Climate ministry faces challenge of balancing environment and economy

Home > Opinion > Columns

Climate ministry faces challenge of balancing environment and economy

Published: 10 Oct. 2025, 00:01

Audio report: written by reporters, read by AI

Kim Myung-ja

The author is the chair of the board at KAIST and the former minister of environment.

The Ministry of Climate, Energy and Environment was launched on Oct. 1, expanding and restructuring the Environment Ministry that had been in place for 30 years. UN Secretary General António Guterres warned in 2023 of a new era of “global boiling.” Against this backdrop, Korea’s decision to strengthen the top command post reflects the urgency to address the climate crisis. At the same time, the ministry must resolve pressing disputes and risks in practical ways.

Minister of Climate, Energy and Environment Kim Sung-hwan, center, poses for a commemorative photo with staff during the ministry’s launch ceremony at the Government Complex Sejong on Oct. 1. In the background, the slogan reads, “We will change the world.” [YONHAP]

The origins of Korea’s environmental administration date back to 1967, when the Bureau of Sanitation within the Ministry of Health and Social Affairs established a department for environmental hygiene. This followed the 1963 Pollution Prevention Act, Korea’s first environmental law. In 1973, a pollution division was added, followed two years later by air conservation and water quality divisions. The Environment Administration was created in 1980, elevated to the Ministry of Environment under the Office of the Prime Minister in 1990, and given greater authority in December 1994. In 2008, the Korea Meteorological Administration was transferred to the ministry, followed by water management functions in 2018 and river management in 2022. In 2025, the new Climate Ministry encompasses electricity and renewable energy.

During my time as minister from 1999 to 2003, we published “New Millennium Environmental Vision” (translated), a collection of President Kim Dae-jung’s writing. The first chapter, titled “A Community of Life Where Humans and Nature Coexist” (translated), began with the words, “It is time for a new environmental view that regards the Earth as our mother and all living beings as brothers and sisters.” The guiding principle was to move from after-the-fact treatment toward preventive action and an integrated management system.

Key issues then included yellow dust air pollution, legislation for the four major rivers, waste management through the producer responsibility recycling system and international cooperation. At the 1999 UN Climate Change Conference, Korea pledged to fulfill its “common but differentiated responsibilities.” That year also marked the launch of seven trilateral projects among the environment ministers of Korea, China and Japan, which later evolved into the only standing annual ministerial meeting among the three countries.

In 2001, just after the country had emerged from a financial crisis, the ministry’s core project was “Eco-2,” aimed at harmonizing environment and economy rather than treating them as opposing forces. It launched a 10-year program for next-generation core environmental technologies, supported venture businesses in recycling and green industries and pushed for buses that used natural gas during the 2002 World Cup. We even proposed the introduction of “green GDP,” which would incorporate environmental costs into national economic accounts. The timing proved premature, and the plan stopped after three years of pilot research. Still, Eco-2 enabled the ministry to be recognized as the top government agency in performance evaluations in both 2001 and 2002, receiving presidential commendations.

Recalling these policies underscores a larger point: Economic and environmental goals must coexist. Today's challenges are more complex and severe. Geopolitical conflicts have brought instability in energy and resource supplies, trade imbalances and deindustrialization pressures. Competition over supply chains and technological leadership is reshaping industrial order. Climate goals and energy transition could easily collide with economic security if not managed carefully. Domestic policy must therefore consider supply chain resilience, price competitiveness and technological independence.

The restructuring of the Climate Ministry raises several concerns. First is the potential conflict between regulatory policies on emissions and promotional policies on energy development. Second is policy confusion caused by splitting responsibility for traditional fossil fuels and renewable energy. Third is the division of authority between the Climate Ministry, which oversees nuclear power construction, and the Industry Ministry, which handles nuclear power exports. Fourth is the burden of rising energy costs and investment in renewables, which could weaken the competitiveness of manufacturing and threaten energy security. Finally, there is concern that shifting the center of policy from the Industry Ministry to the Climate Ministry could diminish Korea's ability to link energy, carbon and trade strategies in global negotiations.

With the Cabinet’s approval on Sept. 30 of a government reorganization plan transferring energy policy functions to the newly expanded Ministry of Climate, Energy and Environment, the ministry was officially launched on Oct. 1. The photo shows the installation of the ministry’s nameplate on the exterior wall of the Government Complex Sejong on Sept. 30. [YONHAP]

For the ministry to succeed, it must provide solutions to these challenges. Possible measures include enshrining a balance between climate and industry policies into law, drafting a rational energy transition road map, creating joint consultative bodies with the Industry Ministry and introducing advanced assessments of industrial impacts from climate regulations. Institutional safeguards for energy security, crisis management systems for power infrastructure, joint public consultation on electricity rates and task forces for climate-related trade negotiations should all be considered.

As a resource-poor country, Korea must also recognize nuclear power as a contributor to both energy security in the age of artificial intelligence and economic security in an era of “weaponized trade.” Renewable energy should expand, but not in ways that leave the domestic market overly dependent on any single foreign supplier. It must be tied to strengthening industrial competitiveness.

Cabinet members are not only heads of their ministry but also advisers to the president and participants in national decision-making. Environmental administration must listen to civic voices, but it is not itself an activist movement. The new ministry should overcome its initial “two families under one roof” identity and develop into an integrated body with a shared vision. By building communication and consensus with the industry, it can contribute to strengthening the country’s overall competitiveness.

This article was originally written in Korean and translated by a bilingual reporter with the help of generative AI tools. It was then edited by a native English-speaking editor. All AI-assisted translations are reviewed and refined by our newsroom.