on Competition Policy

��

Planning and Budget Officer

��

1. Introduction

With the launch of the WTO regime, the economies of the world are striving to emphasize market in their economic management through active market opening and promotion of competition. Nations are placing increasingly greater emphasis on competition policy. However, developing economies are experiencing difficulties in adopting or enforcing competition laws and policies for various reasons.

Recognizing such difficulties of developing economies, international economic bodies such as OECD, WTO, UNCTAD and APEC have operated various technical assistance programs including seminars, training programs and advisory committees. Also, some developing nations which have been successfully operating competition laws have offered technical assistance programs.

In 1996 which marks the year of its accession into OECD, Korea hosted an international training program on competition policy to share its 17-year experience of competition policy with other developing economies. Since then Korea has hosted an international training program on competition policy annually.

��

II. Overall organization of the program

Now I would like to give you a brief description of the Second Annual International Training Program on Competition Policy which was held in Korea from August 4^th to 8^th 1997.

A total of 23 representatives were invited to the Program. They were from Taiwan, Malaysia, Mexico, Singapore, Indonesia, China, Chile, Thailand, the Philippines, Hong Kong and Russia. Most of the participants were public servants of competition agencies or of agencies in charge of economic or legal affairs.

The lecturers and panelists of the training program were from various background. They were Mr. Frederic Jenny, Chairman of the OECD Committee on Competition Law and Policy, Terry Winslow and Massiniliano Gangi, officials in charge of competition policy at OECD and UNCTAD respectively, Geoff Conner and Makoto Kurita, officials of competition authorities of New Zealand and Japan, and Kwang-Sik SHIN, a specialist of competition law at the Korea Development Institute.

After five lecturers presented on five different topics, discussions by the panelists and participants followed the presentations.

��

III. Major topics of discussion

The major issues discussed at the Program can be divide into two categories; One is the effect of adoption and enforcement of competition policy on economic development and the other is the regulation and analysis of various anti-competitive conducts.

With respect to the first topic, Mr. Jenny, Chairman of the OECD Committee on Competition Law and Policy presented the topic of "The Relationship between Economic Development, Competition Policy and Deregulation". He discussed the worldwide trends of deregulation and strengthening of competition policy, emphasizing the growing importance of competition law in their economic policy mix as economic development deepens.

Besides, active discussions took place on various areas of competition policy such as "Market Definition and Abuse of Dominance", "The Definition, Types and Criteria of Cartels", "Competition policy and Public Utilities" and "Types of Vertical Restraints and Their Anti-competitiveness". If you want to get a copy of what was discussed at the Program, never mind asking me.

��

IV. Evaluation

Since the First International Training on Competition Policy was held in 1996, participating economies as well as OECD, WTO and APEC have shown great interest in the program. We heard they have also given positive evaluation of the Program. Especially, OECD supported given positive evaluation of the Program. Especially, OECD supported finance for the airfare and hotel accommodations of the lecturers.

Today, I would like to take this opportunity to assess the Program in various aspects from the perspective of the organizer of the Program.

First, I would like to touch upon the selection of the agenda. They have been selected through consultations between the lecturers and the Korea Fair Trade Commission, the organizer.

In the process of selecting the agenda, much consideration was given as to what issues are appropriate in addressing the needs of the developing economies,. However, I feel that there is room for improvement in selecting the agenda.

In particular, given the fact that the APEC consists of both developing economies who are undergoing systemic reform for market economy, we find substantial differences in their economic situations and perspectives on competition policy among them. Therefore, I believe that from the process of selecting the agenda, the different needs of the participating economies must be thoroughly considered.

Second, I would like to dwell on the selecting of participants. Most of the participating economies select their trainee candidates among those who are in charge of competition policy or those who will be when competition laws are adopted in the near future. I believe they will play a significant role in the introduction and enforcement of competition laws and policies in their respective economies. Their experience of the Program will be greatly helpful.

With respect to the lecturers, as I mentioned earlier, they were consisted of five experts from OECD, UNCTAD, New Zealand competition authority, and Korea Development Institute. Their presentation were very helpful in the understanding of the overall trends of competition policy. However, since their presentations were largely based on their own experience of enforcing competition policies in developed countries, they did not fully address the unique historic, political and economic situation of each developing economy in the APEC region.

Accordingly, I think that those who have first-hand experience in enforcing competition policy and understand the unique situation of the developing economies should be selected as lecturers. For instance, I believe it would be worthwhile to consider increasing the number of Korean lecturers who have rich experience in operating the Fair Trade Act.

Third, I would like to discuss the assessment of the effectiveness of the Program. You may think that it is premature to evaluate the effectiveness of the three-year-old Program, however, I think that for an efficient organization of the next Program, it is crucial to evaluate the degree in which the participants actively utilize what they learned at the Program in their respective economies.

Therefore, a mechanism for assessing the participants' feedback must be developed as soon as possible.

Lastly, I want to briefly talk about the finance for the Program. Last year, approximately fifty thousand dollars were mobilized for the Training Program including the airfare and hotel accomodations for seventeen participants from eight economies. Korea Fair Trade Commission considers the Program the most important annual event and has shown its full support.

��

V. Plans for future operation

I believe that the points that I have mentioned earlier may be gradually improved as our experience accumulates in the near future.

Economies which want to introduce or enforce competition laws more effectively need a firm determination and long-term perspectives that market economy is the only way to achieve economic development.

Among developing nations, Korea has a relatively long history of competition law enforcement. Korea is committed to sharing its 17-year experience with other APEC members and to cooperating with them for successful establishment of competition policy in the Asia Pacific Region.

��

Thank you.