The Korea-NATO Procurement Framework Agreement: Significance and Implications

Hea Ji Park, Mi Jung Kim and Soonhyung Sim
Additional contact information
Hea Ji Park: Korea Institute for Industrial Economics and Trade
Mi Jung Kim: Korea Institute for Industrial Economics and Trade
Soonhyung Sim: Korea Institute for Industrial Economics and Trade

i-KIET Issues and Analysis from Korea Institute for Industrial Economics and Trade

Abstract: The Korea-NATO procurement framework agreement would give South Korea, a non-member of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), an institutional foothold in NATO’s joint procurement and logistics support markets. Korea is pursuing the agreement to overcome the structural constraints of non-membership that its unsuccessful bid for Canada’s submarine program laid bare. The agreement would open an institutional channel through which Korean firms can take part in the programs run by the NATO Support and Procurement Agency (NSPA), spanning acquisition, logistics, in-service support, and systems support.

The negotiations are expected to widen Korea’s opportunities to participate in NATO’s defense supply chains and innovation ecosystem. Beyond the existing export market for finished systems, Korean firms could move into life-cycle markets that generate long-term, recurring demand: ammunition, parts, and materials; maintenance, repair, and overhaul (MRO); upgrades; and education and training. The prospects for cooperation on defense critical raw material supply chains and for joint development in advanced technologies such as drones, AI, and space would also improve, and sharing NATO standards that have been closed to non-members would contribute to interoperability.

A procurement framework agreement is nonetheless only an institutional gateway into the NATO defense market; it cannot substitute for the alliance relationships and trust that member states have accumulated among themselves. Korea therefore needs a medium- to long-term market-entry strategy that expands localization and joint development with NATO countries and draws on regional cooperation instruments such as the European Union’s Security Action for Europe (SAFE) and the NATO Innovation Fund. To make the agreement effective, its detailed provisions and their impact on domestic industry must be examined closely. Finally, by identifying security cooperation agendas in which Korea and NATO share an interest, such as responding to military cooperation between North Korea and Russia, Korea can build mutual trust and strengthen the foundation for a long-term defense industrial partnership.

Keywords: NATO; procurement framework agreement; NSPA; joint procurement; interoperability, defense exports; South Korea (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: F53 H56 H57 L64 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2026-08-12
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Published as i-KIET Issues & Analysis, No. 225

Downloads: (external link)
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=7347863
Our link check indicates that this URL is bad, the error code is: 403 Forbidden

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:ris:kietia:023547

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in i-KIET Issues and Analysis from Korea Institute for Industrial Economics and Trade Sejong National Research Complex, Korea Institute for Industrial Economics and Trade, 370 Sicheong Dae-ro C-dong 8-12F 30147, Republic of Korea. Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Aaron Crossen ().