IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/ieaple/v21y2021i1d10.1007_s10784-021-09529-4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Towards a European Green Deal: The evolution of EU climate and energy policy mixes

Author

Listed:
  • Jon Birger Skjærseth

    (The Fridtjof Nansens Institute)

Abstract

A growing scholarship argues that decarbonization cannot be achieved with single instruments like carbon pricing alone. A broader mix of reinforcing policies is required. This literature focuses on how policies can accelerate technological innovation, restrict polluting activities, promote green growth, and ensure social justice. Applying the policy mix literature to the European Union (EU), this article examines the development of climate and energy policies from separate and narrow initiatives to coordinated policy packages to achieve increasingly ambitious climate targets, culminating with the European Green Deal. The starting point to explain this policy development is that EU policies will reflect the positions of the ‘least ambitious’ actors when unanimity is required. Examination of different policy phases shows that EU policy mixes are not only needed to fulfil different transition functions—they also provide opportunities to combine different actor interests to raise climate ambitions. The EU institutions have been instrumental in crafting policy packages that exempt and compensate the least climate-ambitious actors. The Paris Agreement has also provided an enabling context for higher EU ambitions. Looking towards the future, the corona-induced recession has so far mainly been used by the EU as an opportunity to strengthen climate ambitions and the European Green Deal.

Suggested Citation

  • Jon Birger Skjærseth, 2021. "Towards a European Green Deal: The evolution of EU climate and energy policy mixes," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 21(1), pages 25-41, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:ieaple:v:21:y:2021:i:1:d:10.1007_s10784-021-09529-4
    DOI: 10.1007/s10784-021-09529-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10784-021-09529-4
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10784-021-09529-4?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Andreas Follesdal & Simon Hix, 2006. "Why There is a Democratic Deficit in the EU: A Response to Majone and Moravcsik," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44, pages 533-562, September.
    2. Kern, Florian & Rogge, Karoline S. & Howlett, Michael, 2019. "Policy mixes for sustainability transitions: New approaches and insights through bridging innovation and policy studies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(10).
    3. Sebenius, James K., 1983. "Negotiation arithmetic: adding and subtracting issues and parties," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 37(2), pages 281-316, April.
    4. Jon Birger Skjærseth & Guri Bang & Miranda A. Schreurs, 2013. "Explaining Growing Climate Policy Differences Between the European Union and the United States," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 13(4), pages 61-80, November.
    5. Moravcsik, Andrew, 1999. "A New Statecraft? Supranational Entrepreneurs and International Cooperation," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 53(2), pages 267-306, April.
    6. Rogge, Karoline S. & Reichardt, Kristin, 2016. "Policy mixes for sustainability transitions: An extended concept and framework for analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(8), pages 1620-1635.
    7. Kivimaa, Paula & Kern, Florian, 2016. "Creative destruction or mere niche support? Innovation policy mixes for sustainability transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 205-217.
    8. Kacper Szulecki & Severin Fischer & Anne Therese Gullberg & Oliver Sartor, 2016. "Shaping the ‘Energy Union': between national positions and governance innovation in EU energy and climate policy," Climate Policy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(5), pages 548-567, July.
    9. Edmondson, Duncan L. & Kern, Florian & Rogge, Karoline S., 2019. "The co-evolution of policy mixes and socio-technical systems: Towards a conceptual framework of policy mix feedback in sustainability transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(10).
    10. Steinar Andresen & Jon Birger Skjærseth & Torbjørg Jevnaker & Jørgen Wettestad, 2016. "The Paris Agreement: Consequences for the EU and Carbon Markets?," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 4(3), pages 188-196.
    11. Christopher J. Bickerton & Dermot Hodson & Uwe Puetter, 2015. "The New Intergovernmentalism: European Integration in the Post-Maastricht Era," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(4), pages 703-722, July.
    12. Andrew Jordan & Elah Matt, 2014. "Designing policies that intentionally stick: policy feedback in a changing climate," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 47(3), pages 227-247, September.
    13. Andreas Follesdal & Simon Hix, 2006. "Why There is a Democratic Deficit in the EU: A Response to Majone and Moravcsik," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(3), pages 533-562, September.
    14. Pollack, Mark A., 1997. "Delegation, agency, and agenda setting in the European Community," International Organization, Cambridge University Press, vol. 51(1), pages 99-134, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jon Birger Skjærseth, 2017. "The European Commission’s Shifting Climate Leadership," Global Environmental Politics, MIT Press, vol. 17(2), pages 84-104, May.
    2. S. Andresen & G. Bang & J. B. Skjærseth & A. Underdal, 2021. "Achieving the ambitious targets of the Paris Agreement: the role of key actors," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 21(1), pages 1-7, March.
    3. Guri Bang, 2021. "The United States: conditions for accelerating decarbonisation in a politically divided country," International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 21(1), pages 43-58, March.
    4. Hilde Nykamp, 2020. "Policy Mix for a Transition to Sustainability: Green Buildings in Norway," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-17, January.
    5. Nuñez-Jimenez, Alejandro & Knoeri, Christof & Hoppmann, Joern & Hoffmann, Volker H., 2022. "Beyond innovation and deployment: Modeling the impact of technology-push and demand-pull policies in Germany's solar policy mix," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(10).
    6. Trotter, Philipp A. & Brophy, Aoife, 2022. "Policy mixes for business model innovation: The case of off-grid energy for sustainable development in sub-Saharan Africa," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(6).
    7. Kivimaa, Paula & Rogge, Karoline S., 2022. "Interplay of policy experimentation and institutional change in sustainability transitions: The case of mobility as a service in Finland," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(1).
    8. Barbanente, Angela & Grassini, Laura, 2022. "Fostering transitions in landscape policies: A multi-level perspective," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    9. Daniel Béland & Michael Howlett & Philip Rocco & Alex Waddan, 2020. "Designing policy resilience: lessons from the Affordable Care Act," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 53(2), pages 269-289, June.
    10. Bjerkan, Kristin Ystmark & Seter, Hanne, 2021. "Policy and politics in energy transitions. A case study on shore power in Oslo," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    11. Rauh, Christian, 2022. "Clear messages to the European public? The language of European Commission press releases 1985–2020," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, issue Latest Ar, pages 1-19.
    12. Beetz, Jan Pieter & Rossi, Enzo, 2015. "EU legitimacy in a realist key," Discussion Papers, Center for Global Constitutionalism SP IV 2015-802, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    13. Edmondson, Duncan L. & Kern, Florian & Rogge, Karoline S., 2019. "The co-evolution of policy mixes and socio-technical systems: Towards a conceptual framework of policy mix feedback in sustainability transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(10).
    14. Weigelt, Carmen & Lu, Shaohua & Verhaal, J. Cameron, 2021. "Blinded by the sun: The role of prosumers as niche actors in incumbent firms’ adoption of solar power during sustainability transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(9).
    15. Eric Brouillat & Maïder Saint Jean, 2020. "Mind the gap: Investigating the impact of implementation gaps on cleaner technology transition," Post-Print hal-03490256, HAL.
    16. Meng, Jia-Hui & Wang, Jian, 2023. "The policy trajectory of dual-use technology integration governance in China: A sequential analysis of policy evolution," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    17. Petia Kostadinova & Magda Giurcanu, 2018. "Capturing the legislative priorities of transnational Europarties and the European Commission: A pledge approach," European Union Politics, , vol. 19(2), pages 363-379, June.
    18. Haddad, Carolina R. & Bergek, Anna, 2023. "Towards an integrated framework for evaluating transformative innovation policy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(2).
    19. Pamela Pansardi & Pier Domenico Tortola, 2022. "A “More Political” Commission? Reassessing EC Politicization through Language," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(4), pages 1047-1068, July.
    20. Höpner, Martin & Schäfer, Armin, 2012. "Integration among unequals: How the heterogeneity of European varieties of capitalism shapes the social and democratic potential of the EU," MPIfG Discussion Paper 12/5, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Societies.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:ieaple:v:21:y:2021:i:1:d:10.1007_s10784-021-09529-4. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.