APEC 2025 Gyeongju: AI, Demographics, and the Future of the Global Economy

Part 1. What Is APEC — The Cooperation Forum That Moves the Axis of the Global Economy

The APEC Leaders’ Meeting in Gyeongju in 2025 will bring together leaders from 21 economies that account for 60% of global GDP to discuss AI cooperation and responses to demographic change. It also compares the significance of Korea’s proposals with overseas cases.

1. Context of Birth and Growth

APEC (Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation) is not merely an international gathering; it is a product that reflects the transformation of the global economic order after the Cold War.

Until the late 1980s, the center of the world economy was still concentrated in Europe and North America. But as the late 1980s arrived, high growth in Asian economies became pronounced. Japan emerged as the world’s second-largest economy, and the so-called “Four Asian Tigers”—Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong, and Singapore—rapidly expanded their influence in global trade through industrialization and export-driven strategies. In addition, emerging Southeast Asian economies like Indonesia, Malaysia, and Thailand moved onto a growth trajectory, and Asia was no longer a periphery but recognized as a new growth engine for the global economy.

The problem, however, was the absence of a cooperative framework covering this region. Europe had the European Community (now the EU), and North America had NAFTA (the North American Free Trade Agreement), but while the Asia-Pacific region had grown in economic scale, it lacked a formal platform to coordinate and debate a shared vision. To fill this gap, in 1989, twelve economies—Korea, the United States, Japan, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Brunei, Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand, the Philippines, and Singapore—met in Canberra, Australia, and launched APEC.

Since its inception, APEC has steadily expanded. In the 1990s, China, Russia, Mexico, Vietnam, Peru, and Chile joined in turn, bringing membership to the current 21 economies. This composition effectively includes most major economies along the Pacific Rim, and their share of the global economy is overwhelming.

About 38% of the world’s population

About 60% of global GDP

More than half of global trade

In other words, APEC has become a massive economic forum that covers more than half of the global economy. This is why it is often called “the world’s largest economic cooperation stage.”

---

2. Why APEC Is Special — How It Differs From Other Cooperation Bodies

So how is APEC different from existing trade and economic cooperation frameworks? Its biggest distinguishing feature is the lack of legal enforceability.

For example, the EU is a powerful integration framework in which members comply with common laws and regulations and operate a single market and a common currency. The WTO (World Trade Organization) has enforceability that allows it to impose penalties if members do not comply with dispute settlement procedures. APEC, however, is different. APEC operates on a structure in which members voluntarily implement agreed principles.

This has advantages and disadvantages at the same time.

Advantage: Without legal enforceability, the burden on members is lighter. This allows broad participation from both advanced and developing economies and enables relatively freer discussion of politically sensitive issues.

Disadvantage: Because there is no compulsion, implementation can be weak. Content included in joint statements does not always translate into actual policies in each economy.

For example, at the 1994 APEC Leaders’ Meeting in Bogor, Indonesia, members agreed to achieve full liberalization of trade and investment (the Bogor Goals) by 2010 for developed members and by 2020 for developing members. In reality, however, differing interests among members meant the targets were not fully achieved. Nevertheless, the Bogor Goals remained the broad orienting vision for APEC over the following decades and played a significant role in spreading the discourse of free trade.

---

3. How APEC Operates and Its Characteristics

APEC holds an annual Leaders’ Meeting to discuss major agendas. Centered on the Leaders’ Meeting, dozens of ministerial meetings, Senior Officials’ Meetings (SOMs), and working-level group meetings take place throughout the year, covering a wide range of areas including trade and investment, infrastructure, energy, digital, women and SMEs, and education.

APEC’s process for drafting joint statements is also quite distinctive. Even a single phrase can spur intense negotiations. For example, whether to phrase a line as “promote free trade” or “work towards free trade” can trigger diplomatic contention. This process may appear slow and inefficient, but paradoxically, it is precisely this approach that makes it possible to form a minimum common denominator that all members can accept.

---

4. Why APEC Matters Now

In the 2020s, the global economy has faced multiple shocks: the COVID-19 pandemic, U.S.–China rivalry, supply chain disruptions, and the climate crisis. The WTO’s dispute settlement function has weakened, limiting its effectiveness, and bodies like the EU and G7 have inherent constraints as region- or advanced-economy-centric groupings. In this context, APEC is drawing renewed attention as a rare platform that encompasses the entire Asia-Pacific region and allows both advanced and developing economies to raise their voices together.

In other words, APEC is not just a diplomatic event—it can serve as a proving ground that sets the direction of the world economy. In particular, the 2025 Leaders’ Meeting to be held in Gyeongju is drawing international interest in what vision Korea, as host economy, will present.

---

👉 In summary, APEC is a voluntary cooperation forum without legal enforceability, yet as a massive platform covering more than half of the global economy, it exerts significant influence on the international order. Since its birth in 1989, APEC has evolved into a venue for discussing the defining issues of the times: free trade, investment, digital cooperation, and climate action.

---

Part 2. APEC Leaders’ Meeting Gyeongju 2025 — Theme and Agenda

1. The Significance of Korea Hosting

The 2025 APEC Leaders’ Meeting will be held October 31–November 1 in Gyeongju, Gyeongsangbuk-do.

Gyeongju, the millennium capital of the ancient Silla Kingdom, is home to UNESCO World Heritage sites such as Bulguksa Temple and Seokguram Grotto, while the Bomun Lake resort area has grown into a MICE city with concentrated convention venues, hotels, and tourism infrastructure.

Korea’s choice of Gyeongju as the host city is more than a venue decision.

History and Tradition: Gyeongju stands at the root of Korean culture and at a crossroads of East Asian civilization—symbolizing a space where tradition meets modernity.

Cutting-Edge and Innovation: At the same time, Korea is a leading nation in semiconductors, AI, and digital innovation, capable of showcasing both tradition and the future.

Diplomatic Opportunity: It is the first APEC Leaders’ Meeting in Korea in 20 years since Busan 2005, offering a stage for Korea to reaffirm its middle-power diplomacy on the international stage.

In short, Gyeongju connects past and future, and this hosting allows Korea to highlight both its cultural identity and its image as a technology leader.

---

2. Theme: “Building a Sustainable Tomorrow”

The official theme of this Leaders’ Meeting is:

> “Building a Sustainable Tomorrow: Connect, Innovate, Prosper”

This phrase reflects Korea’s intent as the host. By centering on “sustainability,” it aims to encompass not only economic growth but also inclusion, resilience, environment, and technological innovation.

It can be broken down into three pillars.

1) Connect

Liberalization of trade and investment, stabilization of supply chains

Lowering institutional barriers, expanding people-to-people and cultural exchanges

Examples: Regional cooperation among startups and SMEs; tourism and education exchanges

2) Innovate

Accelerating digital transformation; AI cooperation; building technology collaboration networks

Harmonizing data, cybersecurity, and e-commerce rules

Examples: APEC-level principles on AI; promotion of digital trade

3) Prosper

Inclusive growth; responses to environment and climate change; sustainable development

Examples: Carbon-neutral collaboration; investment in renewables; green finance cooperation

In other words, the Gyeongju meeting is significant because it seeks to address a comprehensive agenda that includes digital, climate, and social structures, going beyond mere “economic liberalization.”

---

3. Korea’s Core Agendas in Preparation

① AI Cooperation

As a digital and AI powerhouse, Korea is pushing AI cooperation as a central agenda for this meeting.

Principles for Responsible AI Use: The goal is to craft joint language for AI use that is safe, ethical, and inclusive, rather than allowing uncontrolled proliferation.

Bridging the AI Capability Gap: The capability gap between advanced and developing economies is widening. Korea aims to propose measures to narrow this gap through education, workforce training, and technology transfer.

Public–Private Partnerships: Discussions include building AI infrastructure and promoting AI use projects through public–private collaboration.

APEC’s First AI Governance Discourse: This is an attempt to extend AI norms discussed at the OECD and G7 to the APEC level.

In this process, Korea is choosing a direction that emphasizes cooperation and inclusion rather than an “AI regulation”-centered European approach (EU AI Act). This is a strategic choice in light of the reality that many APEC members are developing economies.

② Responding to Demographic Change

Another core agenda is low birth rates and population aging. This is a common challenge not only for Korea but also for many Asia-Pacific economies, including Japan, China, Thailand, and Australia.

Low Birth Rate Response: Positioning the long-term growth-potential challenge as a regional common agenda

Expanding Economic Participation by Women and Older Adults: Encouraging labor market participation by women and older adults to offset shrinking working-age populations

Healthcare and Care Innovation: Expanding digital health technologies and smart care services to respond to increased demand for medical and long-term care due to aging

Enhancing Labor Mobility: Increasing cross-border labor mobility among regional economies to complement demographic imbalances

The reason Korea is proposing this agenda is clear: by elevating challenges faced by Korean society into regional common agendas, Korea hopes to share its experience and catalyze international cooperation.

---

4. Why the Agendas Are Persuasive

These two core agendas—AI and demographics—are not merely Korea’s internal issues; they are challenges commonly faced by other members as well.

AI is crucial for technology leaders like the U.S., China, and Japan, and it is both an opportunity and a burden for developing economies in Southeast Asia and Latin America.

While low birth rates and aging are most severe in Japan and Korea, China, Thailand, and Australia have already entered demographic transition phases.

Thus, the Gyeongju meeting will serve as a venue where members share their experiences and solutions and discuss how to address structural problems facing future generations together.

---

👉 In summary, the APEC Leaders’ Meeting in Gyeongju in 2025 is a stage where history meets the future. By putting forward forward-looking agendas—AI cooperation and responses to demographic change—Korea seeks to leave a significant mark on global economic discourse.

---

Part 3. Comparison With Overseas Cases — The Meaning of Korea’s Proposal

1. International Comparisons on AI Cooperation

① G7 Hiroshima AI Process (2023)

The G7, at the Hiroshima Summit, discussed a joint response to the explosive spread of generative AI. It emphasized the ethical and security impacts of AI on society and agreed to establish norms ensuring transparency, safety, and accountability. This framework is strongly characterized as a “advanced-economy-centric norm.”

② EU AI Act (2024)

The European Union enacted the world’s first comprehensive AI law. It classifies AI systems by risk level and imposes strict obligations on high-risk categories (e.g., medical and law enforcement applications). Violations can incur penalties of up to 7% of global turnover. In other words, this is not just a normative framework but the world’s first AI law with legal enforceability, marking a global milestone.

③ OECD AI Recommendation (2019)

In 2019, the OECD adopted an AI Recommendation with participation from 46 countries. It established principles of transparency, fairness, human-rights protection, and explainability. While not legally binding, it has been widely reflected in national policies since.

④ U.S.–Japan AI Cooperation (2024)

The United States and Japan agreed to jointly pursue research in semiconductors and AI and to establish an AI Safety Institute. This strategic cooperation combines U.S. technological capabilities with Japan’s strengths in semiconductor equipment and materials to strengthen leadership over the AI ecosystem.

👉 Korea’s Differentiation

Through APEC, Korea emphasizes bridging gaps and inclusion rather than “regulation.” Given that more than half of APEC consists of developing economies, the EU’s strong regulatory approach is hard to agree upon. Instead, Korea seeks to design consensual agendas acceptable to both advanced and developing economies by highlighting AI capacity building, education and technology transfer, and public–private collaboration.

---

2. Comparisons on Responding to Demographic Change

① EU (European Union)

A region where aging is serious. The EU responds on three pillars: pension reform, expansion of older-adult labor participation, and increased immigration. Notably, it actively uses immigration policy to supplement the workforce.

② Japan

Japan entered a super-aged society earlier than Korea. The government enacted the Act on the Promotion of Women’s Participation and Advancement in the Workplace, encouraged women’s economic participation, extended retirement ages, and expanded re-employment support for older adults. Japan faces social issues similar to Korea, so there is strong common ground with Korea’s proposal in the APEC agenda.

③ United States

The U.S. has largely offset aging through immigration policy. It admits hundreds of thousands of immigrants annually, replenishing labor and attracting innovative talent—an approach aligned with the U.S.’s multicultural context.

④ UN Recommendation

The United Nations’ World Population Ageing 2023 warns of global aging and presents strengthening care and medical systems, social inclusion, and productivity enhancement as common international tasks.

👉 Korea’s Proposal

Korea recognizes that fully addressing immigration in APEC is politically sensitive. Therefore, it avoids pushing immigration expansion and instead emphasizes:

Expanding economic participation by women and older adults

Innovation in healthcare and care services

Enhancing labor mobility and workforce exchanges

These are “minimum common denominator” items that APEC members can discuss collectively.

---

Part 4. Realism and Limits of the APEC Agenda

1. Strengths

Forward-Looking Agenda Setting: AI and demographic change will shape the global economic order for decades. Korea’s initiative carries significance as an effort to lead international discourse.

Expanding Global Discourse: It extends topics already discussed at the OECD, G7, and EU to the APEC arena, creating a forum for both advanced and developing economies to participate.

Inclusive Approach: By emphasizing cooperation and inclusion rather than regulation, it raises the likelihood of consensus and helps build common ground among members.

2. Limits

Lack of Enforceability: APEC joint statements are not legally binding and may remain declaratory.

Divergent Member Interests: U.S.–China tensions, gaps between advanced and developing economies, and varied political and economic situations make concrete action agreements difficult.

Complexity of the Agendas:

AI: Large technological gaps and conflicting national interests

Demographics: Differences in culture, institutions, and social structures make a single solution elusive

Thus, while the agendas themselves readily garner consensus, translating them into practical implementation remains challenging.

---

Part 5. APEC Leaders’ Meeting Gyeongju 2025 — Economic Impact and Beneficiary Sectors

1. Local Economic Impact of Hosting the Meeting

A high-level international summit injects direct momentum into the host city’s economy, beyond diplomatic optics.

The 2025 APEC Leaders’ Meeting in Gyeongju is expected to draw heads of government, ministerial-level officials, thousands of diplomats, business leaders, international-organization staff, and journalists—likely boosting hotels, tourism, transportation, and F&B across the board.

Analyses of the Busan APEC 2005 meeting estimated over KRW 1 trillion in economic spillover effects.

The impact extended from lodging, transportation, security, and interpretation services to local specialties and cultural tourism.

This time, too, around Bomun Resort, Bulguksa, Donggung Palace and Wolji Pond, Gyeongju can expect rising international recognition.

In short, Gyeongju is not just a venue; it gets an opportunity to level up as an international MICE city.

---

2. Beneficiaries Linked to the AI Cooperation Agenda

One of the most watched agendas at APEC 2025 is AI cooperation. Korea proposes principles for “responsible AI use” and supports AI capacity building in developing economies. This can send a positive signal across AI-related industries.

Korean Semiconductor and AI Infrastructure

SK hynix, Samsung Electronics: Leading global market share in AI memory (HBM). As AI demand expands, investments by global data-center and cloud companies increase, making Korean semiconductor firms prime beneficiaries.

NAVER, Kakao: With their own cloud and AI platforms, strengthened APEC digital cooperation can mean expanded overseas opportunities.

Hanwha Systems, KT: Potential policy support in data centers, AI security, and satellite communications infrastructure.

Global Big Tech

NVIDIA, AMD: Direct beneficiaries from expanded GPU and AI chipset supply.

Microsoft, Google: A favorable environment for expanding cloud and generative-AI services.

Since Korea’s proposal centers on “principles of responsible use” rather than hard regulation, global big tech may see opportunities rather than burdens.

---

3. Beneficiaries Linked to the Demographics Agenda

Low birth rates and aging are common challenges across many APEC economies, not just Korea. Related industries can expect steady medium- to long-term benefits.

Healthcare and Bio

Samsung Biologics, Celltrion: Demand for biopharmaceuticals and antibody therapies is surging with an aging population.

Chong Kun Dang, JW Pharmaceutical, Huons: Strong growth potential in therapies for chronic diseases, dementia, osteoporosis, and care-related pharmaceuticals tailored to older adults.

Care and Smart Health Tech

LG Electronics, Panasonic: Beneficiaries of the expanding market for age-friendly appliances and smart healthcare devices.

Domestic silver-care startups: Startups developing care robots, telemedicine platforms, and wearable health devices may gain talent exchange and investment opportunities as APEC advances related agendas.

---

4. Beneficiaries Linked to Supply-Chain Stability and Sustainability

APEC also treats stabilizing global supply chains—shaken by U.S.–China tensions and the pandemic—as a key task. Coupled with climate action and carbon neutrality, related industries are likely to draw direct attention.

Renewables and Carbon Neutrality

HD Hyundai Energy Solutions, Hanwha Solutions, OCI: Beneficiaries of expanded projects in solar, hydrogen, and energy transition.

POSCO Holdings, EcoPro: Gains from stabilizing and investing in supply chains for EV battery materials (lithium, nickel, cobalt).

Logistics, Ports, and Transportation

HMM, Korean Air, CJ Logistics: Increased cargo volumes from revitalized regional exchanges can benefit logistics.

APEC’s emphasis on “connectivity” can lead to modernized infrastructure, smart ports, and digital logistics innovation.

---

5. Summary for Investors

Short-Term Effects

Activation of the Gyeongju/Gyeongbuk regional economy

Near-term beneficiaries among hotels, tourism, transportation, and security services

Medium- to Long-Term Effects

AI semiconductors and cloud: Collaboration with global data centers expands

Healthcare, bio, and silver industry: Rising demand for aging-related solutions

Renewables, batteries, and materials: Investment tied to carbon neutrality and supply-chain stability

Global Effects

While APEC lacks enforceability, consensus itself acts as an investment signal.

If agendas acceptable to both advanced and developing economies are adopted, positive investor sentiment can spread across related sectors.

---

Integrated Conclusion (Part 6) — Questions From Gyeongju and Industry-Wide Ripple Effects

1) Why Gyeongju APEC Is Not a “Trivial Diplomatic Event”

The core meaning of Gyeongju APEC stems from three levers:

Consensus Lever: Though not legally binding, APEC creates a political/policy signal that 21 members “look in the same direction” through joint language. The strength of each phrase sets a reference point for future laws and institutional design in each economy.

Signal Lever: Phrases in the Leaders’ Declaration and Ministerial Statements align the direction of budget allocations, public procurement, development cooperation (ODA), and MDB funding.

Connectivity Lever: Ministers, senior officials, and industry maintain cumulative channels of dialogue throughout the year. These connections solidify as regulation, standards, talent exchanges, and procurement projects, yielding cost reductions, market opening, and risk diversification for companies.

In short, Gyeongju APEC is a “coordination device” aligning policies, capital, and people, and that alignment creates visible changes in markets and industries.

---

2) What Changes Appear—Short Term vs. Medium/Long Term

Short Term (3–6 months around the event): Focus on the local economy and MICE

Direct demand in Gyeongju/Gyeongbuk: lodging; air/KTX/bus transport; security; interpretation; PR and event agencies; local F&B and tourism see immediate benefits.

City brand uplift: International media exposure raises Gyeongju’s cultural/tourism brand value, improving its odds of attracting future international conferences and corporate events.

Medium to Long Term (1–3 years): Agenda-driven industry impacts

AI and Digital Infrastructure: If “responsible AI” and capability bridging are embedded in joint language, members will increase budgets for education, computing infrastructure, security, and data governance.

Demand spreads across the value chain: HBM memory, packaging, power semiconductors, optics, cooling, data-center EPC, and green power procurement.

Cloud, AI SaaS, security, identity, e-signature, and cross-border data rules lower adoption and transaction costs, easing market entry for software firms.

Demographics (Silver Economy, Healthcare, and Care): Expanded labor participation by women and older adults; telemedicine and digital health; and smartization of home and facility care rise to the top of regulatory pilots.

Biopharma contract manufacturing, solutions for chronic diseases and dementia, wearables/appliances/care robots are linked as beneficiary segments.

Supply Chains and Sustainability: Public and PPP projects accelerate for renewables, low-carbon logistics, green ports, and battery materials.

With MDB and export credit agency (ECA) financing, long-term, low-rate capital opens up, bolstering bid competitiveness for EPC, materials, and equipment firms.

---

3) What Constitutes a “Real Outcome” After the Summit

To be judged as having substantive results, the meeting should deliver several of the following:

1. Strength of Language: Does the declaration go beyond “work towards” and include “commit to / adopt”-level phrasing? (e.g., APEC Responsible AI Principles adopted)

2. Roadmaps/Guidelines: Are there year-by-year targets and KPIs in annexes for AI, digital transformation, and demographic response?

3. Pilot Programs: Are cross-border pilots specified for education, SME digitalization, telemedicine and care, and port/logistics digital transformation?

4. Financing: Are funding sources such as MDBs, public funds, and PPP explicitly identified, with implementing windows designated?

5. Standards/Mutual Recognition (MRA): Is there even a draft of mutual recognition or a common framework for data, e-commerce, identity, and cybersecurity?

6. Follow-up Calendar: If a concrete SOM/ministerial-level follow-up schedule and reporting mechanism are set, execution gains traction.

Among these, #3 and #4 (pilots and financing) convert a declaration into tangible procurement and investment signals.

---

4) What to Watch by Sector

AI Semiconductors and Cloud

Data-center expansion will come with simultaneous increases in power, cooling, sites, and green PPAs.

If policy language includes skills, compute access, safety, and SMEs together, markets open for training, compute credits, and safety evaluation.

Healthcare and Silver Tech

Watch for telemedicine regulatory sandboxes, digitalization of long-term care reimbursements, and data interoperability pilots.

Wearables, home monitoring, facility automation, and dementia/fall-prevention solutions are likely to enter procurement catalogues.

Green, Supply Chains, and Logistics

Keep an eye on port optimization, GHG MRV, modal shifts to cold chain and rail, and SAF (sustainable aviation fuel) procurement pilots, alongside global cargo and freight indicators.

If language on a circular economy covering both raw materials and recycling for batteries appears, a policy premium is likely across the materials chain.

---

5) Risks and a Realistic View—Avoid Over-Expectations

Wall of Non-Enforceability: Declarations are declarations—domestic politics and budget constraints can slow progress.

Geopolitical Variables: U.S.–China competition and trade measures (export controls, retaliatory tariffs) can limit the operating scope of any agreement.

Capability Gaps: Even with identical language, infrastructure, human resources, and budgets differ by country, producing execution gaps.

Therefore, evaluate less by the height of the rhetoric and more by follow-through—pilots, budgets, and standards.

---

6) Key Questions From Gyeongju

1. AI: Can members adopt a minimum common denominator for “responsible AI” that both advanced and developing economies accept—and back it with financing and pilots for education and compute access?

2. Demographics: While respecting institutional and cultural differences, can members agree on measurable KPIs for expanding participation by women and older adults and for innovations in care and healthcare?

3. Connectivity and Prosperity: Can supply-chain stability, digital trade, and green transition be tied to international standards and mutual recognition that meaningfully lower transaction costs?

If a combination of language + roadmap + financing + pilots that says “yes” to these questions emerges, Gyeongju will be remembered not just as an ancient capital but as a launchpad for global future industries.

---

7) One-Line Bottom Line

Gyeongju APEC is not an event that ends with a declaration; it is a watershed that will show whether “AI, Silver, and Green” can move into tangible projects through alignment of direction, financing, standards, and people.

In the short term, the local economy will feel it; in the medium to long term, AI semiconductors, cloud, healthcare, renewables, and logistics will. Use the declaration/annex roadmaps and pilot/financing language as your checklist to turn this into real investment and business opportunities.

This article is provided for investment reference only and does not recommend the purchase or sale of any specific securities. Final decisions and responsibility for investments rest with the investor.

---

📌 References

1. Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Republic of Korea

Guide to the APEC Leaders’ Meeting 2025, 2025.

mofa.go.kr

2. APEC Official Site

APEC 2025 Korea Official Website, 2025.

apec2025.kr

3. OECD

Recommendation of the Council on Artificial Intelligence, 2019.

oecd.org

4. EU AI Act

European Commission, Artificial Intelligence Act (AI Act), adopted 2024.

europa.eu

5. G7 Hiroshima Summit (2023)

Hiroshima Leaders’ Communiqué: Hiroshima AI Process, 2023.

g7hiroshima.go.jp

6. UN World Population Ageing

United Nations, World Population Ageing 2023.

un.org

7. KIEP (Korea Institute for International Economic Policy)

Analysis of Key Agendas for APEC 2025, 2024.

kiep.go.kr

8. Domestic Media

Seoul Economic Daily (articles on preparations for Gyeongju APEC), 2025.

Korea Economic Daily (articles on Gyeongju APEC and economic impact), 2025.