Korea's climate-tech industry is growing rapidly. Along with it, government support is also gradually strengthening. But as several problems with climate-tech investment have been raised, there are also voices of awakening that it is time to re-examine the situation.
Is It Time to Re-Examine Korea's Climate-Tech Investment?
[Shall We Re-Examine Korea's "Climate-Tech Investment"? ⓒESG.ONL]
The Government's Vision of Fostering 10 Climate-Tech Unicorns
Our govErnment set a goal of investing 450 trillion won in Green Finance by 2030 and fostering 10 climate-tech unicorn companies. It plans to invest 145 trillion won through public-private cooperation, but currently there are no climate-tech unicorn companies in Korea. With the total number of unicorn companies at 15, the question is being raised of whether the goal of fostering 10 from climate-tech companies alone is excessive optimism.
Startup Alliance pointed out the problems of this government policy in a recently released report.
As of February 2025, a total of 272 climate-tech companies are active in Korea. Among these, "eco-tech" (25.7%) and "food-tech" (27.6%) account for more than half, because they are fields where small-capital startups are possible compared with other fields. On the other hand, "geo-tech" (11.4%)—related to carbon observation and carbon-emission rights—shows a relatively small share. "Geo-tech" has a comparatively small share of companies in that domestic regulatory barriers trip it up first, it requires advanced technology and infrastructure, and it is hard to start without large-scale investment.
Currently, investment in climate tech is concentrated in clean-tech companies related to renewable energy and carbon-tech companies related to carbon-capture technology. This is because the technologies have already entered the commercialization stage, so returns relative to investment are clear. Solar, wind, energy-storage systems, and the like have high market growth potential, and global initiatives such as RE100 are stimulating this market. Since 68% of global climate-tech companies belong to the clean-tech and carbon-tech fields, this concentration of investment can be seen not as Korea's problem alone but as a global trend.
Although eco-tech and food-tech are numerous in company count, they are being pushed out of investment priority. Currently, the domestic average cumulative investment amount is about 25 billion won for clean-tech and about 15.8 billion won for carbon-tech. On the other hand, eco-tech is about 7.5 billion won, food-tech about 7.1 billion won, and geo-tech only about 2.5 billion won. This shows that a clean-tech- and carbon-tech-centered investment strategy is relatively suppressing investment in eco-tech and food-tech.
The Need for Consistency in Government Policy and a Long-Term Vision
Looking at the climate-tech-fostering cases of the U.S. and China, one can see that a long-term roadmap and consistent policy are important. The U.S. achieved large-scale investment in the climate-tech field through powerful government support programs such as the "Inflation Reduction Act (IRA)." China, given its political characteristics, grew competitive companies through investment with policy consistency and a long-term vision. From these cases, Korea can draw the lesson that it should choose a more long-term plan and a way of concentrating investment first on specialized technologies.
Yoon Min-hye, senior researcher at Startup Alliance, emphasized, "Because the climate-tech field requires long-term investment and stable market formation for technology development and commercialization, creating a sustainable ecosystem and support strategy should take priority over simple numerical targets." For this reason, it is important to invest in the climate-tech field with a long-term outlook and form the market. In particular, since Korea is a country that shows strength in food-tech, biased investment even within climate tech should be avoided.
In conclusion, Korea's climate-tech industry needs the fostering of innovative companies that can substantially contribute to responding to climate change, rather than simply fostering unicorn companies. The government must strive to resolve market uncertainty and must reorganize its support policy by improving regulations and overcoming the limits of individual companies. Through this, it will be possible to overcome the climate crisis and build a world where we can all live well together.
by Editor N