More ‘Creative’ Than ‘Destructive’? Synthesizing Schumpeterian and Developmental State Perspectives to Explain Mixed Results in Korea’s Clean Energy Shift

• Published date: 01 September 2021
• Date: 01 September 2021
• DOI: 10.1177/10704965211013491
• Subject Matter: Articles

Article

The Journal of Environment &

Development

2021, Vol. 30(3) 265–290

© The Author(s) 2021

Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/10704965211013491

journals.sagepub.com/home/jed

More ‘Creative’Than

‘Destructive’? Synthesizing

Schumpeterian and

Developmental State

Perspectives to Explain

Mixed Results in Korea’s

Clean Energy Shift

Elizabeth Thurbon

1

, Sung-Young

Kim

2

, John A. Mathews

2

, and Hao Tan

3

Abstract

We develop a new way of analysing the state’s strategic role in the clean energy shift.

We do so by synthesizing Schumpeterian understandings of ‘creative destruction’and

techno-economic change with cutting-edge developmental state theorizing centred on

‘developmental environmentalism’. Our approach allows us to explain South Korea’s

mixed results in the clean energy shift over the 2008–2020 period by focussing on

varying degrees of alignment between the state’s‘creative’and ‘destructive’ambitions

and capabilities. Following a period of misalignment characterized by a creative em-

phasis (2008–2015), we have seen growing alignment between the state’s‘creative’and

‘destructive’endeavours (2015–present). On the basis of our analysis, we anticipate

that Korea’s hitherto mixed results are likely to give way to more consistent strides

towards greening the national economy. Beyond Korea, our fresh analytical approach

may be applied to other national contexts, helping to advance broader debates about

the state’s strategic role in the clean energy shift.

1

UNSW, Sydney, Australia

2

Macquarie University, Sydney, Australia

3

University of Newcastle, Callaghan, Australia

Corresponding Author:

Elizabeth Thurbon, School of Social Sciences, UNSW, Room 147 Morven Brown, Sydney 2052,

NSW, Australia.

Email: e.thurbon@unsw.edu.au

Keywords

South Korea, clean energy shift, developmental environmentalism, Schumpeter,

creative destruction, hydrogen, fuel-cell electric vehicles

Since the announcement of its landmark ‘National Strategy for Green Growth’in 2008,

South Korea has been widely criticized for its lack of progress towards a clean energy

transition by policy observers and scholars alike.

1

Critics rightly point out that in some

key areas, the government’s ambitious greening goals have not been realized. For

example, since 2008, Korea’s per capita emissions have continued to rise while its

domestic uptake of renewables has lagged behind OECD averages, reaching only

around 7% of total energy generation in 2018 (IEA, 2018). These criticisms of Korea’s

progress are certainly valid.

Yet, it is also true that onother key measures, Korea has performed well since 2008

and is now well placed to green its economy in ways that simultaneously advance

environmental and developmental goals (cf. Kim & Thurbon, 2015). These ach-

ievements include the hard-won liberalization of Korea’s power generation system in

2016 which has encouraged renewables-based power companies into the market, the

development of world-class smart grid systems based on local technologies

2

and the

achievement of global leadership in key energy storage technologies including lithium

ion batteries and hydrogen fuel cells.

3

Moreover, since 2018, Korea has made sig-

nif‌icant moves towards coal exit at both national and regional levels –to the extent that

the IEA expects Korean coal imports to at least halve by 2040 (IEA, 2017a).

How, then, can we explain Korea’s mixed results? We contend that Korea’s par-

ticular pattern of progress since 2008 is revealing of two important realities about the

role of the state in the clean energy shift not just in Korea, but also more broadly.

The f‌irst reality –which seems obvious but is often overlooked –is that the clean

energy shift requires policymakers to simultaneously and successfully navigate two

distinct but interrelated dynamics: the creation and mass commodif‌ication of new green

technologies on the one hand and the destruction of powerful fossil-fuel incumbencies

on the other. These dynamics are interrelated insofar as it is diff‌icult to destroy fossil-

fuel incumbencies without f‌irst creating clean energy alternatives and making them

widely available at an affordable price. Similarly, it is diff‌icult to make clean energy

alternatives widely available and affordable without f‌irst destroying fossil-fuel in-

cumbencies, or else convincing incumbents to abandon fossil fuels and deliver clean

energies instead. In sum, if policymakers wish to expedite the clean energy transition,

they must be willing and able to expedite both the ‘creative’and ‘destructive’aspects of

the Schumpeterian dynamic central to all major techno-economic shifts, not least the

greening of energy systems.

4

The second related reality is that the ‘creative’and ‘destructive’aspects of the clean

energy shift involve very different political constituencies and require different kinds of

state capabilities. As a result, some governments may be more willing and/or able to

expedite green industry ‘creation’than fossil-fuel sector ‘destruction’, thereby slowing

a country’s overall greening progress. By focusing on degrees of (mis)alignment

between the state’s creative and destructive ambitions and capabilities - and the factors

266 The Journal of Environment & Development 30(3)