The EU '2020 Energy Initiative' : The post-Lisbon pattern of change in EU energy policy

El novembre de 2010, la Comissió Europea ha finalment donat a conèixer la seva "Energia 2020 Comunicació", un document estratègic en el marc més ampli del programa "Europa 2020". Una estratègia per al desenvolupament sostenible intel · ligent, i creixement inclusiu posa les bases d'un nou enfocament a la política d'energia a la UE. En el marc d'Europa 2020, la Iniciativa d'Energia recopila els resultats que ja s'han obtingut a través de la Estratègia de Lisboa 2000-2010, s'identifiquen les deficiències del passat i i introdueix nous objectius ambiciosos per a la UE en matèria de política energètica.In November 2010 the European Commission has eventually issued its 'Energy 2020' communication1, a strategic document within the broader framework of the 'Europe 2020. A strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth' programme2. The Energy 2020 strategy-or the 'Energy Initiative'-lays the groundwork for a new approach to energy policy in the European Union (EU). Within the framework of Europe 2020, the Energy Initiative collects the results of what had been already achieved through the 2000-2010 Lisbon Strategy, identifies the shortcomings of past interventions3, and introduces new ambitious objectives for the EU's common energy policy actions in the coming years

International regimes as knowledge syndicates? Energy and trends of global governance

El poder de l'Estat i la sobirania tradicional s'està deteriorant de manera constant, sobretot en termes de la provisió de certs béns públics fonamentals. Els Estats, en particular, són incapaços de manejar el coneixement i la informació que és essencial per mantenir la competitivitat i la sostenibilitat en una economia interdependent. Estructures fiables de la governança mundial i la cooperació internacional estan lluny de ser establertes. Energia com a problema a les agendes p dels governs, les empreses privades i la societat civil és un exemple manifest d'aquesta dinàmica.. L'actual sistema de governança mundial d'energia implica accions polítiques disperses per actors divers. L'Agència Internacional de l'Energia té un paper destacat, però està debilitat per la seva composició limitada i basada en el coneixement- epistèmic en lloc del material o executiu. Aquest treball sosté que ni la mida ni nombre de membres disponibles estan dificultant la governabilitat mundial d'energia. Més aviat, l'energia és una sèrie de béns públics que es troben als llimbs, on els estats no poden pagar la seva disposició, així com els diversos interessos impedir l'establiment d'una autoritat internacional. Després de la introducció de la teoria del règim internacional i el concepte de coneixement basats en les comunitats epistèmiques, l'article revisa l'estat actual de la governabilitat de l'energia mundia. A continuació es presenta una comparació d'aquesta estructura amb els règims de govern nacional i regional, d'una banda, i amb règims globals ambientals i de salut, de l'altraTraditional state power and sovereignty are steadily being eroded, especially in terms of the provision of certain fundamental ‗public goods'. States, in particular, are incapable of managing the knowledge and information which is essential to maintain competitiveness and sustainability in an interdependent economy. Reliable structures of global governance and international coop-eration, however, are far from being established. Energy-a top-of-the-agenda issue for most governments, private entrepreneurs and civil societies-is a manifest example of these dynam-ics. The current system of energy global governance entails policy actions scattered over di-verse actors. The International Energy Agency has a prominent role, but it is weakened by its limited membership, and knowledge-driven (‗epistemic') rather than material or executive pow-ers. This paper argues that neither membership size nor available means are hampering global energy governance. Rather, energy is one of a number of public goods which lie in limbo-where states cannot afford their provision, and diverse interests prevent the establishment of an international authority. After introducing international regime theory and the concept of knowl-edge-based epistemic communities, the paper reviews the current state of global energy gov-ernance. It then provides a comparison of this structure with national and regional governance regimes on the one hand, and with environmental and health global regimes on the othe

Localizing and monitoring climate neutrality through the sustainable development goals (SDGS) framework: the case of Madrid

This paper builds on research conducted and developed in the framework of the Joint Research Centre’s URBAN2030 and URBAN2030-II project. The URBAN2030-II Project aims at fostering the achievement of SDGs in European cities and regions. It focuses on providing methodological support and inspiration for the design and implementation of SDG voluntary local reviews. It builds on the knowledge and experience gained in the URBAN2030 project (2018–2020) developed with the support of the Directorate General for Regional and Urban Policy.[Abstract:] Madrid’s Roadmap to Climate Neutrality by 2050 is the city’s strategy to attain a 65% reduction in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 2030 and decarbonisation in 2050. This paper analyses the Roadmap to extract a concept of neutrality, as defined from the perspective of a local or regional government (LRG). It then runs a semantic comparison between the Roadmap’s policy lines and indicators and the metrics used in a sample of other LRGs voluntary local reviews on the localisation of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). It assesses the extent to which the roadmap’s policy priorities and goals fit with the idea of climate neutrality and decarbonisation that other LRGs are monitoring. The paper also links the Roadmap with the SDGs, studying to what extent certain goals resonate with the climate neutrality dimension monitored therein and the other reviews in the sample. The paper suggests that there is still significant diversity in the way LRGs approach climate neutrality, although carbon emissions and sustainable transport remain common priorities. A large majority of indicators monitoring climate neutrality still refer to key climate-related SDGs, such as SDG 7, 11, 12, and 13, even though there is growing evidence that LRGs are diversifying the concept of decarbonisation policy with which they are working

Monitoring SDG localisation: an evidence-based approach to standardised monitoring frameworks

[Abstract:] This article studies closeness between indicators that local governments use to monitor Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) implementation in their Voluntary Local Reviews (VLRs) and those included in the standardised set of indicators of the European Handbook for SDG Voluntary Local Reviews. To do so, it develops an index of ‘indicator proximity’ through a qualitative semantic comparison between 2354 indicators used in a sample of 29 VLRs and the 72 indicators included in the Handbook’s standardised set. The index includes absolute and relative scores, taking into consideration size, comprehensiveness and diversity of the indicator sets included in the sample, as well as the methodological features of the Handbook’s set. The index allows to identify the VLRs with higher or lower proximity to the indicators in the standardised set and the SDGs that elicit a higher or lower degree of closeness between standard metrics and indicators selected or defined by local governments. The output shows that VLRs and the Handbook have an overall significant degree of proximity; that variables such as local government type or size or the size of VLR indicator sets do not provide additional explanation for proximity; and that SDGs that can be monitored with locally accessible and affordable data elicit higher indicator proximity

The EU '2020 Energy Initiative' : The post-Lisbon pattern of change in EU energy policy

El novembre de 2010, la Comissió Europea ha finalment donat a conèixer la seva "Energia 2020 Comunicació", un document estratègic en el marc més ampli del programa "Europa 2020". Una estratègia per al desenvolupament sostenible intel · ligent, i creixement inclusiu posa les bases d'un nou enfocament a la política d'energia a la UE. En el marc d'Europa 2020, la Iniciativa d'Energia recopila els resultats que ja s'han obtingut a través de la Estratègia de Lisboa 2000-2010, s'identifiquen les deficiències del passat i i introdueix nous objectius ambiciosos per a la UE en matèria de política energètica.In November 2010 the European Commission has eventually issued its 'Energy 2020' communication1, a strategic document within the broader framework of the 'Europe 2020. A strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth' programme2. The Energy 2020 strategy-or the 'Energy Initiative'-lays the groundwork for a new approach to energy policy in the European Union (EU). Within the framework of Europe 2020, the Energy Initiative collects the results of what had been already achieved through the 2000-2010 Lisbon Strategy, identifies the shortcomings of past interventions3, and introduces new ambitious objectives for the EU's common energy policy actions in the coming years

International regimes as knowledge syndicates? Energy and trends of global governance

El poder de l'Estat i la sobirania tradicional s'està deteriorant de manera constant, sobretot en termes de la provisió de certs béns públics fonamentals. Els Estats, en particular, són incapaços de manejar el coneixement i la informació que és essencial per mantenir la competitivitat i la sostenibilitat en una economia interdependent. Estructures fiables de la governança mundial i la cooperació internacional estan lluny de ser establertes. Energia com a problema a les agendes p dels governs, les empreses privades i la societat civil és un exemple manifest d'aquesta dinàmica.. L'actual sistema de governança mundial d'energia implica accions polítiques disperses per actors divers. L'Agència Internacional de l'Energia té un paper destacat, però està debilitat per la seva composició limitada i basada en el coneixement- epistèmic en lloc del material o executiu. Aquest treball sosté que ni la mida ni nombre de membres disponibles estan dificultant la governabilitat mundial d'energia. Més aviat, l'energia és una sèrie de béns públics que es troben als llimbs, on els estats no poden pagar la seva disposició, així com els diversos interessos impedir l'establiment d'una autoritat internacional. Després de la introducció de la teoria del règim internacional i el concepte de coneixement basats en les comunitats epistèmiques, l'article revisa l'estat actual de la governabilitat de l'energia mundia. A continuació es presenta una comparació d'aquesta estructura amb els règims de govern nacional i regional, d'una banda, i amb règims globals ambientals i de salut, de l'altraTraditional state power and sovereignty are steadily being eroded, especially in terms of the provision of certain fundamental ‗public goods‘. States, in particular, are incapable of managing the knowledge and information which is essential to maintain competitiveness and sustainability in an interdependent economy. Reliable structures of global governance and international coop-eration, however, are far from being established. Energy—a top-of-the-agenda issue for most governments, private entrepreneurs and civil societies—is a manifest example of these dynam-ics. The current system of energy global governance entails policy actions scattered over di-verse actors. The International Energy Agency has a prominent role, but it is weakened by its limited membership, and knowledge-driven (‗epistemic‘) rather than material or executive pow-ers. This paper argues that neither membership size nor available means are hampering global energy governance. Rather, energy is one of a number of public goods which lie in limbo—where states cannot afford their provision, and diverse interests prevent the establishment of an international authority. After introducing international regime theory and the concept of knowl-edge-based epistemic communities, the paper reviews the current state of global energy gov-ernance. It then provides a comparison of this structure with national and regional governance regimes on the one hand, and with environmental and health global regimes on the othe

International regimes as knowledge syndicates? Energy and trends of global governance

El poder de l'Estat i la sobirania tradicional s'està deteriorant de manera constant, sobretot en termes de la provisió de certs béns públics fonamentals. Els Estats, en particular, són incapaços de manejar el coneixement i la informació que és essencial per mantenir la competitivitat i la sostenibilitat en una economia interdependent. Estructures fiables de la governança mundial i la cooperació internacional estan lluny de ser establertes. Energia com a problema a les agendes p dels governs, les empreses privades i la societat civil és un exemple manifest d'aquesta dinàmica.. L'actual sistema de governança mundial d'energia implica accions polítiques disperses per actors divers. L'Agència Internacional de l'Energia té un paper destacat, però està debilitat per la seva composició limitada i basada en el coneixement- epistèmic en lloc del material o executiu. Aquest treball sosté que ni la mida ni nombre de membres disponibles estan dificultant la governabilitat mundial d'energia. Més aviat, l'energia és una sèrie de béns públics que es troben als llimbs, on els estats no poden pagar la seva disposició, així com els diversos interessos impedir l'establiment d'una autoritat internacional. Després de la introducció de la teoria del règim internacional i el concepte de coneixement basats en les comunitats epistèmiques, l'article revisa l'estat actual de la governabilitat de l'energia mundia. A continuació es presenta una comparació d'aquesta estructura amb els règims de govern nacional i regional, d'una banda, i amb règims globals ambientals i de salut, de l'altraTraditional state power and sovereignty are steadily being eroded, especially in terms of the provision of certain fundamental ‗public goods'. States, in particular, are incapable of managing the knowledge and information which is essential to maintain competitiveness and sustainability in an interdependent economy. Reliable structures of global governance and international coop-eration, however, are far from being established. Energy-a top-of-the-agenda issue for most governments, private entrepreneurs and civil societies-is a manifest example of these dynam-ics. The current system of energy global governance entails policy actions scattered over di-verse actors. The International Energy Agency has a prominent role, but it is weakened by its limited membership, and knowledge-driven (‗epistemic') rather than material or executive pow-ers. This paper argues that neither membership size nor available means are hampering global energy governance. Rather, energy is one of a number of public goods which lie in limbo-where states cannot afford their provision, and diverse interests prevent the establishment of an international authority. After introducing international regime theory and the concept of knowl-edge-based epistemic communities, the paper reviews the current state of global energy gov-ernance. It then provides a comparison of this structure with national and regional governance regimes on the one hand, and with environmental and health global regimes on the othe

The policisation of EU Energy Policy: Instances of Instrumental Re-framing by the European Commission

Over the last fifteen years, the energy policy of the European Union (EU) has changed significantly. It has become more cooperative and integrated across the borders of EU Member States and less preoccupied with the state-centred discourse of energy-supply security. The European Commission, in particular, has policised EU energy policy by re-framing it as a complex patchwork of many energy-related policy interventions. This shift took place in the aftermath of several critical events that affected Europe’s energy supply and jeopardised its energy security. Energy policisation occurred, in other words, when it was reasonable for EU Member States to securitise rather than integrate their energy policies. The core research question of this thesis addresses this apparent paradox: to what extent has EU energy policy become more integrated, and why has this change occurred when it was least expected? This study argues that the shift towards energy policisation has been discursive. The European Commission has been able to harness unprecedented windows of opportunity created by recent crises to re-frame energy policy according to its overarching understanding of EU integration and public policy-making. The Commission has promoted—for over forty years—a vision of energy policy that spans energy security, market competitiveness, environmental sustainability, and energy efficiency. Based on a bibliometric test, this thesis identifies the type of discursive ‘vehicles’ used by the Commission to diffuse its policy ideas and create consensus about its policy agenda. This thesis also argues that the Commission has been able to use diverse discursive tactics to challenge the prevailing energy policy narrative of the Member States and drive the policy-making process towards more integration. The two case studies analyse two instances of instrumental energy policisation. The case of the wind-power offshore grid projects developed in the North Sea during the last decade shows how the Commission managed to socialise other energy policy stakeholders into its own policy agenda and urge national governments to adopt a more integrated perspective on the issue at stake. The case of the Energy Efficiency Directive negotiations, ended successfully in late 2012, shows that the Commission has also been able to challenge the governments’ state-centred discourse more ‘frontally’. The Commission re-told the story of EU-wide energy cooperation as being so necessary as to force Member States to back away from their resolve, approve the Directive, and accept the binding constraints it contains. Ultimately, this thesis tells a story of continuity and change in EU energy policy. There has been continuity in the decades-long Commission’s advocacy for a more complex and integrated EU energy policy and in its guiding belief that public policy in Europe is, under all circumstances, best made at the EU rather than at the national level. There has been change in the sudden and unpredictable effect that crisis and shocks have had on the preferences of policy actors. By telling a story of variation in EU energy policy and successful discursive re-framing by the Commission, this thesis contributes to the on-going debate on the impact of non-material factors such as ideas, meaning, goals, and visions on the outcomes of policy-making. By combining bibliometric, process-tracing, and discourse analysis techniques, this thesis has sought to provide a more reliable and replicable operationalisation of ideational elements and has expanded the prospective agenda for more cross-policy research in EU studies and public policy analysis