Some much needed momentum is finally building behind the EU’s emissions trading system

The EU emissions trading system (ETS) is a key component of the European Union’s policy for tackling climate change. The ETS works using a ‘cap and trade’ system, with a progressively tightening limit set on the amount of greenhouse gases that can be emitted by factories, power plants and other actors. Jørgen Wettestad and Torbjørg Jevnaker write that after a difficult period in which the ETS has struggled to meet its aims, the system finally looks to be building some momentum with greater consensus among EU governments and actors in the European Parliament on the way forward

The Role of Policy Diffusion in Shaping Design Properties

This paper examines the extent to which and how the spread and design of carbon trading systems worldwide have been shaped by international policy diffusion. We highlight eight central design characteristics and identify nine cases for further scrutiny. Focusing on similarities and differences across the cases, we find that international diffusion can explain both converging and diverging designs. While the former observation is in line with the traditional understanding of diffusion leading to convergence as actors adopt a policy initiated by others, it is more striking that policy diffusion stands forth as important for understanding design divergence. Evidence presented in this paper demonstrates that diffusion mechanisms interact with and contribute to the evolution in the policy as it diffuses over time. Hence, we argue that policy convergence is not necessarily a great measure of diffusion because the policy is not the same over time. The policy divergences, partly rooted in different domestic conditions and political constraints, mean that no linked global system is likely in the near future, although the spread of the policy model can be seen as promising for a future emissions trading regime from below

Calling in the Heavyweights: Why the World Bank Established the Carbon Pricing Leadership Coalition, and What It Might Achieve

The initial key international climate policy and carbon market hub was the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Over time several international organizations and networks have been added to the “international carbon market web,” such as several World Bank (WB) initiatives. As to the latter, the Carbon Pricing Leadership Coalition (CPLC) was launched in 2015. A key question then becomes: considering an increasingly dense international environment, why was the Coalition formed? Our analysis shows the importance of taking into account institutional pathways in the Bank itself and the character of previous WB-internal initiatives. However, it is particularly important to note interaction with a strong external pull, stemming both from more “systemic” developments such as the collapse of the Clean Development Mechanism system and the explicit request for new initiatives from key actors, such as UN General Secretary Ban-Ki Moon. We suggest seeing entrepreneurship from the bureaucracies of international organizations as conditional on member-state behavior or a conducive institutional environment (or both). We also discuss main prospects ahead, both for the Coalition and the more general organizational set-up in this issue-area. Here we draw attention to the role of the WB as an international “heavyweight” and CPLC and Bank meetings held back to back.acceptedVersio

Chapter 21 Differentiated integration in EU climate policy

EU climate policy is characterized by significant degrees of differentiated integration. Although the two topics complement each other, differentiated integration and studies of EU climate policy have rarely been studied in conjunction. To address this gap, we develop a three-fold conceptualization that makes it possible to explore differentiation during the course of a policy cycle: policy output differentiation, policy outcome differentiation and policy impact differentiation. Our examination of two key elements of EU climate policy legislation—emissions trading and renewables policy—shows that differentiated integration is an uneven and multi-directional process that varies over time. We argue that differentiation is an important enabler for concerted action in EU climate policy and that differentiation at the policy output and outcome stages may facilitate greater harmonization at the impact stage. Differentiation at the impact and outcome level of the three (idealtype) policy stages does not automatically reflect differentiation at the output policy stage; it is rather that output differentiation may facilitate both high and low levels of differentiation at these later stages

Exploring paths and innovation in Norwegian carbon capture and storage policy

publishedVersio

Linked carbon markets: silver bullet, or castle in the air?

publishedVersio

Smokescreen Politics? Ratcheting Up EU Emissions Trading in 2017

acceptedVersio

Ratcheting Up Carbon Trade: The Politics of Reforming EU Emissions Trading

publishedVersio