3 results
11 - Governance choices and dilemmas in a warmer Europe: what does the future hold?
-
- By Johannes Stripple, Lund University, Sweden, Tim Rayner, University of East Anglia, Norwich, United Kingdom, Roger Hildingsson, Lund University Centre for Sustainability Studies (LUCSUS), Andrew Jordan, University of East Anglia, Norwich, United Kingdom, Constanze Haug, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, the Netherlands
- Edited by Andrew Jordan, University of East Anglia, Dave Huitema, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, Harro van Asselt, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, Tim Rayner, University of East Anglia, Frans Berkhout, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam
-
- Book:
- Climate Change Policy in the European Union
- Published online:
- 05 August 2011
- Print publication:
- 29 April 2010, pp 229-250
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
Introduction
Since 1996, EU climate policy has subscribed to the overall objective of ensuring that global average temperatures do not exceed 2°C above pre-industrial levels. Achieving this target will require fundamental shifts in European and global energy systems. The EU's 2008 climate–energy package, which set out a 20% emissions reduction target by 2020, was a significant step forward in political commitment, but still fell well short of the IPCC's recommendation (Pachauri and Reisinger 2007) of a 25–40% cut by industrialised countries by 2020. The European Council has, since 2007, also been committed in principle to a reduction in collective emissions from industrialised countries by 60–80% by 2050 – a figure broadly commensurate with the IPCC's advice (see Chapter 3).
What stands out about all these goals is that they deal with what many of today's governors would consider to be the very long-term future, although in scientific terms is not. Given that climate policy is such a long-term undertaking, there is a need to understand whether these and other policies are likely to be robust over these timescales; in other words, capable of performing well under a range of different conditions.
The general aim of this chapter is to explore how EU climate policy might evolve in the period from 2020 to 2040 given a set of different policy contexts. In effect, we reverse the emphasis on historical developments of Parts II and III, and examine how policy might unfold in the future.
10 - Exploring the future: the role of scenarios and policy exercises
-
- By Frans Berkhout, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, the Netherlands, Constanze Haug, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, the Netherlands, Roger Hildingsson, Lund University Centre for Sustainability Studies (LUCSUS), Johannes Stripple, und University, Sweden, Andrew Jordan, University of East Anglia, Norwich, United Kingdom
- Edited by Andrew Jordan, University of East Anglia, Dave Huitema, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, Harro van Asselt, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, Tim Rayner, University of East Anglia, Frans Berkhout, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam
-
- Book:
- Climate Change Policy in the European Union
- Published online:
- 05 August 2011
- Print publication:
- 29 April 2010, pp 213-228
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
Introduction
Policy exists to encourage social and environmental change now and into the future. It makes a promise about the future and, by doing so, seeks to align target groups to its goals and means. A fundamental problem in governing any policy problem is that both the governors and the target groups change their preferences over time. Another is that the prevailing system of governance does not remain stable either; it changes over time, partly as a result of the impact of policies, partly as a result of unexpected outcomes and unintended consequences from earlier policies, and partly because of exogenous changes that have nothing to do with the policy in question. As all these things continually change, so does the nature of the choices and dilemmas which confront governors when they pursue new policies and implement old ones.
In looking forward to the future of climate policy, we need to account for changes in the governance system – in our case the EU – and how these may influence the evolution of policies, their impact, effectiveness and legitimacy. But since we are focusing on the longer term (in this and the following chapter, we are mostly dealing with the period 2020–40), we need to go further still. We need to consider the possibility that governance systems will be significantly different from those prevailing today.
5 - Renewable energies: a continuing balancing act?
-
- By Roger Hildingsson, Lund University Centre for Sustainability Studies (LUCSUS), Johannes Stripple, Lund University, Sweden, Andrew Jordan, University of East Anglia, Norwich, United Kingdom
- Edited by Andrew Jordan, University of East Anglia, Dave Huitema, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, Harro van Asselt, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, Tim Rayner, University of East Anglia, Frans Berkhout, Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam
-
- Book:
- Climate Change Policy in the European Union
- Published online:
- 05 August 2011
- Print publication:
- 29 April 2010, pp 103-124
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
Introduction
The promotion of renewable energy sources (RES) has been on the systemic agenda in some European countries since the 1950s. In the 1990s, it moved on to the institutional agenda in many more countries, attracted by the expected potential to mitigate climate change, improve energy security, and provide new opportunities for industrial development and job creation. But at EU level, the path towards greater policy coordination has been a long and winding one. Despite the wave of enthusiasm for a stronger EU role in energy policy noted in Chapter 3, only the responsibility for market liberalisation – and for some science, technology and innovation aspects – currently resides at the EU level. This has made the deployment of RES primarily a matter of national energy policy. So, although there are widely thought to be strong and ‘compelling reasons for setting up an enabling framework to promote renewables’ in the EU (COM (2006) 848: 3), disagreements over its specific design look set to persist, not least because it could limit the freedom to pursue energy policy goals, a right currently enjoyed by the Member States.
The struggle to balance multiple objectives has frustrated the development of an EU-level RES policy since the 1970s. With hindsight, it is clear that policy has been driven by two main objectives, which in turn have flowed from rather different problem framings.
![](/core/cambridge-core/public/images/lazy-loader.gif)