Korea Electric Power Corporation (KEPCO)
What do our scores mean?
The organizational score represents the degree to which the organization influencing climate policy and legislation. Corporations also have relationship scores reflecting their links with influencers like trade associations. Both are combined to place the corporation in a performance band. Full details can be found here.
Update August 2021: If limited evidence had been collected either on a company's direct policy engagement (Organization Score) or industry association links (Relationship Score) this is signified with an ‘n/a’ (not available). If limited evidence has been collected in both areas, the Total Score is also given as n/a. Full details and links back to any primary evidence that has been collected can still be located on the company’s profile.
Engagement Intensity
The engagement intensity (EI) is a metric of the extent to which the company is engaging on climate change policy matters, whether positively or negatively. It is a number from 0 (no engagement at all) to 100 (full engagement on all queries/data points). Clearly energy companies are more affected by climate regulations and will have a higher EI than, for example retailers. So an organization’s score should be looked at in conjunction with this metric to gauge the amount of evidence we are using in each case as a basis for scoring. On our scale, an EI of more than 25 indicates a relatively large amount of climate policy engagement.
Relationship Score, December 2020
A new batch of industry associations has been uploaded onto the InfluenceMap system and the relationship scores recalculated accordingly.
Updated terminology, February 2021
We adjusted the terminology used to describe the queries running down the left-hand side of our scoring matrix and added additional explanatory text to the info-boxes. This has no impact on the scores and methodology. It has been done following user feedback to improve clarity.
- Details of Organization Score
-
What do the 0,1,2 and NSs, NAs mean?
Each cell in the organization's matrix presents a chance for us to assess each data source against our column of climate change policy queries. We score from -2 to 2, with negative scores representing evidence of obstructive influence. "NA" means "not applicable" and "NS" means "not scored" - that is we did not find any evidence either way. In both cases, the cell's weighting is re-distributed over others. Red and blue cells represent highly interesting negative or positive influence respectively. Full details can be found here.
- Details of Relationship Score
-
What is the Relationship Score
A corporation, as well as its organizational score will have a relationship score. It is computed by aggregating the organizational scores of the Influencers (trade bodies etc.) it has relationships with, weighted by both the strength of these relationships and the relative importance of the Influencers towards climate change policy. Full details can be found here.
|
QUERIES
|
DATA SOURCES | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Main Web Site
The main organizational Web site of the company and its direct links to major affiliates and attached documents. |
Social Media
We search other media and sites funded or controlled by the organization, such as social media (Twitter, Facebook) and direct advertising campaigns of the organization. |
CDP Responses
We assess and score responses to two questions from CDP's climate change information request (12.3 a & 12.3c) related to political influence questions (currently these are not numerically scored by the CDP process). |
Legislative Consultations
Comments from the entity being scored on governmental regulatory consultation processes, including those obtained by InfluenceMap through Freedom of Information requests. |
Media Reports
Here we search in a consistent manner (the organization name and relevant query search terms) a set of web sites of representing reputable news or data aggregations. Supported by targeted searches of proprietary databases. |
CEO Messaging
Here we search in a consistent manner (the CEO/Chairman, organization name and relevant query search terms) a set of web sites of representing reputable news or data aggregations. Supported by targeted searches of proprietary databases. |
Financial Disclosures
We search 10-K and 20-F SEC filings where available, and non US equivalents where not. . |
|
|
Communication of Climate Science
Is the organization transparent and clear about its position on climate change science? |
1
|
NS | NS | NS | NS |
2
|
NS |
|
Alignment with IPCC on Climate Action
Is the organization supporting the science-based response to climate change as set out by the IPCC? (the IPCC) |
0
|
NS | NA | NS | NS |
0
|
NS |
|
Supporting the Need for Regulations
To what extent does the organization express the need for regulatory intervention to resolve the climate crisis? |
0
|
0
|
NS | NS | NS | NS | NS |
|
Support of UN Climate Process
Is the organization supporting the UN FCCC process on climate change? |
1
|
NS | NS | NS | NS |
1
|
1
|
|
Transparency on Legislation
Is the organisation transparent about its positions on climate change legislation/policy and its activities to influence it? |
-1
|
NA |
1
|
NA | NA | NA | NS |
|
Carbon Tax
Is the organisation supporting policy and legislative measures to address climate change: carbon tax. |
NS |
0
|
NS | NS | NS | NS | NS |
|
Emissions Trading
Is the organisation supporting policy and legislative measures to address climate change: emissions trading. |
0
|
NS |
0
|
NS |
-2
|
NS | NS |
|
Energy and Resource Efficiency
Is the organization supporting policy and legislative measures to address climate change: energy efficiency policy, standards, and targets |
NS |
1
|
1
|
NS | NS | NS | NS |
|
Renewable Energy
Is the organization supporting policy and legislative measures to address climate change: Renewable energy legislation, targets, subsidies, and other policy |
1
|
NS |
2
|
NS | NS | NS |
1
|
|
Energy Transition & Zero Carbon Technologies
Is the organization supporting an IPCC-aligned transition of the economy away from carbon-emitting technologies, including supporting relevant policy and legislative measures to enable this transition? |
1
|
0
|
NS | NS |
-2
|
1
|
NS |
|
GHG Emission Regulation
Is the organization supporting policy and legislative measures to address climate change: GHG emission standards and targets. Is the organization supporting policy and legislative measures to address climate change: Standards, targets, and other regulatory measures directly targeting Greenhouse Gas emissions |
1
|
NS | NS | NS | NS |
0
|
0
|
|
Disclosure on Relationships
Is the organization transparent about its involvement with industry associations that are influencing climate policy, including the extent to which it is aligned with these groups on climate? |
-1
|
NS |
-2
|
NA | NA | NA | NS |
Open PDF file of Data Source
How to Read our Relationship Score Map
In this section, we depict graphically the relationships the corporation has with trade associations, federations, advocacy groups and other third parties who may be acting on their behalf to influence climate change policy. Each of the columns above represents one relationship the corporation appears to have with such a third party. In these columns, the top, dark section represents the strength of the relationship the corporation has with the influencer. For example if a corporation's senior executive also held a key role in the trade association, we would deem this to be a strong relationship and it would be on the far left of the chart above, with the weaker ones to the right. Click on these grey shaded upper sections for details of these relationships. The middle section contains a link to the organization score details of the influencer concerned, so you can see the details of its climate change policy influence. Click on the middle sections for for details of the trade associations. The lower section contains the organization score of that influencer, the lower the more negatively it is influencing climate policy.
Climate Lobbying Overview: Korea Electric Power Corporation (KEPCO) appears to be engaging on a number of climate policy issues in South Korea. KEPCO has issued positive top-line statements regarding the need for climate action, but appears less supportive of stronger ambition with regard to specific climate policies such as the Korean Emissions Trading Scheme (K-ETS) and measures to transition Korea’s energy mix.
Top-line Messaging on Climate Policy: KEPCO has expressed some support for climate action in its top-line messaging, but lacks detail regarding the level of ambition required on a global scale. In its 2020 Sustainability Report published in September 2020, KEPCO acknowledged the climate crisis and the need to reduce global GHG emissions. However, the company did not appear to take a clear position on the Paris Agreement or the need to limit global temperature increases to 1.5°C or 2°C in line with IPCC guidance. In the same report, KEPCO appeared to support the achievement of Korea’s national policy goals related to climate change.
Engagement with Climate-related Regulations: KEPCO disclosed limited information on its climate policy positions in 2020-21 in its most recent corporate reporting. The company appears to express support for the achievement of South Korea’s federal renewable energy target and GHG target in its 2019 and 2020 Sustainability Reports, respectively.
In its 2020 CDP response, KEPCO expressed support for South Korea’s national emissions trading scheme (K-ETS), although it did not specify what the ‘improvements’ to the scheme that it is suggesting to the government entail. The Hankyoreh reported in September 2020 that at a public hearing hosted by the South Korean government on the Phase Three allocation plan for the K-ETS, the company expressed opposition to the proposed decrease in the amount of free allowances for coal power generation, citing concern for the ‘burden of reduction costs’.
In a report released by the KEPCO Management Research Institute in December 2020, KEPCO expressed support for the introduction of Energy Efficiency Resource Standards and other energy demand management policies in Korea. KEPCO’s 2020 CDP response also disclosed the company’s support for the government’s “Renewable 3020” policy , which establishes a target to produce 20% of energy from renewable sources by 2030. In the same disclosure, KEPCO states support with minor exceptions for Energy Efficiency Resource Standards.
Positioning on Energy Transition: In its 2020 Sustainability Report, the company appeared to support a reduction of coal-fired power generation in the energy mix, although with some ambiguity around the pace and extent of this transition. In 2020, KEPCO President and CEO, Jong-Kap Kim, stated the company’s commitment to play a leading role in the energy transition. KEPCO’s 2020 Sustainability Report further stated support for the decarbonization of the electric power industry and the development of green hydrogen production. A KEPCO research report released in June 2021 recommended policies that strengthen the classification of clean hydrogen, and investment in green hydrogen as well as blue hydrogen on the condition that it is used with CCS technology.
However, evidence suggests that KEPCO still supports investments that will enable the future role for coal in the energy mix. Yonhap News reported in October 2020 that KEPCO will invest in the building of the Vung Ang 2 coal power plant in Vietnam, as a contractor for the Vietnamese Ministry of Trade and Industry. In September 2021, ABC News Australia reported that an Australian Court of Appeal had rejected KEPCO’s repeated appeals to gain permission for a thermal coal mine project in New South Wales.
Evidence from a March 2021 report published by the KEPCO Management Research Institute suggests that KEPCO is supports a continued role for coal in the energy mix, instead advocating for increased use of CCS that will allow fossil fuel facilities to be “used continuously as a power generation source”. In addition, KEPCO opposed reducing the number of free emissions allowances for coal power generation through the application of integrated benchmarks in the K-ETS.
Industry Association Governance: KEPCO has disclosed a list of its memberships to industry associations, but with no further details of the company's role within each organization, nor its influence over their climate change policy positions. KEPCO has not published a review of its industry associations’ alignment on climate change policy.
Additional Note: The South Korean government owns 51.11% of KEPCO through direct and indirect stakes. It is likely that KEPCO retains channels of direct and private engagement with South Korean officials that InfluenceMap is unable to assess, and therefore are not represented in KEPCO’s engagement intensity metric. There is evidence that KEPCO is engaging with the South Korean government on several policy issues through its membership of several committees such as the Operating Committee of the Emissions Trading Market Council and the National Assembly Forum of Climate Change. However, InfluenceMap is not able to fully capture the content discussed in these forums with publicly available information.