A Comparative Study On The Competitiveness Of Productive Service Trade Between China And Korea

Along with the advance of global economic integration and the in-depth development of the social division of labor, the producer service trade has separated from manufacturing and become one of the most important part of the world service trade. Because of its characteristics as technology-knowledge intensive, producer service trade has developed rapidly in recent years, and become a pillar industry in many developed countries. China and South Korea Free Trade Area has been officially established, and the two countries have certain similarities, as they are both developing countries and their development of producer service trade still have many problems, including lack of international competitiveness, unreasonable structure, etc. Through the comparison of the producer service trade competitiveness of the two countries, it can reflect China’s true level of the producer service trade, and help our country draw lessons from South Korea’s successful experience, so that we will develop a better policy measures to promote the international competitiveness of China’s producer service trade.This article first analyzed the international competitiveness present situation of producer service trade of the two countries from the whole to structure to divisions, found that the export scale of China and South Korea increase year by year, as well as the gap between the two countries. The growth rates have a similar trend, but China’s growth is higher than that of South Korea. South Korea’s trade surplus is increasing, while China’s trade deficit is accelerating. And the high ratio of the producer service export of the two countries are traditional labor-intensive and capital-intensive producer service trade department, the proportion of the technology-knowledge intensive service trade department is very low. Specifically, China and South Korea appear strong international competitiveness in the building. The competitiveness of transportation, communications and other business services division is not obvious. The insurance service has obvious competitive disadvantage in both countries.Then, this article uses the International Market Share Index, the Trade Competitive Power Index, the Revealed Comparative Advantage Index, and the Revealed Competitive Advantage Index to compare the competitiveness of producer service trade from the whole and the divisions between China and South Korea, which gives more proof that the two countries have a comparative advantage of the producer service sector focusing on traditional service trade sector, and the development of knowledge technology intensive sector is slow and lack of competitiveness, but South Korea is slightly better than China. Then using Porter’s diamond model as theoretical basis, this article makes an empirical test of the factors affecting producer service trade competitiveness of China and South Korea. It turns out that all variables have a positive role in promoting the producer service trade competitiveness. The influence in China from big to small is the merchandise exports, foreign direct investment flow, service openness, higher education gross enrollment ratio and national income per capita, the influence in South Korea from big to small is the merchandise exports, service openness, higher education gross enrollment ratio, foreign direct investment flow, national income per capita. Especially the contribution of human capital to the producer service trade competitiveness in South Korea is much higher than that in China.Finally, according to the results of the predecessors’ researches and the empirical analysis, this paper put forward the policy proposals to improve the international competitiveness of China’s productive service trade:increasing the cultivation and investment of human capital, promoting the optimization and upgrading of consumption structure, promoting the coordinated development of trade in goods and services, "introduced to" + "going out", raising the level of knowledge and technology, the government playing a good role.