The business value of sustainable logistics: an interview with Yoo Hyun-chul

Environmental responsibility is no longer viewed solely as a corporate commitment, but is increasingly becoming an important factor in long-term business strategy and investment decisions. In the logistics industry, where transportation accounts for a significant share of emissions, companies are under growing pressure to improve efficiency while reducing their environmental impact. In this interview, Yoo Hyun-chul, Investor Relations Manager at CJ Korea Express, discusses how sustainability influences corporate value, why green logistics has become a strategic necessity, and how technological innovation is reshaping the industry's path toward net zero.

First, could you tell us a little about what you’re currently doing?

My official title at CJ Korea Express is IR Manager, and I’m primarily responsible for two main areas. The first is what’s known as IR, or Investor Relations. Since we’re a publicly traded company, this involves communication and related tasks with investors who hold our stock on the stock market. Separately, I’m involved in what we call “financial strategy,” which involves making decisions on how to effectively manage our subsidiaries and the various companies we invest in, as well as how to efficiently pursue growth strategies.

I understand that CJ Korea Express has declared a goal of achieving net-zero by 2050. From your perspective as the head of Investor Relations, how do you think investments in eco-friendly logistics will enhance corporate value in the long term?

First of all, as you’re well aware, environmental regulations are becoming increasingly stringent. So, rather than viewing eco-friendly investments as a means to enhance corporate value, I actually believe that failing to make such investments will ultimately erode corporate value.

Could you explain specifically why corporate value might decline if you don’t make these investments?

If such investments aren’t made, costs will continue to rise. To put it simply—as you’re well aware—the supply of carbon credits, for example, is fixed and will gradually decrease each year. Therefore, if a company doesn’t make the necessary efforts in this area, the related costs it must pay could increase exponentially. Consequently, if a company fails to make the environmental investments that society demands, I believe its corporate value will be eroded, as I mentioned earlier.

You mentioned that environmental investments are becoming increasingly important. Do you think investors are paying more attention not only to a company’s financial performance but also to ESG and climate risks?

When investors make investment decisions, rather than viewing ESG factors as directly influencing those decisions, it seems that many institutional investors—in fact, many institutions—consider ESG ratings during the initial screening process to determine whether a company qualifies as an investable target. While this varies by institution, it seems that rather than investing in a company simply because it makes significant environmental efforts, there are cases where a company is completely excluded from consideration if it falls below a certain threshold.

Since companies vary widely, it seems like ESG standards might differ by sector. In your view, do you think there’s a way to address these differences?

As for establishing consistency and standards in the evaluation process, there are external rating agencies—both in Korea and abroad. In Korea, for instance, there are organizations like the Korea Corporate ESG Rating Institute. These agencies publish the metrics they use, explaining how they measure them, what criteria they apply, what weightings they use, and how they assign scores. They’re also required to disclose the specific metrics for each company. Based on that, evaluation reports are issued stating, “We have assigned this ESG score to this company using these specific criteria.” Furthermore, very large institutional investors, such as the National Pension Service, have internal departments dedicated to reviewing ESG systems. These departments conduct their own evaluations based on the information provided—including data disclosed in sustainability reports—and use those assessments to determine their investment strategies.

When investing in areas such as electric trucks, logistics centers, energy efficiency, or eco-friendly packaging to support green logistics, there may be some short-term costs involved. What are your thoughts on the necessity of such investments despite costs?

These days, despite the cost burden, there are actually quite a few partners who are unwilling to do business with companies that do not make such investments. For example, Amazon in the U.S. has specific ESG evaluation metrics, and it has established policies stating that it will not do business with companies that fail to meet those metrics. So, rather than viewing this as a non-profit endeavor, it can be seen as an investment in future profits. Similarly, both in Korea and abroad, there are projects where you can only win contracts if you use electric vehicles. So, while this does involve costs, it’s not so much a matter of “we have to do this,” but rather there are tangible benefits that come with it. By incurring these costs, we gain opportunities that companies unable to invest in this direction would miss out on.

Also, if there are any specific areas or projects you’re currently prioritizing to achieve your carbon neutrality goals, could you tell us about them?

First, as you mentioned earlier, we’re making significant investments in electric vehicles and clean energy. As you’re probably aware, the trend toward stricter ESG standards means that regulations and systems are shifting—not just for our company, but also for our partners and suppliers—to ensure they meet ESG requirements. In other words, it’s not just about us switching the vehicles we operate to electric and eco-friendly models; we’re also encouraging our logistics partners—the vendors who transport our goods—to transition toward eco-friendly practices. We’re exploring ways to implement policies such as requiring them to use electric vehicles or else they won’t be eligible for our contracts, and we’re preparing accordingly.

When working with a variety of partners, it seems there are likely to be different standards and areas of focus. Still, how do you plan to further expand these efforts to operate the company in an eco-friendly manner?

Actually, what we’re focusing on the most is investment in technology. While the company understands that the focus of today’s discussion and questions is on ESG-related topics, please understand that the area where we are currently conducting the most research and making the most investments is actually technology. In other words, before addressing how to switch to eco-friendly energy sources or replace conventional diesel trucks with electric vehicles, we are conducting a great deal of AI-related research focused on how to reduce energy consumption and how to, so to speak, alleviate the burden of transportation on vehicles. We are conducting a great deal of AI-related research along these lines, and our company believes that these efforts will indirectly contribute to ESG-related goals.