Analysis: Exploring the Six Explanations

  • Jørgen Wettestad
  • Torbjørg Jevnaker


As was shown in Chap. 2, there has been increasing agreement among member-states on the need for reform, with a pivotal change in Germany after the 2013 elections. The 2030 package outcome increased the room for integrative bargaining, which was essential to get acquiescence from sceptical member-states. Launching the less controversial MSR proposal put the Commission on firmer political ground as to ETS reform. Cross-party cooperation in the European Parliament was facilitated by compromise deals and reinforced by the 2014 elections. Energy-intensive industries exhausted by the heated backloading debate became somewhat less opposed to reform. The wish to avoid an embarrassing loss of prestige as an ETS frontrunner added some external pressure, but not nearly as strong as the ‘Copenhagen effect’ back in 2008.


Climate Policy Carbon Price Carbon Leakage Qualified Majority Vote Entrepreneurial Leadership 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. AEII. 2012. Growth and Employment First: Energy-intensive industries warn against current plans to increase energy costs for private and industrial consumers. 6 November.
  2. BDU. 2011. The federal government’s energy concept of 2010 and the transformation of the energy system of 2011. Berlin: Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety. March.
  3. Beveridge, R., and K. Kern. 2013. The Energiewende in Germany: Background, developments and future challenges. Renewable Energy Law and Policy 4(1): 3–13.Google Scholar
  4. Bloomberg. 2015. EOn urges advancing start of EU carbon market reserve to 2017. 15 January.
  5. BMUB. 2014a. EU-Emissionshandel: Reparatur beginnt. Press release no. 47/14, 17 March.
  6. BMUB. 2014b. Hendricks legt Eckpunkte für ‘Aktionsprogramm Klimaschutz 2020’ vor. Press release no. 71/14, 28 April.
  7. BMUB. 2014c. Hendricks: Beim Klimaschutz ehrgeiziger werden. Press release no. 6/14. 16 January.
  8. BMUB. 2014d. Hendricks: EU-Klimapaket ist gute Ausgangsbasis. Press release no. 12/14, 22 January.
  9. Boasson, E.L., and J. Wettestad. 2013. EU climate policy: Industry, policy interaction and external environment. Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  10. BritishInfluence. 2014. Interview with Ed Davey. 7 August.Google Scholar
  11. BusinessEurope. 2013. Letter to the ITRE Committee. 22 January.Google Scholar
  12. CarbonPulse. 2015. EU nations agree to 2019 MSR start date after Czechs defect. 29 April.
  13. CDU/CSU and SPD. 2013. Deutschlands Zukunft gestalten: Koalitionsvertrag zwischen CDU, CSU und SPD. Date accessed 6 Nov 2015.
  14. ClimateGroup. 2013. 13 European ministers join together to call for urgent EU action on green growth. Press release, 28 October.
  15. Commission. 2014e. Questions and answers on 2030 framework on climate and energy, MEMO/14/40. Brussels: European Commission.Google Scholar
  16. Commission. 2014h. State aid: Commission approves UK compensation for indirect costs of carbon price floor. Press release, 21 May.
  17. Derlien, H.-U. 2000. German EU-policy coordination – failing successfully?. In The national coordination of EU policy, eds. H. Kassim, G. Peters and V. Wright, 54_78. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  18. EFF. 2014. EEF comment on DECC Market Stability Reserve announcement. Press release, 20 October.
  19. Eikeland, P.O. 2014. Implementing the EU 2020 energy and climate package in Germany: Green champion struggling to adapt, FNI Report 9/2014. Lysaker: Fridtjof Nansen Institute.Google Scholar
  20. ENDSEurope. 2012. CO2 market intervention plan suffers new delay. 30 November.Google Scholar
  21. ENDSEurope. 2013e. EU rift brewing on climate targets timing, flexibility. 23 April.Google Scholar
  22. ENDSEurope. 2013f. Expert talks home in on ETS reform option. 25 September.Google Scholar
  23. ENDSEurope. 2013h. New EU climate and energy package due this autumn. 27 March.Google Scholar
  24. ENDSEurope. 2014b. Eastern EU states oppose energy, air, waste proposals. 1 October.Google Scholar
  25. ENDSEurope. 2014d. ETS reform will strengthen EU at climate talks – industry. 21 November.Google Scholar
  26. ENDSEurope. 2014e. EU to update carbon leakage protections. 24 October.Google Scholar
  27. ENDSEurope. 2014f. Experts debate ETS future. 29 October.Google Scholar
  28. ENDSEurope. 2014k. Poland issues plan for a clean energy sector. 25 April.Google Scholar
  29. EPP. 2015. EPP internal compromise between Tajani and Belet on the Market Stability Reserve (MSR) in the EU Emission Trading Scheme. 4 February.
  30. EUEnergy. 2013. Ministers set out timetable for EU ETS reform. 17 May.Google Scholar
  31. EurActiv. 2013. Barroso urged to take a stand on EU carbon market fix. 26 April.Google Scholar
  32. EurActiv. 2014e. Poland says it ‘won’ at the EU summit. 24 October.Google Scholar
  33. EurActiv. 2014f. Poland’s carbon emissions billions to be spent on coal, cutting budget deficits. 18 September.Google Scholar
  34. EUROFER. 2014. Heads of state set ambitious climate target with measures to preserve industrial competitiveness, growth and jobs. Press release, 24 October.Google Scholar
  35. EuropeSun. 2013. New German coalition opposes cancelling CO2 permits permanently. 27 November.Google Scholar
  36. Fortum. 2013. Emission allowance supply management in the EU ETS. Discussion paper, July.Google Scholar
  37. Fujiwara, N., C. Karakosta, A. Szpor, A. Tuerk, and E. Hofman. 2015. How do stakeholders view the EU ETS? Diversity and differentiation of interests. POLIMP Working Document, Brussels, No.2 May.Google Scholar
  38. Germany. 2001. Vereinbarung zwischen der Bundesregierung und den Energieversorgungsunternehmen vom 14. Juni 2000 (Berlin). Date accessed 6 Nov 2015.
  39. GreenGrowthGroup. 2013. Going for green growth. Press release.Google Scholar
  40. Jevnaker, T., T.H. Inderberg, J. Wettestad, and M. Waag. 2014. Den britiske klimalovens første fem år: en oversikt over sentral nasjonal dynamikk og samspillet med EU (The UK’s climate change act’s first five years: An overview of domestic developments and interaction with the EU). Oslo: Fridtjof Nansen Institute/EnergiNorge.Google Scholar
  41. Jänicke, M. 2011. German climate change policy and economic leadership. In The European Union as a leader in international climate change politics, eds R.K.W. Wurzel and J. Connelly, 129–46. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  42. Karlseng, T.H. 2006. Decreasing German climate ambitiousness simply due to economic problems, or do politics matter? FNI Report 8/2006 (Lysaker, Norway: Fridtjof Nansen Institute).Google Scholar
  43. 2014. Hendricks: ‘Klimaschutz bekommt Dynamik’. 9 June.
  44. Lockwood, M. 2013. The political sustainability of climate policy: The case of the UK Climate Change Act. Global Environmental Change 23(5): 1339–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Paterson, W.E. 2015. The making of German European policy. In The Routledge handbook of German politics & culture, ed. S. Colvin, 315–28. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  46. PointCarbon. 2012d. EU businesses urge MEPs to reject EU CO2 price plan. 3 October.Google Scholar
  47. PointCarbon. 2012g. EU power firms tentatively support backloading. 16 October.Google Scholar
  48. PointCarbon. 2013a. British minister ‘straining every sinew’ to clinch EU ETS fix. 13 February.Google Scholar
  49. PointCarbon. 2013c. EU carbon hits 8-session high after German government deal struck. 27 November.Google Scholar
  50. PointCarbon. 2013d. EU seeks more feedback on carbon central bank proposal. 28 August.Google Scholar
  51. PointCarbon. 2013f. German economy ministry still opposes EU carbon permit plans. 12 April.Google Scholar
  52. PointCarbon. 2013g. Germany’s Roesler says EU CO2 market intervention would breach trust. 14 May.Google Scholar
  53. Politico. 2012. Poland urges rejection of ETS backloading plan. 17 December.Google Scholar
  54. Reuters. 2013. Merkel: Action needed on reforming CO2 trading. 3 May.Google Scholar
  55. Schreurs, M.A. 2003. Environmental politics in Japan, Germany and the United States. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Skjærseth, J.B. 2014. Implementing EU climate and energy policies in Poland: From Europeanization to polonization?, FNI Report 8/2014. Lysaker: Fridtjof Nansen Institute.Google Scholar
  57. Skjærseth, J.B., P.O. Eikeland, L.H. Gulbrandsen, and T. Jevnaker. 2016. Linking EU climate and energy policies: Policymaking, implementation and reform. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  58. Skovgaard, J. 2013. EU climate policy after the crisis. Environmental Politics 23(1): 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. UK. 2008. The Climate Change Act.Google Scholar
  60. UK. 2011. The carbon plan: Delivering our low carbon future. Presented to Parliament pursuant to Sections 12 and 14 of the Climate Change Act 2008, Date accessed 26 Oct 2015.
  61. UK. 2014a. UK vision for phase IV of the EU ETS. 16 July. London: Department of Energy and Climate Change.Google Scholar
  62. UK. 2014b. UK’s position on the European commission’s proposal to reform the EU ETS by introducing a market stability reserve. 20 October.
  63. Zeit. 2015a. Hendricks bemängelt Kohle-Kompromiss der Koalition. 3 July.Google Scholar
  64. Zeit. 2015b. Koalition will Freileitungen zu Erdkabeln machen. 2 July.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s) 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jørgen Wettestad
    • 1
  • Torbjørg Jevnaker
    • 1
  1. 1.Fridtjof Nansen InstituteLysakerNorway

Personalised recommendations