Among the various threats posed by climate change, sea-level rise is classified as a highly irreversible risk. It entails not only the physical loss of national territory through coastal erosion and permanent inundation but also poses direct threats t...
Among the various threats posed by climate change, sea-level rise is classified as a highly irreversible risk. It entails not only the physical loss of national territory through coastal erosion and permanent inundation but also poses direct threats to national sovereignty and security beyond mere property damage. The repercussions extend to regional economies, infrastructure, and population settlement systems, with recovery costs and time requirements significantly exceeding those of other meteorological disasters. Despite the severity of sea-level rise, there is a lack of quantitative research on the subject. This study focuses on the structural vulnerability of South Korea, which is surrounded by water on three sides and has high concentrations of socio-economic assets and populations in coastal areas. The ultimate goal is to quantitatively evaluate the economic impact of global and local sea-level rise and to derive an optimized adaptation portfolio for South Korea. The specific objectives are: 1) to identify South Korea's relative risk position within the context of global sea-level rise; 2) to determine the most economically efficient adaptation strategies under various climate change scenarios; and 3) to examine the economic feasibility of retreat policies, which have previously been limited in discussion due to social acceptance issues. To achieve these goals, the study reviewed various Integrated Assessment Models (IAMs), specifically within the Mimi Framework, and selected the Coastal Impact and Adaptation Model (CIAM) as the final analysis tool. Simulations were conducted for the period 2010– 2100 to analyze the Net Present Value (NPV) of global costs under different variables and future climate scenarios. The results indicate that global costs increase as the magnitude of sea-level rise grows, even when optimal strategies are applied. Notably, the proportion of damage that must be accepted under "No Action" was the largest across all scenarios, implying that defense infrastructure alone cannot completely eliminate risks and that significant residual damage is inevitable. Under the SSP4 (inequality) and SSP5 (fossil-fueled high growth) scenarios, South Korea, Japan, and China were found to face severe cost burdens and structural limitations through different pathways. Regarding specific strategies, for South Korea and Japan, a defense-oriented strategy combined with long-term investment in operation and maintenance (OPEX) proved effective in curbing costs. In contrast, China, with its vast low-lying areas exposed to risk, faces limitations with large-scale defense alone; thus, combining defense with "planned retreat" in low-density areas is necessary to prevent cost escalation. For South Korea, the optimal portfolio was identified as a mix of approximately 47% protection, 8% retreat, and 46% accommodation . Consequently, it is rational for South Korea to formulate a policy that integrates the strengths of neighboring countries, combining strong defense, selective retreat, and systematic damage management.