Climate Governance, Democratic Accountability, and State Capacity: A ComparativeInstitutional Analysis of the European Union and South Korea

Abstract

Climate governance has become a central test of democratic state capacity, institutional coordination, and
policy legitimacy. This article examines how different institutional configurations shape climate policy
implementation, public accountability, and governance resilience through a comparative analysis of the
European Union and South Korea. While both systems have adopted ambitious carbon neutrality
commitments, their governance architectures differ substantially. The European Union relies on multi-level
legal-regulatory governance, supranational enforcement, carbon market integration, and negotiated policy
coordination among member states. South Korea relies more heavily on developmental-state legacies,
centralized administrative planning, industrial policy, and executive-led green transition strategies. Drawing
on comparative institutional analysis, public policy theory, climate governance scholarship, and international
governance indicators, this study demonstrates that climate policy effectiveness depends not only on formal
targets but also on institutional enforcement capacity, social legitimacy, distributive fairness, and
bureaucratic coordination. The findings reveal that the European Union possesses stronger legal
accountability and regulatory institutionalization but faces coordination fragmentation across member states.
South Korea demonstrates faster centralized policy mobilization but encounters challenges involving
industrial dependency, civic contestation, and implementation credibility. The article contributes to politics
and governance scholarship by advancing a comparative framework linking climate policy design, institutional accountability, state capacity, and democratic legitimacy.