Environmental and Resource Economics Review (자원ㆍ환경경제연구)

Korean Resource Economics Association (한국자원경제학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Decoupling Analysis between GHGs and GDP in Korea

국내 온실가스 배출량과 경제성장 간 장단기 비동조화 분석

  • 김대수 (한국환경정책.평가연구원) ;
  • 이상엽 (한국환경정책.평가연구원)
  • Received : 2019.08.28
  • Accepted : 2019.10.21
  • Published : 2019.12.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This paper investigates the level of decoupling between greenhouse gas emissions and economic growth in Korea. Despite previous studies mainly stressed the existence of the Environmental Kuznets Curve, the lack of investigations in the level of decoupling constraints further policy suggestions. This study analyzes the level of decoupling in the short- and long-term, focusing on short-term volatility of GHG emissions income elasticity. In the long run, there is no decoupling in Korea because a robust causal relationship exists between GHGs, GDP, and fossil fuels. However, the short-term volatility is clearly identified under the long-term equilibrium(coupling), indicating there is the relative decoupling in the short run. The results show that fossil fuel dependence is a significant factor that increases short-term volatility(decoupling) and breaks the causal link(coupling) between GHGs and GDP.

본 논문은 1990~2016년 기간의 우리나라 온실가스 배출량과 경제성장 간 비동조화 수준에 대한 장단기 분석을 실시하였다. 환경쿠즈네츠곡선 존재 여부에 초점을 맞추어 수행된 기존 연구와 달리 본 연구는 온실가스와 경제성장 간 관계(온실가스 배출의 소득탄력성)의 단기 변동성에 초점을 맞추어 분석을 수행하였다. 분석결과 장기적으로는 온실가스 - 경제성장 - 화석연료 간 견고한 인과관계가 존재하여 비동조화로 평가하기에 어려운 것으로 나타난 반면, 단기적으로는 상대적 비동조화가 뚜렷하게 확인되었다. 이를 통해 현재 국가 온실가스 배출전망 및 감축목표 상에 배출 소득탄력성의 단기 변동성을 고려하지 못하는 한계점을 제기하였으며, 국가 단위 내 화석연료소비, 특히 발전부문의 화석연료 의존도가 온실가스 배출 소득탄성치의 단기 변동성을 낮추는 주요 요인임을 제시하였다.

Keywords

References

  1. 김재혁.신동현.조하현, "국가별 $CO_2$ 배출량의 소득탄력성 비교연구", 산업경제연구, 제28권 제1호, 2015.
  2. 김정인.김진욱.박창원, "주요 OECD 국가의 환경쿠즈네츠곡선 검증", 환경경제연구, 제8권 제1호, 1999.
  3. 민인식.최필선, STATA 시계열데이터 분석, 지필미디어, 2016.
  4. 신석하, "오차수정모형을 이용한 한국의 탄소배출량 결정요인 분석", 경제학연구, 제62권 제3호, 2014.
  5. 에너지경제연구원, 2017 에너지통계연보, 2018.
  6. 온실가스종합정보센터, 2018 국가온실가스인벤토리보고서, 2018.
  7. 이광훈, "국내 지역별 이산화탄소 배출에 대한 환경 쿠즈네츠 곡선 추정 및 비교", 환경정책연구, 제9권 제4호, 2010.
  8. 이광훈.이춘화, "수도권 지역 이산화탄소 배출에 대한 환경 쿠즈네츠 곡석 탐색 및 정책적 함의", 서울도시연구, 제10권 제3호, 2009.
  9. 임현진.정수관.원두환, "지구온난화가 가정부문 에너지 소비량에 미치는 영향 분석", 에너지경제연구, 제12권 제2호, 2013.
  10. 전호철, "온실가스 배출량의 소득탄력성 추정 연구: 함수계수 패널 분석방법을 중심으로", 한국환경정책.평가연구원, 2018.
  11. 정군오.정영근, "경제성장과 이산화탄소 배출에 관한 다국가 비교분석", 산업경제연구, 17권 제4호, 2004.
  12. 정용훈.김수이, "한국의 $CO_2$ 배출, 경제성장 및 에너지믹스와의 관계 분석", 자원.환경경제연구, 제21권 제2호, 2012.
  13. 최충익.김지현, "경제성장과 환경오염간의 관계에 대한 국제비교연구: $CO_2$의 환경쿠즈네츠 곡선 검증을 중심으로", 국토계획, 제41권 제1호, 2006.
  14. 한국은행, 국민계정, https://ecos.bok.or.kr, 최종 접속일자: 2019. 8. 11.
  15. Apergis, N. and I. Ozturk, "Testing Environmental Kuznets Curve Hypothesis in Asian Countries," Ecological Indicators, Vol. 52, 2015, pp. 16-22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2014.11.026
  16. Ayres, R. U., and B. Warr, "Accounting for Growth," The Role of Physical Work, Vol. 16, No. 2, 2005, pp. 181-209.
  17. Ayres, R. U., and van den Bergh, J. C. M., "A Theory of Economic Growth Material/ Energy Resources and Dematerialization: Interaction with Three Growth Mechanisms," Ecological Economics, Vol. 55, 2005, pp. 96-118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2004.07.023
  18. Balaguer, J. and M. Cantavella, "The Role of Education in the Environmental Kuznets Curve. Evidence from Australian Data," Energy Economics, Vol. 70, 2018, pp. 289-296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eneco.2018.01.021
  19. de Bruyn, S., "Dematerialization and Rematerialization as two Recurring Phenomena of Industrial Ecology," A Handbook of Industrial Ecology, 2002, pp. 209-222.
  20. Dickey, D. A. and W. A. Fuller, "Distribution of the Estimators for Autoregressive Time Series with a Unit Root," Journal of American Statistical Association, Vol. 74, 1979, pp. 427-431. https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1979.10482531
  21. Eagle, R. F. and C. W. Granger, "Co-Integration and Error Correction: Representation, Estimation and Testing," Econometrica, Vol. 55, 1987, pp. 251-276. https://doi.org/10.2307/1913236
  22. EEA, "Analysis of Key Trends and Drivers in Greenhouse Gas Emissions in the EU between 1990 and 2014," EEA Publishing, 2016.
  23. EEA, "Analysis of Key Trends and Drivers in Greenhouse Gas Emissions in the EU between 1990 and 2015," EEA Publishing, 2017.
  24. EEA, "Why did Greenhouse Gas Emissions Decrease in the EU between 1990 and 2012?," EEA Publishing, 2014.
  25. Grossman, G, M., and A. B. Krueger, "Environmental Impacts of a North American Free Trade Agreement," NBER Working Paper 1914. 1991.
  26. Lopez, R., "The Environment as a Factor of Production: The Effects of Economic Growth and Trade Liberalization," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Vol. 27, 1994, pp. 163-184. https://doi.org/10.1006/jeem.1994.1032
  27. McConnell, K. E., "Income and the Demand for Environmental Quality," Environment and Development Economics, Vol. 2, 1997, pp. 383-399. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1355770X9700020X
  28. OECD, "Indicators to Measure Decoupling of Environmental Pressure from Economic Growth," 2002.
  29. Pesaran, M. H. and Y. Shin, "An Autoregressive Distributed Lag Modelling Approach to Cointegration Analysis," Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999.
  30. Pesaran, M. H., Y. Shin and R. J. Smith, "Bounds Testing Approaches to the Analysis of Level Relationships," Journal of Applied Econometrics, Vol. 16, 2001, pp. 289-326. https://doi.org/10.1002/jae.616
  31. Phillis, P. and S. Ouliaris, "Asymptotic Properties of Residual Based Tests for Cointegration," Econometrica, Vol. 58, 1990, pp. 165-193. https://doi.org/10.2307/2938339
  32. Steger, S., and R. Bleischwitz, "Decoupling GDP from Resource Use, Resource Productivity and Competitiveness: A Cross-Country Comparison," Economic and Global Policy Issues, 2009, pp. 172-193.
  33. Stern, D. and M. Common, "Is there an Environmental Kuznets Curve for Sulfur?," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Vol. 41, 2001, pp. 162-178. https://doi.org/10.1006/jeem.2000.1132
  34. Stern, D., "The Rise and Fall of the Environmental Kuznets Curve," World Development, Vol. 32, No. 8, 2004, pp. 1419-1439. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2004.03.004
  35. Tapio, Petri, "Towards a Theory of Decoupling: Degrees of Decoupling in the EU and the Case of Road Traffic in Finland between 1970 and 2001," Transport Policy, Vol. 12, 2005, pp. 137-151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2005.01.001
  36. UNEP, "Decoupling Natural Resource Use and Environmental Impacts from Economic Growth: A Report of the Working Group on Decoupling to the International Resource Panel," 2011.
  37. Vavrek, R., and J. Chovancova, "Decoupling of Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Economic Growth in V4 countries," Procedia Economics and Finance, Vol. 39, 2016, pp. 526-533. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2212-5671(16)30295-7
  38. Vehmas, J., Malaska, P., Luukkanene, J., Kaivo-oja, J., Hietanen, O., Vinnari, M. and J. Ilvonen, "Europe in the Global Battle of Sustainability: Rebound Strikes Back?-Advanced Sustainability Analysis," Publications of the Turku School of Economics and Business Administration, Vol. 7, 2003.
  39. Wagner, M., "The Carbon Kuznets Curve: A Cloudy Picture Emitted by Bad Econometrics?," Resource and Energy Economics, Vol. 30, No. 3, 2008, pp. 388-408. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.reseneeco.2007.11.001
  40. Wang, W. and M, Li and M. Zhang, "Study on the Changes of the Decoupling Indicator between Energy-related CO2 Emission and GDP in China," Energy, Vol. 128, 2017, pp. 11-18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2017.04.004