國家永續報告書中減碳淨零政策之分析： 臺日韓三國之個案研究

Abstract

現在的地球每天都處於「沸騰」狀況！自2015年聯合國「巴黎協定」達成共識，各國提出「國家自願檢視報告（VNRs）」和「國家自定貢獻減量目標（NDCs）」，希冀2050年能達淨零。反觀我國，2021年當時總統蔡英文宣示「2050淨零目標」，今（2024）年 8月「台灣碳權交易所」正式營運，碳費徵收可望最快於年底徵收。台灣路徑進程乃2030年達到低碳、2050年走到淨零階段，其中企業面臨國內碳費徵收與國外貿易壁壘碳關稅上路，壓力最大。

有鑑於亞洲鄰近國家的日本和韓國與我國，在文化背景和產業結構相似，而且同處地緣政治漩渦，又是能源進口大國，三個國家面臨已從氣候議題成為政治課題，其於淨零政策方針、碳中和策略和碳定價機制為何？政府對於企業輔導之政策與工具如何因應國際局勢？因此本研究採取次級資料分析法及深度訪談法為方法論，透過臺日韓國家永續報告書（VNRs）中淨零政策、碳中和策略和碳定價機制，於相似與相異處進行完整的資料歸納與比較分析，勾勒淨零決策過程與政策執行之良虖。最後本文研究提出五點發現與反思：

一、淨零政策方面，台灣從宣示、法令到行動皆具，但企業反映執行力跟不上；雖有氣候雄心可惜步伐邁開不大，例如2030年減少碳排的目標調整至24％，相較日本46％、韓國40％的目標，仍有段距離；日韓兩國其政策定位則提升至國家變革高度，且扣緊經濟誘因以迎戰國際淨零經貿戰。 二、碳中和策略上之能源供給和核電課題方面，日本和韓國在面臨再生能源發電量成長緩慢情況下，展現政策彈性，將新核能視為過渡性時期可替代方案；日韓兩國背後思維是因應AI時代來臨的電網韌性挑戰。 三、再生能源政策方面，三個國家看法最一致。 四、碳定價機制等策略工具使用上，台灣採取碳費徵收模式，且尚未能確實調查實際的碳排數據，政策評估難以精確；日本採取碳稅，已經著手討論預計於明、後年開徵「國境碳稅」。 五、面對碳關稅之國際貿易壁壘戰，日、韓兩國採市場機制決定，財團對政策建言聲量大，迥異台灣多中小企業多靠政府扶植轉型；韓國面臨的是「大財團勝出、中小企業易陣亡」風險，而臺灣政策擬定應將重點放在中小企業轉型實際解方，建立綠色金融方法論，同步研發儲能新技術。

The Earth is currently in a state of "boiling" every day! Since the United Nations' "Paris Agreement" reached a consensus in 2015, countries have been submitting "Voluntary National Reviews (VNRs)" and "Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs)" with the hope of achieving net zero by 2050. In contrast, in our country, President Tsai Ing-wen declared the "2050 net zero target" in 2021, and in August 2024, the " Taiwan Carbon Solution Exchange" is officially in operation, with carbon fees expected to be collected as early as the end of this year. Taiwan's pathway aims to reach a low-carbon stage by 2030 and achieve net zero by 2050. Among the sectors, businesses face the greatest pressure due to the imposition of domestic carbon fees and the implementation of carbon tariffs as trade barriers abroad.

Since Japan, South Korea, and our country, all of which are neighboring Asian countries, share similar cultural backgrounds and industrial structures, and are situated in a geopolitical vortex, as well as being major energy importers, the climate issue has become a political issue for all three. What are their policies on net zero, carbon neutrality strategies, and carbon pricing mechanisms? How do their governments provide support and tools to assist businesses in responding to the international situation? Therefore, this study adopts secondary data analysis and in-depth interview methods as its methodology.

Through the Voluntary National Reviews (VNRs) of Taiwan, Japan, and South Korea, it comprehensively summarizes and compares the similarities and differences in net zero policies, carbon neutrality strategies, and carbon pricing mechanisms. This aims to outline the strengths and weaknesses of the decision-making processes and policy implementations for achieving net zero. Finally, this study presents five findings and reflections:

First, Net Zero Policy: Taiwan has made declarations, enacted laws, and taken actions, but businesses report that implementation is lagging behind. Despite having climate ambitions, the pace of progress is modest. For example, Taiwan has adjusted its 2030 carbon reduction target to 24%, which still lags Japan's 46% and South Korea's 40%. In contrast, Japan and South Korea have elevated their policies to the level of national transformation, closely tying them to economic incentives to better compete in the international net zero economic and trade battle.

Second, Carbon Neutrality Strategy in Energy supply and Nuclear Power Issues: Faced with slow growth in renewable energy generation, Japan and South Korea demonstrate policy flexibility by considering new nuclear energy as a transitional alternative. The underlying rationale for both countries is to address the grid resilience challenges posed by the advent of the AI era.

Third, Renewable Energy Policy: The three countries have the most consistent views on this matter. Carbon Pricing Mechanism and Other Strategic Tools: Taiwan adopts a carbon fee collection model but has yet to accurately investigate actual carbon emissions data, making precise policy evaluation difficult. Japan uses a carbon tax and has already begun discussions to implement a "border carbon tax" in the next few years.

Finally, Facing Carbon Tariffs as International Trade Barriers: Japan and South Korea rely on market mechanisms, with large corporations having significant influence on policy recommendations, in stark contrast to Taiwan, where many small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) depend on government support for transformation. South Korea faces the risk of "large corporations thriving while SMEs are easily wiped out." Taiwan's policy development should focus on practical solutions for SME transformation, establishing green finance methodologies, and simultaneously developing new energy storage technologies.