This paper reviews the role of internal European Union (EU) policies and measures in implementing the target for greenhouse gas mitigation in the Kyoto Protocol. It starts with a discussion of the EU Burden Sharing Agreement, which distributes the target between Member States. This leads to a review of the appropriate level of implementation of policies, i.e. at the EU level or Member State level. There is a role for the flexible mechanisms of the Protocol, particularly emission permit trading, in complementing Member State policies at the EU level. The implementation is to be done against the background of three major factors which may have an important bearing on the policies:
• the probable long-term requirement of substantial reductions in greenhouse gas emissions
• a changing structure of energy markets, following liberalisation of the gas and electricity markets
• EU enlargement to include economies in transition with the potential for further substantial reductions in emissions.
The paper concludes with a discussion of ancillary benefits of the policies that may be substantial and a summary of the position as regards the "unfinished business" of the Protocol to be discussed at the Conference of the Parties in the Hague in November 2000.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Subscribe to journal
Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Bader, P. (2000), Emissions Trading in the European Union: The Economic Costs of Fulfilling the Kyoto-Commitment. Manuscript. Augsburg: Augsburg University.
Bär, S. et al. (1999), Closer Cooperation in European Environmental Policy. Wien: Federal Ministry of Environment, Youth and Family Affairs.
Barker, T. and K. E. Rosendahl (2000), Ancillary Benefits of Greenhouse Gas Mitigation in Europe: SO 2 , Nox and PM10 Reductions from Policies to Meet Kyoto Targets Using the E3ME Model and ExternE Valuation. IPCC/OECD Expert Meeting on Ancillary Benefits, March 27–29, 2000, Washington D.C.
Blok, K., G. J. M. Phylipsen and J. W. Bode (1997), The Triptique Approach. Burden Differentiation of CO2 Emission Reduction among European Union Member States. Zeist: Discussion paper for the informal workshop for the European Union Ad Hoc Group on Climate, 16–17 January 1997.
Brown, Paige (1998), Climate, Biodiversity, and Forests: Issues and Opportunities from the Kyoto Protocol. Washington D. C.: World Resources Institute.
Dahl, A. (2000), ‘Competence and Subsidiarity. Legal Basis and Political Realities in EU Climate Policy’, in Joyeeta Gupta and Michael Grubb, eds., Climate Change and the European Leadership-A Sustainable Role Europe. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
ETSAP (1997), Providing an Internationally Collaborative and Comparable Capacity for Identifying Cost-Effective and Equitable Policies for Achieving Climate Change Objectives (ETSAP Kyoto Statement), http://www.ecn.nl/unit_bs/kyoto/main.html.
European Commission (1995), ExternE: Externalities of Energy, Vol. 1–6, Brussels: European Commission, DGXII, Science, Research and Development, JOULE Programme.
European Commission (1997), Climate Change-The EU Approach for Kyoto. Commission Communication to the Council, the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. Brussels: European Commission.
European Commission (1999a), The Single Market for Electricity-The Internal Market for Electricity Directive, 96/92, http://europa.eu.int/en/comm/dg17/elechome.htm.
European Commission (1999b), The Single Market for Natural Gas-The Internal Market for Gas Directive, 98/30, http://europa.eu.int/en/comm/dg17/gashome.htm.
European Commission (1999c), Preparing for Implementation of the Kyoto Protocol. Commission Communication to the Council and the Parliament, COM(99)230. Brussels: European Commission.
European Commission (1999d), From Cardiff to Helsinki and Beyond. Report to the European Council on Integrating Environmental Concerns and Sustainable Development into Community Policies.
Commission Working Document, SEC (1999) 1941. Brussels: European Commission.
European Commission (2000a), EU Policies and Measures to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Towards a European Climate Change Programme (ECCP). Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament COM(2000)88. Brussels: European Commission.
European Commission (2000b), Green Paper on Greenhouse Gas Emissions Trading Within the European Union, COM (2000) 87, http://europa.eu.int/comm/environment/docum/0087_en.htm.
European Union-The Council (1999), Community Strategy on Climate Change: Council Conclusions. 8346/99, 18 May. Brussels: European Union DG1.
EWWE (1999), ‘Japanese Car Makers Sign Voluntary Deal to Cut CO2’, Environment Watch Western Europe 8(19) (1 October 1999), 4–5.
FCCC/SB/ 2000/ MISC.2 (2000), Procedures and Mechanisms Relating to Compliance under the Kyoto Protocol. Submissions from Parties (Draft). UNFCCC.
Forum Umwelt & Entwicklung (1999), EU Climate Policy: Time for Implementation (Non-Paper of the Working Group on Climate Policy). Bonn: Forum Umwelt & Entwicklung.
Gielen, D., P. Koutstaal, T. Kram and S. van Rooijen (1998), Post-Kyoto, Effects on the Climate Policy of the European Union, ECN-C–98–040. Petten: ECN.
Gillespie, A. (1998), ‘Sinks, Biodiversity & Forests: The Implications of the Kyoto Protocol Upon the Other Primary UNCED Instruments’, in Bradnee W. Chambers, ed., Global Climate Governance: Inter-linkages between the Kyoto Protocol and other Multilateral Regimes (pp. 117–139). Tokyo: United Nations University, Institute of Advanced Studies.
Houghton, J. T., L. G. Meira Filho, B. A. Callander, N. Harris, A. Kattenberg and K. Maskell (1996), Climate Change 1995-The Science of Climate Change, Contribution of WGI to the Second Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Klaassen, G. (1999), ‘Emissions Trading in the European Union: Practice and Prospects’, in Steve Sorell and Jim Skea, eds., Pollution for Sale: Emissions Trading and Joint Implementation (pp. 83–100). Northampton (Massachusetts): Edward Elgar.
Koutstaal, P., T. Kram and S. van Rooijen (1997), Tradeable Emission Permits, Report ECN-C–98–039. Petten: ECN (in Dutch).
Kram, T., R. Ybema and D. Vos (1997), Burden Sharing and Cost-Efficiency of CO2 Targets for EU Member States, Report ECN-C–97–033. Petten: ECN (in Dutch).
Krause, F., J. Koomey and D. Olivier (1999), Cutting Carbon Emissions While Making Money. Climate Saving Energy Strategies for the European Union. Energy Policy in the Greenhouse, Volume II,Part 2. El Cerrito, California: International Project for Sustainable Energy Paths.
Macrory, R. and M. Hession (1996), ‘The European Community and Climate Change: The Role of Law and Legal Competence’, in Tim O'Riordan and Jill Jäger, eds., Politics of Climate Change. A European Perspective. London/New York: Routledge.
Nilsson, C. and A. Huhtala (2000), Is CO2 Trading Always Beneficial? A CGE-model Analysis on Secondary Environmental Benefits. Stockholm: National Institute of Economic Research.
Oberthür, S. and S. Bär (1998), Untersuchung zur Umsetzung eines Protokolls zur Klimarahmen-konvention: Auswirkungen von Aktivitäten und Regelungen der EU auf die Emission klimawirksamer Gase. Berlin: Ecologic.
Oberthür, S. and H. E. Ott (1999), The Kyoto Protocol. International Climate Policy for the 21st Century. Berlin: Springer.
Pearce, D. (2000), Policy Frameworks for the Ancillary Benefits of Climate Change Policies. Washington, DC: paper presented to the IPCC/OECD Expert Meeting on Ancillary Benefits, March 27–29, 2000.
Reilly, J., R. Prinn and J. Harnisch et al. (1999), ‘Multi-gas Assessment of the Kyoto Protocol’, Nature 401(6653), 549–555.
Ringius, L. (1997), Differentiation, Leaders and Fairness. CICERO Report 1997:8. Oslo: CICERO.
Schleicher, S. P., B. Buchner and K. Kratena (2000), Why Cost Minimization Strategies for the Kyoto Mechanisms May Cause Market Failures. Manuscript. Graz: University of Graz and Austrian Institute of Economic Research.
Shaw, J. (1998), ‘The Treaty of Amsterdam: Challenges of Flexibility and Legitimacy’, European Law Journal 4(4), 292–303.
Torvanger, A. and O. Godal (1999), A Survey of Differentiation Methods for National Greenhouse Gas Reduction Targets. CICERO Report 1999:5. Oslo: CICERO.
UK DETR (2000), Climate Change Draft UK Programme. London: UK Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions.
Volterra Consulting (1999), Taxes and Trading-The Best Way to Reach Environmental Emissions Targets. London.
WBGU, German Advisory Council on Global Change (1998), The Accounting of Biological Sinks and Sources Under the Kyoto Protocol: A Step Forwards or Backwards for Global Environmental Protection (Special Report 1998). Bremerhaven: WBGU.
WWF (1998), A Review of the Stage of implementation of European Union Policies and Measures for CO2 Emission Reduction (edited by Dian Phylipsen, Kornelis Blok and Chris Hendriks). Utrecht: WWF.
Ybema, J. R., P. Lako, I. Kok, E. Schol, D. J. Gielen and T. Kram (1999), Scenarios for Western Europe on Long Term Abatement of CO2 Emissions, Report No. 410 200 035. Petten: ECN.
About this article
Cite this article
Barker, T., Kram, T., Oberthür, S. et al. The Role of EU Internal Policies in Implementing Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Options to Achieve Kyoto Targets. International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics 1, 243–265 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1010133423451
- burden sharing
- EU and Member State policy implementation
- EU policies
- greenhouse gas mitigation
- Kyoto Mechanisms
- Kyoto Protocol