A Comparative Study on South Korea’s Response to the UN Climate Change Convention and the Biodiversity Convention

Authors

  • JinYoung Son

    International School of Urban Sciences, The University of Seoul, Seoul 02504, Republic of Korea

  • HyeMin Park

    International School of Urban Sciences, The University of Seoul, Seoul 02504, Republic of Korea

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.30564/re.v7i1.8349
Received: 5 January 2025 | Revised: 4 February 2025 | Accepted: 6 February 2025 | Published Online: 7 March 2025

Abstract

Climate change and biodiversity loss are intricately linked, and as the severity of these challenges intensifies, the need for a cohesive international response has become increasingly evident. Since 1992, South Korea has developed relevant legal and institutional frameworks; however, its initiatives addressing biodiversity loss have received less recognition and prioritization compared to its efforts concerning climate change. In this context, this study aims to analyze the disparities in South Korea’s policy responses to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), while proposing an integrated policy direction. To achieve this, the study compares key policies related to both conventions by utilizing the OECD’s Policy Coherence for Sustainable Development (PCSD) indicators and evaluation criteria derived from previous research. Furthermore, the analysis incorporates variables identified in earlier studies, including legal enforceability, economic incentives, financial support, and industry participation, to enhance the depth of the analysis. Additionally, a review of international best practices was conducted to extract actionable insights for policy enhancement. The analysis reveals several challenges in biodiversity policies, including fragmented governance systems, low policy prioritization, weakened policy momentum, imbalanced financial support, and limited corporate awareness. Moreover, difficulties in quantitative evaluation hinder the verification of policy effectiveness due to the complex nature of biodiversity goals. This research aims to assess South Korea's responsiveness in accordance with the integrated approach promoted by the international community.

Keywords:

United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC); Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD); Policy Comparison

References

[1] Muluneh, M.G., 2021. Impact of climate change on biodiversity and food security: a global perspective—a review article. Agriculture & Food Security. 10, 36. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40066-021-00318-5

[2] Gupta, H., Singh, N.K., 2023. Climate change and biodiversity synergies: A scientometric analysis in the context of UNFCCC and CBD. Anthropocene Science. 2(5), 5–18.

[3] Morgera, E., 2011. Far away, so close: A legal analysis of the increasing interactions between the Convention on Biological Diversity and climate change law. Climate Law. 2(1), 85–115.

[4] UNFCCC, 2022. Sharm El-Sheikh Implementation Plan. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change: Bonn, Germany.

[5] Seddon, N., Chausson, A., Berry, P., et al., 2020. Understanding the value and limits of nature-based solutions to climate change and other global challenges. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B. 375(1794), 20190120.

[6] Pettorelli, N., Barlow, J., Cardillo, M., et al., 2021. Time to integrate global climate change and biodiversity science-policy agendas. Journal of Applied Ecology. 58(11), 2384–2393.

[7] Myung, S.J., 2024. Discussion Trends of the Convention on Biological Diversity and Korea's Response Strategy. ScienceON.

[8] Pörtner, H.O., Scholes, R.J., Agard, J., et al., 2021. Scientific outcome of the IPBES-IPCC co-sponsored workshop on biodiversity and climate change. IPBES: Bonn, Germany.

[9] Willett, W., Rockström, J., Loken, B., et al., 2019. Food in the Anthropocene: the EAT-Lancet Commission on healthy diets from sustainable food systems. The Lancet. 393(10170), 447–492.

[10] Brooker, R., Young, J.C., Watt, A.D., 2007. Climate change and biodiversity: Impacts and policy development challenges - a European case study. International Journal of Biodiversity Science & Management. 3(1), 12–30.

[11] Driscoll, D.A., Felton, A., Gibbons, P., et al., 2011. Priorities in policy and management when existing biodiversity stressors interact with climate change. Climatic Change. 111(3), 533–557.

[12] Baldwin-Cantello, D.W., Tickner, D., Wright, M., et al., 2023. The triple challenge: Synergies, trade-offs and integrated responses for climate, biodiversity, and human wellbeing goals. Climate Policy. 23(6), 782–799.

[13] Habibullah, M.S., Din, B.H., Tan, S.H., et al., 2022 Impact of climate change on biodiversity loss: global evidence. Environmental Science and Pollution Research. 29, 1073–1086. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-15702-8

[14] Uhm, Y., 2024. The New Governance of Climate Change: Reconceptualizing Common Concern to Embrace Non-State Actors [Doctoral dissertation]. International University of Development Policy: Antwerp, Belgium.

[15] Legagneux, P., Casajus, N., Cazelles, K., et al., 2018. Our House Is Burning: Discrepancy in Climate Change vs. Biodiversity Coverage in the Media as Compared to Scientific Literature. Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution. 5, 1–6.

[16] Brunet, N.D., Dagenais, D., Breux, S., et al., 2018. A characterization of media representation of biodiversity and implications for public perceptions and environmental policy: the case of Québec, Canada. Environment, Development and Sustainability. 22, 1655–1669.

[17] Terton, A., Tsioumani, E., Förster, J., et al., 2022. Synergies between biodiversity- and climate-relevant policy frameworks and their implementation. Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ), International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD), Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research (UFZ): Bonn, Germany

[18] Kim, J.N., 2023. A Study on Policy Changes and Development Plans for Climate Change Policies [Ph.D. Dissertation]. Sejong University: Seoul, Republic of Korea.

[19] IFRS Foundation, 2024. Progress on Corporate Climate-Related Disclosures—2024 Report. IFRS Foundation: London, UK.

[20] Sikora, A., 2021. European Green Deal: Legal and financial challenges of the climate change. ERA Forum. 21(4), 681–704.

[21] Lee, H., 2012. Current Status and Directions for Biodiversity Policy in Korea. Environmental Law and Policy. 9, 11–36.

[22] Yang, H., 2022. Collaborative Governance and International Cooperation Outcomes for Climate Justice: A Comparative Study of the United States, Australia, and the United Kingdom. Korea University: Seoul, Republic of Korea.

[23] Zhang, M., Li, H., Jin, W., et al., 2018. Voluntary agreements to achieve energy efficiency, a comparison between China and the Netherlands. Energy & Environment. 29(3), 281–299.

[24] Bailey, I., 2008. Industry environmental agreements and climate policy: Learning by comparison. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning. 10(2), 153–173.

[25] Stechemesser, A., Koch, N., Mark, E., et al., 2024. Climate policies that achieved major emission reductions: Global evidence from two decades. Science. 385(6711), 884–892.

[26] OECD, 2018. Policy Coherence for Sustainable Development 2018: Towards Sustainable and Resilient Societies. OECD Publishing: Paris, France. 168p. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264301061-en

[27] Ock, G., No, D., Lee, H., et al., 2023. Climate change research. Journal of Climate Change Research. 14(6-2), 981–988. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15531/KSCCR.2023.14.6.981

[28] OECD, 2019. Policy Coherence for Sustainable Development 2019: Empowering People and Ensuring Inclusiveness and Equality. OECD Publishing: Paris, France. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1787/a90f851f-en

[29] OECD, 2010. Recommendation of the Council on Good Institutional Practices in Promoting Policy Coherence for Development (OECD Legal Instruments, OECD/LEGAL/0381). OECD. Available from: https://legalinstruments.oecd.org/en/instruments/OECD-LEGAL-0381

[30] OECD, 2017. OECD environmental performance reviews: Korea 2017. OECD Publishing: Paris, France. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264268265-en

[31] Korea Institute for Environmental Policy and Evaluation, 2019. A comprehensive study on the environmental value for the integrated analysis of the environment and economy: A survey of the national environmental consciousness in 2019 (H.-N. Kim, Manager). Korea Institute of Environmental Research: Seoul, Republic of Korea.

[32] Government of the Republic of Korea, 2019. 2nd Basic Plan for Climate Change Response (2020–2040). Inter-Ministerial Collaboration: Seoul, Republic of Korea.

[33] Ministry of Environment, Republic of Korea, 2023. 5th National Biodiversity Strategy (2024–2028). Inter-Ministerial Collaboration: Sejong, Republic of Korea.

[34] Kim, H.w., 2023. Korea’s recent climate and energy policies: Challenges and future directions. Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung, Korea Office. Available from: https://korea.fes.de

[35] Environmental Defense Fund, International Emissions Trading Association, Climate Change Research Institute of Korea, 2016. Republic of Korea: An emissions trading case study. Available from: https://www.edf.org/sites/default/files/korean_case_study.pdf

[36] ICAP, 2023. Emissions Trading Worldwide: Status Report 2023. ICAP: New York, NY, USA.

[37] ImpactOn, 2024. The Current Status and Improvement Directions of ESG in Korea. Available from: https://www.impacton.net/news/articleView.html?idxno=12939 (cited 31 December 2024).

[38] Yonhap News Agency, 2023. CF100 is necessary, but... 82% of domestic companies unwilling to participate in CF100. Available from: https://www.yna.co.kr/view/AKR20230605140000003 (cited 31 December 2024).

[39] Korea Energy Agency. K-RE100 Implementation Procedures and Key Details. Available from: https://www.k-re100.or.kr/bbs/board.php?bo_table=sub2_2_2&ckattempt=1 (cited 31 December 2024).

[40] Jung, T.J., 2023. The Path to Carbon Neutrality: RE100 and CF100. Road Traffic, No. 173, pp. 96–101. Available from: https://www.kroad.or.kr (cited 31 December 2024).

[41] Yonsei Chunchu. The Era of Carbon Neutrality: Possibilities and Limitations of RE100 and CF100. Available from: https://chunchu.yonsei.ac.kr/news/articleView.html?idxno=31184 (cited 31 December 2024).

[42] Taskforce on Nature-related Financial Disclosures (TNFD), 2023. Recommendations of the Taskforce on Nature-related Financial Disclosures. Available from: https://tnfd.global (cited 1 November 2024).

[43] Impacton, 2024. The Role and Challenges of Companies for Carbon Neutrality. Available from: https://www.impacton.net/news/articleView.html?idxno=6205 (cited 20 December 2024).

[44] ImpactOn, 2024. Global Case of Biodiversity Disclosure and Preparations of Domestic Companies. Available from: https://www.impacton.net/news/articleView.html?idxno=11204 (cited 1 November 2024).

[45] Lim, W.T., 2024. Germany's Climate Protection Policy and Green Transition. International Social Security Review. pp. 55–66. DOI: https://doi.org/10.23063/2024.06.5

[46] Lim, J.C., Roh, B.H., 2024. Case Studies on Wetland Utilization in Response to Climate Change and Policy Improvement Directions. Journal of the Korean Wetlands Society. 26(4).

[47] Korea Environment Institute, 2024. Climate Trends Report No. 2: Blue Carbon - An Asset for Climate Change Response and Sustainable Oceans. Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, Seoul National University: Seoul, Republic of Korea.

Downloads

How to Cite

Son, J., & Park, H. (2025). A Comparative Study on South Korea’s Response to the UN Climate Change Convention and the Biodiversity Convention. Research in Ecology, 7(1), 46–61. https://doi.org/10.30564/re.v7i1.8349

Issue

Article Type

Articles