Climate policy networks in South Korea: alliances and conflicts

Structural dimensions of knowledge-action networks for sustainability

“…The number of links sent out from an actor, or outgoing ties an actor gives out, is a measure of out-degree centrality and it is an indication of knowledge dispersal or advice by an actor [12,43-45**]. Together, these two indicators form degree centrality (Fig 1.2a) and the weighted calculation of the number and ratio of in-degree and out-degree centrality is an indicator of influence [27,29,32,37,41,42,46]. When the same actors have the high in-degree and high influence centrality, this indicates a network structure in which knowledge exchange is highly controlled and centralized.…”

Contingent feasibility for forest carbon credit: Evidence from South Korean firms

“…Korea, however, is under significant pressure from both developed and developing countries as Korea is listed as the 7th greatest emitter of GHG (Olivier et al, 2011). Under these circumstances, the Korean government has set a mid-term target of a 30% reduction in GHG by 2020 (Yun et al, 2014). To accomplish the goal effectively, the GHG & Energy Target Management System was set up in 2011 and a cap-and-trade emissions trading system (ETS) is due to commence on 1 January 2015 (Ernst and Young, 2013).…”

Ethics and Climate Change: A Study of National Commitments

“…Thus, a significant ghg emissions reduction commitment could place a heavy burden on its economy if industries do not quickly adapt and find innovative ways to reduce its emissions. Thus, the business sector was very reluctant to accept any national targets (Yun, 2009;Yun and Won, 2012;Yun et al, 2014). Industries argued that it is not necessary for South Korea (technically a 'developing country' under the Kyoto Protocol) to set itself a national target.…”

“…At the time, it was the most ambitious pledge made by any Non-Annex I country, and the level of commitment conformed to the upper limit of the range of EU-recommended ghg emissions reduction targets for developing countries. The Presidential Committee on Green Growth (PCGG) was a key player in the national target-setting process (Yun et al, 2014). Its key aim was to meaningfully participate in the international mitigation efforts to tackle climate change and accomplish low-carbon green growth by fostering green technologies and industries as new growth engines (PCGG, 2009).…”

“…Then, the highest target was selected based on three surveys directed at experts and the general public. For Korea, international political pressure, the direction of international market change, and its reduction potential were key criteria in the target-setting process (Yun et al, 2014).…”