Environmental Policies
#30Key Findings
Lacking cohesion, South Korea scores relatively poorly (rank 30) in international comparison in the area of environmental policies. Its score on this measure has declined by 0.2 points relative to 2014.
The government has prioritized economic growth over environmental concerns. Improved emissions targets include a 40% cut below 2018 levels by 2030, with a legally mandated target of carbon neutrality by 2050. However, current policies are not deemed sufficient to reach the targets.
Policies include an emissions-trading system for key sectors, a green building plan, an incentive system supporting electric and hybrid vehicles, and measures supporting environmentally friendly public transportation. There are no explicit taxes on carbon or electricity.
As of 2019, Korea was the world’s eighth-largest emitter of CO2, and the share of energy production accounted for by renewables is the second-lowest in the OECD. It has committed to phasing out coal financing. In general, environmental measures tend to be ad hoc and fragmented.
The government has prioritized economic growth over environmental concerns. Improved emissions targets include a 40% cut below 2018 levels by 2030, with a legally mandated target of carbon neutrality by 2050. However, current policies are not deemed sufficient to reach the targets.
Policies include an emissions-trading system for key sectors, a green building plan, an incentive system supporting electric and hybrid vehicles, and measures supporting environmentally friendly public transportation. There are no explicit taxes on carbon or electricity.
As of 2019, Korea was the world’s eighth-largest emitter of CO2, and the share of energy production accounted for by renewables is the second-lowest in the OECD. It has committed to phasing out coal financing. In general, environmental measures tend to be ad hoc and fragmented.
Graph View
Graph View
How effectively does environmental policy in your country protect and preserve the sustainability of natural resources and environmental quality?
10
9
9
Environmental policy goals are ambitious and effectively implemented as well as monitored within and across most relevant policy sectors that account for the largest share of resource use and emissions.
8
7
6
7
6
Environmental policy goals are mainly ambitious and effectively implemented and are monitored within and across some of the relevant policy sectors that account for the largest share of resource use and emissions.
5
4
3
4
3
Environmental policy goals are neither particularly ambitious nor are they effectively implemented and coordinated across relevant policy sectors.
2
1
1
Environmental concerns have been largely abandoned.
Korea’s environmental problems remain very serious, though it did drastically improve its rank on the Yale Environmental Performance Index in 2020 to 28th place (out of 180 countries) from 60th in 2018. It continued to perform poorly with regard to per capita GHG emissions (158th), ecosystem services (100th), and biodiversity (84th). Problems with fine dust exposure improved, raising the country to 45th place. As of 2019, Korea was the world’s eighth-largest emitter of CO2, and the share of energy production accounted for by renewables is the second-lowest in the OECD.
Environmental policies remain unable to protect the environment and ensure sustainable resource use. The main problem appears to be a lack of ambition. Environmental policies largely do not match the scale of environmental challenges. And while “green growth” is widely touted as a policy priority, Korea is more focused on growth than it is on protecting the environment. The Green New Deal announced in 2020 and updated in 2021 allocates KRW 1.4 trillion to the transition to a green economy. However, the Green New Deal is primarily focused on developing and producing greener products – such as energy-efficient buildings and electric / hydrogen cars – and less ambitious with regard to the transition to a carbon-neutral economy. Environmental policies have not been accompanied by an environmental-tax reform. The final deal did not introduce a carbon tax as promised. With no explicit tax rate on carbon and no electricity taxes, the tax regime does not provide price signals for reducing emissions. While Korea has introduced a substantial emissions-trading system, the market has thus far failed to increase emission prices appreciably. Despite Korea’s 2020 pledge of becoming carbon neutral by 2050, there is as yet no comprehensive strategy for achieving net-zero emissions. Environmental measures that have been implemented, such as the bans on free plastic bags and paper cups, usually have a relatively quick and tangible impact. However, the integration of environmental policies is a major problem, as measures seem to be ad hoc and fragmented.
Citations:
“Climate Action Tracker 2021 – South Korea.” Accessed January 18, 2022. https://climateactiontracker.org/countries/south-korea/.
“Environmental Performance Index 2020.” Accessed January 18, 2022. https://epi.yale.edu/epi-results/2020/component/epi.
OECD. Climate Change Mitigation Policies: Korea. Retrieved October 17, 2018 (http://www.compareyourcountry.org/climate-policies?cr=oecd&lg=en&page=0&visited=)
OECD. OECD Environmental Performance Reviews: Korea 2017, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264268265-en.
OECD. “Taxing Energy Use 2019: Country Note – Korea,” 2019. https://www.oecd.org/tax/tax-policy/taxing-energy-use-korea.pdf.
Environmental policies remain unable to protect the environment and ensure sustainable resource use. The main problem appears to be a lack of ambition. Environmental policies largely do not match the scale of environmental challenges. And while “green growth” is widely touted as a policy priority, Korea is more focused on growth than it is on protecting the environment. The Green New Deal announced in 2020 and updated in 2021 allocates KRW 1.4 trillion to the transition to a green economy. However, the Green New Deal is primarily focused on developing and producing greener products – such as energy-efficient buildings and electric / hydrogen cars – and less ambitious with regard to the transition to a carbon-neutral economy. Environmental policies have not been accompanied by an environmental-tax reform. The final deal did not introduce a carbon tax as promised. With no explicit tax rate on carbon and no electricity taxes, the tax regime does not provide price signals for reducing emissions. While Korea has introduced a substantial emissions-trading system, the market has thus far failed to increase emission prices appreciably. Despite Korea’s 2020 pledge of becoming carbon neutral by 2050, there is as yet no comprehensive strategy for achieving net-zero emissions. Environmental measures that have been implemented, such as the bans on free plastic bags and paper cups, usually have a relatively quick and tangible impact. However, the integration of environmental policies is a major problem, as measures seem to be ad hoc and fragmented.
Citations:
“Climate Action Tracker 2021 – South Korea.” Accessed January 18, 2022. https://climateactiontracker.org/countries/south-korea/.
“Environmental Performance Index 2020.” Accessed January 18, 2022. https://epi.yale.edu/epi-results/2020/component/epi.
OECD. Climate Change Mitigation Policies: Korea. Retrieved October 17, 2018 (http://www.compareyourcountry.org/climate-policies?cr=oecd&lg=en&page=0&visited=)
OECD. OECD Environmental Performance Reviews: Korea 2017, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264268265-en.
OECD. “Taxing Energy Use 2019: Country Note – Korea,” 2019. https://www.oecd.org/tax/tax-policy/taxing-energy-use-korea.pdf.
Graph View
To what extent does the government actively contribute to the design and advancement of global environmental protection regimes?
10
9
9
The government actively contributes to international efforts to design and advance global environmental protection regimes. In most cases, it demonstrates commitment to existing regimes, contributes to their being advanced and has introduced appropriate reforms.
8
7
6
7
6
The government contributes to international efforts to strengthen global environmental protection regimes. It demonstrates commitment to existing regimes and occasionally contributes to their being advanced and/or has introduced some appropriate reforms.
5
4
3
4
3
The government demonstrates commitment to existing regimes, but does not contribute to their being advanced and has not introduced appropriate reforms.
2
1
1
The government does not contribute to international efforts to strengthen global environmental protection regimes.
Although South Korea typically ratifies international agreements regarding environmental protection issues, it does not tend to take the initiative in this area, and the agreements do not play an important role in domestic political decisions. The country ratified the Paris Agreement of 2015 on 3 November 2016, hosts both the Global Green Growth Institute and the Green Climate Fund (GCF), and in October 2019, President Moon promised to double Korea’s contribution to the GCF.
While the Moon government demonstrated greater ambition in targeting reduced emissions than it did in targeting other areas relevant to protecting the environment, the challenges ahead remain substantial. The Moon administration – like previous governments – did not place a particularly high priority on its global environmental responsibilities. Instead of articulating a comprehensive strategy for a transition to a carbon-neutral society, the government was quick to give in to populist demands for low electricity and fuel prices.
Korea is the world’s eighth-largest emitter of carbon-dioxide emissions, and 12th-largest with regard to total greenhouse gas emissions. In 2021, Korea officially announced that it would cut its domestic emissions to a level 40% below 2018 levels by 2030. This is a significant improvement compared to its previous target of 24.4% below 2017 levels. In 2020, Korea committed (and enshrined in law) to achieving carbon neutrality by 2050. Nevertheless, the Climate Action Tracker (CAT) notes that with its current policies and measures – including an emissions-trading system for key sectors, a green building plan, an incentive system supporting electric and hybrid vehicles, and measures supporting environmentally friendly public transportation – Korea is unlikely to achieve its nationally determined contribution target. To achieve this, CAT estimates that Korea needs to reduce domestic emissions by at least 59% by 2030.
The 17th Climate Change Performance Index (CCPI, published November 2021) – which evaluates climate policy and implementation among the 64 countries responsible for 90% of global greenhouse gas emissions – ranks South Korea at 59th place. Korea is thus not only near the bottom of the list (with only five countries ranked lower), but it also dropped three places compared to 2020.
Korea is the world’s second-largest investor in the global coal-finance market, following China. International environmental NGOs have for years pushed Korea’s government to stop funding coal power in developing countries such as Indonesia. As a result, Korea committed in 2021 to stop coal financing, albeit with some exceptions for retrofitting and approved projects. Following this, major Korean financial groups (e.g., KB, Shinhan, Hana and Woori) announced plans to make their investment portfolios carbon neutral by 2050.
Citations:
“Climate Action Tracker 2021 – South Korea.” Accessed January 18, 2022. https://climateactiontracker.org/countries/south-korea/.
“Climate Change Performance Index 2022,” December 3, 2021. https://ccpi.org/country/kor/.
“Environmental Performance Index 2020.” Accessed January 18, 2022. https://epi.yale.edu/epi-results/2020/component/epi.
Lee, Keun-young. “Despite Lofty Goals and Declarations, S. Korea Ranks among Worst on Climate Change Action.” Hankyoreh, November 10, 2021. https://english.hani.co.kr/arti/english_edition/e_national/1018756.html.
While the Moon government demonstrated greater ambition in targeting reduced emissions than it did in targeting other areas relevant to protecting the environment, the challenges ahead remain substantial. The Moon administration – like previous governments – did not place a particularly high priority on its global environmental responsibilities. Instead of articulating a comprehensive strategy for a transition to a carbon-neutral society, the government was quick to give in to populist demands for low electricity and fuel prices.
Korea is the world’s eighth-largest emitter of carbon-dioxide emissions, and 12th-largest with regard to total greenhouse gas emissions. In 2021, Korea officially announced that it would cut its domestic emissions to a level 40% below 2018 levels by 2030. This is a significant improvement compared to its previous target of 24.4% below 2017 levels. In 2020, Korea committed (and enshrined in law) to achieving carbon neutrality by 2050. Nevertheless, the Climate Action Tracker (CAT) notes that with its current policies and measures – including an emissions-trading system for key sectors, a green building plan, an incentive system supporting electric and hybrid vehicles, and measures supporting environmentally friendly public transportation – Korea is unlikely to achieve its nationally determined contribution target. To achieve this, CAT estimates that Korea needs to reduce domestic emissions by at least 59% by 2030.
The 17th Climate Change Performance Index (CCPI, published November 2021) – which evaluates climate policy and implementation among the 64 countries responsible for 90% of global greenhouse gas emissions – ranks South Korea at 59th place. Korea is thus not only near the bottom of the list (with only five countries ranked lower), but it also dropped three places compared to 2020.
Korea is the world’s second-largest investor in the global coal-finance market, following China. International environmental NGOs have for years pushed Korea’s government to stop funding coal power in developing countries such as Indonesia. As a result, Korea committed in 2021 to stop coal financing, albeit with some exceptions for retrofitting and approved projects. Following this, major Korean financial groups (e.g., KB, Shinhan, Hana and Woori) announced plans to make their investment portfolios carbon neutral by 2050.
Citations:
“Climate Action Tracker 2021 – South Korea.” Accessed January 18, 2022. https://climateactiontracker.org/countries/south-korea/.
“Climate Change Performance Index 2022,” December 3, 2021. https://ccpi.org/country/kor/.
“Environmental Performance Index 2020.” Accessed January 18, 2022. https://epi.yale.edu/epi-results/2020/component/epi.
Lee, Keun-young. “Despite Lofty Goals and Declarations, S. Korea Ranks among Worst on Climate Change Action.” Hankyoreh, November 10, 2021. https://english.hani.co.kr/arti/english_edition/e_national/1018756.html.