IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/jriskr/v20y2017i3p385-403.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Factors contributing to business actions in response to climate change in Korea

Author

Listed:
  • Jung Eun Kang
  • D.K. Yoon
  • Jinyoung Rhee

Abstract

Climate change is a growing problem and has been highlighted as a global issue. Empirical evidence increasingly indicates its obvious potential risks to humans and society. As members of this society, business organizations face greatly diverse climate change-related risks that they must recognize and respond to. However, gaps exist between scientific evidence and the actions of business organizations. Few empirical studies have examined the business organizations’ actions taken in response to climate change in Korea. This paper addresses this critical gap in the climate change literature by examining business organizations’ behaviors and identifying the factors influencing their actions. We employ statistical models to compare corporate climate change actions, and we explain their variations using survey data. The results indicate that despite increasing concerns about climate change, businesses have implemented very limited precautionary mitigation and adaptation actions. In addition, the concerns of the businesses about future climate change impact, organizational capacity (leadership, staff capacity, existence of a relevant division or department), and business size are significant factors with respect to the implementation of climate change actions.

Suggested Citation

  • Jung Eun Kang & D.K. Yoon & Jinyoung Rhee, 2017. "Factors contributing to business actions in response to climate change in Korea," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(3), pages 385-403, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:jriskr:v:20:y:2017:i:3:p:385-403
    DOI: 10.1080/13669877.2015.1057203
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/13669877.2015.1057203
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/13669877.2015.1057203?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Cameron, Trudy Ann, 2005. "Individual option prices for climate change mitigation," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(2-3), pages 283-301, February.
    2. Lucie Laurian & Maxine Day & Michael Backhurst & Philip Berke & Neil Ericksen & Jan Crawford & Jenny Dixon & Sarah Chapman, 2004. "What drives plan implementation? Plans, planning agencies and developers," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 47(4), pages 555-577.
    3. Raymond Burby & Peter May, 1998. "IntergovernmentalEnvironmental Planning: Addressing the Commitment Conundrum," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 41(1), pages 95-110.
    4. Joanne Harvatt & Judith Petts & Jason Chilvers, 2011. "Understanding householder responses to natural hazards: flooding and sea-level rise comparisons," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(1), pages 63-83, January.
    5. Sonia Akter & Jeff Bennett, 2011. "Household perceptions of climate change and preferences for mitigation action: the case of the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme in Australia," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 109(3), pages 417-436, December.
    6. Samuel Brody, 2003. "Examining the Effects of Biodiversity on the Ability of Local Plans to Manage Ecological Systems," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 46(6), pages 817-837.
    7. Wakabayashi, Masayo, 2013. "Voluntary business activities to mitigate climate change: Case studies in Japan," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 1086-1090.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Callan Harker & Maureen Hassall & Paul Lant & Nikodem Rybak & Paul Dargusch, 2022. "What Can Machine Learning Teach Us about Australian Climate Risk Disclosures?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-22, August.
    2. Giuseppe Forino & Jason von Meding, 2021. "Climate change adaptation across businesses in Australia: interpretations, implementations, and interactions," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(12), pages 18540-18555, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Alló, Maria & Loureiro, Maria L., 2014. "The role of social norms on preferences towards climate change policies: A meta-analysis," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 563-574.
    2. Acquah, H. de-Graft & Onumah, Edward E., 2011. "Farmers Perception and Adaptation to Climate Change: An Estimation of Willingness to Pay," AGRIS on-line Papers in Economics and Informatics, Czech University of Life Sciences Prague, Faculty of Economics and Management, vol. 3(4), pages 1-9, December.
    3. Galina Williams, 2015. "Households Willingness to Pay for the Emissions Reduction Policy, Queensland, Australia," SAGE Open, , vol. 5(3), pages 21582440156, September.
    4. Samuel Brody & Jung Kang & Sarah Bernhardt, 2010. "Identifying factors influencing flood mitigation at the local level in Texas and Florida: the role of organizational capacity," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 52(1), pages 167-184, January.
    5. Sonia Akter & Jeff Bennett & Michael B. Ward, 2013. "Climate change scepticism and public support for mitigation: evidence from an Australian choice experiment," Monash Economics Working Papers archive-47, Monash University, Department of Economics.
    6. Sonia Akter & Jeff Bennett, 2013. "Preference uncertainty in stated preference studies: facts and artefacts," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(15), pages 2107-2115, May.
    7. Dalia Streimikiene & Tomas Balezentis & Ilona Alisauskaite-Seskiene & Gintare Stankuniene & Zaneta Simanaviciene, 2019. "A Review of Willingness to Pay Studies for Climate Change Mitigation in the Energy Sector," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-38, April.
    8. Fredrik Carlsson & Mitesh Kataria & Alan Krupnick & Elina Lampi & Åsa Löfgren & Ping Qin & Susie Chun & Thomas Sterner, 2012. "Paying for Mitigation: A Multiple Country Study," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 88(2), pages 326-340.
    9. Kohei Imamura & Kohei Takenaka Takano & Nobuhito Mori & Tohru Nakashizuka & Shunsuke Managi, 2016. "Attitudes toward disaster-prevention risk in Japanese coastal areas: analysis of civil preference," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 82(1), pages 209-226, May.
    10. Allred, Shorna & Stedman, Richard & Heady, Laura & Strong, Karen, 2021. "Incorporating biodiversity in municipal land-use planning: An assessment of technical assistance, policy capacity, and conservation outcomes in New York’s Hudson Valley," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    11. Veronesi, Marcella & Reutemann, Tim & Zabel, Astrid & Engel, Stefanie, 2015. "Designing REDD+ schemes when forest users are not forest landowners: Evidence from a survey-based experiment in Kenya," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 46-57.
    12. Dienes, Christian, 2015. "Actions and intentions to pay for climate change mitigation: Environmental concern and the role of economic factors," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 122-129.
    13. Ahmet Tolunay & Çağlar Başsüllü, 2015. "Willingness to Pay for Carbon Sequestration and Co-Benefits of Forests in Turkey," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-27, March.
    14. Riddel, Mary C. & Shaw, W. Douglass, 2006. "A Theoretically-Consistent Empirical Non-Expected Utility Model of Ambiguity: Nuclear Waste Mortality Risk and Yucca Mountain," Pre-Prints 23964, Texas A&M University, Department of Agricultural Economics.
    15. Jens Abildtrup & Jette Bredahl Jacobsen & Suzanne Elizabeth Vedel & Udo Mantau & Robert Mavsar & Davide Pettenella & Irina Prokofieva & Florian Schubert & Anne Stenger & Elsa Varela & Enrico Vidale & , 2024. "Preferences for climate change policies: the role of co-benefits," Journal of Environmental Economics and Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(1), pages 110-128, January.
    16. Fouquet, Roger, 2012. "The demand for environmental quality in driving transitions to low-polluting energy sources," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 138-149.
    17. Ibidun Adelekan & Adeniyi Asiyanbi, 2016. "Flood risk perception in flood-affected communities in Lagos, Nigeria," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 80(1), pages 445-469, January.
    18. Halkos, George E., 2011. "Nonparametric modelling of biodiversity: Determinants of threatened species," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 618-635, July.
    19. Carmelo J. León & Jorge E. Araña & Matías González & Javier de León, 2014. "Tourists' Evaluation of Climate Change Risks in the Canary Islands: A Heterogeneous Response Modelling Approach," Tourism Economics, , vol. 20(4), pages 849-868, August.
    20. Benjamin, Emmanuel O. & Hall, Daniel & Sauer, Johannes & Buchenrieder, Gertrud, 2022. "Are carbon pricing policies on a path to failure in resource-dependent economies? A willingness-to-pay case study of Canada," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:jriskr:v:20:y:2017:i:3:p:385-403. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RJRR20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.