Suchergebnisse

In recent years, reducing food waste and loss has become a policy priority in the European Union, but little is known about impacts of related measures in the EU and beyond. This study informs the debate on food waste reduction through a quantitative analysis. It considers adjustment costs for reducing food waste in food processing industries and impacts on food availability, pressure on land and water and other environmental consequences. The results suggest that the leakage effects of global trade may offset almost all benefits of food waste reduction in the EU. We thus conclude that costly efforts to reduce food waste in the EU cannot be motivated by larger contributions to global food availability and environmental benefits. This highlights the need for global coordination of such policies and/or more targeted actions in the EU which focus on specific production chains, where losses can be reduced and environmental gains obtained at a relatively low cost.

Each semester the THINK project publishes two research reports based on topics proposed by the European Commission ; QM-31-11-489-EN-C (print) QM-31-11-489-EN-N (online) ; The THINK project (2010-2013) is funded by the European Commission under the Seventh Framework Programme, Strategic Energy Technology Plan. (Call FP7-ENERGY-2009-2, Grant Agreement no: 249736). Coordinator: Prof. Jean-Michel Glachant and Dr. Leonardo Meeus, Florence School of Regulation, Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies, European University Institute

QM-AI-11-005-EN-C (print)/QM-AI-11-005-EN-N (online) ; THINK Policy Briefs are abbreviated versions of THINK Reports. ; In the current context, where public budgets are overstretched due to the economic crisis, there is a pressing need to understand the fiscal implications of climate policies. Policies intended to achieve decarbonization will impact both sides of a country's budget via changes in the tax levels and composition of taxes on the one hand, as well as transfer payments and direct investments on the other. Back-of-the-envelope calculations – comparing net public revenues in 2020 for a Baseline and an Enhanced Policy scenario – show that the additional revenues from carbon pricing and the reduction in revenues from excise taxes on fossil fuels clearly dominate other direct and indirect effects of policies on public budgets such as the additional expenditures dedicated to RD&D targeting low-carbon technologies. The aggregated net budget impact of all direct and indirect effects of new climate policies implemented in the Enhanced Policy Scenario on public budgets in 2020 for the EU-27 as a whole – given our simplyfying assumptions – amounts to additional net public revenues of about €12.6bn (0.09% in terms of the EU-27 GDP) under medium-level abatement costs. This makes a non-negligible impact which is nevertheless much lower than the impact on public accounts from changes in main macroeconomic variables over time. Differences among Member States mainly depend on the additional revenues they will obtain from carbon pricing, which are driven by three main factors: the carbon intensity of the economy, which is positively correlated with the absolute value of the net budget impact of new policies; the share of non-ETS GHG emissions, which is positively correlated with the net budget impact; and the reduction in GHG emissions resulting from new policies, which is negatively correlated with this impact. Countries most significantly affected, both positively and negatively, are among the "new" Member States in the EU-27. In contrast, the impact of new climate policies on large EU-15 economies would be generally positive and typically in line with average EU values. Therefore, authorities from the EU-15 may consider the option of sharing the economic burden of the transition to a low-carbon economy among EU countries, taking into account their economic strength. ; The THINK project (2010-2013) is funded by the European Commission under the Seventh Framework Programme, Strategic Energy Technology Plan. (Call FP7-ENERGY-2009-2, Grant Agreement no: 249736). Coordinator: Prof. Jean-Michel Glachant and Dr. Leonardo Meeus, Florence School of Regulation, Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies, European University Institute