바로가기메뉴

본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기

logo

An Analysis of Policy Effects of Export Infrastructure Strengthening Program on Export of Food Distribution Companies

The Journal of Distribution Science / The Journal of Distribution Science, (P)1738-3110; (E)2093-7717
2018, v.16 no.1, pp.87-99
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.15722/jds.16.1.201801.87
Huang, Seong-Hyuk
Ji, Seong-Tae
  • Downloaded
  • Viewed

Abstract

Purpose - The Export Infrastructure Strengthening Program(EISP) is a project to expand exports of agri-food products through providing customized export information to food distribution companies and supporting overseas information activities. A total of 39.6 billion won was provided by 2016. So, the purpose of this study is to analyze whether EISP is effective for expanding exports of agri-food products. Research design, data, and methodology - A simple average difference between the export performance of the policy beneficiaries and the non-policy beneficiaries can be biased if the export capacity or inherent characteristics of the enterprise are not taken into consideration. In order to solve the problem of such a bias, the propensity score matching(PSM) method has been employed in this study. PSM is a method of converting the characteristics of an export company into an index through logit analysis and then reducing the matching to one dimension to improve the accuracy of the performance measurement. Results - The balancing test was conducted to determine how the characteristics of the policy beneficiary group and the matched policy non-beneficiary group corresponded to each other. As a result of the test, we could not reject the null hypothesis that there was no difference between the two groups, so that after the matching, the two groups were similar and the explanatory variables were well controlled. Using the nearest neighbor matching with propensity score estimating through logit analysis, we estimated average treatment effect on the treated(ATT). The food companies participating the EISP had the effect of increasing the exports of $ 5.88 million. As a result, the number of export contracts increased by 11.77, the number of exporting countries by 7.52, the number of export items by 47.51, and the number of buyers' consultation by 3.50. And overseas marketing expenses increased by 35.92 million won. Except for the number of export contracts, other export performance results showed statistically significant results. Conclusions - As the EISP has a positive effect on the expansion of agro-food exports, efforts should be made to find out the limitations or problems of the policy in the future and to make a greater contribution to the increase of exports.

keywords
Export Infrastructure Strengthening Program, Propensity Score Matching(PSM), Agri-food Export Company, Distribution Company, Overseas Marketing

Reference

1.

An, W. H., Cho, W. C., & Kim, C. H. (2014). A Study of Korean Agri-Food Brand Identities for Expanding Exports to China. Journal of Distribution Science, 12(2), 7-16.

2.

Angrist, J. D., & Pischke, J. S. (2009). Mostly Harmless Econometrics. New Jersey, USA: Princeton University Press.

3.

Choi, S. J., & Kim, S. S. (2009). The Ananlysis for Effect on Government R&D Subsidies by using PSM. Journal of the Korea Academia-Industrial, 10(1), 200-208.

4.

Dehejia, R. H., & Wahba, S. (1999). Causal Effects in Nonexperimental Studies: Reevaluating the Evaluation of Training Programs. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 94(448), 1053-1062.

5.

Heckman, J. J., & Smith, J. A. (1995). Assessing the Case for Social Experiments. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 9(2), 85-110.

6.

Jeong, M. K., Song, U. J., Ji, S. T., Nam, G. S., Lee, S. H., Yeom, J. W., Kim, M. I., Yoo, J. Y., & Park, S. Y. (2017a). 2016 Evaluation Report of Farmers’Support Policy in Response to FTA Implementation. Naju, Korea: Korea Rural Economic Institute.

7.

Jeong, M. K., Song, U. J., Lee, H. G., Yoo, J. H., & Myoung, S. H. (2017b). 2016 Research and Analysis of Agricultural and livestock products for Direct Payment for FTA Damages. Naju, Korea:Korea Rural Economic Institute.

8.

Jeong, Y. J. (2016). Assessment of Support Projects for Agricultural Products Export. Seoul, Korea:National Assembly Budget Office.

9.

Ji, S. T., Lee, S. H., Park, S. Y., & Jeong, M. K. (2017). The 5th Anniversary of Korea-ASEAN FTA, Changes and Challenges in Agricultural Trade. KREI Agriculture Policy Focus, 144.

10.

Kang, C. W. (2009). A Study on a Plan to Increase Produce and Agricultural Food Export. Journal of Distribution Science, 7(4), 27-36.

11.

Kim, J. H. (2016a). The Investment Aspects from the FTA between Korea and China. Journal of Distribution Science, 14(8), 87-92.

12.

Kim, K. P., & Heo, S. Y. (2014). Efficient Support Plan for Processed Food Exports. Seoul, Korea: Korea Rural Economic Institute, R715.

13.

Kim, S. S. (2016b). Understanding and Using the CEM Method: Focusing on the Effect of Public R&D Subsidies. Korean Journal of Economic Studies, 64(3), 125-151.

14.

Kim, T. Y., Han, D. B., Ahn, J. H., & Lee, S. H. (2013). Effect of Mothers’ Identification on Nutrition Labelling to Childern’s Obesity. The Korean Journal of Health Economics and Policy, 19(3), 51-82.

15.

Lee, D. G. (2016). An Introduction to Propensity Score Matching Methods. Anesth Pain Med, 11(2), 130-148.

16.

Lee, S. W. (2003). Evaluating the Effectiveness of Vocational Training Programs in Korea Using Propensity Score Matching. Korean Public Administration Review, 37(3), 181-199.

17.

Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs. (2017). 2017 FTA Farmers’ Support Investment and Loan Plan(draft). Sejong, Korea: MAFRA.

18.

Park, M. S., & Ahn, B. L. (2014). The impacts of Food Consumption Lifestyle on the Expenditure for the Processed Food: By Cluster Analyses and Propensity Score Matching. Journal of Rural Development. 37(3), 25-58.

19.

Rosenbaum, P. R., & Rubin, D. B. (1983). The Central Role of the Propensity Score in Observational Studies for Causal Effects. Biometrika, 70(1), 41-55.

20.

Smith, J., & Todd, P. (2005). Does Matching Overcome LaLonde’s Critique of Nonexperimental Estimators?. Journal of Econometrics, 125(1-2), 305-353.

The Journal of Distribution Science