Search results

After the climate conferences in Copenhagen and Cancun, it is likely that the EU remains more ambitious regarding greenhouse gas reduction targets than other countries. The possible problem of carbon leakage and instruments to tackle it therefore remains an important issue in the European climate policy debate. The reduction of competitive distortions and carbon leakage induced by different CO2 prices in the EU and important trading partners is one of several reasons for the EU to aim for the establishment of a trading link between the European Emission Trading Scheme (EU ETS) and other domestic or regional emissions trading systems in developed and developing countries. Main reasons for linking include higher cost efficiency to meet a given reduction target as well as improved market liquidity resulting in more robust and stable price signals.

Im Rahmen der Klimarahmenkonvention der UNO treffen die Vertragsstaaten zu ihren Verhandlungen (Conference of Parties, COP 16) von 29. November bis 10. Dezember 2010 in Cancun, Mexiko zusam-men. Die naturwissenschaftlichen Grundlagen für die Szenarien des Klimawandels haben sich über die letzten Jahre weiter erhärtet und weisen auf die Notwendigkeit einer umfassenden Reduktion der Treibhausgasemissionen hin - einer Reduktion um ein Vielfaches der im Kyoto-Vertrag vereinbarten Ziele und unter Einbeziehung von wesentlich mehr als der damaligen Vertragsstaaten. Die Vorgänger-Vertragsstaaten-Konferenz in Kopenhagen 2009 markierte eine fundamentale Änderung in der inter-nationalen Klimapolitik-Architektur, statt völkerrechtlich verbindlichen gemeinsamen Zielen dürfte es nun den einzelnen Staaten überlassen bleiben welche Handlungen sie setzen. Einzelstaatliche Klimapolitik läuft ohne gemeinsame Ziele aber Gefahr mit wesentlichen Wettbewerbseffekten im internatio-nalen Handel verbunden zu sein. Für einige Wirtschaftssektoren zeichnen sich technologische Quan-tensprünge für "Low Carbon" Strukturen ab. Für andere Sektoren werden globale sektorale Treibhaus-gas-Abkommen diskutiert. Vorschläge liegen insbesondere aber auch für Border Tax Adjustments vor, um potenziell nachteiligen Wettbewerbseffekten vorzubeugen. Die Interessenlage der Verhandlungs-staaten ist dabei durchaus komplex.

The environmental effectiveness of an emission trading system depends on the one hand on the stringency of the cap and on the other hand on the scheme's ability to provide stable regulatory conditions and incentives for investment in emission saving technologies. However, in case of highly volatile CO2 prices no clear investment signal is provided and hence firms' decision making and planning is rendered difficult. Analyses of price developments in the European Emission Trading Scheme (EU ETS) indicate that in Phase 1 (2005-2007) fluctuations were mainly caused by incomplete information at the beginning, adjustments after the emergence of verified emission data and regulatory mechanisms. At the beginning of Phase 2 (2008-2012) in contrast a decline in carbon prices was observed as firms sold surplus allowances resulting from lower emissions due to economic recession. For Phase 3 of the EU ETS (2013-2020) hence the introduction of price stabilisation measures has been suggested by several member countries during the discussions on the EU energy and climate package. Various instruments can be integrated in a cap-and-trade scheme in order to reduce price volatility such as provisions for banking and borrowing, the approval of offsets for compliance purposes and hybrid systems, i.e., combinations of price and quantity mechanisms. Given the long-term nature of climate policy, the related uncertainties regarding technological change and political frameworks, and given a rising speculation in carbon markets, such price stabilisation approaches should be considered for the future design of emission trading schemes.

Background This article presents the main findings from a meta-analysis of how climate change mitigation policy evaluations have been undertaken in the European Union (EU) and six of its Member States: Austria, Czech Republic, France, Germany, Greece and the United Kingdom. It aims to provide insights into how policy evaluations are carried out and how those practices might be improved. As a first step, this article reviews the literature on the theory and practice of policy evaluations to guide our methodology and further analysis. Results Our sample of 236 policy evaluations in the EU and six Member States covers the period 2010–2016. Compared with the results of a similar meta-analysis carried out covering the period 1998–2007, formal evaluations commissioned by government bodies have been on the rise in 2010–2016. Most evaluations focus on effectiveness and goal achievement and usually forgo a deeper level of reflexivity and/or public participation in the evaluation process. The analysis also reveals the dominance of the energy sector in the sampled evaluations. The article finds that the low number of any policy evaluations in the agriculture, waste or land-use sectors is an area for further investigation. Conclusions The exercise of identifying, coding and categorising these evaluations for 7 years helps to provide insights into the potential use of ex-post evaluations in support of future EU legislative proposals and accompanying impact assessments. Having a good understanding on how a certain policy performed particularly according to evaluation criteria might form the basis for more ambitious climate change mitigation policies in the future. Our analysis further shows that it is crucial and urgent to allocate sufficient resources to the coverage of relatively under-represented sectors, such as land use, land-use change and forestry, and waste. ; published version ; peerReviewed