30page

ly responsible for Korea’s ranking drop of 6 positions, given that fnancial market devel- opment fell 10 positions, compared to goods market efciency that fell four positions. Specifcally, areas that fared worse than last year and had rankings below 100th include: ease of access to loans (115th→ 118th), ven- ture capital availability (110th→ 115th), and soundness of banks (98th→ 113th). Other in- dicators, such as availability of fnancial ser- vices (82nd→ 92nd), regulations of securities exchanges (80th→94th), fnancing through local equity market (67th→75th), and af- fordability of fnancial services (42nd→69th) stayed within the top 100 but the rankings are still low compared to the overall ranking of 25th. The implications of wef’s assessment of Korea Korea’s signifcant fall of six positions from last year’s WEF competitive ranking can largely be attributed to poorer performance in many areas that comprise the survey. It is worth noting that the survey was conduct- ed from early-April to mid-May of this year, amid national anxiety surrounding North Korea’s third nuclear test and North Korea’s removal of workers of the Kaesong joint in- dustrial complex. With no economic growth for 8 consecutive quarters, executives flling out the survey are likely to have been impact- ed. Primary factors that dragged the over- all performance level down are institutions (62nd→ 74th) and fnancial market develop- ment (71st→ 81st) that fell more than 10 po- sitions. Of all the indicators of institutions, business costs related to terrorism and ethical behavior of frms dropped the most. In addi- tion, it seems that the poor fnancial record was based on inadequate corporate fnancing and reduced bank proftability that resulted from a decrease in stock sales and fewer loans due to credit diferentiation. According to analysis of the WEF fndings by sector, the six areas in the top 20 —macro- economic environment (9th), infrastructure (11th), market size (12th), capacity for inno- vation (17th), health and primary education (18th), higher education and training (19th) —are national competitiveness advantages. Meanwhile, institutions (74th), labor market efciency (78th) and fnancial market devel- opment (81st) are Korea’s weak areas, with their rankings lingering below 70th. Finding and sustaining plans to strengthen those ar- eas are needed to boost Korea’s national com- petitiveness. A s s e t M A n A G e M e n t global ranking basic requirements (18th → 20th) Effciency enhancers (20th → 23rd) innovation and sophistication factors (17th → 20th) institutions macroeco - nomic envi- ronment goods market effciency financial market de- velopment business sophistica- tion capacity for innovation 2012 19 62 10 29 71 22 16 2013 25 74 9 33 81 24 17 <TabLe 2> sub-indexes and CoMPosing PiLLars ranKings indicator rank indicator rank 2012 2013 2012 2013 Availability of fnancial service 89 92 venture capital availability 110 115 Affordability of fnancial service 42 69 soundness of banks 98 113 financing through local equity market 67 75 regulation of securities exchanges 80 94 ease access to loans 115 118 legal rights index 24 28 <TabLe 3> finanCiaL MarKeT deVeLoPMenT: MaJor weaKnesses