What can be learnt from current experience on EU climate policy? How can the future instrument mix be improved, looking at the transformation that needs to take place to achieve deep emission cuts? Speakers at a side event seminar at the COP19 UN climate conference in Warsaw addressed these and other questions around policy instrumentation and discussed relevant recent research results. All presentation slides are available for download.
The event, hosted by Ecologic Institute, Climate Strategies and the Institute for Environmental Studies (IVM), was attended by over 80 participants from around the world, participating in the UN climate negotiations session.
The political process on post-2020 climate policy in the EU
Michael Grubb, a member of the Climate Strategies Board, laid out the political process on post-2020 climate policy in the EU and highlighted the key question in this debate, including the number of targets and the future of the EU Emissions Trading System. He also made the case for different types of policies being needed for different categories of change that they are meant to induce.
Insights from an evaluation of the current policy mix in the EU
Matthias Duwe, Ecologic Institute presented the CECILIA2050 project and insights from an evaluation of the current policy mix in the EU and key Member States, performed by the project consortium. He highlighted in particular the findings on the interaction between different instruments, which the analysis showed to be largely mutually supportive. Finally, he spelt out five lessons drawn from the research on how to optimize future EU climate policy. Detailed information on the CECILIA2050 findings are also contained in a Policy Brief [pdf, 2.9 MB, English] that is available for download.
Energy Intensive Industries
Karsten Neuhoff, DIW presented findings from ongoing research on Energy Intensive Industries, showcasing the cement sector. He talked through the various different mitigation possibilities in the sector and showed data on the extent to which these had been employed in the last decade. He made the case for targeted policies designed to realise specific emission reduction options and argued for a combination of carbon pricing through the EU ETS and dedicated support for innovation and research.
Danish experience with national policies and their relationship with EU legislation
Anne Hojer Simonsen, Danish Climate Ministry laid out the experience with national policies and their relationship with EU legislation from the Danish perspective. She emphasized the driving nature of energy policies for other climate policy measures and explained the way in which Denmark sets out specific targets through Energy Agreements. Denmark has in that way set itself national targets that go beyond those mandated by the EU and it is trying to up the overall European ambition.
Questions and comments from the audience came from representatives of companies and governments from Europe and Latin America in particular - and these focused on the applicability of the findings to other parts of the world and the way in which the CDM experience holds insights for industrial mitigation potential.
Benjamin Görlach, Ecologic Institute led through the presentations and organized the discussion with the audience. As a key conclusion from the discussion he drew out the argument for a combination of carbon pricing with other dedicated policies as a basis for an effective, efficient and feasible policy mix.