저탄소 녹색성장정책과 다자무역규범 간의 조화:주요 쟁점과 정책 시사점 (Korea's Green Growth Policy and Multilateral Trade Rules: Harmonization Issues and Policy Implications)

Korea's Green Growth Policy and Multilateral Trade Rules: Harmonization Issues and Policy Implications 2012

KIEP Policy Analysis

Posted: 13 Sep 2013

See all articles by Sherzod Shadikhodjaev

Sherzod Shadikhodjaev

KDI School of Public Policy and Management

Jeongmeen Suh

Korea Institute for International Economic Policy

Min-Sung Kim

Korea Institute for International Economic Policy

Jae-Young Lee

Korea Institute for International Economic Policy

Date Written: December 31, 2012

Abstract

제2차 세계대전 이후부터 지금까지 꾸준한 성장을 이어온 국제교역은 세계 GDP의 25%를 차지 할 만큼 경제발전에 긍정적인 영향을 주었지만, 동시에 세계 이산화탄소 배출량의 약 21.5%가 국제무역에 의해 발생한다는 점에서 환경적으로는 부정적 영향을 미쳐 왔습니다. 또한 지난 수십 년간 전 세계적으로 이루어지고 있는 산업화와 같은 인간활동으로 인해 자연자원이 고갈 되고 지구온난화 현상으로 인해 많은 환경적 사회적 경제적 문제가 발생 하고 있습니다.

이러한 배경하에 2008년 우리 정부가 발표한 저탄소 녹색성장정책은 지속가능한 성장을 위해 녹색경제를 이끌어내는 새로운 국가발전 패러다임입니다. 이러한 정책은 환경에 대한 부정적인 영향을 최소화하면서 경제발전에 기여하는, 즉 경제와 환경을 서로 조화시킬 수 있는 정책으로서 산업의 녹색화, 에너지 효율 제고, 녹색기술 개발 등의 방법으로 온실가스 배출 감축을 추구하고 있습니다. 녹색성장의 실현을 위하여 녹색성장위원회가 설립되었으며, 녹색성장 5개 년계획이 수립되었습니다. 법적으로는 녹색성장의 기본방향을 정한 저탄소 녹색성장 기본법이 2010년 4월부터 시행되고 있으며, 구체적인 정책을 담은 법령들이 채택되고 있습니다. 또한 대외적으로 우리나라는 기후변화 협상, WTO와 APEC에서 무역과 환경에 대한 다자논의에 참여하고 있습니다. 아울러 우리나라는 글로벌녹색성장연구소(GGGI)와 녹색기후기금(GCF) 같은 국제기구의 유치국가로 선정되었습니다. 이 같은 사실은 기후변화 완화에 대한 우리나라의 기여와 노력이 국제적으로 인정받은 것으로 해석될 수 있는 한편, 지구온난화에 대한 세계 공동체의 대응책에 있어 우리나라에 더욱 많은 책임감이 주어진 것이라 할 수 있겠습니다.

녹색성장정책 수행 시 각종 국내조치는 국제무역에 영향을 미칠 수 있습니다. 예를 들어 고탄소 수입제품에 저탄소 국산제품보다 높은 세금이 부과 되거나, 환경친화적 상품을 생산하는 국내업체들에 보조금이 제공되거나, 엄격한 온실가스 배출 기준이 도입되면, 외국 생산자나 수출업체들이 불이익을 당하고 국제교역이 왜곡될 수 있습니다. 이렇게 될 경우 이들 조치가 다자무 역을 규율하는 WTO 규범을 준수하는가에 대한 문제가 제기될 수 있습니다. 이러한 관점에서 본 연구는 우리나라의 저탄소 녹색성장정책 중 무역 관련 주요 분야와 WTO 규범 간의 조화 가능성, 그리고 녹색성장을 위한 다자 무역체제와 기후변화체제 간의 조화 가능성을 각각 검토하고 이에 따른 정책 시사점을 제시하였습니다.

In his address marking the 60th anniversary of the founding of the Republic of Korea in 2008, President Lee Myung-bak declared ‘Low Carbon Green Growth’ as the country’s new vision to lead the country’s development for the next decades. Since then Korea has taken active measures to combat climate change on both legislative and executive front. A number of ‘green’ measures have an impact on trade and may thus be subject to global trade rules administered by the World Trade Organization (WTO).

This study examines Korea’s green measures - relevant laws, regulations, and programs - from the perspective of WTO law, and explores possible ways of harmonization of the green growth policy with multilateral trade disciplines. The concept of harmonization within the meaning of this study has both internal and external aspects. More specifically, the authors first considered the harmonization at an internal level and suggested that Korea ensure WTO-consistency of its domestic green measures. For this purpose, they examined green measures in three domestic policy areas, such as market opening, industrial subsidies, and technical barriers to trade. Then, they proceeded to see how the global climate regime and the multilateral trade regime could be harmonized on an international plane, and what Korea’s contribution to this process should be.

With respect to the market opening policy, the authors considered, inter alia, GATT-based implications of a carbon tax, import restrictions arising from the emissions trading system and the Bonus-Malus system for car purchasers - the measures that are not currently applied in Korea, but are used by other countries. As for the industrial support policy, Korea’s green subsidies have not yet been complained of in WTO disputes, but were targeted by US countervailing measures - something that should be paid attention to by Korean policy-makers when designing green incentive schemes for domestic producers. As far as technical regulations and standards are concerned, a few WTO members have raised specific trade concerns in the TBT Committee in relation to some Korean green measures.

With respect to the external harmonization issue, the authors focused on two approaches, such as ‘greening’ the WTO and making the global climate regime more ‘WTO-friendly’. In order for the WTO to become more ‘environment-friendly’, the current Doha negotiations on trade and environment should be successfully completed. The authors here proposed that Korea put forward the idea of plurilateral negotiations in the WTO based on APEC’s initiatives on trade and environment. Korea could also initiate discussion among WTO members aimed at rendering climate change subsidies non-actionable under current WTO subsidy disciplines. Moreover, the authors suggested that the Korean government establish environmental impact assessments for its trade treaties so as to ensure that, inter alia, WTO agreements entered into by Korea reflect environmental concerns. In this way, Korea could have an indirect influence on the greening of the WTO. Finally, with a view to making the global climate regime more WTO-friendly, Korea should support a proposal of several countries to discuss within the UNFCCC framework the impact of climate-related response measures on trade, but oppose the idea of introducing a total ban on unilateral response measures. Such a ban would come into conflict with the GATT general exception clause (Article XX) - a WTO provision that can be invoked to justify environment protection measures.

Keywords: Green Growth Policy, Multilateral Trade Rules, Low Carbon Green Growth, Environment protection

Suggested Citation

Shadikhodjaev, Sherzod and Suh, Jeongmeen and Kim, Min-Sung and Lee, Jae-Young, 저탄소 녹색성장정책과 다자무역규범 간의 조화:주요 쟁점과 정책 시사점 (Korea's Green Growth Policy and Multilateral Trade Rules: Harmonization Issues and Policy Implications) (December 31, 2012). Korea's Green Growth Policy and Multilateral Trade Rules: Harmonization Issues and Policy Implications 2012; KIEP Policy Analysis. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2317802

Sherzod Shadikhodjaev (Contact Author)

KDI School of Public Policy and Management ( email )

P.O. Box 184
Seoul, 130-868
Korea, Republic of (South Korea)

Jeongmeen Suh

Korea Institute for International Economic Policy ( email )

[30147] Building C, Sejong National Research Compl
Seoul, 370
Korea, Republic of (South Korea)

Min-Sung Kim

Korea Institute for International Economic Policy ( email )

[30147] Building C, Sejong National Research Compl
Seoul, 370
Korea, Republic of (South Korea)

Jae-Young Lee

Korea Institute for International Economic Policy ( email )

[30147] Building C, Sejong National Research Compl
Seoul, 370
Korea, Republic of (South Korea)

Register to save articles to
your library

Register

Paper statistics

Abstract Views
283
PlumX Metrics