 핵심광물협정의 주요 내용과 정책 시사점Soo Hyun Oh ()
No 24-1, Policy Reference from Korea Institute for International Economic Policy Abstract: 최근 글로벌 공급망의 안정성과 지속가능성이 주요 이슈로 부상하면서 반도체, 전기차 등 첨단 산업과 친환경 에너지 산업에 필수적인 리튬, 니켈, 코발트, 망간, 흑연, 희토류와 같은 핵심광물의 안정적 확보가 중요한 과제로 대두하고 있다. 이러한 광물들은 첨단 기술 제품의 생산에서 공급망의 최상위에 위치하는데, 중국 등 특정국에 대한 의존도가 높아 가격 변동성과 자원 무기화 조치의 영향을 받기 쉽다. 이에 따라 주요국들은 산업 기술 경쟁이 심화되는 상황에서 자국 중심의 공급망 재편을 도모하며, 핵심광물 및 원자재의 안정적 확보와 리스크 관리를 위해 자원보유국 또는 우방국과의 협력을 강화하고 있다. 본 연구는 이러한 국제적 흐름 속에서 주요국의 핵심광물과 원자재 관련 무역협정을 분석하고, 우리나라의 정책 및 통상협상에 활용할 수 있는 방안을 도출하고자 한다. Critical minerals are essential for advanced industries like semiconductors, electric vehicles, and batteries, as well as for clean energy infrastructure. Major countries are actively pursuing trade agreements to ensure stable supplies of these minerals. This study analyzes key countries’ trade agreements related to critical minerals and derives insights for Korea’s policies and trade negotiations. The study narrows its focus to binding trade agreements between countries. Traditionally, mineral and energy regulations in trade agreements were declarative, but recent agreements by the U.S., EU, and Japan have introduced specific obligations and linked these to environmental and labor standards. The EU includes energy and raw materials (ERM) chapters in its trade agreements, while the U.S. tends to establish stand-alone agreements on critical minerals. The EU’s proactive engagement with resource-rich countries aims to reduce price volatility and promote fair trade, while U.S. agreements, such as with Japan, are primarily driven by the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) electric vehicle subsidies and focus on establishing supply chains with allied nations. The U.S.-Japan Critical Minerals Agreement, for example, emphasizes the management of environmental and social risks within supply chains through well-defined environmental and labor provisions. Based on these international trends, this study proposes the inclusion of a Raw Materials Chapter in Korea’s future Free Trade Agreements (FTAs), bench-marking the critical minerals agreements of the EU and the U.S. Specifically, this proposal aligns with the “Critical Minerals Security Strategy” announced by the Korean government in 2023, which advocates for expanded bilateral and multilateral cooperation and enhanced collaboration on critical mineral supply chains in FTA negotiations. When pursuing critical minerals agreements, Korea must carefully consider various elements such as the selection of partner countries, contents and types of agreement to pursue, and the order in which to conduct negotiations, as these factors are intricately interconnected and can influence the outcomes of other aspects. In negotiating critical minerals agreements, several key provisions should be considered, including the definition of minerals, trade facilitation, exploration and production permits, environmental protection, labor rights, and cooperation clauses. For example, trade facilitation provisions might include prohibitions on export quotas, export tariffs, and price caps to mitigate financial risks and price volatility for companies. The environmental and labor provisions evident in the EU-Chile FTA and the U.S.-Japan Critical Minerals Agreement are essential to aligning with the global trend of enhancing supply chain ESG standards and emphasizing responsible sourcing. It is necessary that Korea incorporates these provisions into its agreements, thereby ensuring mineral procurement is conducted in accordance with international standards. However, the adherence to international environmental and labor standards and the associated monitoring may impose additional costs on companies. Thus, a balanced approach is necessary, in hand with dialogue and coordination between the government and businesses to achieve consensus before negotiations.(the rest omitted) Keywords: Critical minerals; Trade agreements; Semiconductors and electric vehicles; Environmental and labor standard; EU and U.S. agreements; Raw Materials Chapter; Koreas Free Trade Agreements (FTAs); Inflation Reduction Act (IRA); Supply chains and cooperation; ESG standards (search for similar items in EconPapers) There are no downloads for this item, see the EconPapers FAQ for hints about obtaining it. Related works: Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:ris:kiepre:2024_001 Access Statistics for this paper More papers in Policy Reference from Korea Institute for International Economic Policy [30147] 3rd Floor Building C Sejong National Research Complex 370 Sicheong-daero Sejong-si, Korea. Contact information at EDIRC. |
Is your work missing from RePEc? Here is how to contribute.
Questions or problems? Check the EconPapers FAQ or send mail to .
EconPapers is hosted by the
School of Business at Örebro University.