During his phone talks with President Park Geun-hye last week, U.S. President Barack said he fully understood her decision to delay a visit to the U.S. to focus on containing the spread of the Middle East respiratory syndrome virus in Korea. The two leaders agreed the visit, which was originally scheduled for this week, would be rearranged quickly so that they could discuss issues of mutual interest.

Obama said the two countries would stand to benefit from their strengthened bilateral partnership on issues ranging from security threats posed by Pyongyang to climate change and cybersecurity. In particular, he asked Park to set an ambitious goal in cutting greenhouse gas emissions, citing efforts to ensure the success of the U.N. Climate Change Conference to start in Paris in late November.

Though wrapped in diplomatic rhetoric, his request was seen by officials here as putting pressure on Seoul to strengthen its carbon emissions reduction target.

A day before the phone talks between Obama and Park, the Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy suggested four options for setting the country’s emissions reduction goal. They range from the minimum 14.7 percent to the maximum 31.3 percent cut from the country’s business-as-usual level by 2030.

Without any measures to cut greenhouse gas emissions, Korea’s overall emissions are projected to grow by an annual average of 1.3 percent over the next 15 years to reach 850.6 million tons of carbon dioxide equivalent by 2030, according to a report released by the ministry.

The government is to finalize its reduction target after public surveys and debates. A report containing the country’s voluntary commitments will be submitted to the U.N. by the end of this month.

Though the most aggressive option may be adopted, it will still mark a setback from a pledge made by the previous administration under President Lee Myung-bak in 2009 to cut Korea’s overall emissions by 30 percent from its BAU level by 2020. Under the most drastic scenario, Korea’s greenhouse gas emissions would amount to 585 million tons of CO2-equivalent by 2030, little changed from the 2005 figure of 594 million tons. In a report submitted to the U.N. in March, the U.S. vowed to reduce its emissions by more than 26 percent from the 2005 level by 2025.

By calling on Korea to take a leading role in addressing climate change by setting an ambitious goal, Obama apparently prodded Seoul to keep its earlier promise and raise its target for 2030. The Park administration may find it difficult to disregard his request as it needs to consolidate cooperation with Washington on a range of issues, including civilian nuclear energy technology.

It may be undesirable to pursue emissions reduction goals set so high that they would hamper business activities and hurt the economy. Some critics here argue the 2009 pledge was unachievable.

But Korea needs to take a more consistent and balanced approach to the global environmental task, based on a long-term view.

Reneging on its earlier commitment will damage the country’s international credibility. It does not make global sense to claim that Korea should be treated as a developing country not bound by obligations to cut greenhouse gas emissions, given that it is the seventh-biggest emitter.

What should also be noted is that policies to tighten regulations on emissions will help boost corporate competitiveness over the long term, even though they may increase burden on companies in the short term.

Expanding investment in environment-friendly industries has become a rising global trend, offering a new growth engine for the world economy. In its 2013 report, the World Economic Forum said that about $7 trillion would need to be invested annually in projects to mitigate climate change over the decades to come. Korean companies should set their sights on this shift in global investment rather than focus on easing short-term burdens.