Policy Analysis to Reduce Climate Change-Induced Risks in Urban and Rural Areas in Korea

Tae Hoon Moon, Dong-Hwan Kim, Chang Sug Park and Dong-Sung Lee
Additional contact information
Tae Hoon Moon: Department of Urban Planning & Real Estate, Chung Ang University, Seoul 06974, Korea
Dong-Hwan Kim: Department of Public Service, Chung Ang University, Seoul 06974, Korea
Chang Sug Park: Division of Climate Change and Interdisciplinary Research, Korea Environment Institute, Sejong 30147, Korea
Dong-Sung Lee: Department of Urban Planning & Real Estate, Chung Ang University, Seoul 06974, Korea

Sustainability, 2017, vol. 9, issue 4, 1-17

Abstract: The purpose of this paper was to project changes in climate change-induced risks over time and to investigate policy alternatives to mitigate the risks from increases in sea level, heavy rains, and heat waves in urban and rural areas. System dynamics simulation was used to build a model and conduct policy analysis for a simulation period over the years 2000–2050. The model was built with a focus on the interaction among three factors: damage restoration costs from heavy rains, heat waves, and sea level rise; the total cost of food imports due to decreases in arable land and agricultural productivity; and changes in the government budget to respond to climate change problems. A policy experiment was conducted with the model under four scenarios mainly based on the government budget for climate change. The results indicated, firstly, that the climate budget needs to be increased to at least 13 trillion Korean Won (US $11.6 billion) per year. Secondly, an earlier budget increase would more effectively reduce the total disaster restoration cost than a delayed budget increase. Third, if an earlier budget increase is difficult, the next best alternative would be to allocate a greater fraction of the climate budget to urban rather than to rural areas. Lastly, an early response to climate change would more effectively reduce food import costs, maintain agricultural productivity, and improve infrastructure for climate change adaptation than a delayed response. In conclusion, an earlier increase in the climate change budget would be more effective than a delayed budget increase of the same amount, and allocating a larger fraction of the climate budget to urban areas could be more cost-effective than increasing the budget, if urban and rural parties could agree on the method of allocation.

Keywords: climate change policy; risk management; system dynamics simulation; urban and rural areas (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: O13 Q Q0 Q2 Q3 Q5 Q56 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2017
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (3)

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/9/4/524/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/9/4/524/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:9:y:2017:i:4:p:524-:d:94482

Access Statistics for this article

Sustainability is currently edited by Ms. Alexandra Wu

More articles in Sustainability from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().