The divergence of South Korea's Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) from the EU ETS: An institutional complementarity view

IF 1.4 Q2 POLITICAL SCIENCE

Politics & Policy Pub Date : 2023-12-01 DOI:10.1111/polp.12566

Jihyung Joo, Jouni Paavola, James Van Alstine

{"title":"The divergence of South Korea's Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS) from the EU ETS: An institutional complementarity view","authors":"Jihyung Joo, Jouni Paavola, James Van Alstine","doi":"10.1111/polp.12566","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <p>Emissions trading schemes (ETS) have spread across the globe to tackle climate change. However, limited attention has been given to how ETS characteristics and designs differ and why. We use the concept of institutional complementarity to explore how the EU ETS and South Korea's ETS (K-ETS) adapt to complement established political economy. The EU ETS is characterized as a market with stakeholder ownership, while the K-ETS is more regulatory in nature with government leadership. The EU ETS complements a decentralized political system with liberalized energy market, and the K-ETS became compatible with the centralized majoritarian politics and a regulated electricity market. The ETSs have evolved incrementally, and they are not likely to link in the foreseeable future due to divergence. We suggest a strong focus on “how to adapt” an ETS to its own institution rather than adopting the established blueprint model in countries with a strong regulatory style of governance.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Related Articles</h3>\n \n <p>Caliskan, Cantay. 2020. “The Influence of Elite Networks on Green Policy Making.” <i>Politics & Policy</i> 48(6): 1104–37. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12382.</p>\n \n <p>Tanaka, Yugo, Andrew Chapman, Tetsuo Tezuka, and Shigeki Sakurai. 2020. “Multiple Streams and Power Sector Policy Change: Evidence from the Feed-In Tariff Policy Process in Japan.” <i>Politics & Policy</i> 48(3): 464–89. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12357.</p>\n \n <p>von Malmborg, Fredrik. 2023. “Combining the Advocacy Coalition Framework and Argumentative Discourse Analysis: The Case of the ‘Energy Efficiency First’ Principle in EU Energy and Climate Policy.” <i>Politics & Policy</i> 51(2): 222–41. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12525.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":51679,"journal":{"name":"Politics & Policy","volume":"51 6","pages":"1155-1173"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/polp.12566","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Politics & Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/polp.12566","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Emissions trading schemes (ETS) have spread across the globe to tackle climate change. However, limited attention has been given to how ETS characteristics and designs differ and why. We use the concept of institutional complementarity to explore how the EU ETS and South Korea's ETS (K-ETS) adapt to complement established political economy. The EU ETS is characterized as a market with stakeholder ownership, while the K-ETS is more regulatory in nature with government leadership. The EU ETS complements a decentralized political system with liberalized energy market, and the K-ETS became compatible with the centralized majoritarian politics and a regulated electricity market. The ETSs have evolved incrementally, and they are not likely to link in the foreseeable future due to divergence. We suggest a strong focus on “how to adapt” an ETS to its own institution rather than adopting the established blueprint model in countries with a strong regulatory style of governance.

Caliskan, Cantay. 2020. “The Influence of Elite Networks on Green Policy Making.” Politics & Policy 48(6): 1104–37. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12382.

Tanaka, Yugo, Andrew Chapman, Tetsuo Tezuka, and Shigeki Sakurai. 2020. “Multiple Streams and Power Sector Policy Change: Evidence from the Feed-In Tariff Policy Process in Japan.” Politics & Policy 48(3): 464–89. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12357.

von Malmborg, Fredrik. 2023. “Combining the Advocacy Coalition Framework and Argumentative Discourse Analysis: The Case of the ‘Energy Efficiency First’ Principle in EU Energy and Climate Policy.” Politics & Policy 51(2): 222–41. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12525.

查看原文本刊更多论文

韩国排放交易计划 (ETS) 与欧盟排放交易计划 (EU ETS) 的差异：制度互补观点

为应对气候变化，碳排放交易计划(ETS)已在全球范围内推广。然而，很少有人关注ETS的特点和设计是如何不同的，以及为什么不同。我们使用制度互补性的概念来探讨欧盟碳排放交易体系和韩国碳排放交易体系(K - ETS)如何适应以补充现有的政治经济。欧盟排放交易体系的特点是一个利益相关者拥有所有权的市场，而英国排放交易体系则在政府领导下更具监管性质。欧盟排放交易体系与自由的能源市场相辅相成，而K - ETS则与集中的多数主义政治和受监管的电力市场相兼容。碳交易体系是逐步演变的，由于存在分歧，它们在可预见的未来不太可能联系在一起。我们建议将重点放在“如何调整”碳排放交易体系以适应其自身的机构，而不是在具有强烈监管风格的国家采用既定的蓝图模式。加州卡利斯坎，坎塔伊，2020。“精英网络对绿色政策制定的影响”政治与政策48(6):1104-37。https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12382.Tanaka, Yugo, Andrew Chapman, Tetsuo Tezuka和Shigeki Sakurai。2020。“多流和电力部门政策变化:来自日本上网电价政策过程的证据”。政治与政策48(3):464-89。https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12357.von马尔姆堡，弗雷德里克。2023。“倡导联盟框架与论辩话语分析的结合:以欧盟能源与气候政策中的“能效第一”原则为例”政治与政策学报(2):222-41。https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12525。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Politics & Policy POLITICAL SCIENCE-

CiteScore

2.50

自引率

23.10%

发文量