Scope 3 배출량과 내부탄소가격 공시 : KOSPI 상장사의 현황 분석

[Purpose]This study aims to analyze the disclosure status of Scope 3 emissions and Internal Carbon Pricing (ICP) among KOSPI－listed companies and explore effective strategies for corporate disclosure and management of relevant information. By doing so, this study seeks to assist companies in establishing carbon management and disclosure systems that align with international standards, thereby enabling investors and stakeholders to make informed decisions based on reliable information. [Methodology]This study employs a descriptive analysis to examine the disclosure status of Scope 3 emissions and Internal Carbon Pricing (ICP) among KOSPI－listed companies. First, the study reviews the sustainability reports of KOSPI－listed firms to assess whether Scope 3 emissions and ICP are disclosed and to analyze the content of such disclosures. Using the Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Protocol as a framework, the study investigates how Scope 3 emissions are categorized and disclosed, while also comparing industry－specific disclosure differences based on the Korean Standard Industrial Classification (KSIC). Second, the study examines 24 KOSPI－listed companies that have adopted ICP to determine whether they disclose their per－ton carbon pricing. Additionally, the study compares the disclosed internal carbon pricing with the average price of the Korean Emissions Trading Scheme (K－ETS) to analyze pricing trends. Through this methodology, the study aims to identify how companies disclose Scope 3 emissions nd ICP, highlight variations in disclosure practices, and propose effective future disclosure strategies. [Findings]The key findings of this study are summarized as follows. First, selective reporting tendencies were observed in the disclosure of Scope 3 emissions. An analysis of the sustainability reports of KOSPI－listed companies revealed that firms disclose Scope 3 emissions selectively by category in accordance with the GHG Protocol. Notably, companies tend to disclose categories that are easier to measure, and there are significant variations in disclosure burdens across industries. Second, an examination of 24 companies that have adopted ICP revealed that only 10 disclosed their per－ton carbon pricing. Most companies set their internal carbon price at approximately KRW 20,000 per ton, which is similar to the average price under the K－ETS. These findings suggest that companies establish their internal carbon pricing based on the emissions trading market price and anticipated economic burdens from future regulations. [Implications]Based on the findings, this study provides several important implications. First, Scope 3 emissions disclosure should be conducted systematically, focusing on key categories that reflect industry－specific characteristics. The current practice of selective disclosure may hinder the comparability of information, highlighting the need for standardized reporting criteria. Second, when setting internal carbon pricing, companies should consider different calculation methodologies and apply approaches that best suit their specific business contexts. While many firms currently base their ICP on emissions trading scheme prices, adopting a more tailored strategy aligned with corporate carbon management goals is necessary. Lastly, for the effective disclosure of Scope 3 emissions and ICP, continuous research and discussions among corporations, governments, and academia are required, along with necessary policy support. In conclusion, this study contributes to the discourse on carbon management and disclosure by analyzing the current state of Scope 3 emissions and ICP disclosures among KOSPI－listed companies and providing practical and policy－oriented insights for establishing internationally aligned corporate carbon disclosure frameworks.