농업·농촌부문 녹색성장 추진전략 개발 (1/2차연도)

Abstract

기후변화와 에너지 위기에 선제적으로 대응하기 위해 정부는 미래의 국정패러다임으로 ‘저탄소 녹색성장’ 전략을 제시하고, 전 부문에 걸쳐 녹색성장 정책을 추진하고 있다. 농업부문에서도 기후변화에 따른 부정적인 영향, 유가상승에 따른 농업경영비의 상승, 과도한 농자재 사용 및 부적절한 축산분뇨 처리에 따른 농업환경의 악화 등 농업이 안고 있는 환경 이슈들에 대응하기 위해 저탄소 녹색성장을 추진하고 있다. 농업부문 녹색성장 사례로 바이오매스 에너지화 촉진, 녹색기술·장비 보급 확대, 기후변화 대응역량 강화 등을 들 수 있다. 이러한 녹색성장을 보다 효과적으로 추진하기 위해서는 녹색성장에 관한 심층적인 분석을 통해 체계적이고 실효성 있는 실행전략이 요구된다.

이 보고서는 경제·인문사회연구회의 협동과제로 2010~11년의 2년에 걸쳐 수행될 예정인「농업·농촌부문 녹색성장 추진전략 개발」연구의 1차연도 결과물이다. 여기에서는 농업·농촌부문 녹색성장 여건진단, 정책평가, 실증분석 등을 기초로 핵심 과제발굴에 관한 기초연구를 수행하였다. 또한, 녹색성장을 위한 농업·농촌 관련정책의 통합의 실태진단과 평가를 통해 정책통합 방향을 제시하였다.

Green growth is the pursuit of economic growth, while preventing environmental degradation and unstainable natural resource use. Korea imports about 97 percent of consumed gross energy as one of 10 energy consuming countries and has a challenge for a new source of energy to cope with climate change and exhaustion of fossil fuels. As the climate gets warmer and warmer, the international society further tightens the environmental restrictions with international regulations for international cooperation in order to reduce greenhouse gases (GHGs). Under such changing circumstances in Korea and other countries, the Korean government presented 'low carbon green growth' to cope with climate change and energy crisis as a preemptive measures. In this note, it is necessary to present fruitful practical strategies for promoting green growth through in-depth analysis in order to successfully implement master plan for green growth. This report is the outcome from the first year of the 'Development of strategy for promoting green growth in agriculture and rural sectors' to be carried out for two years from 2010 to 2011 as a cooperative task of the Korea Council of Economic & Social Research Institutes. The purpose of research is to present a systematic, step-by-step and fruitful strategy for promoting green growth in agriculture and rural sectors by further examining the direction of discussion in Korea and other countries concerning green growth. The major findings of this study are summarized as follows: First, the amount of emitted GHG in the agricultural sector occupies 2.9% of the gross amount of emitted GHG. The BAU figure in 2020 was estimated to reduce the figure by 0.5% as compared to the number in 2005, in accordance with the guideline for calculating the amount of emitted GHG of IPCC. This is higher than -4.0% which is a target figure for national GHG reduction and implies that it is necessary to take measures for reducing and absorbing GHG in the agricultural sector, e.g., technology of reducing emitted GHG from farmland, technology of storing organic carbon in soil, technology of improving enteric fermentation of ruminant livestock, and etc. Second, the assessment of green growth policy in the agricultural sector showed that green growth means have been properly combined, but it is necessary to develop policy programs to be able to achieve fruitful outcomes of green growth and to effectively supply green technology. The assessment of green growth in the agricultural sector for the detailed tasks to be promoted in the sector showed that it is necessary to include policy means to embody the tasks, policies and systems related to green growth in current rural sectors. Third, the survey of farmers' and specialists' recognition of green growth showed high, and positive for combined promotion of environmental conservation and economic growth. They said 'furthering biomass energy' and 'spreading and supplying green technology' should be first driven policies. In addition, they evaluated it is important 'to enhance preventive measure to cope with climate change' and 'drive the project of creating ecofriendly agricultural sectors'. Fourth, diagnosis of current policy integration associated with green growth on the basis of specialists' investigation, policy integration theory and related data showed that it is necessary to set the basic direction of agricultural administration in which economy and environment is harmonized and balanced for integrating green growth related policies, and to enhance the policy promotion system for policy integration. It is indicated that the budget system related to outcome management and mid- and long-term plans are not satisfactory, and there is needed an assessment system for green growth contribution to a specific policy. Fifth, analysis of organic agriculture which is the key project of green growth and of eco-efficiency of geothermal heat pumps to measure the level of green growth showed that organic agriculture was higher than conventional agriculture by 32.0 and the geothermal heat pump was higher than the petroleum heater by 5.1. Analysis of technical efficiency of organic rice farming to compare it with the eco-efficiency index showed that higher technical efficiency groups had higher eco-efficiency indices as well. Sixth, analysis of green productivity in the agricultural sector by means of the carbon productivity index showed increasing carbon productivity. However, this results from the reduced amount of nitrogen fertilizer due to the reduced area for cultivating rice and from the increased GDP due to the increase in pig farming, and is not the type of green growth resulting from applying green technology. This implies that there is a need of green growth by reducing the amount of applied nitrogen fertilizer per cultivation area, and by technology of reducing GHG from ruminant livestock, etc. Seventh, for the derived green growth potential index in rural sectors by means of the OECD index, it was shown that the green growth potential index generalizing the indices in four items of ‘green growth’, ‘green consumption’, ‘green resource basis’ and ‘environmental living quality of residents’ were found in relatively less urbanized areas, e.g., the mountainous sectors in the Gangwondo and the Gyoungsangbookdo, and a part of plain fields in Jeolanamdo and Jeolabookdo. Eighth, it is necessary to develop low carbon policy programs associated with income increase with respect to farming related to GHG reduction or absorption for green growth in the agricultural sector, and feasible programs for reducing GHG, e.g., using the carbon trading system. Exemplary very useful green technology includes vertical farms for producing farm products as produced in factories through the supercritical fluid system for eco-efficiently producing food, energy, raw chemicals and products from geothermal, LED and biogas plants and biomass resources which can reduce energy costs and environmental load, through high-tech environmental control and automation. Green technology should accompany appropriate green finance support which can reduce risk because it initially needs high-cost investment. Ninth, it is important to establish policy targets as a policy project for green growth in the agricultural sector to be suitable for local conditions, to create a basis for promoting the green growth policy of a local body in the rural sectors for enriching the target, to set up a green resource management system for efficiently managing various green resources, to foster green industry and create green employment, and to construct a basis for using renewable energy and reducing energy. Lastly, in order to achieve the agricultural policy target for the economy and environment to be harmonized and balanced, it is necessary to introduce an environmental impact evaluation system for agriculture and rural sectors, e.g., in order to reorganize the policy promotion system by organizing a task force to be devoted to energy and environment related policies in connection with agriculture and rural sectors, and establishing a (provisional) green measure committee, to enhance connectivity between budgets and outcome management, to evaluate impact of individual policies on and contribution to green growth and to reflect the result on budgets.

Researchers: Chang-Gil Kim, Jeong-Seop Kim, Myoung-Ki Lee, Hak-Kyun Jeong, Yoon-Hyung Kim, Jeong-Kyung Jang, Young-Dan Kim and Tae-Hoon Kim E-mail address: changgil@krei.re.kr