Economic Development of China and Trade Policies of Japan and China in East-Asia : CGE Analyses for International Division of Labor

我们的研究主要集中在三点：中国经济发展特征、东亚贸易政策和CGE分析。它可以分为以下几个部分。构建了中国经济发展的理论模型，并对东亚共同体框架进行了研究。在模型中引入了沿海发达地区与内陆欠发达地区的经济差异，并明确了产业集中与分离模式的情景。最近东亚国际分工的特点是三角贸易，日本/韩国/台湾出口核心零部件到中国/东盟，这些出口最终产品到SU/EU。在理论分析中，我们考察了企业分工在企业中的重要作用，明确了东亚地区国际分工的新结构可以用规模经济和范围经济的概念来解释。分析了“东盟+3”和“东盟+3+3”框架的差异，并探讨了它们对东亚共同体的战略重要性。本文采用可计算一般均衡模型定量评价东亚经济一体化进程。通过对欧盟经济一体化的比较分析，明确了两个地区之间的差异。为适应发展中中国的特点，对现有的动态CGE模型进行了修正。利用修正后的模型对东亚之间、东亚与美国或欧盟之间的贸易/投资联系进展进行了评估。研究发现，与东盟与中国、东盟与韩国等规模较小的自由贸易协定相比，扩大东盟与中日韩自由贸易协定需要的结构调整更少。这是一个有趣的结果。国际分工在东亚地区已经广泛开展，在东亚地区进行局部的自由贸易区分组可能是低效的。

Our research focused on the three points, characteristics of economic development in China, trade policies in East Asia, and CGE analyses. It could be divided into the follows.1. Theoretical modes for economic development of China were made and a framework of East-Asia community was investigated. The economic disparity between advanced coastal area and under-developed inland area was introduced in the model and scenarios of patterns for industrial concentration and separation, depending on economic developments, were made clear. The recent feature of international division of labor in East Asia is the triangle trade, Japan/Korea/Taiwan export core parts to China/ASEAN, and these export final products to SU/EU. Important roles of segmentation in business firms were investigated in our theoretical analyses and it is made clear that the new structure international division of labor in East Asia could be explained using concepts of scale economy and economy of scope. It was also investigated about difference in frameworks of ASEAN+3 and ASEAN+3+3, and discussed about their strategic importance for East-Asia community.2. CGE (Computable general Equilibrium) models are used to evaluate quantitatively a progress of economic integration in East-Asia. Comparative analysis to the economic integration in EU was made to clarify the differences between the two regions. The existing dynamic CGE model was revised to cope with characteristics of developing China. The revised model was used to evaluate progress of trade/investment connection among East Asia, and between East-Asia and US or EU. It was found that wider FTA of ASEAN+3 requires less structural adjustments than the cases of smaller FTA as ASEA + China or ASEAN + Korea. This is an interesting result. International division of labor is widely progressed in East Asia and a partial FTA grouping in East Asia might be inefficient.