An Empirical Study on the United States Gold Futures Price Change Impact on the South Korean

2014 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 85-102
Author(s):  
Byung-Jin Yim ◽  
허지훈
2007 ◽  
Vol 39 (1) ◽  
pp. 47-60 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shida Rastegari Henneberry ◽  
Seong-huyk Hwang

The first difference version of the restricted source-differentiated almost ideal demand system is used to estimate South Korean meat demand. The results of this study indicate that the United States has the most to gain from an increase in the size of the South Korean imported meat market in terms of its beef exports, while South Korea has the most to gain from this expansion in the pork market. Moreover, the results indicate that the United States has a competitive advantage to Australia in the South Korean beef market. Results of this study have implications for U.S. meat exports in this ever-changing policy environment.


2018 ◽  
Vol 81 (1) ◽  
pp. 46-65
Author(s):  
Wan-Soo Lee ◽  
Min-Kyu Lee ◽  
Seok Kang ◽  
Jae-Woong Yoo

This study explored a comparative analysis of how the South Korean and United States media framed the Samsung–Apple patent lawsuit. The South Korean and U.S. media have a tendency to report Samsung–Apple patent disputes in a completely different angle. While framing in favor of Samsung was frequent in South Korea, neutral frames were dominant in the United States. The South Korean newspapers showed a stronger nationalism in favor of Samsung, whereas the U.S. newspapers portrayed the business conflict in the market logic. The South Korean and U.S. newspapers also showed differences in framing according to the ideological characteristics of the newspaper. In South Korea, the main conservative newspaper ( Chosun Ilbo) framed the issue in favor of Samsung and the largest liberal newspaper ( Hankyoreh) revealed a tendency to frame it in favor of Apple. However, in the United States, only the main business newspaper ( Wall Street Journal) favored Apple. This study contributes to news framing research in that socio-cultural divergences, framing pool (e.g., generic frames vs. issue-specific frames), and journalistic contexts considered systematically.


2007 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 1-22
Author(s):  
Soonhee Kim

This paper anlyzes the family-friendly policies and benefits currently offered by public organizations in South Korea and the United States. This study found that leaves of absence are the first types of family-friendly policy that reflect an acknowledgement on the part of government agencies in South Korea and the United States aht both men and women must face work/family conflicts in their lives. The South Korean government provides more generous leave policies than those of the American public sector. Hoewver, several family-friendly benefits provided by federal agencies in the United States, including flexible workplace and telecommuting programs, job sharing, and dependent care counseling and referral services were rarely offered by the South Korean government. Finally, the paper discussed policy implications and emphasizes managerial leadership affecting the implementation process behind these policies in public agencies.


2014 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 123-157 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lukas Pokorny

Abstract Drawing on a variety of primary sources and numerous interviews and personal conversations with adherents from East Asia, Europe and the United States, this paper sheds light on the latest historical and doctrinal developments in the South Korean Unification Movement, following the passing of its founder and self-proclaimed Saviour, Mun Sŏn-myŏng, in September 2012. Recent personnel changes resulting in the uncontested leadership of Mun’s wife, Han Hak-cha, as well as the two key events of 2012 and 2013-Mun’s funeral and Foundation Day-will be briefly outlined. Concomitant doctrinal alterations in the interpretation of the movement’s integral millenarian vision, fleshing out as ‘Cheon Il Guk 2.0’ and entailing a revised notion of Foundation Day and the newly launched Vision 2020 scheme, will also be discussed. Ultimately, this paper shows how the Unification Movement has rendered its executive and theological base apt to preserve its systemically constitutive millenarian agenda for a post-Mun and post-Foundation Day era.


2019 ◽  
Vol 35 (2) ◽  
pp. 143-170
Author(s):  
Gerardo Gurza-Lavalle

This work analyses the diplomatic conflicts that slavery and the problem of runaway slaves provoked in relations between Mexico and the United States from 1821 to 1857. Slavery became a source of conflict after the colonization of Texas. Later, after the US-Mexico War, slaves ran away into Mexican territory, and therefore slaveholders and politicians in Texas wanted a treaty of extradition that included a stipulation for the return of fugitives. This article contests recent historiography that considers the South (as a region) and southern politicians as strongly influential in the design of foreign policy, putting into question the actual power not only of the South but also of the United States as a whole. The problem of slavery divided the United States and rendered the pursuit of a proslavery foreign policy increasingly difficult. In addition, the South never acted as a unified bloc; there were considerable differences between the upper South and the lower South. These differences are noticeable in the fact that southerners in Congress never sought with enough energy a treaty of extradition with Mexico. The article also argues that Mexico found the necessary leeway to defend its own interests, even with the stark differential of wealth and resources existing between the two countries. El presente trabajo analiza los conflictos diplomáticos entre México y Estados Unidos que fueron provocados por la esclavitud y el problema de los esclavos fugitivos entre 1821 y 1857. La esclavitud se convirtió en fuente de conflicto tras la colonización de Texas. Más tarde, después de la guerra Mexico-Estados Unidos, algunos esclavos se fugaron al territorio mexicano y por lo tanto dueños y políticos solicitaron un tratado de extradición que incluyera una estipulación para el retorno de los fugitivos. Este artículo disputa la idea de la historiografía reciente que considera al Sur (en cuanto región), así como a los políticos sureños, como grandes influencias en el diseño de la política exterior, y pone en tela de juicio el verdadero poder no sólo del Sur sino de Estados Unidos en su conjunto. El problema de la esclavitud dividió a Estados Unidos y dificultó cada vez más el impulso de una política exterior que favoreciera la esclavitud. Además, el Sur jamás operó como unidad: había diferencias marcadas entre el Alto Sur y el Bajo Sur. Estas diferencias se observan en el hecho de que los sureños en el Congreso jamás se esforzaron en buscar con suficiente energía un tratado de extradición con México. El artículo también sostiene que México halló el margen de maniobra necesario para defender sus propios intereses, pese a los fuertes contrastes de riqueza y recursos entre los dos países.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document