중국 6개 지역별 GDP, 인구, 거리, FDI가 한중 무역량에 미치는 영향에 대한 중력모형분석 : PPML과 관련하여 = The Influence of GDP, population, distance, and FDI on Korea-China trade volume by 6 regions in China using Gravity model analysis: focused on the PPML Method

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

Trade between Korea and China has been increasing steadily, with
diplomatic relations between Korea and China in 1992 and the
conclusion of the Korea-China FTA in 2015. However, various issues
such as the THAAD retaliation issue in 2016, the trade dispute
between the US and China in 2017, and the outbreak of Corona 19 in
2020 have come to a situation that regulates and pressures Korean
companies in China. In a situation where competition is getting fiercer,
in order to reduce dependence on the top 10 export products and
maintain sustainable growth, the ability to supply new industries in
China, which is growing in demand in the era of the 4th industrial
revolution, along with the development of new products and new
markets. And there is a desperate need to expand customized export
capabilities by region.
In this context, regional studies in China are needed, and this
study attempts to investigate whether China's regional GDP, distance,
FDI, and population affect the volume of trade between Korea and
China. In order to achieve the purpose of the study, literature and
empirical studies were conducted in parallel. First, the process of trade
development between Korea and China and the status of import and
export were examined. In addition, the research hypothesis was
established through previous studies, and the research hypothesis was
verified using Stata 14.0 as the panel gravity model method. The
stability of the time series data was examined through the unit root
test, and the Poisson Psuedo Likelihood Estimation Method (PPML)
was used using the panel gravity data.
In the case of population, GDP, and FDI, data from the National
Bureau of Statistics were used, and the amount of trade between
Korea and China was from the Korea International Trade Association.
In the case of streets, data were used on the EUROPA site. These
data were collected from 2010 to 2019. The main results are as
follows.
First, as a result of the hypothesis test that GDP will affect the
amount of trade between Korea and China, all regionsshowed
significant results, but in terms of relations, Hwa-Buk region showed
negative (-) relations.
Second, as a result of hypothesis verification that population will
affect the amount of trade between Korea and China, all regions
showed significant results, but in relation to Hwa-Buk, Hwa-dong,
South Central and Northwest regions, the relational direction was
negative (-).
Third, as a result of the hypothesis verification that distance will
affect the amount of trade between Korea and China, all regions
showed significant results, but in terms of relational direction,
Hwa-dong region showed positive (+) direction.
Fourth, as a result of hypothesis verification that FDI will affect the
amount of trade between Korea and China, all regions except the
southwest region showed significant results. As for the relational
direction, the relational direction was negative (-) in Hwa-buk,
Northeast, and Hwa-dong regions.
The significance of this study is that the impact on the amount of
trade between Korea and China was analyzed using the Poisson
Psuedo Likelihood Estimation (PPML), which supplemented the existing
gravity model. And, since there are not many empirical studies that
analyze how each variable affects trade by dividing China by region, it
is empirical to see whether the four variables of GDP, population,
distance, and FDI in each of the six regions of China affect the
amount of trade. It is meaningful to have analyzed it.
The implication from this study is that it is necessary to establish
specific information on overseas expansion of Chinese companies by
region to expand trade between Korea and China. In addition, export
strategies for SMEs(customized export strategies) should be
strengthened for each region in China, thereby strengthening exports
by region.

국문 초록 (Abstract)

한국과 중국 간의 교역은 1992년 한중수교를 이후로 2015년 한중 FTA
체결이 되는 등 지속적으로 교역이 증가해 왔다. 그러나 2016년 사드 보
복문제, 2017년 미중간 무역분쟁, 2020년 코로나19 등 다양한 이슈가 발생
하고, 중국 내 한국기업들을 규제 및 압박하는 상황에 이르렀다. 한국이
대중국 수출에 있어 10대 수출상품에 대한 의존도를 줄이고 지속가능한
성장을 유지하기 위해서는 신상품 개발, 신시장 개척 등과 함께 중국의
신산업에 대한 공급능력 및 지역별 맞춤형 수출역량의 확대가 절실하다.
이러한 맥락에서 중국의 지역별 연구가 필요하며, 본 연구에서는 한국
과 중국 간 교역량에 중국의 지역별 GDP, 인구, 거리, FDI가 영향을 미
치는 지에 대해 알아보고자 한다. 연구의 목적을 달성하기 위해서 문헌연
구와 실증연구를 병행하였다. 먼저 한중간 무역 발전과정, 수출입 현황 등
에 대해 살펴보았다. 그리고 연구가설을 설정하고, 중력모형 방법으로
Stata 14.0을 사용하여 연구가설을 검증하였다. 단위근 검정을 통해 시계
열 자료의 안정성을 살펴보았으며 패널 중력 데이터를 이용하여 포아송
유사최대우도추정법(PPML)을 이용하였다.
GDP, 인구, FDI의 경우 중국 국가통계국 자료를 6개 지역(화북, 화동,
중남, 동북, 서북, 서남으로 구분)을 이용하였으며 한중간 교역량은 한국
무역협회 자료를 이용하였다. 거리의 경우 EUROPA 사이트에 있는 자료
를 이용하였다. 이들 데이터는 2010년도부터 2019년까지의 통계자료를 수집하였다.
연구의 주요한 결과는 다음과 같다.
첫째, GDP는 한국과 중국 간 교역량에 영향을 줄 것이라는 가설검증 결
과 모든 지역이 유의미하였고, 관계방향에 있어서는 화북지역은 부(-)의
방향을 나타냈다. 화북지역 외 5개지역은 정(+)의 방향을 나타내었다.
둘째, 인구는 한국과 중국 간 교역량에 영향을 줄 것이라는 가설검증
결과 모든 지역이 유의미한 결과를 나타내었으나 관계방향에 있어서는 화
북, 화동, 중남, 서남, 서북지역은 부(-)의 방향을 나타냈다.
셋째, 거리는 한국과 중국 간 교역량에 영향을 줄 것이라는 가설검증
결과 모든 지역이 유의미한 결과를 나타내었으나 관계방향에 있어서는 중
남지역은 정(+)의 방향을 나타냈다.
넷째, FDI는 한국과 중국 간 교역량에 영향을 줄 것이라는 가설검증 결
과 모든 지역이 유의미한 결과를 나타냈다. 관계방향에 있어서는 화북, 동
북, 화동, 서남지역은 부(-)의 방향을 나타냈다.
본 연구의 의의는 기존의 중력모형을 보완한 포아송 유사최대우도추정
법(PPML)을 이용하여 한국과 중국 간 교역량에 미치는 영향을 분석하였
다는 것이다. 그리고 중국을 지역별로 나누어 각 변수들이 교역에 어떠한
영향을 주는 지를 분석한 실증연구는 많지 않다. 따라서 중국의 6개 지역
별 GDP, 인구, 거리, FDI 4개 변수가 교역량에 영향을 미치는 지에 대한
실증적인 분석이 중국 지역별 수출 전략에 밑거름이 될 수 있을 것이다.
본 연구를 통해 얻는 시사점은 한중간 교역 확대를 위한 구체적인 중국
지역별 기업의 해외진출 정보 구축이 필요하다는 것이다. 그리고 중국지
역별로 기업 수출전략(맞춤형 수출전략)의 강화를 도모해야 할 것이다.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• 제1장 서론 ········································································································· 1
• 제1절 연구의 배경 및 목적·········································································· 1
• 제2절 연구의 범위 및 방법·········································································· 2
• 제2장 한중간 교역 및 중국의 지역별 경제 현황 ····················· 5
• 제1절 한중간 교역 현황 ················································································ 5
• 1. 한중간 교역 발전과정 ··········································································· 5
• 2. 한중간 FTA 이후 현황 ········································································ 6
• 제2절 중국의 지역별 경제 현황 ·································································· 9
• 1. 중국 지역별 구분··················································································· 9
• 2. 6개 지역별 경제 현황 ········································································· 13
• 3. 31개 지역별 GDP, FDI, 인구 순위················································· 65
• 제3장 중력모형에 대한 이론적 고찰 ·············································· 71
• 제1절 중력모형 ······························································································ 71
• 1. 무역학 관점에서의 중력모형 ····························································· 71
• 2. 패널중력모형························································································· 75
• 제2절 중력모형에 관한 선행연구 ······························································ 77
• 1. 중력모형 선행연구··············································································· 77
• 2. 변수별 선행연구 ··················································································· 81
• 3. 종합 및 시사점 ····················································································· 88
• 제4장 연구의 설계 ····················································································· 89
• 제1절 연구모형 및 가설설정······································································ 89
• 1. 연구모형·································································································· 89
• 2. 포아송 유사최우도추정방법(PPML) ·················································· 89
• 3. MLE와 추정··························································································· 98
• 4. 연구가설································································································ 107
• 제2절 변수의 선정 및 기초통계량분석 ·················································· 114
• 1. 변수의 선정 ·························································································· 114
• 2. 기초통계량분석···················································································· 116
• 제5장 실증분석 ··························································································· 122
• 제1절 모형 설명 및 안정성 검정···························································· 122
• 1. 모형 설명 ·······························································································122
• 2. 안정성 검정···························································································123
• 제2절 실증분석 결과 ·················································································· 131
• 제3절 실증분석 해석 ·················································································· 152
• 1. GDP에 대한 해석·············································································· 152
• 2. 인구에 대한 해석··············································································· 154
• 3. 거리에 대한 해석··············································································· 158
• 4. FDI에 대한 해석 ················································································ 159
• 제6장 결론 ····································································································· 161
• 제1절 연구의 요약 및 의의······································································ 161
• 제2절 연구의 한계 및 향후 연구과제 ···················································· 164
• 참고문헌 ·········································································································· 165