[7th EAI Academy] ⑦ Climate and Environmental Diplomacy for Future Korea

YouTube Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M1UDi5Ecsnw

Video Script

Future Korean Climate and Environment Diplomacy and Career Development

Yes, hello. I will begin the lecture. I am Lee Tae-dong from the Department of Political Science and International Relations at Yonsei University, who was just introduced. It's a pleasure to meet you. The topic I will discuss today is 'Future Korean Climate and Environmental Diplomacy.' I teach environmental and energy politics at Yonsei University, particularly politics and policy related to climate change. It is a great pleasure to see you all again. Before we begin discussing climate change, the main theme is the future, future generations, and you. What do you think you are most interested in? Of course, you may be interested in various topics such as security, diplomacy, AI, and climate change, but at the same time, I believe your greatest interest lies in your careers, that is, how to develop these topics into your own careers.

Isn't that right? Are you not very interested? My teaching philosophy is this: to contribute even a little to helping students become happy individuals. This is my educational philosophy. This philosophy has changed since I entered my 15th year as a professor. Nowadays, my educational philosophy is to contribute even a little to helping students become happy. So, how can one be happy? There are many different kinds of happiness. Eating delicious food makes one happy. Being with a good person, a boyfriend or girlfriend, also brings happiness. You can figure out those aspects on your own. I cannot do anything about them, but among various aspects, one can find happiness through one's work, one's career.

I am happy in many ways. I eat delicious food, and I have good people and a loving family, but I find great happiness through the work I do. Of course, you might think, 'Being a professor at Yonsei must be happy.' That is not incorrect. You are the future. Looking at you now, you range from 20 to 30 years old, and you will spend the next 20 to 40 years working. I hope you find happiness through that work. Therefore, not only my educational philosophy but also, as the head of the Department of Political Science and International Relations Graduate School at Yonsei University, I co-authored the book 'Career Development in Political Science and International Relations.' The subtitle is 'What to Do with a Political Science Degree to Make a Living?' Future education and career development are emphasized, but there is little content on this. What to do with a social science degree to make a living, not just making a living, but how to

prepare, and what one does there, there was almost no information. So, I prepared this book with the students. We compiled the more common career paths in political science and published it as a book. The next project changed significantly. We discussed future career paths beyond conventional ones with the students, and those who wanted to pursue those fields wrote chapters, resulting in the book 'Future Careers in Political Science and International Relations.' Chapter 1 of this book is 'Future Careers in Environmental and Energy Politics.'

I am not here to sell books. They are in the library, so if you are curious about how to develop your career, what options are available, how to prepare, and what you do once you get there, you can refer to them. Based on my experience, I have identified about six key points to help you develop your future careers. The first is the 'aha moment.' In English, it's called an 'aha moment.'

Ah, there are such moments. Related to careers. 'Ah, this is truly the path I should take.' You might have opportunities to find that. Of course, you might find it gradually, but I hope you experience those moments where you think, 'Wow, this seems really interesting? Wow, I could do this continuously?' The first is that 'aha moment.' For me, it was in 1994 during a club activity called the 'Korea-Japan Student Conference.' At that time, three Japanese students and three Korean students formed a team and debated the topic 'How should Korea and Japan respond to transboundary pollution in China?' You all do team projects and club activities, right? I also had an 'aha moment' while doing that. 'Wow, there's something this fun.' Typically, about 80% of students who enter the Department of Political Science and International Relations say they want to become diplomats. They say they will take the foreign service exam.

In fact, only about four of my classmates became diplomats by passing the foreign service exam. It's not a small number, though. I had an 'aha moment' discovering this international, meaningful, dynamic area where something can be done. 'Ah, I want to continue doing this. In my career.' Second, instead of just staying put, you need to seek out various opportunities. While it's important to find them yourself, people and networks are very crucial.

Opportunities are often given by people. If you have an 'aha moment' and decide, 'I will go into this field,' it doesn't have to be environmental and energy climate change. If you find something 'really interesting,' pursue it continuously. Coming here is also a great thing. How troublesome is it? You came to listen despite the heat and sweat, right? To find such opportunities, and also, through that, you meet people and gain opportunities. For me, as an undergraduate, when I was looking for that opportunity,

I realized there were very few people majoring in environmental studies in the Department of Political Science and International Relations. This was 30 years ago. However, when I talked to people and said in class, 'I am interested in this,' the professor thought, 'What an unusual student.' There was a professor at our university named Moon Chung-in, and he said, 'Tae-dong, would you like to visit the Nautilus Institute?' I asked, 'Where is that?' He said, 'It's in Berkeley.' 'What do they do there?' 'They work on environment and security together.' I thought, 'How can they combine environment and security?' Many things happened in 1994. What was one of the biggest events in 1994-1995?

It was the North Korean nuclear issue. There are many reasons why the North Korean nuclear issue arose, but at that time, what happened was that North Korea needed energy, so they built nuclear power plants. If they reprocessed them, they would possess nuclear capabilities. However, the Nautilus Institute's approach was, 'If you lack energy, why not provide energy? Why not provide electricity?' So, what did they try to provide? They undertook a project to provide renewable energy sources like small hydropower and solar power to North Korea at that time. Of course, North Korea did not accept it. The costs were high then, and North Korea itself had many intentions to develop its nuclear capabilities. Nevertheless, these were very meaningful efforts. Why? Because people only saw the North Korean nuclear issue, but what was the cause of that issue?

It was an energy issue. They were trying to provide a solution to that problem. I learned a lot by observing such things. So, you are both undergraduates and graduate students. Graduate students have opportunities to talk with professors, but undergraduates rarely do. Is there anyone you can talk to comfortably with your professors? Please raise your hand. Yes, about five people raised their hands. Ask them. Ask them even for a brief moment after class, and they often provide opportunities. They might offer opportunities you are unaware of. Not only professors but various people can provide opportunities, so people and networks are very important.

They might offer opportunities you are unaware of. Not only professors but various people can provide opportunities, so people and networks are very important. Third is 'It's okay to fail.' Failure can be a blessing in disguise, and I believe failure itself is acceptable. I was admitted to the Department of Political Science and International Relations at Yonsei University directly without repeating a year, and I completed my master's at Seoul National University's Graduate School of Environmental Studies. I never failed and proceeded as planned, then decided to study abroad. I was very arrogant. This is because, during my master's studies, I won all the related thesis competitions. I won seven or eight. So, I became arrogant. When preparing for my studies abroad, I only applied to four universities: Harvard, Princeton, etc. But I was rejected. I had to get married, and my plans had fallen apart; I was at a loss. But in reality, it turned out to be a very good thing. Experiencing such failure made me think more deeply about what I truly wanted to do. At that time, the places I applied to for study abroad were mainly in 'Environmental Studies,' but I thought, 'Since I studied political science, it would be good to research environment and climate change based on my political science background.' So, I diligently searched for what I wanted to do and where I wanted to go, and I also looked for doctoral professors who would supervise me. Thus, I ended up studying abroad in Washington. During that time, I had the opportunity to prepare for things like scholarships, for which I was not well-prepared before.

In a way, over the course of a year, I had more time to reflect on myself and think about how to proceed and prepare. At first, I was very upset, but failure can lead to better outcomes. It's okay to fail. Fourth, you need to understand your 'profession.' You will each pursue different careers. Professor, researcher, international organization, company, etc. However, you should not choose solely because it 'looks cool' or 'seems okay.' You must understand what that profession, that career, pursues. You need to understand the profession. For example, researchers and university professors may seem similar, but their professions are different. You need to understand these things well. What is required there, how to prepare to become one, whether you are a good fit, without understanding these, you should not readily choose something just because it 'looks cool.' As I have only been in academia, I will briefly explain the characteristics and outputs of our profession. What do you think we do? Professors are idle. I am also quite idle. What do you think we do?

In a way, over the course of a year, I reflected more on myself and thought more about how to proceed and prepared for the future. At first, I was extremely frustrated, but failure can lead to better outcomes. It's okay to fail. The fourth point is understanding your 'profession.' You will each pursue different careers. These may include professor, researcher, international organization staff, or company employee, among others. However, you should not choose a career solely because it 'looks cool' or 'seems okay.' You must thoroughly understand what is pursued in that profession, in that career. You need to understand the profession. For example, although a researcher and a university professor may seem similar to a graduate student, their professions are different. You must understand these distinctions. Without understanding what is required, how to prepare to achieve it, and whether you are a good fit, you should not readily choose a path simply because it 'looks cool.' Speaking briefly from my experience in academia, what are the characteristics and outputs of our profession? What do you think we do? University professors play. I also play a lot. What do you think we do?

Professors said they weren't close. What we do is research and education. The outputs of research are broadly two: papers, and second, books. Has anyone published a paper? Yes. The characteristic of our profession is that we must publish papers. Publishing good papers in good journals is the research aspect of a university professor's profession. Besides education, you, as students, mainly see the lectures. However, looking at how I spend my time, I spend much more time on research than on teaching. But just writing papers is not enough. There is a double-blind peer review. This means the reviewer doesn't know who wrote it, and the author doesn't know who the reviewer is. This is because if your junior wrote it, they might write favorably. It's double-blind because you don't know who wrote it or who is reviewing it.

Therefore, the better the journal, the more rigorously it operates, and the more people review it, leading to many rejections. Our lives, the lives of university professors, are a 'series of rejections' from our research. We are rejected all the time. I came here today after being rejected a few times. Rejected for funding, rejected for papers. Have you ever been rejected? You are quite accomplished. You've never been rejected. It's on a different level than being rejected by a boyfriend or girlfriend. You worked hard, studied hard, and then you get a rejection saying, 'You submitted this?' It's quite a psychological blow. You worked hard, but don't you think it's like that? It is. However, in our lives, as we continue our research,

the more we aim high and try to publish in better journals, the more rejections we receive. If you cannot withstand this, you should not enter this field. You should not think of doing this. Your mental state will be shattered. You need to understand the profession in that sense. Whatever it may be, whatever career you pursue. So, there's a saying, 'Luck accounts for seven parts, effort for three.' This doesn't simply mean entrusting yourself to luck. Luck, in my opinion, involves many aspects that you cannot control.

Many things are beyond your control now and in the future. For me too, there are many things I cannot control or decide. However, 'effort' is something you can strive for, manage, and control through your efforts. Roughly speaking, about 70% are things you cannot control or manage, and about 30% are things you do through hard work, hence the saying 'luck accounts for seven parts, effort for three.' Therefore, what you continue to do in your career is to increase, little by little, the things you can manage and control through persistent effort.

By doing so, I hope that ultimately, you will work with good people to achieve meaningful results, create a slightly better world, and shape yourselves, and that these will be the challenges you face in your careers. In relation to this, I also wanted to work in an international organization. But before working in an international organization, I wanted to get a taste of it. We always learn from books, right? So, there are international organization internship programs. However, international organization interns receive no support. You have to pay for everything with your own money. However, there are two programs: the 'International Environmental Expert Training Program' under the Korea Environmental Corporation, affiliated with the Ministry of Environment. Although it is now offered by other universities, it was hosted by Yonsei University for 10 years. I also hosted it, and there is the 'International Meteorological and Climate Expert Training Program' by the Korea Meteorological Administration. What is this? For those who want to pursue a future career in climate and environment and work in international organizations. Are there any of you who want to work in international organizations? Anyone interested? What do you want to do?

By doing so, I hope that ultimately, you will work with good people to achieve meaningful results, create a slightly better world, and shape yourselves, and that these will be the challenges you face in your careers. In relation to this, I also wanted to work in an international organization. However, I wanted to gain experience before working in one. I wanted to gain experience through international organization internship programs, not just learn from books. International organization internships require you to cover all expenses with your own money without separate support. There are two programs. First, the International Environmental Expert Training Program operated by the Korea Environmental Corporation under the Ministry of Environment. This program was hosted by Yonsei University for the past 10 years, and I also have experience hosting it. Second, the International Meteorological and Climate Expert Training Program by the Korea Meteorological Administration. This program is for those who aspire to work in international organizations in relation to future climate and environmental careers. Are there any of you interested in working in international organizations? In what field would you like to work?

In any case, if you are interested, it is good to try. Then, they provide some support for flight tickets and living expenses, allowing you to intern for about 3 to 6 months. For about 10 years now, we have been building networks, and it is not easy to get an internship because the seniors here have done a good job. However, the network is quite well-established. So, if you want to go into areas like SDG through SCORE or similar programs, you can apply to these places, receive about a month of training, and if you are well-matched with your desired location, you can intern there. I supervise quite a few doctoral students, about 30 in total. Although there are more, I am proud of my students. All 30 are working or studying in their desired fields. It's 100%. While the students have worked hard and done well in various ways, I also

The Current State of Climate Change and the Difficulties of Greenhouse Gas Reduction

am helping a little. For you all, the climate and environment field might seem like a field where you wonder what you can do in political science or social science, but it seems to be one of the most sought-after fields right now. I will elaborate a bit more later, but we work closely with companies these days. When working with companies, we often deal with things like ESG. Working in a company is also very important. Companies are also very important, so I hope you consider that aspect well. I have spent quite a lot of time. It was intentional. The climate and environment field's papers have all been sent out, and you can review the content. However, perhaps the most important thing for you is how you develop your career in the future, so think carefully about these things, and there are good leagues here, right? Talk a lot. If you say, 'I'm interested in this,' you can help each other. Now, let's get back to the main topic. I will provide some numbers related to climate. Globally, about 55 billion tons of greenhouse gases are emitted annually. 55 billion tons. This is converted to CO2. There are about six types of greenhouse gases that cause climate change, and their proportions vary slightly. When converted to CO2, about 55 billion tons are emitted. So, how much does Korea emit? About 700 million tons. In the global context, it's not that much, right? Who emits the most? China. Who is second? The United States. Korea ranks around 12th, emitting about 1.2%, less than 2%. There are natural emissions as well as those from human activities, and it is said that if it exceeds about 460 billion tons, it is the amount of greenhouse gas to limit the temperature rise to 1.5 degrees. Therefore, the carbon budget is estimated to exceed 1.5 degrees in about 11 years.

This summer was really hot, wasn't it? It seems like it will continue to be so. However, while it may continue to be hot, it can also suddenly get cold and then hot again. Climate change means an increase in the range of intensity and frequency. Will it continue to be hot? Not necessarily. The frequency and intensity of hot and cold weather are significantly increasing. Therefore, greenhouse gases, the cause, must be reduced. 55 billion tons, 700 million tons – these numbers are hard to grasp. So, I often use this analogy. Have you ever tried to diet?

This might not seem very relevant. I always do it. I always start tomorrow. Let's say you weigh 70 kg. Some weigh more than 70 kg, some less, but do you weigh around 70 kg? Or think about your own weight. Has anyone tried to lose 10% of their body weight? Has anyone lost 20%? We call such people 'determined.' Look. From 700 million tons, what percentage do we need to reduce by 2030? 40%. We need to achieve net-zero by 2050.

Of course, if a person weighing 70 kg becomes 0 kg, they die, but that's not the point; it's that difficult. Losing even 7 kg from 70 kg is difficult, isn't it? We need to lose 280 million tons by 2030. But why is dieting difficult? It's due to familiarity. When eating pork belly, you want a drink of soju, or you want a macaron because you're bored, and if you're too lazy to exercise, it won't work. Our system is the same. We use fossil fuels, and we are too accustomed to them. They are convenient, cheap, and relatively so. So, we are accustomed to them, but it's not just familiarity; the scale of Korea's energy market is about 200 trillion won. If the energy mix changes by 1%, how much is that? 2 trillion won is at stake. How many stakeholders are involved in that? Politically and economically, it is very difficult to change this. This is precisely climate change mitigation. Reduction is so difficult for this reason. But it's not just that; adaptation is also very important.

So, why do we talk about 1.5 degrees, 1.5 degrees? Because if it exceeds 1.5 degrees, unique ecosystems and human societies face significant risks, coral reefs disappear, vulnerable populations increase, water-scarce populations increase significantly, and the frequency of terrestrial ecosystem loss, sea-level rise, and Arctic sea ice melt increases significantly. I research this field, so I constantly watch the news and see things like the wildfires in Canada last year. The area burned by wildfires in Canada was about 130,000 square kilometers. 120,000, 130,000 square kilometers. It's hard to grasp, isn't it? Do you know the size of Korea? Please know the area of Korea as common sense. The numbers are also quite easy. 100,000 square kilometers. About 330km x 330km is about 100,000 square kilometers. How much area burned in Canada? 130,000 square kilometers burned. An area larger than Korea's landmass burned.

Impacts of Climate Change: Wildfires, Floods, and Food Security

Australia is the same. Australia burned 120,000 square kilometers a year ago. Think about it. Even if one room burns, it's a huge disaster. If one building burns, it's a big deal. Do you know the size of Seoul? Seoul is 600 square kilometers. Thinking of the Olympic Expressway, it's about 30km east-west and 20km north-south for arterial roads, making it about 600 square kilometers. Imagine all of that burning, 600 square kilometers. But in Australia, in Canada, that's 130,000, 120,000 square kilometers. It's an area equivalent to burning all of Korea's landmass plus one-third more. Because it's not happening in Korea, we might just think, 'Oh, it's just burning. Poor koalas,' but such events are happening frequently, and things that didn't happen before are happening more now. Northern Europe, for instance, didn't have many wildfires. But now they are occurring. So, are these things happening there? Not necessarily. Not just in forests, but why are wildfires related to climate change?

This is the case. Australia is the same. Australia burned 120,000 square kilometers a year ago. Think about it. Even one room burning is a huge problem. Even one building burning is a huge problem. Do you know the size of Seoul? Seoul is 600 square kilometers. If you think of the Olympic Expressway, it's about 30km east-west, and if you consider the main roads, it's about 20km, making it about 600 square kilometers north-south. Even if all of that burns, it's 600 square kilometers. But fires in Australia, Canada, 130,000, 120,000 square kilometers. It's like our entire country burned and then an additional third burned. Because it's not happening within our country, we might think, 'Oh, it's just burning. Poor koalas,' but these events are happening frequently, and things that didn't happen before are happening now. Northern Europe, for instance, didn't have many wildfires. But now they are occurring. So, are these events happening there? Not necessarily. It's not just mountains. So why are wildfires related to climate change?

It's dry. But suddenly, water flows, meaning water flows in low-lying areas. Because 40cm of water suddenly arrives, it all overflows and hits POSCO. POSCO suffered 2.4 trillion won in damages. It's somewhat similar to the Fukushima nuclear accident. You know the blast furnaces at POSCO? The power facilities to operate those blast furnaces are all located underground because they are unsightly. The power generation, transformation, and transmission facilities are underground, but the flood covered the entire underground area. So, all electricity stopped. The blast furnaces stopped. Once a blast furnace stops, it cannot be restarted. It must be discarded. It cannot be reheated. Thus, damages of nearly 2.4 trillion won occurred, and people trying to move their 20 million won cars parked in underground garages in Pohang found water had entered them, and they drove for about 10 minutes and passed away. Such incidents continue to happen. Not only in Korea but in many places. In other words, climate change is not only about reducing greenhouse gas emissions, which is mitigation, but its impacts are already affecting our lives.

and we must respond to them. This is called climate change adaptation. We must do both. So, what does this have to do with political science or future diplomacy? Ultimately, this issue of climate change interacts with national economies, trade, commerce, finance, and energy, leading to political processes and market interactions. Especially when responding to climate change through measures like the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism, it can function as a trade regulation. There are such issues, and it also poses a security threat. Furthermore, developing countries have a lower capacity to respond to climate change. They have had little responsibility so far but suffer most of the damage. These issues, and the fact that there are various actors in the world, are what we will briefly cover today. Let's look at the contributions and responsibilities of developed and developing countries.

The Political Economy of Climate Change Response: Responsibility, Agreements, and Trade

Green is the US, red is China, at the top, and India. So far, China is first and the US is second, but historically, the US and the EU account for a significant portion. This means that developed countries have historically borne a much larger responsibility, at a ratio of about 60 to 40. In other words, if you emit a lot of greenhouse gases, there is differentiated responsibility, known as CBDR (Common But Differentiated Responsibilities). Developed countries have a much greater responsibility. So, looking at the national greenhouse gas emissions, in 2019, out of the 55 billion tons mentioned earlier, about 1 billion tons came from China, and the US emitted about 500 million tons.

This means China emits far more greenhouse gases than the US. So, developed countries account for 60%, and developing countries account for 40%. Based on a simple carbon cycle model, the ratio between developed and developing countries is about 70 to 30. This is a crucial issue for international cooperation regarding who bears responsibility and what actions should be taken. How to resolve these issues is a very important question. The UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, this is one of my research areas, led to the creation of the Kyoto Protocol. The Kyoto Protocol is an agreement that well embodies CBDR. That is, under the Kyoto Protocol, who was responsible for reducing greenhouse gas emissions? Only developed countries. What about Korea? Did Korea have a responsibility? We were always excluded as a 'developing country.' We were excluded from the Kyoto Protocol, but here we are looking at the compliance level.

This is internal accountability, compliance. Compliance means looking at how well one has adhered to what they committed to doing. In the case of the Kyoto Protocol, the average reduction target was 5%, but the responsibility varied by developed country. Countries like the UK, which had been emitting continuously since the Industrial Revolution, had to reduce significantly, while countries like Australia, where the Industrial Revolution was later, could even increase emissions by about 10%. However, when we looked at whether they approached that target, many countries did not comply. It wasn't just one or two countries; it was more. Even among developed countries. So, when we ask why, we find that countries with high consumption levels, especially those with high fossil fuel consumption, tend not to comply. This is shown by empirical research, and thus things changed.

Now, things have changed. The biggest difference with the Paris Agreement is that while Kyoto was an obligation for developed countries, the Paris Agreement requires all countries, 190 countries, to reduce emissions. However, it's not a uniform reduction but through NDCs (Nationally Determined Contributions). That is, the Paris Agreement involves setting one's own target and determining the method to achieve it. Therefore, compliance is more important in the current context. In many cases, plans are well-made. Targets are well-set, but we need to see if they are actually achieved. This is what academics do. In a way, if the media plays a role, where does the content come from? Researchers must do it. We need to see how much countries achieve their NDCs, their set targets, and if they achieved them, by how much, and if not, by how much they failed, and why.

This is what is currently being studied. A very important aspect of international political economy is trade and carbon border adjustments. Trade involves the movement of goods and services between countries. Many goods and services are ultimately produced based on fossil fuels. Therefore, they are saying, 'We will not import products made by emitting a lot of carbon.' In other words, trade regulations are imposed as a means of environmental protection, conservation, and response to climate change. The most representative example is the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM). What is the principle? It's like creating a club. A club is formed among countries that are reducing emissions well, and if a country that is not doing so wants to join the club, it has to pay. You go to dance clubs, right? You can have fun to your heart's content.

It's similar. It's called a 'club good,' where exclusion does not lead to competition. A club good is created by CBAM. It's a club created among European countries. Therefore, if products from industries like steel and aluminum outside the EU are imported into Europe and have emitted a lot of carbon, you have to pay the difference to reduce the gap with European companies that have strived to reduce emissions. In simple terms, you have to pay taxes or tariffs. There are industries that emit a lot of carbon. The pronunciation might be a bit tricky, but they are cement, power generation, aluminum, steel, petrochemicals, and steel. Cement is somewhat okay. Because it's produced in Korea and used in Korea.

Aluminum is not produced much in Korea. What's the problem? Power generation is also not a major issue. Power generation is used internally. We don't export electricity we produce to Europe. So, what's the problem? Steel and petrochemicals. Therefore, if you do well in these areas, you can work with companies like POSCO and LG Chem in the steel and petrochemical sectors. Political scientists do. What do they do? When it comes to climate change, ESG. They can work there, but why is POSCO trying to develop hydrogen reduction steelmaking? Do you know how steel is made?

We do not produce much aluminum. What is the problem? Development is also not significantly related. Development is used internally. We do not generate electricity and export it to Europe. So, what is the problem? It is steel and petrochemicals. Therefore, if you perform well in these areas, you will work extensively with companies like POSCO and LG Chem in steel or petrochemicals. Political scientists. Doing what? Climate change, ESG. You can work in those fields, but trade and climate change, meaning why is POSCO trying to implement hydrogen reduction steelmaking? Do you know how steel is made?

I don't know the details either. I study political science and international relations, and environment, so I need to understand the technology to some extent. The process of making steel, simply put, involves iron ore. Ore containing iron. It is heated to a high temperature. Is it enough to just heat it? No. What needs to be done? Coke is added. Coke is, in a nutshell, coal. Coal is added, reduced, and steel is extracted from it. Therefore, the process of making iron ore, the process of making steel itself, inevitably emits a lot of carbon dioxide.

I don't know the details either. I study political science and international relations. But when studying environment, one needs to understand the technology to some extent. The process of making steel, simply put, involves iron ore. Ore containing iron. It is heated to a high temperature. Is it enough to just heat it? No. What needs to be done? Coke is added. Coke is, in a nutshell, coal. Coal is added, reduced, and steel is extracted from it. Therefore, the process of making iron ore, the process of making steel itself, inevitably emits a lot of carbon dioxide.

How much carbon dioxide do we emit in Korea? 700 million tons. It's worth remembering this figure. Of this 700 million tons, the steel industry, like POSCO, accounts for 10%. This is not because POSCO wants to, but because the process of making steel itself generates emissions. Therefore, technologies that use hydrogen instead of coke, such as hydrogen reduction steelmaking, are being developed. Using hydrogen emits water instead of carbon dioxide. While not yet commercialized, efforts are being made in technological development. The Carbon Border Mechanism will be a very important keyword in future climate diplomacy. Trade and climate change affect not only nations but also Korean companies. Therefore, even if you research in this field, work at a national research institute, or join a company, you will continuously face this issue. It is a very busy field.

Climate Change and Security: Impacts on Economic and Food Security

Second is the issue of security. Security is the protection of people's lives and property from internal and external threats. In the past, war was mostly the entirety of threats. However, climate change can cause immense loss of life and property over an area of 130,000 square kilometers. Dams collapse, and as seen with POSCO's 2.4 trillion won in damages. If we do not respond to climate change, which causes more frequent and larger damages, it cannot be called security. While preventing war is important, climate change also affects infrastructure vulnerability and food production.

This has a very complex mechanism. There are various reasons why the price of US beef or Australian beef has increased, and grain prices have risen significantly. One reason is the decrease in production due to climate change. Crops burn, making production impossible. The second reason is that even if crops are replanted, insurance premiums increase significantly. According to people from Australia, insurance premiums are rising because insurance companies have already paid out large claims.

These increased insurance premiums are ultimately included in the product price. Inflation occurs due to various factors, but climate change also directly impacts food security through economic security. It damages breadbasket regions or affects them indirectly. The bee ecosystem is also very important. Bees play an essential role in food production through pollination. If bees disappear, food production will face significant difficulties. In fact, many such events are occurring, negatively impacting food security and acting in complex ways.

Development Cooperation and Decoupling: Efforts for Sustainable Growth

This summer is a prime example. Climate change adaptation and mitigation can create synergy, but they can also conflict. For instance, continuously running air conditioners in hot weather increases energy consumption, which in turn increases greenhouse gas emissions. This is an important factor in how climate change affects economic security. A related book chapter is scheduled for publication at the end of this year. Another important topic in climate change diplomacy is development cooperation. Development cooperation is about how to bridge the gap between developed and developing countries. It seeks ways to achieve both economic growth and carbon emission reduction through technological investment and aid. I have extensively researched decoupling.

There are various types of decoupling. In the climate political economy, which I mainly research, decoupling refers to the phenomenon where, contrary to the general notion that economic growth increases greenhouse gas emissions, the economy grows while greenhouse gas emissions decrease. In other words, economic growth and greenhouse gas emissions are separated. Analyzing countries where such decoupling is possible, we found that in the European Union (EU) countries, in particular, decoupling occurred in countries that successfully implemented carbon pricing over the long term. Decoupling has been achieved in places that have operated systems like the Emissions Trading System (ETS) or carbon taxes effectively.

Research on whether decoupling is occurring in some developing countries has also shown instances where economic growth and carbon emission reduction occur simultaneously. The reason why decoupling is possible in these developing countries indicates that the more Official Development Assistance (ODA) and projects related to climate change there are, the more decoupling is promoted. For example, in Mongolia, waste management is a major source of greenhouse gas emissions. If waste is not properly managed, methane (CH4) is generated.

In the past, Korea was similar. Sangam Sky Park and Noeul Park in Seoul were formerly landfills. At that time, food waste was not separated, so all waste was buried together, generating a tremendous amount of methane. Methane is a component of city gas and is easily combustible, so methane is still extracted from landfills and used as fuel. This prevents methane from being released into the atmosphere through carbon capture technology. In countries like Mongolia, where vast amounts of waste are indiscriminately dumped, methane emissions increase, making responses to such issues important.

Unlike developing countries that still lack technology, Korea possesses related technologies and experience. Therefore, it is important to support developing countries in areas of green technology, such as waste management and greenhouse gas reduction. Projects like these are actively underway at the Korea Environment Corporation and the Korea Environmental Industry & Technology Institute. I am also collaborating with these institutions on interesting research. International organizations are also important actors. International organizations deal with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), and some of my students work in international organizations in Switzerland or intern in renewable energy-related institutions. There are many opportunities to work in various fields. International organizations create systems and, through them, induce behavioral changes in countries and various stakeholders.

The reason I chose 'Global Cities and Climate Change' as my doctoral dissertation topic was during my internship in Bangkok in 2007. At that time, national-level climate change responses were minimal, but city-level responses were very active. Focusing on this point, I wrote my doctoral dissertation. For over 10 years, I have been researching international relations of climate-change-affected cities, or 'local governance,' and a related book is scheduled for publication next year. My doctoral dissertation emphasizes that cities are important actors in international relations.

The Role of Corporations and Climate Change Adaptation Living Labs

Although some say ESG management is outdated, it is a pressing, realistic issue. For example, RE100 (100% Renewable Energy) started not with an international organization but with a non-profit organization called CDP, but it spread as global companies like Apple and Google demanded RE100 from their supply chain companies. Companies that want to supply products to Apple or Google must implement RE100. The role of corporations is very important. Of Korea's annual greenhouse gas emissions of 700 million tons, the top 10 companies account for half, 350 million tons.

This does not mean that individual efforts like using tumblers or using public transportation are unimportant. However, the root cause of the problem must be accurately identified and resolved. I emphasize to students that while studying and research are good, it is important to enter companies and contribute to changing corporate culture and practices, even if it is difficult from the start. Next is a list of the top 10 greenhouse gas emitting companies. POSCO emits the most, and the rest are mostly power plants.

Petrochemical companies like Ssangyong C&I are also included. Currently, I am the overall head of the 'Climate Change Adaptation Living Lab' project within a national R&D project group. This project, worth approximately 6.6 billion won, involves about 40 researchers. This project requires transformative adaptation, and climate change issues require an interdisciplinary approach. Experts from various fields are collaborating, including political scientists, communication specialists, sociologists, climate scientists, urban engineers, hydrologists, and statisticians. Through the convergence of social and natural sciences, we are co-creating region-specific solutions and conducting large-scale research through experimental studies, field experiments, or simulation verification. We are developing and piloting methods with local governments, businesses, and citizens, and then conducting research for dissemination.

Additionally, we conducted surveys and competitions on the theme of 'The Future of Carbon Neutrality.' The results indicated the importance of carbon-neutral futures, safety infrastructure, climate citizenship, and the economy, and highlighted the significance of a just energy transition and inclusive social infrastructure development. This is research that asked citizens about the elements necessary for long-term greenhouse gas reduction by 2050. We plan to submit a paper compiling these findings to the future studies journal 'Future Studies.' If you are interested in futurology, you will find it interesting to read.

Conclusion: A Transdisciplinary Approach and Future Prospects for Climate Change Issues

In conclusion, climate change is a very difficult problem to solve. This is because there are various stakeholders within a country, and the impacts of climate change vary by region. The patterns of climate change are complex, with some regions getting hotter while others get colder. Instead of the term 'global warming' used in the past, terms like 'climate crisis' or 'climate boiling' are sometimes used. In this context, climate change will be an important field requiring interdisciplinary convergence research and solution development, not only in international politics but also in political economy, policy, and management. I hope you will take an interest in this field and develop your careers.

I am currently supervising 8 doctoral students and 6 master's students. The students are researching climate change issues from various perspectives, including international politics, comparative politics, and Korean politics. I hope that not only my students but also you will take an interest in these topics and forge your futures successfully.

Lee Tae-dong, Professor of Political Science and International Relations, Yonsei University.