WTO체제와 조화를 이루는 배출권거래제도의 설계

초록

It may not be a wise idea in terms of national competitiveness to introduce the Emission Trading Scheme into Korea when its main rival states, such as the US and Japan has not yet induced the Scheme into their countries. The only countries that have imported the Scheme are those from the European Union (EU). However, the increase of international pressure pushing Korea to mandatorily decrease the amount of greenhouse gas makes it harder for Korea to solely ignore the problem on climate change. Regarding all this, rather than condemning the Scheme and being tossed around by the industries’ views, it is necessary to seek a way to introduce the Emission Trading Scheme while at the same time maintaining Korea’s national competitiveness. In order to introduce the Scheme and fully practice it as well in such a situation, there must be a delicate plan that will enable efficient operation of the Scheme. It is hard to find any measures that can solve the problem of declining competence of Korea’s industry in the current law related to the Emission Trading Scheme. The law also lacks any device that can block dispute regarding the international trade law. It would be helpful to look into the ‘conditioning access to domestic markets on the purchase of GHG emission allowances’ adopted by the Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act of 2008. However, since such buy-in requirement has an element of unilateral trade restriction, it is necessary to prepare for trade disputes through additional devices. If the buy-in requirement aims to prevent carbon leakage, reduce greenhouse gas and prevent climate change, it can be justified through the GATT Article XX’s exceptions. However, if it mainly aims to solve the problem of national competence, it can be regarded no more than a protectionism, thus it loses justification. Even if the WTO regime plans the Emission Trading Scheme quite delicately, if it forms arbitrary and unjustifiable discrimination, then it also may cause trade disputes. Regarding this, it is necessary to give serious and good faith attempts at negotiation with foreign countries before enforcing the measure. It is important for countries concerned to participate, provide opportunity to be heard and to respond, provide procedures for review or appeal, give opportunity to notify approval or denial, maintain transparency, equity, constitutionality, and predictability through appropriate level of publicity.

키워드