Search

This contribution examines the EU's innovative climate and energy package: how this package of binding policies has been initiated, decided, implemented and reformed. The key argument is that linking climate and energy concerns can help to explain how the EU managed to adopt an ambitious package of policies aimed at achieving 2020 goals. The combination of differently valued issues, side payments to overcome distributional obstacles and the creation of synergies contributed to a successfully negotiated outcome. The consequences for implementation and further policy development towards 2030 are explained by challenges in reproducing these joint EU-level gains at national level and by new circumstances. This may weaken the EU's chances of realizing a low-carbon economy and 'leadership by example' in international climate policy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper analyses the evolution of the new environmental policy of the European Union in the context of the efforts undertaken to moderate the negative effects of climate change. It describes all the activities in the European Union designed to implement new tools of the EU environmental policy, such as low carbon economy technologies, tools that improve the efficiency of managing the limited natural resources, the environmentally friendly transport package, etc. All of them are aimed at laying the foundations of the circular economy, which may also be referred to as a closed-loop economy, i.e., an economy that does not generate excessive waste and whereby any waste becomes a resource. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Links between security and migration are well established and are associated with the meaning, status, and practice of borders in the international political system. This article assesses how and with what effects the effects of environmental and climate change have entered this relationship between migration and security. It does so by assessing the EU’s external governance of migration in “South Mediterranean Partner Countries” (SMPCs): Algeria, Egypt, Iraq, Israel, Jordan, Libya, Morocco, Palestine, Syria, and Tunisia. It is argued that a focus on promoting “adaptation” and building “resilience” has developed that is consistent with the logic of governing migration from a distance. However, the article challenges ideas that environmental/climate change act as simple migration “triggers” and instead explores implications of movement towards and not away from risk, as well as the potential for populations to be trapped in areas that expose them to risk. It is shown that both have important implications for the relationship between migration, environmental/climate change, and security in SMPCs. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

As the world's two largest economies, the European Union (E.U.) and the United States (U.S.) are dependent on traditional fossil fuels for transportation, and consume more traditional fossil fuels than any other countries, or regions. Hence, for these two regions, dealing with shortages of traditional fossil fuels and battling global climate change are critically important. In recent years, bio-fuel, a much debated and controversial alternative energy source, has been proposed as a solution or a strategic policy tool, in answer to the aforementioned concerns in the transportation sectors of many other countries. The U.S. and the E.U. have developed comprehensive regulations to promote the usage of bio-fuels, such as mandates or direct/indirect subsidies, etc. This article aims to review the history and development of biofuel policies and legislation in U.S. and E.U., such as the "Renewable Energy Directive" and "Renewable Fuel Standard II", and focuses on the sustainable development criteria of biofuel legislation in these regions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses findings of a survey conducted by the European Commission (EC) and other European Union (EU) environmental institutions and bodies reflecting key developments in environmental policies related to biodiversity, climate change and water policy. Topics discussed include the EC's prospective international negotiations over Sustainable Development Goals, the EU's new rules on environmental impact assessment, and Environmental Council's meeting on genetically modified organisms.

The European Union (EU) Emission Trading System (ETS) has been a major tool of the EU climate policy. Despite its significance, the EU ETS faces serious challenges regarding its function. One of the major issues that encumber its contribution in EU climate policy is value added tax (VAT) carousel fraud within it. This paper examined the ways this type of swindle is conducted and its economic impact. It analyses the parameters that facilitate it and evaluates the responses of the EU and its Member States and mainly the introduction of the reverse charge mechanism. It finally highlights the need to implement some changes to the EU ETS, the VAT provisions, and the way the national tax authorities and the EU coordinate. Finally, it suggests the introduction of a real-time VAT collection mechanism that can be an effective and feasible solution to the problem in general. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) is the cornerstone of EU climate policy, a grand policy experiment, as the first and largest international emissions trading system in the world. In this article, we seek to provide a broad overview of the initiation, decision-making and implementation of the EU ETS so far. We explore why the EU changed from a laggard to a leader in emissions trading, how it managed to establish the system rapidly, and the consequences to date, leading up to the 2008 proposal for a revised ET Directive for the post- 2012 period. We apply three explanatory approaches, focusing on the roles of the EU member states, the EU institutions and the international climate regime, and conclude that all three approaches are needed to understand what happened, how and why. This also reveals that what happened in the early days of developing the system had significant consequences for the problems experienced in practice and the prospects ahead. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

At the European Council's December 2008 summit and with the European Parliament's decision a week later, a political agreement was reached on the Commission's Climate-Energy package of January 2008, which will profoundly shape Europe's climate policy for the next decade. Europe is therefore the first actor in the run up to the global climate negotiations in Copenhagen to come forward with a detailed program confirmed by parliament. Center of attention in the negotiations was the EU's emissions trading system. From 2013 this will be centrally administered by the European Commission and so guarantee the same conditions throughout Europe. In order to get all the member states to agree, however, the French Council presidency had to include numerous derogations in a compromise package: the promised reduction targets were not changed, but the effectiveness of the instruments was weakened. Alongside the Directive on emissions trading a decision was passed that imposes limits on member states' discharge of greenhouse gases in the sectors not covered by the emissions trading regime. These targets are legally binding by 2020. Though only mentioned in passing in the media a Directive on renewable energy was passed that for the first time includes all sectors - that is, electricity generation, transport, and heating / cooling - and also lays down binding national levels by 2020. Alongside these central aspects of future European climate policy outline conditions and financing mechanisms for carbon capture and storage technology and for emissions caps for new cars were legally enshrined. While its final compromise means that the European Union formally retains its leadership role in the campaign against climate change, at the same time it has left a number of losers at various levels. One of them is the European Parliament. Under pressure of time and the member states' entrenchment, MEPs were confronted with a matter of conscience but were severely constrained in bringing to bear their own long nurtured and ambitious position. The developing countries may be regarded as the second losers. They are largely innocent victims of anthropogenic climate change, yet for the most part they are excluded from relief measures within the framework of Western climate policy. The EU heads of state and government denied them financial aid from the emissions trading system and technological support. Despite its flaws, the scope of the compromise package is of enormous significance and its targets are ambitious. Europe is therefore entitled to claim its exemplary role. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article evaluates the cooperative federalism models. It mentions that the Warner-Lieberman bill is the most important federal legislation because it provides only a limited role for the states. Among the cooperative federalism models are the decentralized approaches taken by the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, the Emissions Trading Systems of the European Union, and the Clean Air Act.

The objective of this paper is first to provide empirical evidence of what can be seen as a rather remarkable change in EU’s position on the use of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions trading (ET) in climate policy, from the role of a sceptic in the run-up to Kyoto towards more of a frontrunner. The paper argues that there is a synergistic and multilevel mix of explanatory factors for this “U-turn”, including developments at the international, EU, Member State, sub-national, and even down to the personal level. Second, the paper explores and discusses the philosophy behind the Commission’s proposal for a directive on GHG ET. Third, the paper examines the prospects for ‘success’ of a scheme for EU-wide ET using a multifaceted set of metrics. In brief, we argue that output success—the chances for having a directive adopted—hinges on the resolution of two key issues. First, whether the preliminary phase is to be mandatory or voluntary, and second, incompatibilities with domestic ET schemes. Outcome success—steering and cost-effectiveness—will in turn depend on factors like the coverage of the scheme and inclusion of project-based credits, while more long-term political implications hinges on the successful adoption and operation of the scheme.“The Proposal on emissions trading represents a major innovation for environmental policy in Europe. We are de facto creating a big new market, and we are determined to use market forces to achieve our climate objectives in the most cost-conscious way […]. The emissions trading system will be an important cornerstone in our strategy to reduce emissions in the most cost-effective way”.Environment Commissioner Margot Wallstro¨m. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

The author discusses the controversy behind European Union Emissions Trading Scheme as a European climate policy to address climate change and reduce emissions of industrial greenhouse gas. He says that the carbon price that the scheme sets is too low to incentivize a switch from coal to low- or zero-emission alternatives. He also emphasizes that as an intertemporal trading scheme, prices of carbon should reflect expectations of future allowance scarcities in times of non-binding caps.