A Case Study of Korean Farmer’s Voluntary Participation in Greenhouse Gas Reduction Programs: Based on In-depth Interview

A Case Study of Korean Farmer’s Voluntary Participation in Greenhouse Gas Reduction Programs: Based on In-depth Interview

Published: 2022.11.23
Accepted: 2022.11.21
NH Economic Research Institute National Agricultural Cooperative Federation (NACF), Republic of Korea


Climate change has affected the entire world. Without exception, the impacts of climate change are becoming evident across the Korean peninsula. In order to mitigate the impacts and damage caused by climate change, in particular, the Korean agricultural sector is required to play a more responsible role not only as a carbon emission source but also as a carbon sink, with the national pursuit of carbon neutrality. In the Korean agricultural sector, it is a key strategy to reduce greenhouse gas through the transition to low-input, low-carbon agriculture. Therefore, it is very crucial to continuously develop agricultural methods and technologies that contribute to greenhouse gas reduction and energy efficiency and to spread to the agricultural field. The Korean government has implemented various programs to support the supply of greenhouse gas reduction facilities including energy-saving and renewable energy facilities, and to compensate for low-carbon farming methods. According to the case study analysis, it was found that the support and compensation programs for adopting greenhouse gas reduction facilities in which farmers voluntarily participate are economically, environmentally and socially beneficial. Accordingly, the government-led greenhouse gas reduction programs have considerable potential as an important stepping stone for the transition to low-carbon agriculture. However, more government-level efforts to clear away existing policy obstacles are needed to further encourage farmers to be engaged in low-carbon agriculture. In particular, in order to expand the participation of farmers, it is critical to support policies that lower the threshold for technology adoption and enhance the effectiveness and acceptability of technology. In addition, it is necessary to develop a targeted strategy tailored to the characteristics of each type of farm, and effective and sophisticated policy matching efforts to link various types of carbon reduction technologies with the existing incentive system will also be required. In addition, it is essential to strengthen on-site incentives to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from the agri-food value chain.

Keywords: carbon neutrality, low-carbon agriculture, carbon reduction technology, energy-saving technology  


It is widely recognized that greenhouse gases (GHG) from the anthropogenic sources including farming, is the main cause of climate change (IPCC 2019; Fahey et al. 2017). With the growing crisis of climate change, combating it is becoming a policy challenge for almost every country in the world. The agricultural sector can be said that it is arguably the most risky and vulnerable in the context of climate change as it makes the sector even more difficult and problematic for farmers to incur more costs to obtain crop and livestock products. The Korean agriculture is no exception to the impacts of climate change. The impacts of climate change are becoming evident across the Korean peninsula. Changing weather patterns in Korea, such as rising average temperature, increasing frequency and intensity of extreme weather events including typhoons with heavy rains, heat waves, droughts and floods, threaten Korean farmers. Especially frequent agricultural disasters originated by climate change are on the rise. For instance, according to the Rural Development Administration (RDA), crop insurance payments have increased significantly in recent years. Insurance payments for rice-growing farmers increased by 19.7 times from KRW580 million (equivalent to USD0.44 million) in 2015 to KRW11.43 billion (equivalent to USD8.69 million) in 2018. And the payments for field crops increased by 24.6 times from KRW470 million (equivalent to USD0.36 million) in 2015 to KRW11.56 billion (equivalent to USD8.80 million) in 2018. Accordingly, the Korean government is pursuing the various policies to cut GHG emissions from the agricultural sector, aiming to minimize the impact and damage caused by climate change and ultimately reduce the climate vulnerability of the agricultural sector.

In Korea, the agricultural sector's GHG emissions accounted for approximately 2.9% of the total emissions as of 2018, and its share is on a downward trend. The GHG emissions from agricultural sector increased from 21.0 million tons of carbon dioxide equivalents (CO2eq.) in 1990 to 21.2 million tons CO2eq. in 2018, a slight increase compared to other industries’ emissions, while total GHG emissions increased significantly from 292.2 million tons CO2eq. to 727.6 million tons CO2eq. during the same period. The GHG emissions from the agricultural sector come from crop and livestock activities. And the pathways and types of the GHG emissions are primarily methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O) from rice cultivation and the livestock manure management process, and methane (CH4) from the intestinal fermentation of ruminants such as cattle (MOE, 2020).

Thus to meet the requirements of an agricultural development in a sustainable manner, agriculture should strive to minimize the consumption of energy and chemical materials which are GHG emission sources, and thus lower the environmental load intensity and cut GHG emissions (Holka et al., 2022). For tackling climate change, the Korean government declared ‘2050 carbon neutrality[1]’ in 2020 and then, with upgraded Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) targets, established carbon neutrality goals, implementation strategies and action plans at the national and industry levels in 2021. In particular, the government has set ambitious targets for reducing GHG emissions caused by the agricultural sector by 30.9% by 2050 compared to 2018 levels, and strategies and action plans for carbon reduction were established (MAFTA 2021; Kim et al., 2022). Through this, the Korean government seeks to reduce the input of livestock manure into arable land, improve water management in rice paddy fields, and use less nitrogenous fertilizers. In the livestock sector, the government aims to expand the use of livestock manure as a resource rather than a waste, control feed protein through the development of low-methane feed, etc., and reduce GHG emissions by diffusing smart and precision agriculture technologies. Furthermore, in the agricultural energy sector, the government pursues expanding energy-efficient facilities and renewable energy facilities and converting agricultural machinery based on fossil fuels into more environmentally friendly energy sources such as electricity and hydrogen.

As earlier stated, the Korean agriculture sector remained passive in responding to climate change since it not only produces much less GHG emissions compared to other industries, but also lacks the overall capacity to lessen GHG emissions and is related to national food security. However, to achieve national carbon neutrality, the Korean agricultural sector is given stronger reduction targets than ever before. And a more active role in absorbing as well as reducing GHG emissions is required. And the government’s carbon neutrality initiative should be utilized as an opportunity, not a crisis. Accordingly, the agricultural sector urgently needs to shift from a high-input agricultural practices to a low-input, low-carbon agricultural system. In addition, as the Korea government joined the International Methane Pledge (IMP) in 2021, efforts to reduce methane in the agriculture and livestock sector, which accounts for 43.6% of domestic methane emissions, are further required. Therefore, it is important to practice environmentally friendly and low carbon agriculture that contributes to GHG reduction and energy efficiency, and continuously invest in R&D and to spread clean technology to agriculture fields. The R&D in clean technology in the agricultural sector has been continuously developed centered on the Rural Development Administration (RDA) under the Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs (MAFRA). And in connection with this, various government support programs are being promoted for the supply of energy-efficient facilities and new and renewable energy facilities. 

For empirical research on the government's efforts to reduce GHG emissions in the agricultural sector, a case study was conducted on farmers who are voluntarily participating in the government’s GHG reduction support and compensation programs. It analyzed the effects of the programs in terms of economic, environmental and social aspects. Moreover, it was attempted to draw implications by identifying the difficulties that farmers face in the process of participating in the programs, and based on this, to present policy suggestions for the improvement of the government’s voluntary programs and for the spread of low-carbon agriculture. According to the analyses of the case study, after adopting energy saving and renewable energy facilities, the farmers significantly reduced heating costs in wintertime by reducing the use of fossil fuels. Through this, the farmers could reduce GHG emissions and obtained incentives from the government for the certified amount of GHG reduction. As a result, the farmers were able to increase non-farm income by saving agricultural operating costs as they were farming in a cleaner and effective way. Through the adoption of the facility, the temperature inside the greenhouse facility was precisely controlled to reduce stress on crops, thereby improving their crop production and quality.

Furthermore, by voluntarily participating in the GHG reduction programs, the farmers' environmental awareness was raised, and in the meantime, the practical experiences and knowledge of farmers on carbon emission reduction through practicing low-carbon agricultural activities were accumulated. Their experiences and knowledge inspire them again and continue to motivate them to practice low carbon agriculture. Further, as they inspire other farmers and stakeholders in the region, it contributes to build a basis for low-carbon agriculture in the region, as well as accumulate social capital, which is essential for establishing a carbon-neutral society. This study therefore provides an insight into voluntary carbon reduction polices that is supposed to encourage farmers to change their behaviors in a more effective and sustainable ways. The remainder of the study is organized as follows. Section 2 reviews the voluntary carbon reduction programs in the Korean agricultural sector. Section 3 describes the case study (methodology and results) and address its implications. And Section 4 concludes with policy suggestions.


The Korean government has been promoting low-carbon agriculture support policies to properly address climate change and encourage farmers to voluntarily participate in carbon reduction activities. The most commonly targeted climate change mitigation measure is to improve on-farm energy efficiency. In particular, the extension of low-carbon agricultural technologies such as energy-saving and renewable technologies is one of the key strategies of the Korean government to fulfill its emission reduction commitments under the ‘2050 Carbon Neutrality.’ For the extension of low-carbon agricultural technology, there are largely two types of policies: (1) facility support programs that disseminate GHG reduction technology; and (2) compensation programs that incentivize farmers for GHG reduction through low-carbon agricultural conversion based on the direct compensation and market system.

The GHG reduction facility support programs include ‘the Program for Livestock Manure Resource Conversion,’ ‘the Program for Forage Production Base Expansion,’ and ‘the Program for Agricultural Energy Use Efficiency Improvement.’ Among the facility support programs, ‘the Program for Agricultural Energy Use Efficiency Improvement’ is a representative policy of the MAFRA, which aims to induce farmers to voluntarily adopt GHG reduction facilities with governmental subsidies and loans, and self-pay. The program has been implemented mainly in the energy-intensive horticultural and livestock sectors. The energy-efficient facilities supported by the program include multi-layer insulation curtains, automatic insulation covers, circulating water film cultivation facilities, heat recovery ventilation devices, exhausted heat recovery devices, and air heating and cooling facilities. The new and renewable energy facilities supported by the program include geothermal heating and cooling facilities and waste heat reuse facilities, wood pallet heaters, etc.

In regard to compensation programs, there are three major programs: ‘the Voluntary GHG Reduction Program’ and ‘the Low-carbon Agricultural and Livestock Product Certification System’ that have been promoted since 2012. And since 2017, ‘the External Program of the Emission Trading System (Korean ETS)’ supervised by the Ministry of Environment (MOE) has been operating as a carbon offset system in the agricultural sector. And the various agricultural entities such as farmers, agricultural corporations, agricultural cooperatives, etc. can participate in the compensation programs if they have adopted the carbon reduction technologies and methods approved by the government.

Through ‘the Voluntary GHG Reduction Program’, the government tries to induce farmers’ voluntary carbon reduction activities by providing indirect support on consulting and verification costs as well as direct support for financial incentives (KRW10,000 per ton, equivalent to USD7.62 per ton) for the certified reduction. In the case of ‘the Low-carbon Agricultural and Livestock Certification System,’ the government provides overall assistance from certification acquisition to distribution including certification consulting and verification costs. As a consumer benefit, if consumers purchase certified low-carbon agricultural and livestock products (which is slightly more expensive than non-certified products) with Eco-Money affiliate cards (e.g. green card), they receive the cash reward (green point) equivalent to 15% of the purchase price, which is supported by government subsidies. This cash reward service helps consumers to accelerate the purchase of certified low-carbon products. ‘The External Program of the Korean ETS’ is market-based, which allows farmers to sell their carbon reductions to the emission permit allocation company subject to the Korean ETS. The government supports the initial consulting and preparation procedure necessary for program participation, and farmers can generate additional income by trading their reductions in the carbon market within the Korea Exchange (KRX) system. The Korean government has put considerable efforts into providing various voluntary carbon reduction mechanisms (Jeong et al., 2018)



This study uses the case study approach, a form of qualitative descriptive research, which is supplemented by quantitative research as well . The purpose of this study is to identify the environmental, economic, and social effects of the government-led voluntary GHG reduction programs that was implemented in the Korean agricultural sector. To the end, this study primarily explores the main effects of each type of GHG reduction programs and obstacles faced by participating farmers through case studies, and draw implications based on the findings, and furthermore suggest policy directions for spreading low-carbon agriculture in Korea. Case studies were conducted based on in-depth interviews with the farmers and also used the official GHG reduction data offered by the implementing agency (Korea Agricultural Technology Promotion Agency under the MAFRA), and energy consumption data provided by farmers. 

The questionnaire composition of an in-depth interview used a method of categorizing and setting detailed contents to match the research topic and purpose. The interview guide consists of four sections (See Table 1). The first section deals with the background and motivation that farmers came to adopt new technologies. The second part considers farmers’ performances from the economic, environmental, and social perspectives. The third part focuses on difficulties and limitations that the farmers evaluate and based on this, address insights and implications towards technologically and economically affordable ways for farmers to reduce carbon emissions. In the fourth part, their view on the GHG reduction programs is asked for to better understand their attitudes and evaluation towards the programs in general. And the in-depth interview survey was conducted based on the preliminary survey questionnaire (See Table 1) with farmers. For areas that require further research, surveys were supplemented through additional written and verbal interviews via email and telephone.

Selection of survey target 

This study did not target every farmers participating in GHG reduction programs due to case study constraints. Thus three farmers engaged in energy-intensive horticulture and floriculture with greenhouses were selected for the case study on the recommendations from the implementing agency. The selected farmers are currently participating in the corresponding GHG reduction programs, and are eligible for in-depth interviews due to their high awareness and sufficient experience on the program (See Table 2).


Findings: motivation, effects and limitations 


This study finds that there are three main motives that led farmers to voluntarily participate in the programs for energy-saving facility supply and compensation. First, economic reasons are the biggest motive. These farms are energy-intensive horticultural and floricultural farms that use heating energy in winter, and they have a considerable burden on energy costs as the share of heating costs in farm operating costs increase. As an alternative to alleviate these difficulties, they chose to actively participate in government support programs. Second, they have a high tendency of voluntary exposure and acceptance towards new technologies. These farmers have a lot of interest in energy saving technology because they need to use not only heating in winter but also cooling in summer due to climate change. Therefore, they have very active and positive attitudes towards the government's energy saving support programs and have sufficient knowledge and understanding of the related technologies prior to their adoption. Third, they also have high tendency to perceive the introduction of new technology as an investment rather than an expense. They are convinced that they can benefit from new technologies. Furthermore, they understand the social and economic costs and benefits of investing in new technologies quite well. Therefore, they tend to be more proactive in terms of awareness and capability to respond to the changing environment.


  • Case 1 : Paprika farm

In terms of the economic effect, it was found that the farmer dramatically reduced energy costs for heating by 50% in the winter season (4 months from November to February) by replacing fossil fuel energy with geothermal energy[2]. In the case of diesel boilers, the temperature gap between nighttime and daytime was large, but as the temperature control inside the greenhouse with geothermal-based system becomes more precise by using the geothermal heat pump system, the temperature deviation decreased and stress on crops also was reduced, thereby improving the production and quality of paprika. In addition, by minimizing the frequency of opening and closing of the greenhouse roof through operating the automatic adjustment cooling system, the loss of carbon dioxide (essential for photosynthesis) required for growing paprika was reduced. This resulted in lower carbon dioxide cost by about 15%.

With the improvement of the crop growing conditions, the crop harvest period increased from 6 months to 9 months, and thus production and sales increased by about 10%. Furthermore, by participating in the voluntary GHG reduction program, the farmer obtained an incentive of KRW10,000 (equivalent to USD7.62) per ton of carbon reduction, creating a total of KRW10.02 million (equivalent to USD 7,621) in non-farm income over the three-year period of the program. As to an environmental effect, the farmer ceased using fossil fuels such as bunker fuel and diesel for heating and instead switched to a geothermal heat pump system, resulting in reducing GHG emissions by a total of 1,002 tons CO2eq. for three years.


  • Case 2 : Cherry tomato farm

Looking at the economic effect, it was found that the farmer significantly reduced heating costs by 78% during the winter season (4 months from December to March) by installing multi-layer insulation curtains and switching from an oil boiler to an electric boiler.[3] In addition, the multi-layer insulation curtain also acts as a light shield during the summer season, thereby minimizing stress on crops and contributing to growth and quality improvement. Moreover, the farmer was able to achieve significant agricultural cost savings, including decreasing energy and labor costs, by reducing chemical farming materials and forage costs through self-manufactured agricultural materials and no-tillage. Also by participating in the low-carbon agriculture and livestock product certification system and obtaining certification, the price premium on low-carbon certified product was also obtained. For instance, the low-carbon certified cherry tomatoes grown at the farm were sold directly to consumers at 2-3 times higher than the wholesale price of uncertified general cherry tomatoes. Recently the demands from schools and public institutions that provide meals with eco-friendly agricultural products has increased.

In terms of environmental effect, it was confirmed that the carbon emission level of the farm was only 15.9, which is equivalent to 84% less emissions than the standard emission level 100 of certified agricultural products. In addition, the no-till farming method is helpful for reducing carbon emissions by storing soil carbon and decomposing organic matter because crop residues are buried in the soil and stored as carbon. It is also effective in reducing carbon emissions by reducing the energy input required to produce commercialized chemical fertilizers by using self-manufactured agricultural materials instead of chemical fertilizers. In addition, as to social effect, exchanges between the farmer and consumers (farm visits,

  • Case 3 : Rose farm

From the perspective of the economic effect, as the farmer converted the heating system from electric hot water boiler to the geothermal heat pump system, the heating costs was reduced by about 41% in winter (3 months from December to February). And the annual total energy costs of the farm after the acceptance of the geothermal heat pump system were reduced by more than KRW100 million (equivalent to USD76,057) even though both heating and cooling system were operated. In addition, since the complex environmental control system maintains the appropriate temperature and environment for growing roses, thus resulting in stabilizing the growing conditions, improving the growth, production, and quality of roses, which brings the increase in farm income. And it was found to have reduced carbon emissions during the program period, and if the certified reduction is traded through the carbon market, the total profit is expected to generate about KRW75 million (equivalent to USD57,077)[4] of non-farm income. In fact, after the adoption of the geothermal heat pump system on the farm, it was confirmed the carbon emissions were reduced by a total of 2,139 tons CO2eq. (535 tons CO2eq. per year), decreasing the GHG emissions by about 30% during the 4-year program period.

To summarize the main achievements of the GHG reduction support and compensation programs based on the case studies on farmers, first, it was found that the farmers could alleviate the energy risks and uncertainties by switching from fossil fuels to renewable energy. Second, the government-led programs are serving as a safety net for farm management by decreasing production costs and creating non-farm profits. In particular, it reduces the entry barriers for the diffusion of new energy-saving technologies into agricultural sector by alleviating the cost burden on farmer in the introduction of high-cost renewable energy facilities. Moreover, it has contributed to securing market competitiveness through improving product quality and reducing production costs by dramatically reducing heating costs by about 40% to 70% in winter season. Third, in the long run, it is beneficial to reducing the social cost[5] of carbon neutrality by saving the cost and time required to respond to climate change at the regional and national level beyond the individual farm level. Lastly, in the process of participating in the program, the awareness of farmers is increasing. In other words, the farmers are accumulating vivid field knowledge and experience on how GHG emission is generated in the agricultural production process and how it can be reduced. Through this process, it was identified that the government programs had a significant potential in improving the awareness of farmers and motivating to practice environment-friendly agriculture.


Although the government programs present the positive outcomes as above mentioned, the case study also revealed that there are some limitations of the programs that need to be improved. First of all, it is most crucial to improve the economic feasibility of high-cost low-carbon agricultural technologies and to effectively support the introduction of optimal low-carbon agricultural facilities suitable for farmhouse types. Specifically, first, the initial investment cost was too high for farmers to adopt new technologies. Furthermore, the cost of renovation and repair for facility maintenance and management, facility replacement due to aging equipment, and difficulties in warranty service (post-management) were found to be the main obstacles that the farmers highlight. Second, the procedural cumbersomeness for participation in the program (i.e. physical and time-consuming costs such as complicated procedures for data preparation and deliberation, etc.) and difficulties in monitoring GHG emissions and obtaining certification for their reduction are major complaints from farmers. These difficulties also act as a stumbling block to the participation of farmers. Third, as the incentives for the expansion of the target farmhouse are insufficient, it is necessary to diversify the incentive mechanism of the programs. In the case of ‘the Low-Carbon Agricultural and Livestock Certification System’, the certification standards and procedures are intricate and it seems that the economic compensation is not sufficient for the famers. Particularly, in regard of ‘the Voluntary GHG Reduction Program’, farmers can participate only once for three years, so the three-year period is not enough to recover their initial investment cost. In the case of ‘the External Program of the Emission Trading System ’, it is not easy for farmers to bear full cost of certification for GHG reduction, and besides the inconvenience to individually trade the certified reduction through the ETS’s exchange market and over-the-counter market is another burden on farmers.


The Korean government has placed a great emphasis on the role of the agricultural sector in achieving GHG emission reduction targets toward carbon neutrality. Given this situation, the Korean agricultural sector is obliged to implement more ambitious and challenging reduction targets. To achieve these targets, policy efforts for an aggressive transition to low-carbon agriculture are very urgent. Therefore, to accelerate the spread of low-carbon agriculture, first, the government needs to strengthen environmental and energy education and establish a social consensus through a great transition of public perception. Enhancing awareness of the environment and energy transition is a crucial basis for a soft landing of the national task of carbon neutrality. Second, the GHG reduction programs should play a significant role as a stepping stone leading to a transition to low-carbon agriculture in a broad framework. Because the conditions and capabilities of farmers are not identical, and thus realistically, not all farmers will be able to participate in the GHG reduction programs. Nevertheless, the government needs to continuously develop and promote a customized program (targeting strategy) suitable for the types and characteristics of farmhouses, while disseminating information and effects related to the low-carbon technologies and government programs through maintenance of information support system and establishment of comprehensive education support service in connection with programs (Jeong et al., 2022; Jeong et al. 2021a). And the government should also make continuous efforts to improve the existing programs. Furthermore, sufficient incentives should be provided to the farmers participating in the program to contribute to the management stability of the farms and to enhance the satisfaction of the program. In addition, institutional incentives such as the establishment of direct payments linked to carbon-neutral activities of farmers and linking with the low-carbon certification system should be expanded to encourage the voluntary technology adoption of farmers.

Third, policies that can lower the threshold for adoption of carbon reduction technologies should properly be operational. According to the survey, farmers are aware of the seriousness of climate change and the need for changes to high-input conventional farming practices and high dependency on fossil fuels (Chung and Park 2022). However, it is not well linked to the behavior that are willing to adopt low-carbon agricultural technologies and methods. As confirmed in the case study, another study also found that the main causes are the initial investment cost burden, distrust of technology, concerns about rising operating costs and possibility of reduced production, and lack of incentives (Jeong et al. 2021b). In particular, it is necessary to spread awareness that the agriculture and livestock industry has a responsibility to reduce GHG emissions as well as strengthen publicity and education on policies related to low-carbon agricultural technology. Furthermore, it is needed to improve the understanding and access of the new technologies while complementing the low economic feasibility of low-carbon technology through increasing R&D. Fourth, site-based incentives must be strengthened to reduce GHG emissions from the agri-food value chain. It is necessary to expand opportunities for producers, distributors, and consumers to share the clear purpose of low-carbon agricultural technology and low-carbon certification, and to strengthen incentives not only for producers, but also for the retailers and consumers (Lim 2016).

Fifth, it is necessary to disseminate best practices, so that other farmers can share and benchmark them. It is critical to broaden the understanding between farmers, consumers and low-carbon farms by comprehensively evaluating the program performance in economic, environmental, and social aspects and by activating field trip programs for farms with best performance (Jeong et al. 2021b). Sixth, it is vital to upgrade the measurement of GHG emissions in the agricultural sector and improve the statistics system. Based on this, the effect of agricultural technology dissemination and the amount of GHG reduction should be precisely measured, which is tangibly able to contribute to the national carbon neutrality goal and GHG inventory system. Finally, the transition to low-carbon agriculture should be viewed as a transformative opportunity to enhance the base of agriculture and promote public values inherent in agriculture. It should be seen as an opportunity to transform the agricultural structure that is economically, environmentally and socially sustainable, while recognizing and reinforcing agricultural intrinsic values, such as food security, environmental conservation, and carbon storage. More importantly, it is essential to design and operate policies from a balanced perspective that considers compatibility with existing systems to effectively achieve food security while reducing GHG emissions, and appropriately responding to the possibility of output reduction due to climate change.


Kim, K. H., Jang, Y. J., and Yoo, J. B. 2022. Future Challenges for Implementation of Carbon Neutral Agriculture by 2050. Issues and Perspectives No. 1917. National Assembly Research Service. 1-4

Chung, D.C., and Park, H.J. 2021. 2021 Public Opinion Survey on Agriculture and Rural Areas, Korea Rural Economic Institute 

Fahey, D.W., Doherty, S.J., Hibbard, K.A., Romanou, A., and Taylor, P.C. 2017. Physical drivers of climate change. In

Climate Science Special Report: Fourth National Climate Assessment; Wuebbles, D.J., Fahey, D.W., Hibbard, K.A., Dokken, D.J., Stewart, B.C., Maycock, T.K., Eds.; U.S. Global Change Research Program: Washington, DC, USA, 73–113

Holka, M., Kowalska, J., and Jakubowska, M. 2022. Reducing Carbon Footprint of Agricultural – Can Organic Farming Help to Mitigate Climate Change? agriculture, MDPI, 12(1383), 1-21 (http://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture12091383)

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2019. Climate Change and Land: An IPCC Special Report on Climate Change, Desertification, Land Degradation, Sustainable Land Management, Food Security, and Greenhouse Gas Fluxes in Terrestrial Ecosystems; Shukla, P.R., Skea, J., Calvo Buendia, E., Masson-Delmotte, V., Pörtner, H.-O., Roberts, D.C., Zhai, P., Slade, R., Connors, S., van Diemen, R., Eds.; IPCC: Geneva, Switzerland

Jeong, H. K., Sung, J. H., and Lee, H. J. 2022. Agricultural policy tasks to achieve carbon neutrality. Agricultural Outlook 2022 Korea, Korea Rural Economic Institute, 103-131

Jeong, H. K., Lim, Y. A., Kang, K. S., and Han, J. H. 2021a. Identifying Factors Participating in the Low-carbon Agriculture Policy. Journal of Agricultural & Life Science 55(5), 143-152 

Jeong, H. K., Lee, S. M., Lee, Y. G., and Jeong, S. H., 2021b. A Study on Vitalizing Green Economy in the Agricultural and Forestry Sectors (Year 1 of 3), Korea Rural Economic Institute 

Jeong, H. K., Lim, Y. A., Lee, H. J., and Lee, G. J. 2018. Current status of greenhouse gas reduction programs and systems in the agricultural and livestock food sector, Korea Rural Economic Institute (http://repository.krei.re.kr/handle/2018.oak/23409)

Lim S. 2016. Promotion of the Low-carbon Agriculture Certification System, Korea Journal of Organic Agriculture, 24(2), 201-219

Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, Rural Development Administration, Korea Agricultural Technology Promotion Agency. 2019. Low Carbon Agricultural Technology Handbook.

Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (MAFRA). 2021. 2050 Agri-food Carbon Neutral Promotion Strategy, 2021.12.27  (https://mafra.go.kr/2021plan/2691/subview.do)

Ministry of Environment (MOE). 2020. 2020 National Greenhouse Gas Inventory 

Park, J.Y. and Kim, Y. J. 2019. The Effects of Renewable Energy in Agricultural Sector. Journal of the Korea Academia-Industrial Cooperation Society 20(1), 224-235

[1] Carbon neutrality means having a balance between emitting carbon and absorbing carbon from the atmosphere in carbon sinks. Removing carbon oxide from the atmosphere and then storing it is known as carbon sequestration. In order to achieve net zero emissions, all worldwide greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions will have to be counterbalanced by carbon sequestration (source from "What is carbon neutrality and how can it be achieved by 2050?” News of European Parliament”, www.europarl.europa.eu.)

[2] The Korean government has been supporting the supply of renewable energy facilities (such as solar power, geothermal heat, and waste heat, etc.) in the agricultural sector. Currently, solar power system is most widespread renewable energy facility in rural area in Korea. Agricultural type photovoltaic, which can perform both agricultural activities and electricity generation at the same time, is currently promoting a pilot project. In case of geothermal system, it have regional limitations, so there are not many eligible areas in Korea. However, recently thermal cultivation area has increased to 34% of the total cultivation area. And 82% of heating fuel used for thermal cultivation such as horticulture with the year-round production is petroleum while renewable energy account for only 1.4%. In particular, heating costs account for 20-40% of farm management costs, and the trend of high oil prices puts a burden on horticulture farmers. Thus, the government has been supporting the adoption of geothermal heat pump system based on stable heat source throughout the year, centered on energy-intensive horticultural farms since 2009.

[3] It is known that installing multi-layer insulation curtains in single-dong greenhouses can save about 38-43% of heating energy compared to triple plastic-covered houses (source: Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, Rural Development Administration, Korea Agricultural Technology Promotion Agency, 2019)

[4] It was calculated as carbon price KRW35,000 (equivalent to USD26.6) per ton as of January 15, 2022

[5] It refers to the amount of loss borne by society, including productivity, property damage, and health impact due to climate change.