diplomats, key U.S. and Korean government representatives, and occasion- ally the Ambassadors from the two respective countries. We hope that you enjoy this edition of Korea’s Economy. We look forward to continuing to produce objective and timely analysis of issues affecting Korea’s domestic economy and its economic
Recommended publications
  • SOUTH KOREA BETWEEN EAGLE and DRAGON Perceptual Ambivalence and Strategic Dilemma

    SOUTH KOREA BETWEEN EAGLE and DRAGON Perceptual Ambivalence and Strategic Dilemma

    SOUTH KOREA BETWEEN EAGLE AND DRAGON Perceptual Ambivalence and Strategic Dilemma Jae Ho Chung The decade of the 1990s began with the demise of the Soviet empire and the subsequent retreat of Russia from the center stage of Northeast Asia, leaving the United States in a search to adjust its policies in the region. The “rise of China,” escalating cross-strait tension since 1995, North Korea’s nuclear brinkmanship and missile challenges, latent irreden- tism, and the pivotal economic importance of Northeast Asia have all led the United States to re-emphasize its role and involvement in the region.1 This redefinition of the American mission has in turn led to the consolidation of the U.S.-Japan alliance, exemplified by the 1997 Defense Guideline revision, as well as to the establishment of trilateral consultative organizations such as the Trilateral Coordination and Oversight Group (TCOG) among the U.S., Japan, and South Korea. The increasingly proactive posture by the U.S. has, however, generated grave strategic concerns on the part of China and Russia, which have sought to circumscribe America’s hegemonic parameters in Asia both bilaterally and multilaterally (i.e., the formation of the “Shanghai Six” and the Boao Asia Forum, as well as China’s call for an Association of Southeast Asian Nations Jae Ho Chung is Associate Professor of International Relations, Seoul National University, Seoul, Republic of Korea. The author wishes to thank Bruce J. Dickson and Wu Xinbo for their helpful comments on an earlier version. Asian Survey, 41:5, pp. 777–796. ISSN: 0004–4687 Ó 2001 by The Regents of the University of California.
  • South Korea Section 3

    South Korea Section 3

    DEFENSE WHITE PAPER Message from the Minister of National Defense The year 2010 marked the 60th anniversary of the outbreak of the Korean War. Since the end of the war, the Republic of Korea has made such great strides and its economy now ranks among the 10-plus largest economies in the world. Out of the ashes of the war, it has risen from an aid recipient to a donor nation. Korea’s economic miracle rests on the strength and commitment of the ROK military. However, the threat of war and persistent security concerns remain undiminished on the Korean Peninsula. North Korea is threatening peace with its recent surprise attack against the ROK Ship CheonanDQGLWV¿ULQJRIDUWLOOHU\DW<HRQS\HRQJ Island. The series of illegitimate armed provocations by the North have left a fragile peace on the Korean Peninsula. Transnational and non-military threats coupled with potential conflicts among Northeast Asian countries add another element that further jeopardizes the Korean Peninsula’s security. To handle security threats, the ROK military has instituted its Defense Vision to foster an ‘Advanced Elite Military,’ which will realize the said Vision. As part of the efforts, the ROK military complemented the Defense Reform Basic Plan and has UHYDPSHGLWVZHDSRQSURFXUHPHQWDQGDFTXLVLWLRQV\VWHP,QDGGLWLRQLWKDVUHYDPSHGWKHHGXFDWLRQDOV\VWHPIRURI¿FHUVZKLOH strengthening the current training system by extending the basic training period and by taking other measures. The military has also endeavored to invigorate the defense industry as an exporter so the defense economy may develop as a new growth engine for the entire Korean economy. To reduce any possible inconveniences that Koreans may experience, the military has reformed its defense rules and regulations to ease the standards necessary to designate a Military Installation Protection Zone.
  • EU-Korea Convergence and Partnerships 10 Years After the EU-ROK FTA, in the Post Covid Era and Within the US-China Trade War

    EU-Korea Convergence and Partnerships 10 Years After the EU-ROK FTA, in the Post Covid Era and Within the US-China Trade War

    EU-Korea convergence and partnerships 10 years after the EU-ROK FTA, in the post Covid era and within the US-China trade war Asia Centre is delighted to host a distinguished panel to discuss the current status of EU and Republic of Korea partnerships, relations and cooperation on multilateral issues and focused sectors of mutual interest. Please find some of the papers of the authors-speakers on the following pages. CHAIRS: • Lukas MANDL (chairman of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations with the Korean Peninsula) • Jean-François DI MEGLIO (President of Asia Centre) SPEAKERS : Panel 1 : The points of convergence within the analysis of post Covid international relations • Maximilian MAYER (University of Bonn) : introduction • Antoine BONDAZ (FRS, SciencesPo): “The Covid-19 pandemic as a great opportunity for greater EU-Korea coordinAtion And cooperAtion” • Nicola CASARINI (Istituto Affari InternAzionAli): « EU-Korea strAtegic pArtnership ten years after. Opportunities, and challenges, in the age of Covid and mounting US-China tensions » • Paul ANDRE (SciencesPo): « Is KoreA on the threshold of the G7? StrAtegic opportunities and challenges ahead in the perspective of an enlarged G7 » • René CONSOLO (French diplomAt who worked in PyongyAng): « The European Union’s Restrictive Measures against North Korea: a medium term view, beyond the current difficulties. Looking at solutions beyond the deadlock ». Transition: Elisabeth Suh (SWP): « Certain uncertainty – the cyber challeng posed by Pyongyang » Panel 2 : Future opportunities of EU-ROK cooperation in specific areas of competence and excellence • Ramon PACHECO-PARDO (King’s College): « Reassessment of the goals intended and achieved through the EU-ROK FTA » • Tereza NOVOTNA (MArie SklodowskA-Curie Fellow): « WhAt EU-ROK Partnership within the US-China Conflict? » • Brigitte DEKKER (ClingendAel Institute): « EU-ROK digital connectivity: United, we must stand.
  • Reunification of Korea: Economic Consequences from an External Point of View*

    Reunification of Korea: Economic Consequences from an External Point of View*

    International Studies Review Vol. 6 No. 2 (October 2005): 21-33 21 Reunification of Korea: Economic Consequences from an External Point of View* EDWARD M. GRAHAM ** Korean reunification remains an uncertainty. When and if it comes, the condition of the North Korean economy is primitive compared to the economy of South Korea. Because of massive investment needs in the North, and under plausible assumptions regarding savings rates in a unified Korea, the balance of payment of a reunified Korea is likely to deteriorate significantly in the event of reunification. Foreign direct investment could ameliorate this result, and might contribute to a more rapid catch-up of the North to the South. Keywords: Korean reunification, economic effects of Korean re­ unification, balance of payments effects of Korean reunification Originally Prepared for 2005 IKUPD Forum "Korean Reunification in Korea-US Relationship," Harvard Law School, April 9, 2005. " The author would like to thank Ted Kim, Jim Lister, Paul Karner, Marcus Noland, two persons of Korean nationality who wish to remain anonymous, and two anonymous reviewers for valuable comments on an earlier draft. Direct all correspondence co Edward M. Graham, Senior Fellow, Institute for International Economics, 1750 Massachusetts Ave. NW, Washington, D.C. 20036-1903 USA; Tel: 1-202-454-1326; E-mail: [email protected] Downloaded from Brill.com09/28/2021 05:49:58AM via free access 22 Reunification of Korea I. INTRODUCTION lmost all Koreans dream that the "two Koreas," the Republic of Korea A (ROK) in the south and the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) in the north, reunify.
  • Tracking COVID-19 As Cause of Death: Global Estimates of Relative Severity

    Tracking COVID-19 As Cause of Death: Global Estimates of Relative Severity

    Tracking COVID-19 as Cause of Death: Global Estimates of Relative Severity By Philip Schellekens and Diego Sourrouille* May 2020 ABSTRACT: Despite the rapid spread of the COVID-19 pandemic across countries, the global death toll remains highly concentrated in few high-income countries. Reported data suggests the developing world has been largely spared, yet a host of factors, not least demography, suggest that the observed discrepancy in the burden of mortality is likely significantly exaggerated. This paper tracks the severity implied by the reported data and relates it to pre-pandemic mortality patterns to get a feel for the discrepancies and inequalities. An indicator of “relative severity” is proposed to generate global comparisons across countries and over time. The methodology can be utilized to improve tracking systems and detect data anomalies that can then set the stage for further analysis. It should prove useful in getting a better grasp of the distribution and progression of the pandemic if or when the epicenters of the pandemic start shifting to the developing world. JEL: I10, J11 Keywords: Mortality; pandemic. * World Bank Group. Email correspondence: [email protected] and [email protected]. We would like to thank Syud Amer Ahmed, Pablo Cafiero, Marcio Cruz, Carl Dahlman, Indermit Gill, Huade Huo, Matthew Jones, Fabrice Lockefeer, Andrew Mason, Iris Pigeot, Bryce Quillin, Juan V. Sourrouille, Alfred Watkins, Juan Wisnivesky and Shahid Yusuf. 1. Introduction Views about the severity of the COVID-19 outbreak have evolved considerably. The initial outbreak was thought to be confined to China. Soon it spread across Asia and then the rest of the world.
  • Foreign Trade Regimes and Economic Development: South Korea

    Foreign Trade Regimes and Economic Development: South Korea

    This PDF is a selection from an out-of-print volume from the National Bureau of Economic Research Volume Title: Foreign Trade Regimes and Economic Development: South Korea Volume Author/Editor: Charles R. Frank, Jr., Kwang Suk Kim and Larry E. Westphal Volume Publisher: NBER Volume ISBN: 0-87014-507-X Volume URL: http://www.nber.org/books/fran75-1 Publication Date: 1975 Chapter Title: Economic Growth in South Korea since World War II Chapter Author: Charles R. Frank Jr., Kwang Suk Kim, Larry E. Westphal Chapter URL: http://www.nber.org/chapters/c4063 Chapter pages in book: (p. 6 - 24) Chapter 2 of ti proc of it 72! cent EconomicGrowth in South put Korea sinceWorldWar II dusi deci lack nun ECONOMIC DISORGANIZATION FOLLOWING LIBERATION The Japanese occupation of Korea ended on August 15, 1945 and was sup- planted in part by a U.S. military government. The immediate postwar period was characterized by extreme economic disorganization and stagnation caused by the sudden separation of the Korean economy from the Japanese economic bloc, and by the partition of the country along the 38th parallel. — Undercolonial rule from 1910 to 1945, the Korean economy became Me highly dependent upon Japan for capital, technology, and management. Of the Ma total authorized capital of business establishments in Korea, the Japanese Ch owned approximately 94 percent, as of 1940.1 Japanese engineers and tech- nicians employed in manufacturing, construction, and public utilities in 1944 constituted about 80 percent of the total technical manpower in Korea. The Pri proportion of Korean engineers and technicians was particularly small in the Ha metal and chemical industries (11 to 12 percent).2 The relative number of Korean business establishments was very small in high-technology industries— about 10 percent in the metal and chemical industries and 25 percent in the Ce4' machinery industry.
  • The Korean Wave in the Middle East: Past and Present

    The Korean Wave in the Middle East: Past and Present

    Article The Korean Wave in the Middle East: Past and Present Mohamed Elaskary Department of Arabic Interpretation, Hankuk University of Foreign Studies, Seoul 17035, South Korea; [email protected]; Tel. +821054312809 Received: 01 October 2018; Accepted: 22 October 2018; Published: 25 October 2018 Abstract: The Korean Wave—otherwise known as Hallyu or Neo-Hallyu—has a particularly strong influence on the Middle East but scholarly attention has not reflected this occurrence. In this article I provide a brief history of Hallyu, noting its mix of cultural and economic characteristics, and then analyse the reception of the phenomenon in the Arab Middle East by considering fan activity on social media platforms. I then conclude by discussing the cultural, political and economic benefits of Hallyu to Korea and indeed the wider world. For the sake of convenience, I will be using the term Hallyu (or Neo-Hallyu) rather than the Korean Wave throughout my paper. Keywords: Hallyu; Korean Wave; K-drama; K-pop; media; Middle East; “Gangnam Style”; Psy; Turkish drama 1. Introduction My first encounter with Korean culture was in 2010 when I was invited to present a paper at a conference on the Korean Wave that was held in Seoul in October 2010. In that presentation, I highlighted that Korean drama had been well received in the Arab world because most Korean drama themes (social, historical and familial) appeal to Arab viewers. In addition, the lack of nudity in these dramas as opposed to that of Western dramas made them more appealing to Arab viewers. The number of research papers and books focused on Hallyu at that time was minimal.
  • China's False Allegations of the Use of Biological Weapons by the United

    China's False Allegations of the Use of Biological Weapons by the United

    W O R K I N G P A P E R # 7 8 China’s False Allegations of the Use of Biological Weapons by the United States during the Korean War By Milton Leitenberg, March 2016 THE COLD WAR INTERNATIONAL HISTORY PROJECT WORKING PAPER SERIES Christian F. Ostermann, Series Editor This paper is one of a series of Working Papers published by the Cold War International History Project of the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars in Washington, D.C. Established in 1991 by a grant from the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, the Cold War International History Project (CWIHP) disseminates new information and perspectives on the history of the Cold War as it emerges from previously inaccessible sources on “the other side” of the post-World War II superpower rivalry. The project supports the full and prompt release of historical materials by governments on all sides of the Cold War, and seeks to accelerate the process of integrating new sources, materials and perspectives from the former “Communist bloc” with the historiography of the Cold War which has been written over the past few decades largely by Western scholars reliant on Western archival sources. It also seeks to transcend barriers of language, geography, and regional specialization to create new links among scholars interested in Cold War history. Among the activities undertaken by the project to promote this aim are a periodic BULLETIN to disseminate new findings, views, and activities pertaining to Cold War history; a fellowship program for young historians from the former Communist bloc to conduct archival research and study Cold War history in the United States; international scholarly meetings, conferences, and seminars; and publications.
  • Primary Sources

    Primary Sources

    Primary Sources: "07편 잘살아보세, 박정희와 새마을 운동 1." YouTube. YouTube, 27 Apr. 2015. Web. 09 Dec. ​ ​ 2015. <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ARQxzRTjHhI> ​ ​ We used footage of Korean citizens working during the New Village Movement to reconstruct their local villages in the introduction of our video when we explained that the development of South Korea arose from the efforts of its citizens. We also used footage of Park Chung­hee telling the Korean civilians that they must work diligently to make life in Korea better for all. We used this footage when explaining that Park Chung­hee was the one who sent Koreans to Germany to work as miners and nurses. "1960년대 우리 나라." YouTube. YouTube, 27 Oct. 2012. Web. 01 June 2016. ​ ​ <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D9xhm34TZik> ​ ​ We used footage of Koreans working when the economy was underdeveloped to show how man power and determination, not resouces, were the main causes of South Korea’s economic development. We also used footage of Korea in the 1960s. The 1960s was when the Korean War happened, and the economy was at its worst. 1970. 중앙포토. KoreaDaily. Web. 9 Dec. 2015. ​ ​ <http://m.koreadaily.com/news/read.asp?art_id=706259&referer=> ​ ​ We used a photo of the finished Seoul Busan highway from this source. We used this photo when giving examples of the multiple ways Park Chung­hee strived to develop Korea’s economy. Ahn On­gil (77). Personal interview. 2 November 2015 This was a student­conducted interview with a Korean man who traveled to Germany as a miner.
  • The Sunshine Policy and Its Aftermath

    The Sunshine Policy and Its Aftermath

    The Sunshine Policy and its Aftermath Youngho Kim (Department of Political Science, Sungshin Women's University) I. Introduction The Kim Dae-jung administration's sunshine policy represents a paradigm shift in South Korea's policy toward North Korea. The traditional paradigm was the containment of North Korea based on the defense alliance between the United States and the Republic of Korea. During his presidency the containment policy was replaced by the proactive engagement policy to induce gradual changes of the North Korean regime through reconciliation and economic cooperation. His presidency experienced the North Korea's naval provocations in 1999 and 2002. The emergence of the Bush administration with reservations on the sunshine policy and suspicion of the Agreed Framework created strains on US-ROK alliance. Yet the sunshine policy was pursued without interruption until the end of his presidency. The dispatch of the special envoy to find a peaceful solution for the North Korea's nuclear standoff in January 2003 represents last-minute efforts to rescue the engagement policy. The next administration cannot be free from the legacies of the sunshine policy. Indeed, President-elect Roh Moo-hyun is expected to carry on the former administration's engagement policy toward North Korea.1 Critical assessments of the theoretical backgrounds and the achievements of the sunshine policy will help the Roh Moo-hyun administration to devise and implement its new policies toward North Korea. The Kim Dae-jung administration also raises theoretical questions in pursuit of the sunshine policy. One of the most important issues is the announcement of the policy to dissolve the Cold War structure on the Korean peninsula the administration considers one of the barriers to improving inter-Korean relations.
  • Coronavirus (COVID-19) and Cultural and Creative Sectors: Impact, Policy Responses and Opportunities to Rebound After the Crisis

    Coronavirus (COVID-19) and Cultural and Creative Sectors: Impact, Policy Responses and Opportunities to Rebound After the Crisis

    WEBINAR Coronavirus (COVID-19) and cultural and creative sectors: impact, policy responses and opportunities to rebound after the crisis 17 April 2020 | 15.00-16.30 CET oe.cd/culture-webinars #OECDculture REGISTER HERE Along with the tourism industry, cultural and creative sectors are among the most affected by the current coronavirus (Covid-19) crisis The current crisis is particularly critical for cultural and creative sectors due to the sudden and massive loss of revenue opportunities, especially for the more fragile players. Some actors benefit from public support (e.g. public museums, libraries, theatres) but may experience significant budget shortfalls. The sector includes major multinational companies with sustainable revenues (e.g. Netflix), but many small companies and freelance professionals essential for the sector could face bankruptcy. This crisis creates a structural threat to the survival of many firms and workers in cultural and creative production. Today, more than ever, the importance of culture and creativity for society is clear. The availability of cultural content contributes to mental health and well-being, and many cultural institutions have provided online and free content in recent weeks for that purpose. Sustainable business models during and after the initial crisis are imperative for the sector’s survival. Leaving behind the more fragile part of the sector could cause irreparable economic and social damage. The current challenge is to design public supports that alleviate the negative impacts in the short term and help identify new opportunities in the medium term for different public, private and non-profit actors engaged in cultural and creative production. This webinar will gather representatives of the cultural and creative sectors, local and national governments to review: The short and long-term impacts of the current crisis on CCS The innovative solutions put in place by CCS across countries The policy supports put in place by national and local governments to alleviate the short and long- term effects of the crisis on CCS.
  • Redalyc.Cultural Economics: the State of the Art and Perspectives

    Redalyc.Cultural Economics: the State of the Art and Perspectives

    Estudios de Economía Aplicada ISSN: 1133-3197 [email protected] Asociación Internacional de Economía Aplicada España SEAMAN, BRUCE A. Cultural Economics: The State of the Art and Perspectives Estudios de Economía Aplicada, vol. 27, núm. 1, abril, 2009, pp. 7-32 Asociación Internacional de Economía Aplicada Valladolid, España Available in: http://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=30117097001 How to cite Complete issue Scientific Information System More information about this article Network of Scientific Journals from Latin America, the Caribbean, Spain and Portugal Journal's homepage in redalyc.org Non-profit academic project, developed under the open access initiative E STUDIOS DE E CONOMÍA A P L I C A D A V OL. 27-1 2009 P ÁGS. 7-32 Cultural Economics: The State of the Art and Perspectives BRUCE A. SEAMAN Andrew Young School of Policy Studies Department of Economics GEORGIA STATE UNIVERSITY e-mail: [email protected] ABSTRACT The intellectual development of cultural economics has exhibited some notable similarities to the challenges faced by researchers pioneering in other areas of economics. While this is not really surprising, previous reviews of this literature have not focused on such patterns. Specifically, the methodology and normative implications of the field of industrial organization and antitrust policy suggest a series of stages identified here as foundation, maturation, reevaluation, and backlash that suggest a way of viewing the development of and controversies surrounding cultural economics. Also, the emerging field of sports economics, which already shares some substantive similari- ties to the questions addressed in cultural economics, presents a pattern of development by which core questions and principles are identified in a fragmented literature, which then slowly coalesces and becomes consolidated into a more unified literature that essentially reconfirms and extends those earlier core principles.