Publications

REPUBLIC OF KOREA: AN EMISSIONS TRADING CASE STUDY

22 June 2015 - Special issues

I4CE co-authors: Marion Afriat & Lara Dahan
EDF co-authors: Joojin Kim & Peter Sopher
IETA co-authors: Jeff Swartz & Stefano de Clara

The authors would like to thank Ruben Lubowski, Joe Billick, Clayton Munnings, Jennifer Andreassen, Richie Ahuja,
Sung Woo Kim (KPMG), Siwon Park, and Yong Gun Kim (Korea Environment Institute) for very helpful comments and information for this case study.

Since 1990, the Republic of Korea’s greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions have increased by 132.9% and, in 2012, amounted to 688.3 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (tCO2e) excluding LULUCF. In 2012, the majority of CO2e emissions were derived from the energy sector, responsible for 87.2% of national emissions, followed by industrial processes (7.5%) the agriculture (3.2%) and the waste sector (accounted for 2.2%).
As part of the 2009 Copenhagen Accord, the Republic of Korea pledged to reduce GHG emissions by 30% below its Business as Usual level by 2020, a goal that equates to a 4% reduction below 2005 levels.
A major step towards this goal came in April 2010, when the Framework Act on Low Carbon Green Growth (Framework Act) and the Presidential Decree promulgated thereunder came into effect. The three most important features of the Framework Act are that it:
1. sets the national GHG emission target to reduce emissions 30% below Business As Usual (BAU) levels by
2020;
2. establishes the Greenhouse Gas Target Management System (TMS), which sets emissions and energy targets
for business entities in the industrial, power generation, transportation, building, agriculture, food and waste
sectors; and;
3. provides the legal basis for an Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS).
Unlike the ETS, the TMS does not enable companies to trade credits. Penalties for non-compliance are maximum KRW 10 million (approximately US$9,100i) regardless of the level of infraction. Conversely under the ETS, companies are subject to penalties that are proportionate to the volume of GHG emissions exceeding the cap. In July 2011, the Republic of Korea announced BAU emissions levels it will use as the baseline for reducing emissions, and GHG emission reduction targets for each sector.

REPUBLIC OF KOREA: AN EMISSIONS TRADING CASE STUDY Download
To learn more
  • 02/19/2026 Blog post
    Food sovereignty relies on ecological planning

    The upcoming food sovereignty conferences are likely to shape debates on the future of French agriculture in 2026. The main responses provided over the past two years can be summarised as follows: remove production constraints to produce more of everything (both animal and plant products), to recover market shares in France and abroad. Seeking to produce more of everything without considering adaptation or transition is a form of denial, at a time when climate change is hitting farmers hard and regularly, and when our dependence on imported fertilisers and oilseed meals undermines our sovereignty. The conferences must take these considerations into account — otherwise, they will serve only to perpetuate the notion of an illusory sovereignty. 

  • 02/19/2026
    Which production assets for more resilient and sustainable agricultural and food sectors? Which investment needs? Which stranded assets?

    Les choix d’investissements des secteurs agricoles et alimentaires des années à venir sont déterminants. Pour pérenniser leurs productions et faire face aux crises, les secteurs agricoles et alimentaires français doivent évoluer vers des systèmes plus résilients et durables. L’enjeu est d’autant plus crucial que différentes vagues d’investissements sont en cours ou à venir dans ces secteurs. Dans cette étude, I4CE a estimé qu’environ 100 milliards d’euros d’outils de production agricoles et alimentaires sont affectés par la transition. Une coordination et une planification des investissements semblent incontournables, notamment pour en limiter les coûts.

  • 01/23/2026 Foreword of the week
    Financing carbon farming practices: lessons learnt in France can reinforce the EU level initiatives

    In a challenging economic and political context, especially for the agriculture sector, some incentive schemes can still help bring stakeholders together in climate transition and resilience initiatives. This is the case with carbon certification schemes, which both ensure the credibility of the climate impact of the actions implemented and provide remuneration for farmers and foresters for changes in practices. Some of these measures, such as replacing mineral fertilisers (mostly imported) with organic fertilisers, also help to meet the sector’s needs for resilience and strategic independence, which are crucial in the current context.

See all publications
Press contact Amélie FRITZ Head of Communication and press relations Email
Subscribe to our mailing list :
I register !
Subscribe to our newsletter
Once a week, receive all the information on climate economics
I register !
Fermer