IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

The evolution of flexibility mechanisms for achieving European renewable energy targets 2020--ex-ante evaluation of the principle mechanisms

Listed author(s):
  • Klessmann, Corinna
Registered author(s):

    In December 2008, the European Council and the European Parliament agreed on a final compromise for a new European renewable energy directive. One of the most debated issues prior to this compromise was the design of "target flexibility mechanisms", which should allow member states with low or expensive renewable energy potential to partly fulfil their national renewable energy target in other countries. This article traces back the political discussion that has led to the evolution of the different flexibility options. It then evaluates the most prominent flexibility mechanisms against a set of qualitative criteria. It concludes that free or restricted certificate trade based on guarantees of origin (GOs) - as proposed earlier by the European Commission - is not a viable option due to some "knockout" criteria, despite other potential advantages. The mechanisms that have replaced GO trade in the final compromise - joint projects, joint support schemes and statistical transfer between member states - provide less flexibility, but score better against a number of other important criteria. The crucial question for the coming years is how their utilisation can be facilitated. One first step might be that proactive member states define open design issues for implementing the mechanisms.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Energy Policy.

    Volume (Year): 37 (2009)
    Issue (Month): 11 (November)
    Pages: 4966-4979

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:37:y:2009:i:11:p:4966-4979
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

    in new window

    1. Klessmann, Corinna & Nabe, Christian & Burges, Karsten, 2008. "Pros and cons of exposing renewables to electricity market risks--A comparison of the market integration approaches in Germany, Spain, and the UK," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(10), pages 3646-3661, October.
    2. Munoz, Miquel & Oschmann, Volker & David Tabara, J., 2007. "Harmonization of renewable electricity feed-in laws in the European Union," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 3104-3114, May.
    3. Atle Midttun & Mari Hegg Gundersen & Anne Louise Koefoed, 2004. "Greening of Nordic Electricity Industry: Policy Convergence and Diversity," Energy & Environment, , vol. 15(4), pages 633-656, July.
    4. Toke, David, 2008. "The EU Renewables Directive--What is the fuss about trading?," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(8), pages 2991-2998, August.
    5. Ragwitz, Mario & Resch, Gustav & Schleich, Joachim, 2007. "Increased auctioning in the EU ETS and trade in guarantees of origin for renewables: a comparison of the impact on power sector producer rents," Working Papers "Sustainability and Innovation" S8/2007, Fraunhofer Institute for Systems and Innovation Research (ISI).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:enepol:v:37:y:2009:i:11:p:4966-4979. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu)

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.