This study evaluates the effectiveness of Korea’s first Materials, Parts, and Equipment (MPE) Competitiveness Enhancement Plan (2021-2025) and draws policy implications for supply chain diversification and resilience. Following export restrictions imposed by Japan in 2019 and the growing fragmentation of global supply chains, Korea elevated MPE policy from a conventional industrial competitiveness strategy to a key pillar of economic security. Against this backdrop, the study examines both structural changes in the MPE sector and the performance effects of major policy instruments.

Using industry-level and firm-level data, the study analyzes changes in domestic production, value-added, trade structure, and corporate performance before and after policy implementation. At the industry level, self-sufficiency ratios, import penetration ratios, and trade diversification indicators are employed to assess structural changes in production and trade. At the firm level, the impacts of three major policy measures―R&D support, designation as a National Champion Firm, and participation in specialized industrial complexes―are evaluated using propensity score matching (PSM) and difference-in-differences (DID) methods.

The empirical findings reveal notable shifts in Korea's MPE trade structure: import dependence on Japan declined, while import dependence on China increased and exports to China contracted. In particular, the analysis demonstrates that deepening import dependence on China exerts a negative effect on domestic production, whereas exports to China contribute positively to domestic output―underscoring China's dual role as both a critical upstream supplier and a key downstream export market within Korea's MPE value chain.

Firm-level analysis indicates that R&D support is the most effective policy instrument, generating positive effects on profitability, innovation, and productivity. National Champion Firm designation strengthens innovation capacity, while participation in specialized industrial complexes contributes to financial stability in the early stages. Moreover, policy packages combining R&D support with National Champion Firm designation produce considerably stronger outcomes than either instrument alone, pointing to significant complementarities across policy instruments. In contrast, policy combinations without R&D support exhibit weaker innovation and profitability outcomes.

Based on these findings, the study argues that Korea’s MPE policy should evolve from fragmented project-based support toward an integrated, R&D-centered policy package spanning the entire innovation cycle. It also highlights the need to strengthen long-term technological capabilities, develop ecosystem-based industrial clusters, and shift policy objectives from import substitution toward strategic indispensability and supply chain resilience within global value chains.

These findings should be interpreted with caution. The firm-level analysis compares treated and untreated firms and cannot fully rule out the influence of unobserved firm characteristics; moreover, a uniform treatment-timing assumption (2019 for R&D, and 2020 for National Champion Firm designation and specialized industrial complexes) may not fully capture firm-specific variation in the timing of policy benefits. The results should therefore not be interpreted as a definitive assessment of the overall success or failure of Korea's MPE policy. Further research―incorporating firm-specific treatment timing, longer time series, and complementary qualitative evidence―is needed to validate and refine these findings.

요 약

제1장 서 론

제2장 한국 소부장 정책의 주요 내용 및 해외 사례
　제1절 소부장 정책의 배경 및 추진 과정
　제2절 제1차 소부장 정책의 주요 내용 및 성과
　제3절 일본 소부장 정책의 배경과 주요 특징
　제4절 소 결

제3장 소부장 정책 시행 이후 수출입 다변화
　제1절 국내 생산 및 부가가치율 변화
　제2절 수출 및 수입 구조 변화
　제3절 한국 소부장 수출입 다변화 분석
　제4절 소 결

제4장 소부장 정책 수혜기업의 성과 평가
　제1절 정책 및 성과 지표 설정
　제2절 정책별 기대효과
　제3절 소부장 정책의 다각적 성과 분석
　제4절 소 결

제5장 결론 및 시사점
　제1절 주요 결과
　제2절 정책 시사점

참고문헌
부 록
ABSTRACT