"If Mexican agricultural products come in, our farmers will face even more difficulties. While it is said to be necessary for the development of the Korean economy, I fear that the measures for farmers will be mere window dressing, just like during the Korea-China Free Trade Agreement (FTA) negotiations."
This was the sentiment expressed by an agricultural industry representative during a recent meeting. The agricultural sector is closely monitoring the government's push for membership in the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP). Following a press conference attended by hundreds of farmers, large-scale protests are also being considered.
The discussion was ignited by Minister of Trade, Industry and Energy Kim Jeong-kwan, who stated during a presidential briefing on August 4 that the government would consider joining the CPTPP to secure new markets in ASEAN and Mexico and to expand exports of K-content. He further formalized the discussion at a forum, asserting, "It is rather strange for a trading nation like Korea not to join the CPTPP."
The agricultural sector, which had felt relieved after successfully blocking agricultural imports during tariff negotiations with the United States, was taken aback. Joining the CPTPP could allow agricultural and fishery products from countries without an FTA with Korea to enter at lower tariffs. Since Korea has not signed an FTA with countries like Mexico among the CPTPP members, there are concerns that products such as Mexican peppers and avocados could enter Korea duty-free.
The potential acceleration of market opening during the CPTPP membership process is also heightening farmers' concerns. The CPTPP has a higher rate of tariff elimination for agricultural products among member countries compared to existing FTAs, and it is more challenging to set exceptions. This raises fears that the impact on farmers could be greater than that of past bilateral FTAs.
The concerns of the agricultural sector regarding CPTPP membership appear to be valid. Recent analyses suggest that the decrease in agricultural production could be greater than during the 2022 discussions on CPTPP membership, as the number of member countries and the scale of trade have both increased since then. Additionally, the fact that the fund for rural cooperation established during the Korea-China FTA negotiations only raised about 30% of its target amount remains a significant concern. This has led to widespread skepticism in the agricultural community about the effectiveness of any proposed measures.
However, many experts believe that Korea's membership in the CPTPP is inevitable. Free trade agreements are seen as one of the avenues to maximize exports. Notably, Mexico is a key export market for major Korean products such as automobiles, auto parts, steel, and machinery, and it could serve as a gateway for Korea's entry into North America. This could signal a new direction for the Korean economy in search of growth engines beyond semiconductors.
The economic benefits are also expected to be substantial. The Korea Institute for International Economic Policy (KIEP) previously analyzed that joining the CPTPP could increase Korea's real GDP by 0.33% to 0.35% and consumer welfare by $3 billion. The Korea Institute for Industrial Economics and Trade also projected that Korea's net exports could increase by an average of $600 million to $900 million annually over 15 years if it joins.
Nevertheless, there should be no agreements that sacrifice the agricultural sector unilaterally, as it is a vital national industry responsible for the country's food supply. Practical safety measures must be established to minimize the damage to farmers from market opening. The previous voluntary contributions to the rural cooperation fund have proven ineffective.
There needs to be a new agreement that can be legislated. Currently, the United States is pushing for the 'Farm, Food, and National Security Act' to elevate agriculture as a national industry. The Korean government can learn from this. If it pursues legislation and corresponding policies, persuading farmers may not be as difficult as it seems.
Some experts emphasize the need to treat farmers like quasi-public servants. Given the importance of agriculture in the era of climate crisis, the government should more actively support their livelihoods, with suggestions including increasing direct payments.
The significance of agriculture is growing in the context of the climate crisis. It is widely recognized that enhancing food self-sufficiency is crucial to avoid being swayed by external variables. If trade is restricted to protect farmers, economic growth could be hampered. It is essential to devise new measures for the development of the agricultural sector while also ensuring the creation of national wealth. Membership in the CPTPP is no longer a matter of avoidance or delay.
This was the sentiment expressed by an agricultural industry representative during a recent meeting. The agricultural sector is closely monitoring the government's push for membership in the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP). Following a press conference attended by hundreds of farmers, large-scale protests are also being considered.
The discussion was ignited by Minister of Trade, Industry and Energy Kim Jeong-kwan, who stated during a presidential briefing on August 4 that the government would consider joining the CPTPP to secure new markets in ASEAN and Mexico and to expand exports of K-content. He further formalized the discussion at a forum, asserting, "It is rather strange for a trading nation like Korea not to join the CPTPP."
The agricultural sector, which had felt relieved after successfully blocking agricultural imports during tariff negotiations with the United States, was taken aback. Joining the CPTPP could allow agricultural and fishery products from countries without an FTA with Korea to enter at lower tariffs. Since Korea has not signed an FTA with countries like Mexico among the CPTPP members, there are concerns that products such as Mexican peppers and avocados could enter Korea duty-free.
The potential acceleration of market opening during the CPTPP membership process is also heightening farmers' concerns. The CPTPP has a higher rate of tariff elimination for agricultural products among member countries compared to existing FTAs, and it is more challenging to set exceptions. This raises fears that the impact on farmers could be greater than that of past bilateral FTAs.
The concerns of the agricultural sector regarding CPTPP membership appear to be valid. Recent analyses suggest that the decrease in agricultural production could be greater than during the 2022 discussions on CPTPP membership, as the number of member countries and the scale of trade have both increased since then. Additionally, the fact that the fund for rural cooperation established during the Korea-China FTA negotiations only raised about 30% of its target amount remains a significant concern. This has led to widespread skepticism in the agricultural community about the effectiveness of any proposed measures.
However, many experts believe that Korea's membership in the CPTPP is inevitable. Free trade agreements are seen as one of the avenues to maximize exports. Notably, Mexico is a key export market for major Korean products such as automobiles, auto parts, steel, and machinery, and it could serve as a gateway for Korea's entry into North America. This could signal a new direction for the Korean economy in search of growth engines beyond semiconductors.
The economic benefits are also expected to be substantial. The Korea Institute for International Economic Policy (KIEP) previously analyzed that joining the CPTPP could increase Korea's real GDP by 0.33% to 0.35% and consumer welfare by $3 billion. The Korea Institute for Industrial Economics and Trade also projected that Korea's net exports could increase by an average of $600 million to $900 million annually over 15 years if it joins.
Nevertheless, there should be no agreements that sacrifice the agricultural sector unilaterally, as it is a vital national industry responsible for the country's food supply. Practical safety measures must be established to minimize the damage to farmers from market opening. The previous voluntary contributions to the rural cooperation fund have proven ineffective.
There needs to be a new agreement that can be legislated. Currently, the United States is pushing for the 'Farm, Food, and National Security Act' to elevate agriculture as a national industry. The Korean government can learn from this. If it pursues legislation and corresponding policies, persuading farmers may not be as difficult as it seems.
Some experts emphasize the need to treat farmers like quasi-public servants. Given the importance of agriculture in the era of climate crisis, the government should more actively support their livelihoods, with suggestions including increasing direct payments.
The significance of agriculture is growing in the context of the climate crisis. It is widely recognized that enhancing food self-sufficiency is crucial to avoid being swayed by external variables. If trade is restricted to protect farmers, economic growth could be hampered. It is essential to devise new measures for the development of the agricultural sector while also ensuring the creation of national wealth. Membership in the CPTPP is no longer a matter of avoidance or delay.
* This article has been translated by AI.
Copyright ⓒ Aju Press All rights reserved.