RISS 학술연구정보서비스

검색
다국어 입력

http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.

변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.

예시)
  • 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
  • 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
닫기
    인기검색어 순위 펼치기

    RISS 인기검색어

      (The) food miles effect of the Korea-China free trade agreement

      한글로보기

      https://www.riss.kr/link?id=T13383131

      • 0

        상세조회
      • 0

        다운로드
      서지정보 열기
      • 내보내기
      • 내책장담기
      • 공유하기
      • 오류접수

      부가정보

      다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract) kakao i 다국어 번역

      The concept of ‘food mileage’ is emerging to capture the distance food is traveled from production sites until it reaches at consumption points. Coupled with transportation types, the term can shed light on the environmental impact of trade flows. The objectives of this thesis are two folds. One is to estimate the food mileage for the case of Korea, a major food importing country in the world. The other is to apply the term to the potential Korea-China Free Trade Agreement (FTA) and figure out its likely environmental impacts. The data set is constructed by the 4-digit Harmonized System codes for 169 products and each product’s trade flows with a total 71 trading partners. The food mileage is estimated as 258 billion ton•km in 2010, which is equivalent to 5,418 million kilograms of carbon dioxide (CO2) emission, or 1% of the total agricultural import value. The CO2 emission effect under the Korea-China FTA is captured in the scenario analysis. The trade expansion scenario which assumes the decrease in Korea’s domestic production due to the FTA will be offset by China’s export increase brings about a higher CO2 emission level of 6,008 million kilograms. The trade shifting scenario which replaces the imports from other trading partners with Chinese products to a certain extent gives out a smaller CO2 emission level of 5,417 million kilograms. This finding suggests that the trade expansion should carry more weight in gauging CO2 emission effects of the FTA. Finally, analysis on Napa cabbage and turnip trades confirms the non - reversal of their food miles effects when they are estimated by a product life-cycle approach.
      번역하기

      The concept of ‘food mileage’ is emerging to capture the distance food is traveled from production sites until it reaches at consumption points. Coupled with transportation types, the term can shed light on the environmental impact of trade flows....

      The concept of ‘food mileage’ is emerging to capture the distance food is traveled from production sites until it reaches at consumption points. Coupled with transportation types, the term can shed light on the environmental impact of trade flows. The objectives of this thesis are two folds. One is to estimate the food mileage for the case of Korea, a major food importing country in the world. The other is to apply the term to the potential Korea-China Free Trade Agreement (FTA) and figure out its likely environmental impacts. The data set is constructed by the 4-digit Harmonized System codes for 169 products and each product’s trade flows with a total 71 trading partners. The food mileage is estimated as 258 billion ton•km in 2010, which is equivalent to 5,418 million kilograms of carbon dioxide (CO2) emission, or 1% of the total agricultural import value. The CO2 emission effect under the Korea-China FTA is captured in the scenario analysis. The trade expansion scenario which assumes the decrease in Korea’s domestic production due to the FTA will be offset by China’s export increase brings about a higher CO2 emission level of 6,008 million kilograms. The trade shifting scenario which replaces the imports from other trading partners with Chinese products to a certain extent gives out a smaller CO2 emission level of 5,417 million kilograms. This finding suggests that the trade expansion should carry more weight in gauging CO2 emission effects of the FTA. Finally, analysis on Napa cabbage and turnip trades confirms the non - reversal of their food miles effects when they are estimated by a product life-cycle approach.

      더보기

      목차 (Table of Contents)

      • Abstract∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙i
      • List of Tables∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙iv
      • I. Introduction∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙1
      • II. A Literature review∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙2
      • Abstract∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙i
      • List of Tables∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙iv
      • I. Introduction∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙1
      • II. A Literature review∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙2
      • III. Agricultural Trade and Geography∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙6
      • IV. Calculation Methods and Data∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙13
      • V. Food Miles and Carbon Emission Estimates∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙18
      • VI. The Food Miles Effects of the Korea-China FTA∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙21
      • VII. Conclusions∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙36
      • Reference∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙∙39
      더보기

      분석정보

      View

      상세정보조회

      0

      Usage

      원문다운로드

      0

      대출신청

      0

      복사신청

      0

      EDDS신청

      0

      동일 주제 내 활용도 TOP

      더보기

      주제

      연도별 연구동향

      연도별 활용동향

      연관논문

      연구자 네트워크맵

      공동연구자 (7)

      유사연구자 (20) 활용도상위20명

      이 자료와 함께 이용한 RISS 자료

      나만을 위한 추천자료

      해외이동버튼