The purpose of this study is to construct a regional-sector-fishery-offshore and inshore fishery competitiveness index, examine the types and changes of competitiveness, and derive implications by processing data of the Survey on the Current Status of Offshore and Inshore Fishery from 2013 to 2020 for this study. The main results of this study can be summarized as follows. First, considering the competitiveness of offshore and inshore fishery by region and year, Jeonnam, Jeju, and Incheon were relatively competitive. Second, considering the competitiveness of inshore fishery by region and year, we found that Jeonnam, Chungnam, Jeonbuk, and Jeju were relatively competitive. Third, looking at the types of competitiveness based on the competitiveness index in the management sector of offshore and inshore fisheries by region and year, Ulsan, Jeonnam, and Gyeongbuk were relatively competitive between 2014 and 2020. Fourth, Jeonnam and Jeju were relatively competitive between 2014 and 2020 based on the competitiveness index in the fishing sector of offshore and inshore fisheries by region and year. Fifth, we found that Jeonnam, Jeju, and Chungnam were relatively strong in the competitiveness of offshore and inshore fishery, combining the offshore and inshore fishery indexes by region and year. The results of this study have some limitation on outlier treatment, grade assignment, and weight for aggregation, so research considering these needs to be done in the future. In conclusion, the results of this study which were derived objectively and scientifically in the era of the 4th industrial revolution, when evidence-based decision-making was becoming critical, are expected to help the central or local governments determine the priority of support projects or investments.

Quality has been a key issue to manufacturers. Many distinguished scholars have defined quality with profound insight. Korean firms struggle to make better products to fulfil requirements and satisfy customers. Korean industries have implemented quality management from Japan in early 70s. Statistical quality control, QCC (Quality Control Circle), and total quality management have also been introduced in succession. Chief executive officers, managers, and field employees have been aware of the importance of quality since then. This quality movement force workers to improve quality. They have to maintain the quality of products and compete with foreign products. Korean industries were able to compete with foreign industries in price. However, Korean firms now have to compete in quality as well as price. ISO (International Organization for Standardization) was established and industries around world have started to implement standardized systems depending on their need. ISO 9000 has continuously been revised and firms around world started to register a ISO 9000 certificate. Today’s quality competitiveness gets more deeply involved. KSA (Korean Standard Association) have launched QCAS (Quality Competitiveness Assessment System) since 1997. Up until now recent status of QCAS have been reported but the characteristics of QCAS results have not been analyzed. In this article we examine the QCAS results of 41 firms in 2014. QCAS consisted of 13 subsections : strategy and management system, organization culture and development of human resource, information management, quality system, customer satisfaction, management achievement, TPM, logistics, product development and technology, PL, QCC, SQC/SPC, and reliability. We performed one way ANOVA to discover the difference among the levels of firm size, business type, and quality hall of fame using the total scores of 13 subsections resulted from QCAS. We also analyzed the scores of 13 individual subsections of QCAS to see if there is any differences based on firm size and business type. We interpret the results and implication of analysis and finally draw a conclusion.