기후스마트농업의 실태진단과 과제

Abstract

최근 기후변화에 대응하고 식량안보를 확보하기 위한 기후스마트농업이 부각되고 있다. 우리나라는 식량자급률이 낮은 편이며 기후변화로 안정적인 식량공급이 위협받을 것으로 예상되기 때문에 기후스마트농업 추진이 더욱 긴요하다. 반면, 기후스마트농업 추진은 동반 편익 및 상승효과 창출에도 불구하고 비용을 수반하게 된다. 농가들이 향후 기후스마트농업의 기술과 제도에 적극적으로 반응할 것에 대비한 실증 분석이 필요하나, 이에 대한 관련 분야 연구는 매우 제한적이다. 이 연구는 기후스마트농업에 대한 체계적인 진단과 경제적 효과 분석을 바탕으로 추진과제를 제시하기 위해 이루어졌다.

이 보고서는 「기후스마트농업의 실태진단과 과제」에 관한 연구원 기본 과제의 최종 결과물이다. 여기서는 우선, 기후스마트농업 적용의 애로사항을 살펴보았고, 이어서 기술 선호도, 기후스마트농업 채택 요인 등을 분석하였다. 또한 선택실험법을 적용하여 선호하는 정책수단을 도출하였다. 더 나아가 CSA 정책대안에 대한 비용편익 분석, 한계감축비용 분석 등을 실시하였다. 기후스마트농업 활성화를 위한 핵심과제로서, 실용화 기술 개발, 기후스마트농업 실천농가의 소득안정지원, 홍보 및 교육, 지역 맞춤형 기후스마트농업 추진 등의 정책, 정책조합을 위한 추진 주체 간 역할분담 방향 등을 제시하였다.

Background of Research Many countries in the world have promoted climate-smart agriculture for food security and to adapt to climate change. The outlook of Korea is that food self-sufficiency is low and climate change threatens stable food supply. Therefore, adopting climate-smart agriculture is further required. Despite benefits and created synergy effects of climate-smart agriculture, it involves costs. Because it is expected farmers are willing to respond to the technology and system of climate-smart agriculture, empirical analysis is required, but it is hard to find many studies for the field of climate-smart agriculture. This study aims to suggest future tasks based on systematic analysis of climate-smart agriculture and the effect thereof on the economy.

Research Methodology A survey by questionnaire was conducted to examine farmer’s response and decision-making about awareness of climate change and instruments of climate-smart agriculture. Frequency and cross-tabulation analysis was made of the survey result by questionnaire including farmer’s awareness of climate change, their recognition, and farmer’s response to application of climate-smart agriculture. In order to identify farmer’s preference for climate-smart agriculture, the Rank method and the tendering scheme were used. In addition, the Binominal Logit Model was used to analyze factors of farmer’s decision-making and adopting climate-smart agriculture. For analyzing the effect of major instruments of climate-smart agriculture on the economy, cost-benefit analysis and marginal abatement cost analysis were made. Through the analysis, a suggestion is made for implications of alternative policies in consideration of the leverage effect and sensitivity. Last, the AHP analysis is made on the basis of the survey by questionnaire with experts to determine priorities of policy instruments for climate-smart agriculture.

Research Results and Implications Frequency and cross-tabulation analysis was made on the basis of the result of the survey for farmers about instruments for climate-smart agriculture. The analysis shows difficulties in adoption of climate-smart agriculture include ‘Do not know the effect of technology of climate-smart agriculture well’, ‘Lack of cultivation technology’, and ‘High risk of initial cost for investment’ although those in applying key technology of climate-smart agriculture somewhat depend on each technology. Moreover, the answer of ‘Accept’ was 71.2% even higher than ‘Do not accept’ (3.1%) if new technology for climate-smart agriculture is developed. Government’s effort required for further application of climate-smart agriculture technology included ‘Provide incentives for direct payment’ (28.6%), followed by ‘Support initial cost of investment’ (19.2%), ‘Ensure stable sales channels’ (18.9%), and then ‘Develop and propagate new climate-smart agriculture technology’ (13.7%). The Rank method and the Tendering scheme were used to identify preference for climate-smart agriculture. The result shows the technology the most preferred by greenhouse farmers is ‘Multi-ply insulation covering and automatic insulation tunnel covering system’ followed by ‘Introduce new varieties’, and then ‘Apply relevant nutrients (customized fertilizer)’. ‘Introduce new varieties’ was the technology the most preferred by other farmers than greenhouse farmers, followed by ‘Crop insurance’ and then ‘Apply relevant nutrients (customized fertilizer)’. ‘Introduce new varieties’ and ‘Apply relevant nutrients (customized fertilizer)’ were technologies preferred by both the greenhouse farmers and the non-greenhouse farmers. For the result of identifying technology the most preferred for greenhouse farming and non-greenhouse farming, ‘Multi-ply insulation covering and automatic insulation tunnel covering system’ were selected for the horticultural farming and ‘Crop insurance’ for non-greenhouse farming. ‘Introduce new varieties’ was selected for greenhouse farming and non-greenhouse farming to grow food crops. For the technology the most preferred in each region on the basis of food crops not cultivated in greenhouses, farmers in Gyeongsang-do selected ‘Crop insurance’, but farmers in Jeolla-do selected ‘Introduce new varieties’. The Logit analysis of policy preference shows farmers prefer propagation of cultivation technology, propagation of varieties adapted to climate change, more crop insurance service, environmental cross-compliance, and the instrument of direct payment, but do not like monitoring the standard of environmental regulations, and the greenhouse gas target management scheme. This estimate result can be used to examine preference for policy combinations. The analysis of marginal abatement cost of major instruments for climate-smart agriculture shows the highest priority technologies to be enforced include multi-ply thermal insulation covering as an energy-smart instrument, and green manure cultivation as a nutrient-smart instrument in consideration of the leverage effect. In order to expand climate-smart agriculture by increasing benefits of each instrument, it is necessary to establish a plan for increasing the benefit following abatement of greenhouse gases by vitalizing the emission trading scheme, and embodying relevant taxation for water use. Meanwhile, where the sluice gate system was employed in the water saving scheme, the net present value was a negative value, implying that it is necessary to guide farmers to manage water through public relations and training rather than the method for using the sluice gate system. For prioritizing the policy instruments for climate-smart agriculture, the AHP analysis based on the survey by questionnaire for experts shows the policy instruments (layer 1) that should first be promoted are ‘Research and technology development’ and ‘Economic instruments’. Furthermore, the detailed instruments of the policy for vitalizing climate-smart agriculture of Korea include ‘Develop technology for adopting climate-smart agriculture’, ‘Support farmers to stabilize their income’ and ‘Vitalize the value chain and related agricultural market’, which showed higher importance in consideration of the weight of both layers 1 and 2. The comprehensive assessment result reveals that it is necessary to first promote ‘Develop varieties adapted to climate change (first place)’, ‘Develop agricultural weather forecast technology (second place)’, and ‘Develop cultivation technology (third place)’ as a policy instrument to vitalize climate-smart agriculture. For vitalizing climate-smart agriculture, it is necessary to establish policies of ‘Develop technology for adopting climate-smart agriculture’, ‘Support farmers who adopt climate-smart agriculture for stable income’, ‘Provide public relations and training for climate-smart agriculture’, and ‘Implement customized climate-smart agriculture specific to each region’.

Researchers: Jeong Hakkyun, Lim Youngah, Lee Hyejin and Kim Changgil Research Period: 2016. 1. ∼ 2016. 10. E-mail address: hak8247@krei.re.kr