About
This paper examines the Special Act on the Promotion of Offshore Wind Power and Industrial Development (the “OSW Special Act”) and proposes transition measures to integrate existing offshore wind development businesses and energy clusters into the new regime. The analysis draws on relevant legislation, interviews with subject matter experts, and international case studies – most notably Ireland’s Maritime Area Planning Act (the “MAP Act”).
Main takeaways:
To advance the OSW Special Act’s purpose and credibility, transition measures for legacy projects should reflect the statutory qualifications for designating OSW zones and OSW developers under the new regime.
To avoid duplication and inefficiency, transition measures should leverage prior evaluations and documentation from the legacy regime, while confirming their continued adequacy, taking into account elapsed time and any material change.
Ireland’s MAP Act provides a clear reference point. The country’s shift from a developer-led to a government-led model reduced confusion by specifying in statute who qualified for transition and what criteria apply, and by establishing a phased pathway to leverage both existing and new projects toward the 2030 target.
Executive summary
The key conclusions are as follows.
First, decisions on whether to incorporate existing projects into the Special Act on the Promotion of Offshore Wind Power and Industrial Development should be made based on a substantive assessment of whether such projects meet the requirements for designation as offshore wind development zones and for the selection of project developers under the Act. This is a fundamental principle to ensure policy credibility while preserving the legislative intent of the Special Act.
Second, in order to reduce inefficient duplication of procedures, it is necessary to allow the use of previously submitted documents and past review results, taking into account factors such as the time elapsed since permitting. However, such flexibility should not be interpreted as exempting projects from a substantive evaluation of whether they meet the relevant requirements.
Third, a representative international reference for designing transitional arrangements is Ireland’s Maritime Area Planning Act (MAP Act). Similar to Korea, Ireland transitioned from a system with pre-existing projects to a government-led, plan-based site designation regime. In doing so, it minimized uncertainty during the transition by clearly defining eligible projects and evaluation criteria in legislation. In addition, Ireland established an implementation strategy that phases in both existing and new projects to achieve its 2030 offshore wind deployment targets.
Finally, transitional arrangements must be designed and implemented in a way that simultaneously considers two objectives: achieving offshore wind deployment targets and ensuring the credibility of the legal framework. If the system is not effectively implemented after its establishment, the extensive efforts—spanning more than 1,400 days—to build the legal foundation of the Special Act may not yield meaningful results. The new government should therefore promptly demonstrate tangible outcomes by showcasing both successful integration of existing projects and new project development under the Special Act, thereby translating institutional reform into real-world progress.




