Energy Transition Law and Economics

  • Sebastian HeselhausEmail author
Part of the Economic Analysis of Law in European Legal Scholarship book series (EALELS, volume 5)


The author analyses the extent to which the energy sector in Europe is suitable for a law and economics approach, especially regarding a policy of energy transition. To this end, the author provides first a short historic overview of energy transitions in the past and of their framework in Europe. Second, the author analyses the aspects of political sovereignty connected with the supply of energy. Third, the legal and political framework for the regulation of the energy sector pursuing an energy transition in the European Union, its Member State Germany, and in Switzerland with the aim to reduce carbon dioxide emissions are analysed in detail. Besides the European Union, a specific focus is placed on Germany and Switzerland because both countries have chosen to end the use of nuclear energy as well. Thus, they will have to implement an even broader energy transition. The author shows how individual choices by the market participants are often rendered impossible because of government intervention. Furthermore, he depicts how attempts to liberalise the energy market are faced with approaches to utilise the remains of the former monopoly like structure of the market for the regulatory objectives of energy transitions. This leads to the question whether the transaction-based approaches of traditional and modern economics remain beneficial in analysing energy law.



The author likes to thank Ass. iur. Markus Schreiber, University of Lucerne, for assisting in research and analytical discussions.


  1. Akins JE (1973) The oil crisis: this time the wolf is here. Foreign Aff 51:462–490CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baer S (1997) Zum “Recht auf Heimat” - Art. 11 GG und Umsiedlungen zugunsten des Braunkohletagebaus. Neue Zeitschrift für Verwaltungsrecht 16:27–33Google Scholar
  3. Bithas K, Kalimeris P (2015) Revisiting the energy-development link. Evidence from the 20th century for knowledge-based and developing economies. Springer, HeidelbergGoogle Scholar
  4. Buchdahl Roth M, Jaramillo P (2017) Going nuclear for climate mitigation: an analysis of the cost effectiveness of preserving existing U.S. nuclear power plants as a carbon avoidance strategy. Energy 131:67–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bundesamt für Energie (2016) Gesamtenergiestatistik 2015. BerneGoogle Scholar
  6. Bundesministerium für Wirtschaft und Energie (BMWi) (2017) Energiedaten: Gesamtausgabe. Bonn, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  7. Bundesnetzagentur (2016) Monitoringbericht 2016. BonnGoogle Scholar
  8. Cernoch F, Zapletalová V (2015) Hinkley point C: a new chance for nuclear power plant construction in central Europe? Energy Policy 83:165–168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Esposito F, de Almeida L (2018) A shocking truth for law and economics: consumer welfare explains the internal market for electricity better than total welfare. In: Mathis K, Huber BR (eds) Energy law and economics. Springer, Cham. (this volume)Google Scholar
  10. Esposto S (2008) The possible role of nuclear energy in Italy. Energy Policy 36:1584–1588CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Fraunhofer ISE (2013) Stromgestehungskosten Erneuerbare Energien. FreiburgGoogle Scholar
  12. Heselhaus S (2014a) Aktuelle Entwicklungen im Europäischen Energierecht. Schweizerisches Jahrbuch für Europarecht 2013/2014:201–221Google Scholar
  13. Heselhaus S (2014b) Differenzierungen im Klima- und Energierecht vor den europäischen Gerichten – Emissionshandelssystem und erneuerbare-Energien-Gesetz. In: Heid D, Stotz R, Verny A (eds) Festschrift für Manfred A. Dauses zum 70. Geburtstag. C.H. Beck, München, pp 137–152Google Scholar
  14. International Emissions Trading Association (IETA) (2016) IETA’s views on the European Commission’s revision of the EU ETS Directive for the post-2020 period. GenevaGoogle Scholar
  15. Laing T, Sato M, Grubb M, Comberti C (2013) Assessing the effectiveness of the EU emissions trading system. Centre for Climate Change Economics and Policy, Working Paper No. 126. London, Cambridge and OxfordGoogle Scholar
  16. Lazarus RJ (1986) Changing conceptions of property and sovereignty in natural resources: questioning the public trust doctrine. Iowa Law Rev 71:631–716Google Scholar
  17. Lippert A, Kindler L (2017) Die Staatlichkeit finanzieller Mittel in Umlagesystemen. Das Urteil des EuG vom EUG 10.5.2016 zum EEG 2012 und dessen Bedeutung für Umlagesysteme. Zeitschrift für das gesamte Recht der Energiewirtschaft 6:256–262Google Scholar
  18. Liu X, Zhang S, Bae J (2017) The nexus of renewable energy-agriculture-environment in BRICS. Appl Energy 204:489–496CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Paetsch M, Böck R (2009) Strommarktliberalisierung in der Schweiz: Neue Strukturen und ihre Herausforderungen. St. GallenGoogle Scholar
  20. Plumer B (2017) The U.S. Won’t Actually Leave the Paris Climate Deal Anytime Soon. The New York Times, 7 June 2017Google Scholar
  21. Pollitt MG, Shaorshadze I (2011) The role of behavioural economics in energy and climate policy. EPRG Working Paper 1130. CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  22. Schaffhauser R, Uhlmann F (2014) Art. 89 FC. In: Ehrenzeller B, Schindler B, Schweizer RJ, Vallender KA (eds) Die schweizerische Bundesverfassung, St. Galler Kommentar. Dike Verlag, ZurichGoogle Scholar
  23. Schmocker U, Kalkhof D (n.d.) Langzeitbetrieb der Schweizerischen Kernkraftwerke. BruggGoogle Scholar
  24. Scholtka B, Martin J (2017) Die Entwicklung des Energierechts im Jahr 2016. Neue Juristische Wochenschrift 1370:932–936Google Scholar
  25. Statistisches Bundesamt (2016) Statistisches Jahrbuch 2016. WiesbadenGoogle Scholar
  26. Swiss Federal Office of Energy (SFOE) (2015) Vollzugsweisung Rückerstattung Netzzuschlag. Berne, IttigenGoogle Scholar
  27. Theobald C (2017) § 1 EnWG. In: Danner W, Theobald C (eds) Energierecht. C.H. Beck, MunichGoogle Scholar
  28. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) (2006) UNFCCC handbook. BonnGoogle Scholar
  29. Weitzman ML (2014) Can negotiating a uniform carbon price help to internalize the global warming externality? J Assoc Environ Res Econ 1:29–49Google Scholar
  30. Winter G (2009) Das Klima ist keine Ware. Eine Zwischenbilanz des Emissionshandelssystems. Zeitschrift für Umweltrecht 20:289–298Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of LawUniversity of LucerneLucerneSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations