Transnationalization and Domestic Policy-Making Processes: Electricity Market Reform in Belgium and Switzerland

Chapter

The electricity sector has undergone and continues to experience a fundamental transformation. Liberalization, deregulation and re-regulation have spread around the world, which has led to a fundamental restructuring of the sector. In Europe, this trend has been reinforced by a European Union (EU) directive adopted in 1996. This directive alone, however, cannot sufficiently explain how and why most countries, some of them not members of the EU, decided to liberalize their electricity sectors. First, the directive gave large leeway to the member states about how to implement liberalization, and second, the phenomenon is an almost global trend, not limited just to Europe. Therefore, Europeanization as an explanation for the electricity market’s liberalization has been criticized for overemphasizing the impact of the EU (Fligstein and Merand 2001; Jordana et al. 2006; Levi-Faur 2004; Verdier and Breen 2001).

Abbreviations

CCEG

Control Committee of Electricity and Gas, Belgium

CSC

Confédération des Syndicats Chrétiens (Christian Democratic Trade Union, Belgium)

FEB

Fédération des Entreprises Belges (Federation of Belgian Firms)

FEBELIEC

Federation of Belgian Large Industrial Energy Consumers

FGTB

Fédération Générale du Travail de Belgique (Socialist trade union, Belgium)

IEA

International Energy Agency

OECD

Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development

SFOE

Swiss Federal Office for Energy

SGB

Schweizerischer Gewerkschaftsbund (Association of the Swiss trade unions, without the Christian trade unions)

SPE

Société Productrice d’Electricité, Belgium

TSO

Transmission system operator (operator of the high-voltage network)

UCPTE

Union for the Co-ordination of the Production and Transmission of Electricity

UCS

Union des Centrales Suisses d’électricité (Union of Swiss Electricity Companies)

UCTE

Union for the Co-ordination of Transmission of Electricity

UNICE

Union of Industrial and Employers’ Confiderations of Europe

Unipede

International Union of Producers and Distributors of Electrical Energy

VPOD

Verband des Personals Öffentlicher Dienste (Trade Union of Public Services, Switzerland)

References

  1. De Lovinfosse, Isabelle (2008). How and why do policies change? A Comparison of Renewable Electricity Policies in Belgium, Denmark, Germany, the Netherlands and the UK. Action publique/Public Action. Bruxelles: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  2. De Lovinfosse, Isabelle and Frédéric Varone (2004). From Private Self-Regulation to Public Renewable Electricity Policy: A Paradigmatic Change in Belgium. In Renewable Electricity Policies in Europe. Tradable Green Certificates in Competitive Markets, edited by Isabelle De Lovinfosse and Frédéric Varone. Louvain-la-Neuve: Presses universitaires de Louvain.Google Scholar
  3. Declercq, Christine and Anne Vincent (2000). L’ouverture du marché de l’électricité. Le cadre institutionnel. Courrier Hebdomadaire. Bruxelles: CRISP Centre de recherche et d’information socio-politiques.Google Scholar
  4. Djelic, Marie-Laure (2006). Marketization: From intellectual agenda to global policy-making. In Transnational Governance: Institutional Dynamics of Regulation, edited by Marie-Laure Djelic and Kerstin Sahlin-Andersson. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Djelic, Marie-Laure and Kerstin Sahlin-Andersson (2006). Introduction: A World of Governance: The Rise of Transnational Regulation. In Transnational Governance: Institutional Dynamics of Regulation, edited by Marie-Laure Djelic and Kerstin Sahlin-Andersson. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Fligstein, Neil and Frederic Merand (2001). Globalization or Europeanization? Evidence on the European Economy Since 1980. In “Shareholder Value-Capitalism and Globalization” Hamburg: FRG.Google Scholar
  7. George, Alexander L., and Andrew Bennett (2005). Case Studies and Theory Development in the Social Science. Cambridge, Massachusetts; London, England: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  8. Gerring, John (2007). Case Study Research: Principles and Practices. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Jegen, Maya (2003). Energiepolitische Vernetzung in der Schweiz: Analyse der Kooperationsnetzwerke und Ideensysteme der energiepolitischen Entscheidungsträger. Basel: Helbling & LichtenhahnGoogle Scholar
  10. Jordana, Jacint, David Levi-Faur, and Imma Puig (2006). The limits of Europeanization: Regulatory reforms in the Spanish and Portuguese telecommunications and electricity sectors. Governance-An International Journal of Policy and Administration 19 (3):437–464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Katzenstein, Peter (1985). Small States in World Markets. Industrial Policy in Europe. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Knill, Christoph and Dirk Lehmkuhl (2002). The national impact of European Union regulatory policy: three Europeanization mechanisms. European Journal of Political Research 41:255–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Levi-Faur, David (2004). On the “Net Impact” of Europeanization. The EU’s Telecoms and Electricity Regimes Between the Global and the National. Comparative Political Studies 37 (1):3–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Lijphart, Arend (1999). Patterns of Democracy. New Haven; London: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Mach, André (2002). Economists as policy entrepreneurs and the rise of neo-liberal ideas in Switzerland during the 1990s. Economic Sociology – European Electronic Newsletter 4 (1): 3–16.Google Scholar
  16. Mach, André, Silja Häusermann, and Yannis Papadopoulos (2003). Economic regulatory reforms in Switzerland: adjustment without European integration, or how rigidities become flexible. Journal of European Public Policy 10 (2):301–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Milner, Helen V., and Robert O. Keohane (1996). Internationalization and Domestic Politics: An Introduction. In Internationalization and Domestic Politics, edited by Helen V. Milner and Robert O. Keohane. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Moravcsik, Andrew (1994). Why the European Union Strengthens the State: Domestic Politics and International Cooperation. In Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association. New York.Google Scholar
  19. Orenstein, Mitchel A. and Hans-Peter Schmitz (2006). The new transnationalism and comparative politics. Comparative Politics 38 (4).Google Scholar
  20. Papadopoulos, Yannis (1997). Les processus de décision fédéraux en Suisse. Paris: L’Harmattan.Google Scholar
  21. Sager, Fritz (2006). Infrastrukturpolitik: Verkehr, Energie und Telekommunikation. In Handbuch der Schweizer Politik, edited by Ulrich Klöti et al. Zürich: NZZ Verlag.Google Scholar
  22. Schmidt, Vivien A. (2005). Democracy in Europe: The Impact of European Integration. Perspectives on Politics 3 (4):761–779.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Schutyser, Frederik and Lennart Deridder (1999). Belgium’s draft (federal) law on the organisation of the electricity market. Util Law Review 10 (4): 158–163.Google Scholar
  24. Sciarini, Pascal (2004). Decision-Making Processes. In Handbook of Swiss politics, edited by Ulrich Klöti et al. Zurich: Neue Zürcher Zeitung Publishing.Google Scholar
  25. Slaughter, Anne-Marie. (2004). A New World Order. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Streeck, Wolfgang and Kathleen Thelen (2005). Beyond Continuity. Institutional Change in Advanced Political Economies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Thatcher, Mark (2007). Internationalisation and Economic Institutions: Comparing the European Experience. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Verbruggen, Aviel and Eewin Vanderstappen (1999). Electricity sector restructuring in Belgium during the 90’s. Utilities Policy 8: 159–171.Google Scholar
  29. Verbruggen, Aviel and S. Verheyen (1997). Implementation of the EU-directive on internal market for electricity in Belgium. ENER bulletin 21:52–74.Google Scholar
  30. Verdier, Daniel and Richard Breen (2001). Europeanization and Globalization. Politics Against Markets in the European Union. Comparative Political Studies 34 (3):227–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Vincent, Anne and Christine Declercq (2000). L’ouverture du marché de l’électricité. Organisation et stratégie des acteurs. Courrier Hebdomadaire. Bruxelles: CRISP Centre de recherche et d’information socio-politiques.Google Scholar

DocumentsBelgium

  1. Chambre (1999). Doc. parl., 1933/1 (98/99). Projet de loi relatif à l’organisation du marché de l’électricité. Bruxelles.Google Scholar
  2. Control Committee of Electricity and Gas, (CCEG) (1998). Avis du Comité Restreint du Comité de Contrôle au sujet de l’avant-projet de loi relatif à l’organisation du marché de l’électricité. Bruxelles: CCEG.Google Scholar
  3. FGTB (20.4.1999). Lettre ouverte aux Sénateurs des partis démocratiques. Bruxelles.Google Scholar
  4. Poncelet, Jean-Pol (1998a). Note au Conseil des Ministres. Objet: Avant-projet de loi relatif à l’organisation du marché de l’électricité. Ministre de la Défense national et de l’Energie. Bruxelles.Google Scholar
  5. Poncelet, Jean-Pol (1998b). Un nouveau marché de l’électricité pour le 21ème siècle. Transposition en droit belge de la directive européenne 96/92 concernant des règles communes pour le marché de l’électricité. Note d’orientation. Bruxelles.Google Scholar
  6. Sénat (1999). Rapport: Projet de loi relative à l’organisation du marché de l’électricité. Rapport fait au nom de la Commission des finances et des affaires économiques par M. Weyts. Bruxelles.Google Scholar

Switzerland

  1. Cattin, Jean, et al. (1995). Ouverture du marché de l’électricité. Office fédéral de l’énergie. Berne.Google Scholar
  2. Economiesuisse (2002). Das Elektrizitätsmarktgesetz – eine schweizerische Lösung. Sichere Stromversorgung zu marktgerechten Preisen.Google Scholar
  3. Federal Council (1999). Message du CF concernant la loi sur le marché de l’électricité du 7 juin 1999. Berne, pp. 6646–6740.Google Scholar
  4. IPW (1999). Année politique suisse. Bern: Institut für Politikwissenschaft, Universität Bern.Google Scholar
  5. Kiener, Eduard, et al. (1997). Marktöffnung im Elektrizitätsbereich. Bericht des Bundesamts für Energiewirtschaft an das Eidg. Verkehrs- und Energiewirtschaftsdepartement. Bern.Google Scholar
  6. Komitee gegen das Elektrizitätsmarktgesetz (2001). Kein Kurzschluss bei unserer Stromversorgung. Nein zum Elektrizitätsmarktgesetz.Google Scholar
  7. Le Temps (8.6.1999). L’ouverture accélérée du marché de l’électricité révolte les producteurs.Google Scholar
  8. Maillard, Pierre-Yves (2001). Die Netze müssen staatlich bleiben. In links.ch.Google Scholar
  9. NZZ (1997a). Die CKW unter dem Druck der Liberalisierung. Deutlich gestärkte Ertragskraft.Google Scholar
  10. NZZ (1997b). Die EGL vor der Konstituierung der Watt AG. Verbessertes Ergebnis trotz rückläufigem Umsatz.Google Scholar
  11. NZZ (1997c). Ungewisser Fahrplan für die Marktöffnung. Seilziehen in der Schweizer Elektrizitätswirtschaft.Google Scholar
  12. NZZ (1998). Statt einer nun zwei Netzgesellschaften. Groteske in der schweizerischen Elektrizitätswirtschaft.Google Scholar
  13. NZZ (1999). Mut zum Abbruch der Strommonopole.Google Scholar
  14. SFOE (1998). Loi sur le marché de l’électricité. Synthèse des résultats de la consultation. Berne.Google Scholar
  15. SGB (1998). Elektrizitätsmarktgesetz (EMG); Vernehmlassung. Bern: Schweizerischer Gewerkschaftsbund.Google Scholar
  16. VPOD (2002). DV-Bericht, 7. Dezember 2002. Google Scholar

Transnational Networks

  1. Eurelectric (1997). Annual Activity Report. Brussels: Eurelectric.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of LausanneLausanneSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations