A FLAS Fellow's Semester Abroad in Amman

Audrey Dombro, an agricultural and consumer economics student and 2019-20 FLAS fellow, reflects upon her experience studying in Jordan.

Master of Arts in European Union Studies

The European Union Center at the University of Illinois offers the only Master of Arts in European Union Studies (MAEUS) program in the Western Hemisphere. Learn more here.

Nuclear Energy and Its Environmental, Policy, and Security Implications

On Earth Day 2022, the EU Center organized a symposium on the future of technology, energy, and security in Europe, featuring prominent scholars and policy makers from France, Germany, and the U.S.

Conversations on Europe

Watch the collection of online roundtable discussions on different EU issues sponsored by the University of Pittsburgh.

Accelerating Climate Change Mitigation: Policy Statements on the Road to Sharm-El-Sheikh and Beyond

Bruce Murray, Resident Director of the Illinois Program in Vienna, presents a series of student-written policy statements for accelerating climate change mitigation.

Videos of Previous Lectures

Missed an EUC-hosted lecture? Our blog's video tag has archived previous EUC-sponsored lectures.

Wednesday, November 23, 2022

Using Virtual Reality in the K-12 Language Classroom: A Beginner’s Guide to Device and Apps

by Sydney Lazarus

In October 2022, the European Union Center hosted a presentation by Dr. Tricia Thrasher, who recently earned her PhD in French with a concentration in second language acquisition and teacher education from the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign. Thrasher now works as a research manager at Immerse, the first virtual reality (VR) application designed specifically for synchronous language teaching and learning.

Part of the EU Center’s fall 2022 Transatlantic Educators Lecture Series, Thrasher’s presentation provided an overview of different types of VR devices, recommendations for language learning VR apps, and tips on integrating VR into the classroom and acquiring headsets. Prior to working at Immerse, Thrasher taught French at UIUC for five years, and she drew on her own experience using VR with her students for her presentation.

First, why use VR in the language classroom at all? Aside from the ability to transport students to culturally relevant locations and immerse them in the target language, VR boasts the research-backed benefits of lower student anxiety, higher motivation and engagement, and opportunities for more student-centered collaborative interactions. This can be particularly valuable for language classes, where progress depends so much on students’ willingness to speak up in class. 

VR devices range from simple and affordable viewing devices such as Google Cardboard and Google Daydream to standalone headsets like Meta Quest 2 and HTC Vive Focus 3 to the most expensive models like Valve Index and HTC Vive, which are tethered to a computer. Headsets can be prohibitively expensive (the Meta Quest 2, one of the more affordable headsets, typically retails for $399). However, many VR applications do not require a headset and can be used with a personal computer, tablet, and smartphone.

Apps designed specifically for language learning can be categorized into human-to-computer interaction and human-to-human interaction. The former allows for asynchronous learning, whereas the latter would require teachers to be in VR along with their students. Mondly and ImmerseMe are two applications that use human-to-computer interaction, which, Thrasher says, is better “for lower-level students who are still practicing interactions like ordering a coffee or buying something at the store.” Students would put on a headset (or turn on their devices), log into the application, and interact with chatbots.

In contrast, in an application using human-to-human interaction like Immerse (Thrasher’s employer), teachers interact with their students in VR. Immerse is currently the only VR app on the market that is designed for synchronous language teaching. In the screenshot below, Thrasher and Randall Sadler, an associate professor of linguistics at UIUC, use Immerse to teach English learners from Spain, who are describing the portraits on the wall. 


Then there are general social VR platforms like Alcove, vTimeXR, and Spatial, which are not specifically designed for education but can be used for educational purposes, such as bringing students together into a VR space for collaboration and discussion. Spatial allows users to build their own VR spaces, and there is the option of creating a password-protected space just for your students. One of Thrasher’s current projects involves bringing together UIUC students learning Japanese and Japanese students learning English and having them build an art gallery in Spatial that showcases what they’ve learned about each other’s culture. Thrasher also recommends looking into Mozilla Hubs and Alcove. Mozilla Hubs, which is free to use and does not require a VR headset, lets users design private meeting spaces using the app’s library of 3D objects and share external content such as Kahoot games and YouTube videos.

Video tours and multiplayer and single-player games can also be valuable tools in language classrooms. Wander, which Thrasher describes as “Google Earth meets VR,” allows students to explore parts of the world where the target language is spoken. An activity Thrasher has used with her students is to have them go into the same place in Wander and describe to each other, using the target language, what they are seeing. Students can also act as tour guides and present on a place in Wander to their classmates.

Thrasher concluded her presentation with tips on starting to use VR in your classroom. “I really cannot emphasize enough the importance of training,” Thrasher said, “This goes for both training yourself and your students to use the headsets.” VR is not necessarily intuitive even for digital natives. Hence, Thrasher recommends practicing presenting a lesson to a friend using any given VR app before using it in the classroom.

A remote learning format can be perfect for VR if headsets are not required: students would all log into the VR app from their personal computers like they log into Zoom. If students are using VR in a physical classroom, Thrasher recommends giving yourself enough time for equipment and classroom setup. Make sure that your headsets are charged and that your apps are downloaded and updated, so that your students can come in, put on their headsets, and immediately get to work. 

Lastly, double-check your school and country's privacy laws, as not all VR apps are compliant. One U.K.-based audience member mentioned that she was unable to use ImmerseMe with her students due to the application's privacy policies. 

If you have experience — good or bad! — with using VR in your language classroom, please comment below. Thrasher’s company, Immerse, is looking to donate Meta Quest 2 VR headsets to underserved high schools in Champaign, Ill., Dallas, Texas, and Santa Barbara, Calif. If you would be interested in receiving some, please write to Tricia@immerse.online. 

Share/Bookmark

Thursday, November 17, 2022

What happened in Przewodów?

The European Union Center is grateful to publish a brief piece by Professor George Gasyna on the Polish press’s reporting on the missile that killed two Polish citizens on November 15, 2022. The European press is presenting the accident as an event that almost led to a direct confrontation between NATO and Russia, with potential unfathomable consequences for the world. The EUC asked Professor Gasyna to inform us on how the Polish press is discussing the incident and to monitor the Polish reactions to the events. Professor Gasyna is a scholar of Polish culture and literature at UIUC.

By George Gasynaggasyna@illinois.edu

Aftershocks of the (likely) unintended missile incident in southeast Poland late on November 15 that killed two civilians have continued to reverberate in the media sphere as new information comes to light. The consensus being established now is that the two missiles that struck a grain depot in the small village of Przewodów were launched by Ukrainian air defense forces. Ongoing investigation by Polish military officials and the district attorney’s office [Prokuratura] is moving toward the conclusion that the two missiles were deployed to intercept Russian rockets or armed drones that had been targeting Lviv Oblast [Province].[1] Mainstream Polish media – Gazeta Wyborcza, Rzeczpospolita, TVN – are near unanimous about this version of the events,[2] supported by wire dispatches from Western opinionmakers such as Associated Press, as well as American sources including CNN, MSNBC, and other news outlets that have widely reported on the incident, including reactions by the Biden presidency. The narrative of a “lost, wandering Ukrainian anti-aircraft missile”[3] appears to be the official version, reiterated by both President Andrzej Duda and Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki in statements to the press. There has, however, been no shortage of commentaries by alternative media, especially on the right. In venues such as wpolityce.pl,[4] as well as in the blogosphere, a counter-theory of an unprovoked Russian attack on Polish soil seems to carry the day, prompting calls for swift and decisive retaliation – a revanchist mood brought on, in part, by what seemed like hesitation on the part of the government to issue its official statement. Its initial “suspicious” silence has lent support to a number of conspiracy theories about the causes and sequence of events in Przewodów.[5] Authorities are basing their conclusions in part on a film which purportedly shows the explosion – from which the likely direction of the incoming missiles can be inferred – but the clips have not been made available to the public, due to the sensitive nature of the investigation.[6]


[3]  https://wiadomosci.gazeta.pl/wiadomosci/7,114883,29151355,krater-szczatki-nagrania-i-dane-z-radarow-sekwencja-zdarzen.html#s=BoxMMtImg1; [Wszyscy mówią zgodnie to samo, o zabłąkanej ukraińskiej rakiecie przeciwlotniczej] gazeta.pl; accessed November 17, 2022


Share/Bookmark

Thursday, September 22, 2022

Congratulations to Our AY 2022-23 FLAS Fellows!

The EUC congratulates our Foreign Language & Area Studies (FLAS) fellowship recipients for the 2022-23 academic year. FLAS fellowships support undergraduate and graduate study in modern foreign languages in combination with area studies, international studies, or international or area aspects of professional studies. The purpose of the FLAS program is to train students to integrate global knowledge into a future career, particularly in areas of national need, such as college or university teaching, government service, and business. Both undergraduate and graduate students from all departments and professional schools are encouraged to apply. For more info: https://europe.illinois.edu/FLAS

Graduate FLAS Fellows

Ganiyat Alli (Arabic) - History

Angela Gavic (Bosnian) - Accounting

Braden Muscarello (Turkish) - German Studies

Ben Nathan (Modern Hebrew) - European Union Studies

Brett Stallone-Dwyer (Italian) - Anthropology

Brian Yang (Bosnian) - Slavic Languages & Literatures


Undergraduate FLAS Fellows

Marina Foss (Portuguese) - Global Studies

Dylan Gunn (Arabic) - History

Lindsay Merdian (Arabic) - Political Science

John Wachala (Polish) - Computer Science


Share/Bookmark

Thursday, September 1, 2022

Welcoming Visiting Scholars José Luis Gómez-Barroso and Matteo Pasetti

José Luis Gómez-Barroso (left) and Matteo Pasetti (right)
The European Union Center warmly welcomes visiting scholars José Luis Gómez-Barroso and Matteo Pasetti. Dr. Gómez-Barroso will be affiliated with the EU Center as a Fulbright-Schuman scholar for the 2022-23 academic year. He will be working primarily on the topic of public economics in the EU but will also be helping with organizing EU Center conferences and events. Dr. Pasetti will be at the EU Center until Sept. 16. During his visit, he will examine published and archival materials related to his research interests, in particular drug use as a socio-historical phenomenon in the last decades of the twentieth century. This will be the subject of his keynote presentation for the EU Center’s fall reception on Thursday, Sept. 15. 

Please join us in welcoming Dr. Gómez-Barroso and Dr. Pasetti to the EU Center and UIUC, and see below for their bios.

 

José Luis Gómez-Barroso is a professor in the department of Applied Economics and Economic History at UNED (Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia – Spanish National Distance Education University). His educational background includes degrees in Economics, Law and Telecommunication Engineering. His research has focused on the foundations of the digital economy and, in particular, on the role that the public sector should play in this area. Building on this, he extended his work to Public Economics in general. He is now interested in framing the activity of the European Union institutions and bodies within the context of Public Economics.

 

Matteo Pasetti is Associate Professor of Contemporary History at the Department of Philosophy and Communication Studies, University of Bologna, where he teaches History of Mass Communication and History of Journalism at the School of Arts, Humanities, and Cultural Heritage. He is a member of the editorial boards of several scientific journals and he is the author, among other publications, of the books Tra classe e nazione. Rappresentazioni e organizzazione del movimento nazional-sindacalista, 1918-1922 (Carocci, Roma 2008), Storia dei fascismi in Europa (Archetipolibri, Bologna 2009), and L’Europa corporativa. Una storia transnazionale tra le due guerre mondiali (Bononia University Press, Bologna 2016).

 

His research deals with twentieth-century European history and, more specifically, the history of fascism by a comparative and transnational approach. In this field of studies, his interests include the issues of memory and public use of the past after dictatorships. He is also interested in the evolution of mass communication, public spheres, and circulation of ideas from a global perspective. His current work focuses on the topic of drug consumption in the last decades of the twentieth century as a socio-historical phenomenon.


Share/Bookmark

Tuesday, August 30, 2022

Announcing New EUC Associate Director Markian Dobczansky

The European Union Center is pleased to announce that Dr. Markian Dobczansky has joined the center as its new Associate Director. Dr. Dobczansky teaches classes in European Studies and serves as Director of Graduate Studies for the MAEUS program. Prior to joining the University of Illinois, he was a postdoctoral researcher at the University of Toronto and Columbia University. He received a Ph.D. in Russian/Soviet history from Stanford University with a dissertation on the politics of culture in twentieth-century Kharkiv. His research interests include the history of the Soviet Union, Ukraine, and Russia, the politics of culture, urban history, and the Cold War. He has also worked in an administrative capacity at the Central Eurasian Studies Society, the Shevchenko Scientific Society in the U.S., and the Kennan Institute of the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. Dr. Dobczansky is currently an Associate at the Harvard Ukrainian Research Institute. He speaks Ukrainian, Russian, and German, and has studied Qazaq and Armenian.
Share/Bookmark

Monday, August 29, 2022

Welcoming Our New MAEUS Students!

The EUC would like to welcome two new students to our MA program in European Union Studies: Ben Nathan and Angelina Sandora. They are joined by our continuing MAEUS students: Jean-Yves Lacascade and Simone Palmieri.

Ben is a recent graduate of UIUC where he received a Bachelor of Arts in Political Science. He is staying there for one additional year to complete a Master of Arts in European Union Studies through a 5-year accelerated graduate program offered at the European Union Center. His primary area of research has been propaganda and misinformation, which culminated in a senior honors thesis seeking to explore when and why governments utilize minority group targeting propaganda campaigns in the manner that they do. Ben has been a research assistant on numerous projects dealing with topics ranging from constitutional law to civil war conflicts. In the long term, he hopes to go to law school after finishing his graduate program so that he can practice law in the realm international law and trade.

Angelina is a first year MAEUS student. She graduated with a Bachelor of the Arts in International Relations from Michigan State University in spring of 2022. She is interested in questions of populism, refugees, the Mediterranean, and security. She also is passionate about learning languages and activism.

Click here to learn more about our M.A. in European Union Studies program, which is designed for students who are seeking to combine area expertise with professional training, planning to pursue a PhD, or desiring a stand-alone professional degree.

Share/Bookmark

Friday, July 1, 2022

Accelerating Climate Change Mitigation: Policy Statements on the Road to Sharm-El-Sheikh and Beyond

by Bruce Murray, Professor and Director of Illinois in Vienna Programs, retired.

As I write these lines in June 2022, the annual Bonn Climate Conference has convened to lay the groundwork for success at COP 27 in Sharm-El-Sheikh. The European Union (EU) Parliament is voting on eight pieces of the “Fit for 55” package. United States (US) Senators Schumer and Manchin strive to salvage climate change measures from the apparently failed Build Back Better Act, and the Biden administration seeks to compensate for legislative shortcomings with significant executive action. Meanwhile, the world climate clock keeps ticking. The World Meteorological Organization now estimates that the global temperature increase could overshoot 1.5 degrees Celsius before 2026.

Against that backdrop, 12 students from North America, South America, Europe, and Asia offer their policy statements for accelerating climate change mitigation with big bold action in the EU, US, and globally. They focus our attention on geo-political, technical, sectoral, as well as other approaches, proposing action capable of helping us to turn the corner on greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 2030. Their proposals deserve our close attention.

In the context of their work in a course on EU and US Climate Change Mitigation during the spring of 2022 at the Vienna University of Economics and Business, these guest experts expanded the students’ knowledge base and provided invaluable insights:
  • Christina Voigt, UNFCCC PAICC Co-Chair (slide presentation; video recording can be found in the EU Center's Video Library, under 2021-22 Recordings)
  • Andreas Beckmann, WWF CEE CEO (slide presentation; video recording can be found in the EU Center's Video Library, under 2021-22 Recordings)
  • Günter Hörmandinger, EUC Secretariat General Senior Expert (slide presentation; video recording can be found in the EU Center's Video Library, under 2021-22 Recordings)
  • Stephan Renner, Austrian Ministry for Climate Action Cabinet Member (slide presentation)
  • Claudia Kettner, Austrian Institute of Economic Research Senior Economist (slide presentations on carbon pricing and climate policy)
  • Barry Rabe, Brookings Institution Non-Resident Senior Fellow (slide presentation; video recording can be found in the EU Center's Video Library, under 2021-22 Recordings)
  • Sally Burgess, Sierra Club Illinois Downstate Lead Organizing Representative (slide presentation; video recording can be found in the EU Center's Video Library, under 2021-22 Recordings)
  • Dawn Dannenbring, Illinois People’s Action Lead Organizer (slide presentation; video recording can be found in the EU Center's Video Library, under 2021-22 Recordings)
  • Rev. Tony Pierce, Illinois People’s Action Board President (slide presentation; video recording can be found in the EU Center's Video Library, under 2021-22 Recordings)
So, too, did field study visits at select sites where state of the art renewable energy and energy conservation projects exemplify the potential for catalyzing climate change mitigation.
Interacting collaboratively, the students developed their policy statements from topic selection to thesis statement, abstract, outline, oral presentation, written draft, and final text. Along the way, they discussed and considered options to cross-reference each other’s work. Their ultimate goal has been a package that attracts the attention of decision makers and can make a meaningful difference in achieving the Paris Agreement goals. The results appear in four categories:
  • Global, Regional, and Local Change
  • Accelerating E-mobility
  • Road to Rail for Freight and Passengers
  • Expanding Hydropower and Regenerative Ocean Farming
Policy statements in the first category challenge us to pursue transformational change at all levels of human interaction. Kaan Taşlı asserts: Where we have focused on climate change symptoms, we must focus more on systemic social causes and change systems. For Julia De Miguel Bergaz, success with the Paris Agreement’s transformational goals depends on the combined efforts of supranational entities, NGOs, and the public. Micaela Palacios advocates for the synergistic potential of collaboration between the UNFCCC, OECD, and the International Energy Agency to catalyze the shift to renewable energy in developing economies. Michael Gillesberger promotes the next generation of EU emissions trading as a best practice to be adopted globally. And Rogier Weegink identifies the potential for grassroots initiatives to turn the corner on GHG emissions.

The proponents of e-mobility as a climate change mitigation catalyst cite transport as a leading cause of GHG emissions. David Mader looks to the EU as a model for accelerating the transition to electric vehicles with education, incentives, and renewable sources for the electricity e-mobily requires. Adam Foster focuses on the US and, like Mr. Mader, sees subsidies and awareness building as keys to success. He also looks to government initiatives as a powerful source for scaling up the necessary charging infrastructure. Selin Yüksel draws attention to the need for more effective battery recycling, identifies related challenges, and, referring foremost to EU programs, proposes methods to meet them quickly.

The impressive energy efficiency of rail transport motivates the policy recommendations in the next category. Thomas Strahlhofer views work on a Single European Rail Network as central to increasing rail freight transport quickly. Akinaro Sato proposes EU initiatives to expand high speed rail to accomplish the same for passenger transport. Both offer recommendations capable of being replicated in other advanced economies, not least of all in the United States.

The final category seeks to harness water’s potential. Kurt Bauer highlights the efficiency and untapped potential of hydropower to encourage its expansion in the EU, US, and globally. Samantha Goldberg does the same for regenerative ocean farming, noting its food, carbon sink, and jobs potential, tool.

As you read the policy statements, consider other options to group them. Also, contemplate the effect of implementing their proposals by 2030. Above all, use them as a catalyst for your own recommendations for the big and bold action we need now!


Share/Bookmark

System Change, Not Climate Change!

by Kaan Taşlı (Turkey, Cyprus)

Abstract

Albert Einstein is reported to have said, “No problem can be solved from the same level of consciousness that created it.” Whether or not this quote is genuine, it contains important wisdom. (1) It implies that we cannot solve problems with the very mindset that created them. It also implies that we cannot solve problems within the very structures that are responsible for their creation. Starting from this premise, I question whether it would be possible to reach climate goals within the existing socio-economic and political system. My answer is no. The existing socio-economic and political system is the main source of the current climate crisis and as such it will not be able to generate comprehensive and effective solutions that we urgently need. It is necessary to rethink our socio-economic and political system if we want to tackle the climate crisis in a sustainable and resilient manner.

Conceptual Framework

The problem—let us call it climate crisis— we created has a long history and seems to have started in the late years of the industrial revolution, namely in the 1830s (Abram, Nerilie J., et al. 2016). This is much earlier than had been assumed. During these almost two hundred years, the climate crisis has firmly taken root in our modern civilization. As such, it is not alone a product of the technologies we have been using but also of our lifestyles in the broadest sense. It is about how we organize our societies socio-economically and politically. It is about how we define welfare and well-being. It is about how we produce and consume.

We, therefore, need to approach the climate crisis in its long history and broad societal context. We need to understand that it is a product of a well-established and deeply-rooted system. However, there seems to be a trend of isolating the climate crisis from its broader context and reducing it to a matter of technology. In doing so, we believe we can overcome the crisis by the means of new clean technologies, without having to change much in our current system. A statement made by the former Austrian Federal Chancellor Sebastian Kurz from the People’s Party (ÖVP) reflects this view quite well. In the context of a discussion regarding the planned construction of the highway S18 in the province of Vorarlberg, he said, “the only right approach is to rely on innovation and technology” and argued that it is possible to combat climate change without having to make any sacrifices (Salzburger Nachrichten 2021). It is the other way around. We will not be able to combat the climate crisis via innovation and technology alone. New technologies are certainly an important part of the solution, but they are not the solution per se.

It is inevitable that we make sacrifices. We need to consume less, more sensibly, and differently. This is not an easy task. It challenges the very foundations of our convenience and consumption-oriented societies. It demands a strong shift in our mindsets, values, and norms. This, in turn, requires a deep structural change at both individual and collective levels, as well as in all socio-economic and political spheres of our societies.

Failed Experiment: Biofuels

The biofuel experiment is a good example of attempting to solve a problem within the existing system, without questioning its underlying principles and structures. As a new source of renewable energy, biofuels—such as bioethanol and biodiesel—were celebrated and regarded as an environmental-friendly alternative to fossil fuels. They enjoyed great popularity as a promising candidate in combating the climate crisis. This is, at first glance, not surprising. As the GreenFact (2) initiative points out, most studies found that first generation biofuels release 20 to 60 percent less greenhouse gas emissions in comparison to fossil fuels. In the case of ethanol produced from sugar cane in Brazil and second-generation biofuels the figure is even higher: 70 to 90 percent. (3) As a result, production of biofuel has been encouraged worldwide through direct or indirect measures such as subsidies and tax incentives. In 2009, the EU created its Renewable Energy Directive (RED) to “remove barriers, stimulate investments, and drive cost reductions in renewable energy technologies” (European Commission) which—among others—has been supporting biofuel production.

However, the reality differed from the expectations. It became apparent that the issue of biofuel production is complex and multi-layered—like all socio-economic and environmental issues. Evidence from practice showed that biofuel production has a number of undesirable side-effects. The GreenFacts initiative (ibid.) points in particular to the following: (1) The land available for the production of biofuel crops is limited. It can expand only at the expense of other types of land, for example land used for food crops or forests. (2) Biofuel crops production requires large amounts of water and cannot be rain-fed in most parts of the world. The need for intensive irrigation affects water availability and quality. (3) Different types of biofuel crops require different growing techniques. Some demand intensive use of pesticides and fertilizers, which has a strong impact on soil and water quality. (4) Biofuel production requires large scale mono-cropping, which has an adverse effect on biodiversity. Furthermore, “[T]he biofuel sector is characterized by a wide range of stakeholders with diverse interests” (ibid.) and usually places commercial interests above the social and environmental ones.

In this regard, the Oxfam briefing paper on bioenergy (2016: 2) delivers interesting facts. It criticizes the EU’s bio-energy policy for having left “a trail of destruction around the planet” and demonstrates how the powerful European biofuel industry captured the EU’s bioenergy policy. It provides various examples of environmental and social destruction, especially in developing countries. Just to mention one of them:

“In Tanzania, Dutch company BioShape Holding BV acquired 34,000 hectares of land in 2008 to grow jatropha in order to supply 'green‟ electricity and biodiesel to the Dutch and Belgian markets. Four communities were deprived of their customary rights to the land. The project has failed, the investors have left, but local communities are still struggling to recover their land and rebuild their livelihoods.” (ibid.)

For all these reasons, environmental-friendly, socially-responsible and sustainable production of biofuel is not an easy task. Our advanced technologies allow us to produce biofuels from plants. However, our socio-economic and political system, as well as our consumerist habits, prevents us from using this technology in a sustainable manner. Here we face a serious dilemma. If we want to produce biofuels in a responsible manner, the output is not large enough to make a substantial change. If we, on the other hand, want to produce larger amounts, disadvantages tend to outweigh the advantages.

Can We Transform?

The key question is whether or not we will manage to break away from the existing structures and make a societal transformation possible. The answer is: Yes, it is possible. Let us remember how individual countries and the international community responded to the immediate economic and social threats posed by COVID-19. Their policy responses, both in monetary and non-monetary terms, were enormous. This leads us to expect that the international community will respond to the climate crisis, whose consequences are far more devastating and long lasting—if not irreversible, with the same determination. It seems this is already happening. The EU’s post-COVID-19 recovery plan for creating a “greener, more digital and more resilient Europe” reserves 30 percent of its funds for fighting the climate crisis. This is the highest share of the European budget ever. Furthermore, the recovery plan will be financed by a long-term budget of more than 2 trillion Euros, making it “the largest stimulus package ever financed in Europe” (European Commission 2020).

It is however important that these measures are accompanied by a profound transformation process that cuts deep into the roots of the existing socio-economic and political structures. We have to act on what we have learned from past lessons, such as the biofuel experiment, and apply this knowledge in other areas, for instance electric mobility. Replacing conventional vehicles with the electric ones will not bring about the sort of change we need. First, we need to conduct comprehensive life cycle analysis (4) to understand “how eco-friendly” electric cars are (BUM 5). Second, we need to analyze how environmentally-friendly the electricity that powers our vehicles is produced. Third and most importantly, we need to understand that electric vehicles make sense only as a part of a holistic solution that allows us “higher mobility [with] fewer cars” (Eurocities). This implies that we individuals alter our mobility consumption habits radically, and rely heavily on alternative modes of mobility such as bikes, electric bikes, public transportation, railways, and so on. It also means governments need to invest heavily in cycling infrastructure, public transportation, and railways, but also create incentives for individuals to use these. This is possible through education and social awareness campaigns, as it was in the case of the anti-smoking movement.

We must address the roots of the problem rather than combatting its symptoms. We must transform our social systems so that they no longer are the source of crisis. If we fail to do so, we will fail to stop the climate crisis, no matter how advanced our technologies and how large our recovery packets are. Let us change ourselves and the system but not the climate!

Endnotes
1. Robinson (2018) points out that “Among the hundreds of quotes […] are misattributed to Einstein are many that are subtly debatable. Some are edited or paraphrased to sharpen or neaten the original.”
2. Facts provided by the GreenFact initiative are based on a scientific consensus report produced in 2008 by the Food & Agriculture Organization (FAO): "The State of Food and Agriculture, Biofuels: Prospects, Risks and Opportunities"
3. These calculations do not include the carbon releases related to land-use change.
4. “This kind of analysis takes into account the whole vehicle life cycle, including the production of the individual components, the energy the vehicle needs in order to operate, the level of maintenance required and finally, its disposal.” (BMU 5)

Works Cited

Abram, Nerilie J., et al. “Early Onset of Industrial-Era Warming across the Oceans and Continents.” Nature, vol. 536, no. 7617, Aug. 2016, pp. 411–418, 10.1038/nature19082.

Eurocities “Greater Mobility, Fewer Cars - Eurocities.” Eurocities - Home, 20 Oct. 2021, eurocities.eu/stories/greater-mobility-fewer-cars.

European Commission (2020) “Recovery Plan for Europe.” 11 Nov. 2020, ec.europa.eu/info/strategy/recovery-plan-europe_en.

‌European Commission “Renewable Energy Directive.”
energy.ec.europa.eu/topics/renewable-energy/renewable-energy-directive-targets-and-rules/renewable-energy-directive_en. Accessed 20 May 2022.

‌GreenFacts “Liquid Biofuels for Transport Prospects, Risks and Opportunities.” www.greenfacts.org/en/biofuels. Accessed 20 May 2022.

Herman, M. O., Mayrhofer, J., & Oxfam. (2016). Burning Land, Burning the Climate. Oxfam Online.

Robinson, Andrew. “Did Einstein Really Say That?” Nature, vol. 557, no. 7703, 30 Apr. 2018, pp. 30–30.

Salzburger Nachrichten. “Kurz Will Klimawandel Ohne Verzicht Bekämpfen: “Kein Weg Zurück in Die Steinzeit.”” 21 July 2021, www.sn.at/panorama/klimawandel/kurz-will-klimawandel-ohne-verzicht-bekaempfen-kein-weg-zurueck-in-die-steinzeit-106918420. Accessed 18 May 2022.


Share/Bookmark

Unenforced International Law - The International Community as a Catalyst for Climate Change Mitigation

by Julia De Miguel Bergaz (Spain) 

Abstract

Public International Law often seems unenforceable. Its authority is practically weak since it primarily relies on states’ good faith to fulfill their legal obligations. States are prone to take advantage of such unenforced features to evade their binding commitments. This is an issue when tackling problems requiring a high degree of inter-state cooperation, like climate change mitigation. Acknowledging that state action is the most effective way of combating climate change, a series of mechanisms have been developed to monitor states’ accomplishments of their legal obligations concerning climate action. On the one hand, state-based mechanisms include those installed by the UN and the EU to monitor member states commitments to climate change mitigation. On the other hand, are those established by organizations, particularly NGOs. A compromised and engaged public also constitutes a powerful tool in pressuring states to take action. These options all contribute to partially eliminating the obstacle that the unenforced nature of International Law poses to cooperation for climate change mitigation.

International Law and Climate Change Mitigation (CCM)

International Public Law is the conjunction of rules agreed upon by states that regulate their behavior and affiliations. It is the basis for peaceful and organized international relations. However, it lacks a central authority with power over states’ actions. Consequently, there is no conventional manner to force states to accomplish their duties. Therefore, every state shall fulfill its international legal obligations in good faith (Art. 2.2 UN Charter). Notwithstanding, whenever it is in their interest, states take advantage of the structure of International Law to avoid being true to their legal commitments (Fitzmaurice). A remarkable example is that concerning international legal obligations to mitigate climate change. For instance, all the signatories to the Paris Agreement are obliged to act according to the Agreement. Unfortunately, there is no effective way of enforcing it. Therefore, it is no surprise that progress in accelerating climate change mitigation has been relatively slow and that Nationally Determined Contributions lack the necessary impetus to achieve real, effective change. In response, mechanisms have been developed, both at the state and non-state level, to pressure states to attain their obligations. Concerning state-level measures, International Organizations, under which binding agreements are implemented, have developed mechanisms to control states’ fulfillment of their obligations. Therefore, it is indispensable to begin by introducing the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). In force since 1994 and with 197 ratifying parties, its principal aim is to prevent hazardous human interference with climate. The Kyoto Protocol and the Paris Agreement are vital elements in the UNFCCC framework: they constitute attempts at operationalizing the goals of the Convention. The most recent of the two, the Paris Agreement, entered into force in 2016, intending to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius. Its signatories are legally obliged to make economic and social transformations to reach the Agreement’s objective. The Agreement requires each member to submit Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) to impede the unenforced system from being an obstacle to its effectiveness. These are documents submitted by the signatories of the Agreement in which they transmit the actions they will take to reduce Greenhouse gas emissions and the measures they plan to implement to adapt to climate change (United Nations Climate Change). That way, it is possible to assess the effectiveness of the Agreement and what states are doing to fulfil their duties.

Nevertheless, the NDC system still relies heavily on states’ good faith to submit reports on what they plan to do. Even more importantly, states must decide to take such action for NDCs to be effective. The Paris Agreement Implementation and Compliance Committee (PAICC) has been introduced to monitor and support state action. All-inclusive, whenever a party to the Paris Agreement fails to communicate its NDC, the Committee is allowed to initiate consideration of issues. If such failure to act persists, the Committee can consider the issue (as long as it has the party’s consent). It is still a non-punitive system that mainly provides recommendations since the only organ with disciplinary authority inside the United Nations system is the Security Council. It relies on the party’s consent to take action. (United Nations Climate Change). Nevertheless, the PAICC, which continues to strengthen its monitoring system and rules of procedure, does aid in incrementing state parties’ compliance to the Agreement. It represents a step in the right direction to pressure states to take real policy action and implement the goals they set for themselves in their respective NDCs. It is crucial to remember that despite not having an authority that forces them to cooperate, states often choose to do so to preserve a good image before the international community. That is where the PAICC has strong influence.

Supranational Entities and CCM

Another critical example regarding state-based mechanisms is that of supranational entities, namely, the European Union. Unlike the UN, the Union is a political community with its legal system, which permits broader punitive power. The European Union has a standardized NDC for all of its members. Parallelly, the Union’s framework on climate change mitigation is based on the Regulation on the Governance of the Energy Union, a legally binding instrument that aims at synchronizing the Union’s energy and climate plans with the Paris Agreement. Under this Regulation, member states shall develop their national energy and climate plans according to a common framework (European Commission). It constitutes a more compelling example of enforcement due to the structure of the European Legal System: whenever a member state fails to accomplish its obligations, in this case concerning a regulation (which is legally binding and more restrictive than directives), the European Commission can initiate the infringement procedure, and even refer the case to the European Court of Justice. The latter can end in the imposition of economic sanctions (European Commission). Therefore, the Union being punitive and exigent in requiring its members to comply with the standardized NDC supposes an impulse to implement the Paris Agreement. There is, consequently, great potential in the European Union’s authority for it to be even more demanding in the climate goals it sets for itself.

Non-Governmental Organizations and CCM

Nevertheless, and as can be deduced, relying solely on states’ will to act towards climate change mitigation is not the safest bet since the system has inherent flaws that impede it from being completely effective. That is where non-state actors come into play. Concretely, Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) play a particularly significant role in lobbying for state action, working as semi-enforcement mechanisms in many instances. These organizations can influence climate change mitigation in various ways. Firstly, they can directly join government negotiations, providing support and assistance to develop or improve policies to implement such state’s NDC. For instance, when submitting their reports on their activity to whichever international authority required, many states include opinions provided by NGOs. Secondly, they can take an “outsider approach,” work as activists by mobilizing the masses and the media so that states feel pressured to act (Rietig). Either way, their influence is increasingly notable. As aforementioned, governments often accomplish their commitments to maintain their legitimacy and good image before their voters.

An example of how NGOs influence governmental policy through negotiating directly with governments is the World Wildlife Fund. WWF has partnered with a series of institutions, including governments, to achieve its goals. For instance, it has worked together with the government of the United States to protect tropical forests, contributing to the strengthening of laws against the trade of illegal wood products. In addition, it has campaigned for the government’s more vigorous commitment to the Paris Agreement. What is more, it assisted the Chinese government in establishing a giant panda conservation network (World Wildlife Fund).

Another example is the Health and Environment Alliance, a European non-profit that works by informing policymakers on the impact of reduced emissions on their population’s health. It is a stakeholder in the UN Environment Program and a member of expert groups in the World Health Organization, the European Commission, and the EU’s Chemicals Agency. It, therefore, has vast access to government decision-making bodies and can help bring change from the very top of the system (Health and Environmental Alliance).

Non-profits also aim to pressure states by influencing the grassroots: mobilizing the masses and the media, using publicity campaigns and other means to keep the population informed. The most prominent example is Greenpeace: It has developed campaigns that direct the attention to the direct causes of climate change and have a long history of successes. For instance, in the US, the organization mobilized the public to pressure President Biden’s administration, which finally decided to establish protections in the Arctic and end oil leases in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Moreover, the Environmental Protection Agency announced a phase-down in the production of hydrofluorocarbons in the US after decades of pressure from Greenpeace (Greenpeace).

In the United States, the Citizens’ Climate Lobby is another remarkable case: its main aim is to generate the political will necessary to tackle climate change by bringing crucial issues to the attention of individuals. In that sense, it has accomplished much at the national level through its grassroots supporters. For instance, it has played a role in enacting the Energy Innovation and Carbon Dividend Act (Citizens’ Climate Lobby).

Public Will and CCM

This last point leads to the final proposed solution: the will of the public. Public will can be defined as the shared recognition of a problem and determination to address it in a specific way through continuous collaborative activity. In the words of Anthony Leiserowitz, founder and director of the Yale University Program on Climate Change Communication, “one important influence on government leaders is engaged citizens who demand action” (1). In democratic countries, the ultimate political power comes from the citizenry – it is upon them to decide on the legitimacy of their government. Hence, the latter is influenced by the public’s actions and wishes. An example of public will mobilization is Fridays for Future. Inspired by Greta Thunberg, it is a student-led global strike movement that started in 2018 to raise awareness of the need for urgent action to be taken by governments all around (Fridays for Future). In four years, it has turned into one of the most significant strike movements in history. That, undoubtedly, captures the attention of policymakers.

It remains clear that actual change can only be achieved by consistent, demanding, and urgent state action. Therefore, states must fulfill their commitments to the Paris Agreement and strive for more ambitious goals. This is the greatest challenge. Support is needed to lobby for action in an international system that favors lack of enforcement. Non-governmental organizations and the public have great potential to influence the negotiation and implementation of climate policies that adapt to the international obligations that governments take upon. That, together with the mechanisms developed at the state level to either directly enforce or pressure states to cooperate, helps overcome the obstacle that the unenforced nature of International Law supposes. The existence of such mechanisms reveals an obvious need for reform: the International Legal System should be a direct tool of cooperation in issues as crucial as climate change mitigation, not an obstacle to achieve such collaboration.

Works Cited

Citizens' Climate Lobby. “Citizens’ Climate Lobby.” Citizens’ Climate Lobby, 2018, citizensclimatelobby.org/.

European Commission. “Applying EU Law.” European Commission, 2019, ec.europa.eu/info/law/law-making-process/applying-eu-law_en.

European Commission. “Governance of the Energy Union and Climate Action.” Ec.europa.eu, 2018, ec.europa.eu/clima/eu-action/climate-strategies-targets/progress-made-cutting-emissions/governance-energy-union-and-climate-action_en.

Fitzmaurice, G. G. “The Foundations of the Authority of International Law and the Problem of Enforcement.” The Modern Law Review, vol. 19, no. 1, 1956, pp. 1–13, www.jstor.org/stable/1092152?casa_token=KWmXRW74lfUAAAAA%3A2qa1NruKJoAO9jpk9f-6eC2nsuPc0w8k24EtaPm7slzFXEnNEGLyhBv33Rn1QEfFIUwaX4nEImxLXBhwNypthuI1qOlVazcYpJky0c_sCuME-kknbTY&seq=1.

Fridays for Future. “Fridays for Future – How Greta Started a Global Movement.” Fridaysforfuture.org, 2021, fridaysforfuture.org/what-we-do/who-we-are/.

Greenpeace. “2021 Environmental Successes: Eleven Moments You Helped Unlock!” Greenpeace USA, 2021, www.greenpeace.org/usa/victories/2021-environmental-successes-eleven-moments-you-helped-unlock/.

Health and Environment Alliance. “Health and Environment Alliance | WHO WE WORK WITH.” Health and Environment Alliance, 2018, www.env-health.org/about/who-we-work-with/.

Leiserowitz, Anthony. “Building Public and Political Will for Climate Change Action.” Yale School of the Environment, 30 June 2020, environment.yale.edu/news/article/building-public-and-political-will-for-climate-change-action.

Rietig, Katharina. Public Pressure versus Lobbying -How Do Environmental NGOs Matter Most in Climate Negotiations? 2011, www.lse.ac.uk/granthaminstitute/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/WP70_environmental-NGOs-climate.pdf.

United Nations. “UN Charter.” United Nations, 1945, www.un.org/en/about-us/un-charter.

United Nations Climate. “Paris Agreement Implementation and Compliance Committee (PAICC).” Unfccc.int, 2021, unfccc.int/process-and-meetings/bodies/constituted-bodies/committee-to-facilitate-implementation-and-promote-compliance-referred-to-in-article-15-paragraph-2.

United Nations Climate Change. “UNFCCC Process | UNFCCC.” Unfccc.int, 2017, unfccc.int/process-and-meetings.

World Wildlife Fund. “Influencing Policy | Initiatives | WWF.” World Wildlife Fund, 2013, www.worldwildlife.org/initiatives/influencing-policy.


Share/Bookmark

Effective Climate Change Mitigation: International Energy Agency (IEA) Renewable Energy Development in Developing Economies

by Micaela Palacios (Ecuador)

Abstract

The International Energy Agency (IEA) has been mitigating climate change for many years. It has a wide variety of programs, alliances, and policies, engaging countries around the world to secure sustainable energy usage. Three programs designed to assist emerging economies in better implementation, usage, and understanding of renewable energy deserve closer attention. They focus specifically on improving the data collection system and introducing new tools and methods to analyze and process this data for future improvements. They are a step in the right direction, nevertheless, a unification of standards would increase effectiveness to the extent the current situation requires.

Urgency

Greta Thunberg says she wants the world to act as if our house was on fire because it is. This quote appeals literally to the climate change emergency that we are facing: the earth is getting hotter minute by minute, and if we ignore it, humans are dangerously close to reaching a point of no return. Ms. Thunberg’s words make clear how critical it is for us to take serious action. If we do not, we might end up without a house to live in.

The International Energy Agency (IEA)

The IEA is an international body that strives for secure and sustainable energy. It does so by working with members and associated members to develop projects in various areas of work, targeting fuel (and related technologies) from materials ranging from aluminium to cement, bioenergy, and wind. Helping ensure energy security, tracking clean energy transitions, collecting data, or providing training globally, is in a nutshell, what their projects and programs seek to accomplish.

The actions started during the oil crisis in 1973-1974, when developed countries needed a method to deal with the oil embargo set by OPEC producers. Since then, the IEA has acted in moments of global economic and political emergencies, providing the main international forum for energy cooperation on the security of supply, long-term policy, information transparency, energy efficiency, sustainability, research and development, technology collaboration, and international energy relations.

The IEA has acted in moments that can be counted on one hand: the first Gulf War; after the hurricanes Katrina and Rita; during the Libyan crisis; and after Russia invaded Ukraine. In addition to these emergency actions, it has continued working towards its Net Zero Emissions by 2050 scenario. Despite the valuable work being done, as described in other contributions to this package, there is still much to be done and the time is short.

The Significance of Energy

The energy sector accounts for 1/4 of global GHG emissions, according to COP 26 and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Energy production and consumption must be improved through the swift and efficient transition to renewable energies. This is necessary to accelerate climate change mitigation to the extent required by 2030.

To meet the goals of the Paris Agreement, we need to phase out coal as an energy source and move to clean power about five times faster than at present. Change is needed and efforts have shown what can be done. For instance, the IEA recognized that in 2020, renewable electricity generation rose ~7%; wind and solar PV technologies together account for almost 60% of this increase. This led to the share of renewables in global electricity generation reaching almost 29% in 2020, a record annual increase of two percentage points. This performance must be duplicated annually between now and 2030, which requires ambitious strategies.

Focus on Developing Economies

Currently, the goal is clear, but the playing field is not always level. Developing and emerging economies have been struggling to develop sustainable energy production and consumption due to a lack of know-how and resources.

One of the major COP26 outcomes was that the developed countries pledged to deliver on their promise to provide developing countries $100 billion annually for climate change mitigation and adaptation by 2023 at the latest. This corresponds with one of the seven functions of the UNFCCC. It expressly intends to direct new funds to climate change activities in developing countries.

The urgency of climate change mitigation is to no small extent a product of increasing GHG emissions and inadequate counter measures in many emerging economies. Brazil, China, India, Indonesia, Mexico, and South Africa together consume one-third of the world’s energy – expected to rise to 40% under current policy directions. At the same time, many of them continue bad practices, for example, deforestation in Brazil and a heavy reliance on coal in India.

Programs

The IEA also acknowledges this need for action with its global engagement initiative 3 programs that target the development of renewable energy management in developing countries. First, the Energy Efficiency in Emerging Economies (E4) program is associated with the Clean Energy Transitions Program, secondly the EU4Energy, and lastly the EnergySub-Saharan Africa.

The E4 program concentrates in Brazil, China, India, Indonesia, Mexico, and South Africa and is financed by members of the EU. It establishes foundations for collaboration to understand the problem, set targets, track progress, and develop strategies. This is done with policy development, as well as training in person and online. Many programs, including this one, are connected to other projects so that they can be continued indefinitely. In this case, the adjacent program would be the Clean Energy Transitions Program that took over after 2018 and focuses on similar areas of work.

The EU4Energy program works with eleven countries in the Caucasus, Eastern Europe, and Central Asia with two main goals in mind: (1) to improve energy data collection and monitoring, as well as (2) to provide technical assistance on the legislative and regulatory frameworks and on key energy infrastructure investments. It targets problems such as lack of legal basis and technical expertise to initiate and continue long-term action.

Lastly, EnergySub-Saharan Africa targets mainly Ethiopia, Senegal, and Benin, but Ghana, Nigeria, the Democratic Republic of Congo, and Zambia. This project, similarly to the above, focuses on reinforcement of technical support, development of IT and energy modelling tools, as well as improvement of the tracking system of NDCs and SDGs.

IEA Impact on Climate Change Mitigation in Emerging Economies

As described, the IEA is carrying out valuable work in these areas for the optimization, management, and development of energy use. This is aligned with international organization goals, foremost among them the UNFCCC. Nevertheless, not every aspect or goal is aligned with pledges such as the Paris Agreement or the European Green Deal. More coordination is required.

Proposals for IEA Collaboration

There are 3 proposals. The first addresses the limited number of IEA members. It is a requisite to be a part of the OECD, which only leaves 38 countries, of which 31 are a part of the IEA, plus 10 associated members. Meanwhile, the Paris Agreement was signed by 193 parties, even more as the EU was considered an individual party. Perhaps a broader IEA inclusion policy, including more liberal associate member status, would enable more countries to work towards the same goal and profit from IEA research.

The parties leading the way toward change also have slightly different objectives. We all know we must limit the global temperature increase to 1.5 degrees and that GHG emissions need to be reduced. Nevertheless, the IEA has a goal of reaching net-zero in 2050 while other bodies strive to do so earlier. Some criticize the less ambitious IEA goal. If more ambitious goal standardization could be established, resources could be better allocated and used to reach the shared goal faster.

COP and PAICC could be influential in this endeavor. They could expand their current collaboration with UN entities to include external entities like the IEA. They ought to use their resources and abundant research material as the basis for establishing new objectives and key results. The COP outcomes and the UNFCCC functions can be aligned and expanded based on IEA , as well as other agency projects. This could enable developing and emerging countries to accelerate their climate change mitigation and do so more efficiently.

The only way in which the world can achieve the required change is if we all work together, and it is possible. It just requires unification and will. We need to act now to stop our house from burning. Joining forces is a path to ignite more rapid action toward climate change mitigation.

Works Cited
IEA. International Energy Agency. https://www.iea.org/analysis. May 18  2022.

UKCOP26. UN CLIMATE CHANGE CONFERENCE UK 2021. https://ukcop26.org/ May 19  2022.


Share/Bookmark

In Search of Best Practices: Effective EU Carbon Pricing

by Michael Gillesberger (Austria)

Abstract

In order to accelerate climate change mitigation and steer the global economy towards an ecological transition, we must alter the current incentive structure. The ecologically necessary must become economically profitable. Effective carbon pricing creates financial incentives for polluters to reduce emissions. The European Union has put in place the world’s first international emissions trading system in 2005. Although the EU ETS has been criticized for several shortcomings, including high price volatility and an over-allocation of free permits, it is an auspicious tool to reduce CO2 emissions. To make the cap-and-trade instrument more effective, the caps must be reduced, and a carbon price floor be implemented. Furthermore, a decisive and rapid agreement on the European Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM), which is a core element of the “Fit for 55” package, is vital to ensure that the climate objectives of the EU are not undermined by production relocating to countries with less ambitious policies. It also induces other world regions to put their own carbon pricing schemes into place and sets the scene for a global climate club. Carbon taxes on the emissions not covered by the European Trading System are desperately needed in order to catalyze climate change mitigation. Sweden, for instance, implemented a carbon tax more than 30 years ago and demonstrates that effective carbon pricing schemes can be both an ecological and an economic success-story. Effective carbon pricing schemes in the European Union are indispensable to accelerate climate change mitigation and demonstrate to the world that ecological ambition and economic success are not opposites, but obligatory conditions to thrive in the 21st century.

Carbon Pricing and the EU Fit for 55

Altering the current economic incentive structure is essential to catalyze climate change mitigation. Economists widely agree that carbon pricing is the single most effective way for countries to reduce their emissions. On the one hand, it creates financial incentives for polluters to reduce emissions (e.g. using a bike rather than driving a car), on the other hand, it generates revenues which can be used to accelerate the green transition (e.g. ramping up renewable energy sources).

The “Fit for 55” legislative package, put forward by the European Commission in 2021, aims to reduce net greenhouse gas emissions by at least 55% by 2030, from 1990 levels. Carbon pricing schemes are indispensable to reach this target. Core elements of the proposal include the extension and strengthening of the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS), the implementation of a European Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) and the revision of the Effort Sharing Regulation (ESR). Since the current policies do not reflect the urgency of the climate crisis, it is necessary to strive for more ambition and transformative changes immediately.

The European Emissions Trading System (EU ETS)

The European Union put in place the world’s first international emissions trading system in 2005. The EU ETS covers approximately 45% of overall GHG emissions in the EU and operates under a ‘cap-and-trade’ system. The main features are the emission cap (a ceiling on the maximum amount of CO2 emissions) and the trading of EU emission allowances (CO2 certificates). Since its introduction, emissions from the ETS sectors have been cut by around 43% which clearly shows the effectiveness of the instrument.

A current European Commission proposal aims to revise the EU ETS. According to the proposal, emissions from the current ETS sectors ought to be reduced by 61% by 2030. To reach this target, the EC aims to lower the emissions cap. Furthermore, the Commission proposes to extend emissions trading in new sectors where sharper reductions are needed to reach the 2030 target. Under the proposal, emissions from maritime transport will be included in the existing EU ETS, while emissions from fuels used in road transport and buildings will be covered by a new, separate ETS. These adjustments are necessary to deliver on the ambitious reduction targets that are written into the legal framework by the European Climate Law. However, the suggested speed of phasing-out free allowances and the time span for the revision implementation do not reflect the urgency of the crisis. EU-policymakers must therefore ramp up the pace and ambition of their legislative proposal. Furthermore, to reduce the price volatility and ensure a large enough steering effect, the EU must introduce ETS carbon price floors . As Bruegel, a renowned European think tank, demonstrates, price floors make the system both more transparent and predictable, which increases its effectiveness. NGOs, national governments, and the civil society must pressure the European decisionmakers to agree on a final revision of the current directive before the EP summer recess that starts in July 2022.

European Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM)

Another key element of the “Fit for 55” package is the implementation of a European Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM). The overarching goal of CBAM is to ensure that the climate objectives of the EU are not undermined by production being relocated to countries with less ambitious policies. The introduction of CBAM aims to equalize the price of carbon between domestic products and imports. EU importers will be obliged to buy carbon certificates corresponding to the carbon price that would have been paid, had the goods been produced under the EU's carbon pricing rules. As proposed by the EC in July 2021, CBAM will apply to imports of electricity, cement, fertilizers, iron, steel and aluminium. These sectors represent over 90% of industrial CO2 emissions of the European Union.

While the implementation of the EC’s proposal is long overdue, NGOs such as WWF and the Carbon Market Watch put forward an array of suggestions to make the current proposal more effective. First and foremost, it is essential to enlarge the scope of CBAM to cover all high emission industrial sectors. Moreover, indirect emissions that occur in the production of the electricity used in the manufacturing process in the country of origin must be addressed since this incentivizes producers to switch to renewable energy sources. To ensure that the EU increases its contribution to the decarbonization of developing economies, CBAM revenues must be recycled towards green investments in the global south. This redistribution of revenues sends a strong message to trading partners and leverages the EU’s position in global climate negotiations. CBAM must be the starting point for a global climate club - a coalition of nations that commit themselves to a minimum carbon price and mechanisms to penalize countries that do not participate. This will overcome free riding in international climate policy. The implementation of CBAM has significant implications on the global economic system and incentivizes other countries to implement similar carbon pricing schemes as the EU. China, for instance, introduced its own emissions trading system in 2021. Canada and Japan are planning their own carbon border adjustment initiatives. The USA, responsible for one quarter of all historical CO2 emissions, must also follow suit. Horizontal diffusion of effective carbon pricing schemes is needed to keep the 1.5° Celsius temperature target alive.

Revision of Effort Sharing Regulation (ESR)

The Effort Sharing Regulation (ESR) sets binding national targets for the emissions currently not covered by the EU ETS. It encompasses around 55% of overall GHG emissions in the EU. ESR targets are different for each country, depending on their GDP per capita and the cost-effectiveness of reducing emissions. In order to reach the 55% reduction target by 2030, the EC proposes a revision of the ESR. According to the proposal, sectors covered by the ESR should achieve a collective reduction of 40 % by 2030 compared to 2005.

While it is clear that the current targets for the various member states do not reflect the urgency of the climate crisis, the ESR reform must also close existing loopholes that undermine the law’s effectiveness. It has to ensure that decisions on, for example, agricultural subsidies, public transport infrastructure, building renovations and waste collection, support the transition to carbon-free societies. In a joint report by environmental NGOs, an array of policy solutions are proposed to modify the current EC proposal. Above all, enhanced governance mechanisms are needed to guarantee compliance and transparency. In the future, every EU citizen must have the opportunity to see how each country is contributing towards climate change. By publicly disclosing the yearly compliance checks, the EC ensures that leaders are held accountable. Member states also should be incentivized to overachieve on their targets by receiving additional funds if they do so.

Moreover, carbon taxes for the emissions not covered by the EU ETS are needed to accelerate climate change mitigation in the various member states. Sweden, for instance, implemented a carbon tax more than 30 years ago and demonstrates that effective pricing schemes can be both an ecological and an economic success story. Therefore, European leaders must take urgent action and implement incrementally increasing carbon taxes in their respective jurisdictions. The EC must support the various member states by providing funds and knowledge – essentially nudging them to take bold and immediate actions.

Ecological Necessity and Economic Prudence

Saving the planet must become a profitable economic endeavor. Effective carbon pricing provides an incentive structure that protects our climate and fosters the creation of green jobs. The EU, with nearly one quarter of global historical CO2 emissions, has a tremendous responsibility to push forward and show the world, not least of all the developing countries, that ecological ambition and economic success are no opposites, but obligatory conditions to thrive in the 21st century. Since there is no time for delay, it is absolutely vital that the EU delivers on its promises and adapts the aforementioned key elements of the “Fit for 55” package before the 2022 summer recess of the European Parliament.

The EU ETS has proven to be effective. It needs to be extended in scope, tightened in the emission cap and abbreviated in phasing-out free allowances. The implementation of CBAM addresses the challenge of carbon leakage and incentivizes other world regions to introduce effective carbon pricing schemes in their respective jurisdictions. Thus, it sets the scene for a global climate club – an undertaking that the European Union must prioritize in its diplomatic efforts. The revision of the ESR must reflect the urgency of the climate crisis. Enhanced compliance and transparency ensure that emissions from the non-ETS sectors, which account for more than half of EU’s GHG emissions, are significantly reduced.

The EU wields unique, and highly penetrating power to transform global markets unilaterally. It has done so in the areas of competition regulation, data protection, online hate speech as well as consumer health and safety. The implementation of effective carbon pricing in the EU has the potential of becoming one more manifestation of the so-called “Brussels effect”, a term used to describe the spill-over of rules outside the European Union. The world desperately needs a “Green Brussels Effect”. As Ursula von der Leyen put it in her presentation of the European Green Deal: “This is Europe’s man on the moon moment.”

Works Cited
Bagchi, Chandreyee. “The EU Emissions Trading System.”, Climate Policy Info Hub, n.d. (May 10, 2022), https://climatepolicyinfohub.eu/eu-emissions-trading-system-introduction

Bozsó, Brigitta. “Joint NGO statement on the Revision of the Effort Sharing Regulation.”, CAN Europe, March 2022, (May 10, 2022), https://caneurope.org/content/uploads/2022/03/LIFE-UNIFY_ESR-Report-2022-1.pdf

Bradford, Anu. “The European Union in a globalized world: the "Brussels effect.", groupe d’études géopolitiques, n.d. (May 10, 2022), https://geopolitique.eu/en/articles/the-european-union-in-a-globalised-world-the-brussels-effect/

Demertzis, Maria. “Carbon price floors: An addition to the European Green Deal arsenal.”, Bruegel, March 2021, (May 10, 2022), https://www.bruegel.org/2021/03/carbon-price-floors-an-addition-to-the-european-green-deal-arsenal/

Euronews. “Green Deal 'man on the moon moment' for Europe.”, December 2019, (May 10, 2022), https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZVdAwsW8tV0

European Commission. “CBAM – Questions and Answers.”, July 2021, (May 10, 2022), https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/qanda_21_3661

European Commission. “EC proposal on the Effort Sharing Regulation.”, July 2021, (May 10, 2022), https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52021PC0555

European Commission. “EC Proposal to revise EU ETS.”, July 2021, (May 10, 2022), https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/default/files/revision-eu-ets_with-annex_en_0.pdf

Goldthau, Andreas. “How an open climate club can generate carbon dividends for the poor.”, Bruegel, January 2021, (May 10, 2022), https://www.bruegel.org/2022/01/how-an-open-climate-club-can-generate-carbon-dividends-for-the-poor/

Nordhaus, William. “The Climate Club: How to Fix a Failing Global Effort.”, Foreign Affairs, April 2020, (May 10, 2022), https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/united-states/2020-04-10/climate-club

Ruggiero, Agnese. “Joint NGO statement on the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism.”, WWF, December 2021, (May 10, 2022), https://wwfeu.awsassets.panda.org/downloads/joint_ngo_statement_on_cbam_proposal_final_dec_2021.pdf



Share/Bookmark

 
Cookie Settings