IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v17y2025i18p8407-d1753247.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Public Perspective on Increasing Renewable Energy Use Ratio in Public Buildings in South Korea

Author

Listed:
  • Bo-Min Seol

    (Department of Future Energy Convergence, College of Creativity and Convergence Studies, Seoul National University of Science & Technology, Seoul 01811, Republic of Korea)

  • Min-Ki Hyun

    (Department of Energy Policy, Graduate School of National Defense Convergence Science, Seoul National University of Science & Technology, Seoul 01811, Republic of Korea)

  • Seung-Hoon Yoo

    (Department of Future Energy Convergence, College of Creativity and Convergence Studies, Seoul National University of Science & Technology, Seoul 01811, Republic of Korea)

Abstract

The South Korean government plans to increase the share of renewable energy (RE) used in public buildings by 10% from the current 30% to 40% by 2030. This article seeks to estimate the public willingness to pay (WTP) for this increase. To this end, a contingent valuation was applied, with 1000 households randomly selected and surveyed through one-on-one interviews. The payment vehicle and WTP elicitation method were determined to be income tax per household and the one-and-one-half-bound model, respectively. The annual WTP per household was estimated to be KRW 2712 (USD 2.04) with statistical significance. When expanded to the population, this produces an annual value of KRW 60.15 billion (USD 45.23 million). The increase in the RE use share can not only reduce greenhouse gas emissions but also result in savings on electricity bills. The sum of these two can be considered as benefits, and the sum of the construction and maintenance costs incurred due to the increase can be considered as costs. The cost–benefit analysis indicates that the present value of net benefits and the benefit-to-cost ratio were estimated to be KRW 667.3 billion (USD 501.7 million) and 1.48, respectively. Consequently, the increase is socially desirable and should be implemented immediately.

Suggested Citation

  • Bo-Min Seol & Min-Ki Hyun & Seung-Hoon Yoo, 2025. "Public Perspective on Increasing Renewable Energy Use Ratio in Public Buildings in South Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(18), pages 1-18, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:18:p:8407-:d:1753247
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/18/8407/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/18/8407/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Heberlein, Thomas A. & Wilson, Matthew A. & Bishop, Richard C. & Schaeffer, Nora Cate, 2005. "Rethinking the scope test as a criterion for validity in contingent valuation," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 50(1), pages 1-22, July.
    2. Richard T. Carson & W. Michael Hanemann, & Raymond J. Kopp & Jon A. Krosnick & Robert C. Mitchell & Stanley Presser & Paul A. Rudd & V. Kerry Smith & Michael Conaway & Kerry Martin, 1997. "Temporal Reliability of Estimates from Contingent Valuation," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 73(2), pages 151-163.
    3. Ian J. Bateman & Brett H. Day & Diane P. Dupont & Stavros Georgiou, 2009. "Procedural Invariance Testing of the One-and-One-Half-Bound Dichotomous Choice Elicitation Method," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 91(4), pages 806-820, November.
    4. W. Michael Hanemann, 1994. "Valuing the Environment through Contingent Valuation," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(4), pages 19-43, Fall.
    5. Krinsky, Itzhak & Robb, A Leslie, 1990. "On Approximating the Statistical Properties of Elasticities: A Correction," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 72(1), pages 189-190, February.
    6. Brad R. Humphreys & Bruce K. Johnson & John C. Whitehead, 2020. "Validity and reliability of contingent valuation and life satisfaction measures of welfare: An application to the value of national Olympic success," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 87(1), pages 316-330, July.
    7. Joseph C. Cooper & Michael Hanemann & Giovanni Signorello, 2002. "One-and-One-Half-Bound Dichotomous Choice Contingent Valuation," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 84(4), pages 742-750, November.
    8. John Loomis & Thomas Brown & Beatrice Lucero & George Peterson, 1997. "Evaluating the Validity of the Dichotomous Choice Question Format in Contingent Valuation," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 10(2), pages 109-123, September.
    9. Stella Nalukwago Settumba & Marian Shanahan & Willings Botha & Muhammad Zulilhaam Ramli & Georgina Mary Chambers, 2019. "Reliability and Validity of the Contingent Valuation Method for Estimating Willingness to Pay: A Case of In Vitro Fertilisation," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 17(1), pages 103-110, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Ju-Hee Kim & Seul-Ye Lim & Seung-Hoon Yoo, 2022. "A Price Premium for the District Heating System: An Empirical Investigation on South Korean Residents," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-10, June.
    2. Park, Seong-Ju & Kim, Ju-Hee & Yoo, Seung-Hoon, 2023. "Utilization of early retiring coal-fired power plants as a cold reserve in South Korea: A public perspective," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    3. Koo, A Mi & Kim, Ju-Hee & Yoo, Seung-Hoon, 2022. "Household willingness to pay for a smart water metering and monitoring system: The case of South Korea," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    4. Kim, Ju-Hee & Lim, Seul-Ye & Yoo, Seung-Hoon, 2021. "Public preferences for introducing a power-to-heat system in South Korea," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    5. Richard T. Carson, 2011. "Contingent Valuation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2489, March.
    6. Kim, Hyo-Jin & Lee, Hye-Jeong & Yoo, Seung-Hoon, 2018. "Are South Korean people willing to pay for official development assistance for building renewable power plants in developing countries?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 626-632.
    7. Halkos, George, 2012. "The use of contingent valuation in assessing marine and coastal ecosystems’ water quality: A review," MPRA Paper 42183, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Massimo Filippini & Adán L. Martínez-Cruz, 2016. "Impact of environmental and social attitudes, and family concerns on willingness to pay for improved air quality: a contingent valuation application in Mexico City," Latin American Economic Review, Springer;Centro de Investigaciòn y Docencia Económica (CIDE), vol. 25(1), pages 1-18, December.
    9. Min-Ki Hyun & Jungho Nam & Seung-Hoon Yoo, 2024. "Public Willingness to Pay for Interstate Cooperation to Preserve the Ecological Integrity of the Han River Estuary in Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(9), pages 1-17, April.
    10. Henry-Osorio, Miguel & Mittelhammer, Ronald C., 2012. "An Information-Theoretic Approach to Modeling Binary Choices: Estimating Willingness to Pay for Recreation Site Attributes," 2012 Annual Meeting, August 12-14, 2012, Seattle, Washington 123432, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
    11. K. McConnell* & I. Strand & Sebastián Valdés, 1998. "Testing Temporal Reliability and Carry-over Effect: The Role of Correlated Responses in Test-retest Reliability Studies," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 12(3), pages 357-374, October.
    12. Kim, Soo-Il & Haab, Timothy C., 2009. "Temporal insensitivity of willingness to pay and implied discount rates," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(2), pages 89-102, May.
    13. Ghanem, Samar & Ferrini, Silvia & Di Maria, Corrado, 2023. "Air pollution and willingness to pay for health risk reductions in Egypt: A contingent valuation survey of Greater Cairo and Alexandria households," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).
    14. Sardana, Kavita, 2019. "Tourists' Willingness to Pay for Restoration of Traditional Agro-forest Ecosystems Providing Biodiversity: Evidence from India," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 362-372.
    15. So-Yeon Park & Ju-Hee Kim & Jungkwan Seo & Seung-Hoon Yoo, 2022. "Evaluating the Economic Benefits of Tightening Regulations on the Use of Toluene, a Hazardous Chemical, in South Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-15, May.
    16. Kim, Ju-Hee & Han, Su-Mi & Yoo, Seung-Hoon, 2023. "Price premium for green hydrogen in South Korea: Evidence from a stated preference study," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 211(C), pages 647-655.
    17. Robert J. Johnston & Kevin J. Boyle & Wiktor (Vic) Adamowicz & Jeff Bennett & Roy Brouwer & Trudy Ann Cameron & W. Michael Hanemann & Nick Hanley & Mandy Ryan & Riccardo Scarpa & Roger Tourangeau & Ch, 2017. "Contemporary Guidance for Stated Preference Studies," Journal of the Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, University of Chicago Press, vol. 4(2), pages 319-405.
    18. Kwak, So-Yoon & Yoo, Seung-Hoon, 2015. "The public’s value for developing ocean energy technology in the Republic of Korea: A contingent valuation study," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 432-439.
    19. Lee, Juyong & Cho, Youngsang, 2020. "Estimation of the usage fee for peer-to-peer electricity trading platform: The case of South Korea," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 136(C).
    20. Richard T. Carson & W. Michael Hanemann & Raymond J. Kopp & Jon A. Krosnick & Robert Cameron Mitchell & Stanley Presser, 1998. "Referendum Design and Contingent Valuation: The NOAA Panel's No-Vote Recommendation," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 80(2), pages 335-338, May.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:18:p:8407-:d:1753247. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.