Adaptability versus certainty in a carbon emissions reduction regime: An assessment of the EU’s 2030 Climate and Energy Policy Framework

• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/reel.12354
• Published date: 01 July 2020
• Author: Roderic O’Gorman,Diarmuid Torney
• Date: 01 July 2020

RECIEL. 2020;29:167–176. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/reel  

|

  167© 2020 Wiley Peri odicals LLC

1 | INTRODUCTION

The 2015 Paris Ag reement saw a move from the top-down m odel

of centrally dete rmined nationa l emissions tar gets used in the

1997 Kyoto Protocol towards a bottom -up approach un der which

parties woul d propose nationally de termined contribut ions (NDCs)

setting out th e measures that they wou ld take to reduce emissions .

This represent s a significa nt change in the glob al climate gover-

nance architec ture. It increases the r isk that parties’ col lective pro-

posals will be ins ufficient to m eet the scale of de carbonizat ion

required, and t his is indeed the c ase.1 For this reaso n, the Paris

Agreement al so builds in a cycle of five-yearly cont ributions from

parties and a n expectation that t heir subsequent contr ibutions will

be increased.2 This creates a f lexible syst em where needs fo r in-

creased emissio n reductions i n light of long-term temp erature

goals, as identif ied by so-calle d global stock takes, can be r e-

sponded to.3

Through its 20 30 Climate and Ene rgy Policy Fra mework, the

European Union (EU ) initiated a process to both r eform its legislative

framework around climate and energy to implement its NDC under

the Paris Agr eement, and also part icipate in the cycle created u nder

the Agreeme nt. Six key pieces of legislation were p assed or revised

by 2018.4 The w ay in which they func tion demons trates how the

 1United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), Emissions Gap Re port 2019 (UNEP

2019).

 2Paris Agre ement (adopted 1 2 December 2015, e ntered into forc e 4 November 2016) 55

ILM 740 art 4.

 3ibid art 14.

 4Regulation (E U) 2018/1999 on the Govern ance of the Energ y Union and Clim ate Action

[2018] OJ L328/1 (Governa nce Regulation) ; Directive (EU ) 2018/410 amending Direc tive

2003/87/EC on the EU emis sions trading s ystem [2018] OJ L76/3 (ETS Am ending

Directive) ; Regulation (EU) 2 018/842 on binding an nual greenho use gas emissio n

reductio ns by Member State s from 2021 to 2030 c ontributing t o climate actio n to meet

commitment s under the Par is Agreement [2 018] OJ L156/26 (Effort Sh aring Regulati on);

Regulation (E U) 2018/841 on the inclu sion of greenho use gas emission s and removals

from land use , land-use chang e and forestr y in the 2030 clim ate and energy f ramework

[2018] OJ L156/1 (LULUCF Regu lation); Parlia ment and Counc il Directive (E U)

2018/2001 on the p romotion of the u se of energy fro m renewable sou rces (recast)

[2018] OJ L328/82 (Renewa ble Energy Di rective); and Di rective (EU) 2018/2 002 of the

European Pa rliament and of th e Council of 11 Decem ber 2018 amendi ng Directive

2012/27/EU on energ y efficienc y [2018] OJ L328/210 (Energy Ef ficiency Dir ective).

Received: 30 Ja nuary 2020 

|

  Accepted: 6 June 202 0

DOI: 10 .1111/reel .12354

SPECIAL ISSUE ARTICLE

Adaptability versus certainty in a carbon emissions reduction

regime: An assessment of the EU’s 2030 Climate and Energy

Policy Framework

Diarmuid Torney  | Roderic O’Gorman

Correspondence

Email: diarmuid.torney@dcu.ie Abstract

The Paris Agree ment moves away from top-down agreed national ta rgets towards a

bottom-up system i n which each party submits re gular nationally determined contri-

butions (NDCs). The A greement outline s a highly adaptable p rocess in which, ever y

five years, par ties are required to up date their NDCs, whi ch must represent a pr o-

gression on their exis ting contribution. This article an alyses the extent to w hich the

European Union’s 2030 Clim ate and Energy Policy Framework has create d an adapt-

able structu re that reflect s the Paris Agree ment’s ratchet mecha nism. The articl e

contrasts this a pproach with the c arbon budget proces s adopted under the Un ited

Kingdom’s Climate Change Act . The article as sesses the respe ctive advantage s and

disadvantages of cre ating a system where targets are eas ily increased on a medium-

term basis allowing resp onsiveness to changed circumstances su ch as scientific data

indicating the ne ed for more rapid emissi on reductions, ver sus a stable sys tem that

provides greater cer tainty for economic actors .