Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.14386/SIME.2020.28.2.1

A Study on effectiveness of transition of policy instruments for renewable energy: In the case of shift from FIT to RPS in Korea  

Park, Inyong (한국과학기술원 기술경영학부)
Choung, Jae-Yong (한국과학기술원 기술경영학부)
Publication Information
Journal of Technology Innovation / v.28, no.2, 2020 , pp. 1-36 More about this Journal
Abstract
While the policy intervention of each country for the promotion of renewable energy is strengthened, Korea introduced Feed-in Tariff (FIT) in 2002 to directly support the development of renewable energy. But in 2012, the shift of policy instrument that from FIT to Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) is occurred. This is a unique background that is currently found only in Korea, and new answers that focus on the outcomes of the shift of policy instruments are needed in addition to the existing discussion of comparison of FIT and RPS. Therefore, this study analyzed the change of policy efficiency after the shift to RPS using Data Envelopment Analysis(DEA) and Malmquist Index. In the result of analysis, a difference in the improvement of policy efficiency after in shift to RPS is found among each renewable energy source. This result is because renewable energy companies voluntarily entered the market only for energy sources that have secured technology or price competitiveness, and this indicates that the performance of renewable energy after the RPS shift has been concentrated on specific energy sources. As a result of this study, considering that the goal of renewable energy policy is to expand distribution and to drive growth engines, multi-faceted analysis is required in consideration of technology and market in selecting policy instruments.
Keywords
shift of policy instruments; Feed-in Tariff; Renewable Portfolio Standards; Data Envelopment Analysis; Malmquist Index;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 구민교 (2013), "우리나라의 발전차액지원제도 사례 분석: 신산업정책론 시각에서", 한국행정연구, 22(1), pp.1-27.   DOI
2 권태형 (2012), "신재생에너지 지원정책의 지대발생 효과와 규제: 신재생에너지 공급의무화제도(RPS)를 중심으로", 에너지경제연구, 11(2), pp.141-163.
3 권태형 (2014), "신재생에너지 시장 확대를 위한 정책수단의 비교 - 가격정책과 수량정책의 정책결합", 한국정책과학학회보, 18(2), pp.1-23.
4 김봉주.김건식(2013), "신재생에너지 공급의무 제도의 운용 현황과 과제", 이슈와 논점, 753, 국회입법조사처.
5 김은성.허은녕 (2016), "동적 패널 모형을 이용한 재생에너지 정책의 OECD 국가 재생에너지 보급 효과 분석", 자원.환경경제연구, 25(2), pp.229-253.
6 김준영.김성배.박성욱 (2016), "의무할당제의 국내 신재생에너지 발전량에 대한 정책효과 분석", 한국사회와 행정연구, 27(2), pp.131-160.
7 김태은 (2011), "신재생에너지 성장의 영향요인 연구: FIT와 RPS의 효과성 검증을 중심으로", 한국행정학보, 45(3), pp.305-333.
8 박연수(2018), "신재생에너지 공급의무화 제도(RPS)의 현황과 개선과제", NARS 현안분석, 25, 국회입법조사처.
9 산업자원부 (2006), 신재생에너지 발전차액지원제도 개선 및 RPS제도와 연계방안.
10 신정희 (2011), "에너지공급에 있어서 국가의 과제와 지속가능한 재생에너지 보급촉진제도: 현행발전차액지원제도와 2012년 도입되는 발전비율할당제", 법학연구, 52(4), pp.27-51.
11 이경재 (2006), DEA 모형을 활용한 인터넷 기업의 효율성 평가에 관한 연구, 전남대학교 대학원 박사학위논문.
12 이석호.조상민(2017), 신재생에너지 RPS제도 개선을 위한 경매제도 도입 방안 연구, 기본연구 17-22, 에너지경제연구원.
13 이성호 (2014), "한국의 RPS제도 이행 점검과 개선 방향", Current Photovoltaic Research, 2(4), pp.182-188
14 이수일.노재형.백철우(2015), 신재생에너지 보급정책의 효율화 방안 연구, 정책연구 2015-17, 한국개발연구원.
15 이수진.윤순진 (2011), "재생가능에너지 의무할당제의 이론과 실제: RPS 도입국가들에 대한 분석을 바탕으로", 환경정책, 19(3), pp.79-111.
16 이찬우 (2001), DEA 모형을 이용한 과학기술계 정부출연연구소 연구부서의 효율성 분석: A정부출연연구원의 연구사업단 사례를 중심으로, 연세대학교 대학원 석사학위논문.
17 임형우.조하현 (2017), "RPS 및 FIT 제도가 신재생에너지 보급에 미치는 효과 분석", 에너지경제연구, 16(2), pp.1-31.
18 장진영.엄이슬.임두빈(2019), "연료전지 시장의 현재와 미래", Issue Monitor, 112, 삼정KPMG경제연구원.
19 지식경제부 (2009), 신재생에너지 의무할당제(RPS) 국내운영방안 수립.
20 한국에너지공단 (2018), 2018 신재생에너지 백서.
21 Banker, R.D., Charnes, A. and Cooper, W.W. (1984), Some models for estimating technical scale inefficiencies in data envelopment analysis, Management Science, 30(9), pp.1078-1092.   DOI
22 Batlle, C., Perez-Arriaga, I.J. and Zambrano-Barragan, P. (2012), Regulatory desing for Res-E support mechanism: Learning curves, market structure, and burden-sharing, Energy Policy, 41, pp.212-220.   DOI
23 Bergek, A. and Jacobsson, S. (2010), Are tradable green certificated a cost-efficient policy driving technical change or a rent-generating machine? Lessons from sweden 2003-2008, Energy Policy, 38(3), pp.1255-1271.   DOI
24 Charnes, A., Cooper, W.W. and Rhodes, E. (1978), "Measuring the efficiency of decision making units", European Journal of Operational Research, 2(6), pp.429-444.   DOI
25 Choi, G., Huh, S.Y., Heo, E. and Lee, C.Y. (2018), Prices versus quantities: Comparing economic efficincy of feed-in tariff and renewable portfolio standard in promoting renewable electricity generation, Energy Policy, 113, pp.239-248.   DOI
26 Dong, C.G. (2012), Feed-in tariff vs. renewable portfolio standard: An empirical test of their relative effectiveness in promoting wind capacity development, Energy Policy, 42, pp.476-485.   DOI
27 Doris, E. and Gelman, R. (2011), State of the states 2010: The role of policy in clean energy market transformation, National Renewable Energy Laboratory.
28 Fare, R.S., Grosskopf, S., Noriss, M. and Ang, Z. (1994), Productivity growth technical progress and efficiency changes in industrialized countries, American Economic Review, 83, pp.66-83.
29 Farrell, M.J. (1957), The measurement of productive efficiency, Journal of Royal Statistical Society, 120, pp.253-281.   DOI
30 Frondel, M., Ritter, N., Schmidt, C.M. and Vance, C. (2010), Economic impacts from the promotion of renewable energy technologies: The German experience, Energy Policy, 38(8), pp.4048-4056.   DOI
31 Grinlinton, D. and Paddock, L. (2010), The Role of Feed-in Tariffs in Supporting the Expansion of Solar Energy Production, University of Toledo Law Review, 41(4), pp.943-973.
32 Kwon, T. (2015), Is the renewable portfolio standard an effective energy policy?: Early evidence from South Korea, Utilities Policy, 36, pp.46-51.   DOI
33 Menanteau, P., Finon D. and Lamy, M. (2003), Prices versus quantities: choosing policies for promoting the development of renewable energy, Energy Policy, 31, pp.799-812.   DOI
34 Neij, L. (1997), Use of experince curves to analyse the prospects for diffusion and adoption of renewable energy technology, Energy Policy, 25(13), pp.1099-1107.   DOI
35 REN21 (2019), Renewables 2019 Global Status Report.
36 Vedung, E. (1998), Policy Instruments: Typologies and Theories, In Bemelmans-Videc, M., Rist, R.C. and Vedung, E. (ed.), Carrot, Stick and Sermons: Policy instruments and their evaluation, New Brunswick NJ. USA.
37 Verbruggen, A. (2009), Performance evaluation of renewable energy support policies, applied on Flanders' tradable certificates system, Energy Policy, 37(4), pp.1385-1394.   DOI
38 Verhaegen, K., Meeus, L. and Belmans, R. (2009), Towards an international tradable green certificate system-The challenging example of Belgium, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 13(1), pp.208-215.   DOI
39 Wei, M., Patadia, S. and Kammen, D.M. (2010), Putting renewables and energy efficiency to work: How many jabs can the clean energy industry generate in the US?, Energy Policy, 38(2), pp.919-931.   DOI
40 Woodman, B. and Mitchell, C. (2011), Learning from experience? The development of the Renewables Obligation in England and Wales 2002-2010, Energy Policy, 39, pp.2914-3921.
41 Yi, J.Y., Yoon, K.B. and Park, W.S. (2013), The Renewable Portfolio Scheme, Environment Law Review, 35(1), pp.279-316.
42 Yin, H. and Powers, N. (2010), Do state renewable portfolio standards promote in-state renewable generation?, Energy Policy, 38(2), pp.1140-1149.   DOI
43 Zhao, X., Tang, K.K. and Wang, L. (2013), Do renewable eletricity policies promote renewable electricity generation? Evidence from panel data, Energy Policy, 62, pp.887-897.   DOI