## 4 Results and Discussion
### Long- and Short-Run Effect Test Analysis
The immediate reductions in emissions stem from the adoption of more efficient technologies, improved energy management systems, and the optimization of industrial operations. These early gains, although relatively moderate due to the gradual integration of new practices and technologies, contribute to lower CO2 emissions even as industrial output continues to grow. This is consistent with findings from [PERSON] et al. [71] and [PERSON] et al. [72], who emphasize the short-term advantages of energy efficiency measures, although their full potential may only be realized as these innovations become more widely implemented. In the long run, the impact of energy efficiency on CO2 emissions is even more substantial. Sustained investment in energy-efficient technologies, along with advancements in renewable energy, leads to a more pronounced decoupling of economic growth from carbon emissions. The compounding effects of technological innovation, policy support, and broader adoption of green practices significantly enhance the reduction of emissions over time. This is corroborated by [PERSON] et al. [73] and [PERSON] and [PERSON] [42], who highlight the importance of energy efficiency as a key driver of long-term emissions reduction, particularly when combined \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline
**Variable** & **Long-Run Effect** & **Variable** & **Short-Run Effect** \\ \hline tp & \(-0.093\)*** & \(\Delta\)tp & \(0.229\)*** \\  & \((-6.239)\) & \(\Delta\)tp & \((5.714)\) \\ ee & \(-0.259\)*** & \(-0.147\)*** \\  & \((-3.689)\) & \(\Delta\)ee & \((-3.916)\) \\ eg & \(0.359\)*** & & \(0.533\)*** \\  & \((8.524)\) & \(\Delta\)eg & \((8.866)\) \\ ur & \(0.199\)** & \(\Delta\)ur & \(0.258\)*** \\  & \((2.205)\) & \(\Delta\)ur & \((2.834)\) \\ in & \(0.306\)** & \(\Delta\)in & \(0.447\)*** \\  & \((2.129)\) & \(\Delta\)in & \((3.738)\) \\ fdi & \(-0.108\)** & & \(0.075\)** \\  & \((-2.273)\) & \(\Delta\)fdi & \((2.215)\) \\ gt & \(-0.117\)*** & & \(-0.032\)*** \\  & \((-3.228)\) & \(\Delta\)gt & \((-3.662)\) \\ Diagnostics test & & & \\ Statistical test & Value & Statistical test & Value \\ ect & \(-0.181\)*** & Ramsey RESET test & \(0.152\) \\ F1 & \(0.052\)*** & ARCH test & \(0.292\) \\ F2 & \(0.079\)*** & Jarque–Bera test & \(0.381\) \\ LM test & \(0.217\) & CUSUM and CUSUM & Stable \\  & & of squares test & \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} Note: *** 1% significance level. ** 5% significance level. \(t\)-statistics in the parentheses.  
\end{table} 
Table 4: Results of long- and short-run effect test analysis. with advancements in clean technologies and supportive regulatory frameworks. The primary distinction between the findings of this study and those of previous literature lies in the more granular differentiation between short- and long-term effects. While existing studies acknowledge the overall role of energy efficiency in reducing emissions, this study offers a more comprehensive perspective by clearly delineating the time horizons over which these impacts manifest. Nonetheless, the conclusion remains consistent across studies: the long-term benefits of energy efficiency are significantly greater than the short-term reductions, especially when underpinned by continuous technological innovation and policy interventions. In the short term, South Korea's rapid economic growth, urbanization, and industrialization contribute significantly to increasing CO2 emissions, primarily due to the country's dependence on energy-intensive industries and urban infrastructure expansion. Economic growth in particular drives a higher demand for energy across critical sectors, such as manufacturing, transportation, and construction, leading to increased consumption of fossil fuels and, consequently, higher emissions. Similarly, urbanization, characterized by the growth of cities and rising demand for services like housing and transportation, exacerbates energy use, further elevating emissions.