The Future of the Cardiff process
Annex III: The European Climate Change Programme
III.1 Introduction
The Vienna and Cologne European Councils in December 1998 and June 1999 respectively stressed that cross-sectoral issues such as climate change should be addressed by sectoral Councils in their Cardiff strategies. The Cologne summit made particular reference in this regard to the Transport, Energy and Ecofin Councils.
However, in the absence of an effective mechanism for the mutual co-ordination of the Cardiff strategies, and of resources to enable Councils to undertake a scientific analysis of what they might each be able to contribute to GHG reductions, the response has been quite limited. Instead, the main forum for advancing the EU's climate change policy has been the European Climate Change Programme (ECCP). This was led by the Commission rather than the Council - the Steering Group being chaired by DG Environment. It involved all relevant DGs; and included Member State and stakeholder representatives. Detailed work was undertaken in a series of working groups, chaired by the appropriate Commission DG.
Together with the CAFE (Clean Air for Europe) programme, the ECCP could be considered to represent a new approach to the development of policy where cross-sectoral and integration issues feature strongly. It is also likely to provide a model for at least some of the forthcoming 6EAP Thematic Strategies. However, the experience to date with the ECCP raises some questions of its own which are set out below.
III.2 Background to the ECCP
The European Climate Change Programme (ECCP) was launched by the European Commission in a Communication published in March 2000 (COM(2000)88) with the aim of developing proposals on policies and measures to address climate change. The Communication noted the importance of the Cardiff integration strategies in strengthening common and coordinated policies and measures, particularly in the major greenhouse gas emitting sectors – highlighting the energy, transport, agriculture, industry, internal market and development sectors. However, the work of the ECCP was subsequently undertaken independently of those strategies and with little further reference to them.
Annex 2 outlined the proposed structure of the ECCP, which included concrete proposals for Working Groups (WGs) on flexible mechanisms (WG1), energy supply (WG2), energy consumption (WG3), transport (WG4) and industry (WG5), and put forward other areas on which working groups might be formed, including capacity building, agriculture, sinks, waste and research.
Annex 3 included a list of proposed common and coordinated policies and measures, which the Commission set out in response to the conclusions of an Environment Council meeting of October 1999. This was the list on which the work of the ECCP would be based and it consisted of 32 proposals, some of which were rather vague, covering energy supply, industry, transport, the consumption of energy in the domestic and transport sectors, waste, research and international cooperation.
III.3 The first phase of the ECCP
In the event, the ECCP started in the second half of 2000 with six working groups – WGs 1 to 5, as set out above and WG6 on Research. Each WG was chaired by a senior official of the most appropriate Commission DG, ie DG Environment chaired WG1 on flexible mechanisms, DG Enterprise chaired WG5 on Industry, DG Research chaired WG6 and DG Tren chaired the remainder. The work of the ECCP was overseen by a Steering Committee chaired by DG Environment. A Joint Sub Working Group on Energy Consumption in Products and Industrial Processes was also created, chaired jointly by DGs Tren and Enterprise, leaving WG3 to focus on the energy consumption of buildings. The work of WG5 on Industry focused on two ‘work items’ – fluorinated gases and renewable raw materials – while the work of WG4 on Transport was split between five Topic Groups and a number of associated groups. Originally four sets of meetings had been planned to take place between July 2000 and January 2001, contributing to the production of a final report in February 2001.
A progress report on the ECCP was published in November 2000. This contained 22 measures, some of which had not been listed in the original Communication. For some of these, emissions savings and costs were only estimated, whereas for others these were to be properly quantified in the following months.
A report containing the final findings of the six original ECCP Working Groups was published in June 2001, which was followed by a conference in Brussels in early July. The latter became an important event to demonstrate the EU’s commitment to addressing climate change. The report proposed 42 policies and measures resulting from the work of the six original Working Groups. Some of these were already under development, eg the Directive on the energy performance of buildings; some called for the expansion of existing policies to address climate concerns, eg the extension of EMAS and amendments to IPPC; and some were new proposals, eg a Directive on energy efficient public procurement.
A Communication on implementing the first phase of the ECCP was published in October 2001 (COM(2001)580). The Communication outlined twelve measures that it intended to bring forward in the course of the following two years, most of which were identified in the report from June 2001. Of these, three were horizontal, five addressed energy, three transport and there was one industry proposal. In some cases, eg a proposal for a Directive to promote combined heat and power (CHP), these were exactly the same as the measure proposed in the 2001 report, whereas in other cases the measure had been amended slightly (eg a proposed Directive on energy services became a proposal for a Directive on ‘energy demand management’). However, some proposals, notably two of the transport proposals on the promotion of biofuels and modal shift, had not been listed in the report published in June.
The Commission also signalled its intention to examine additional measures, including a selection of the remainder identified in the first stage of the ECCP, implying that further measures could be introduced if necessary.
III.4 The second phase of the ECCP
As a result of the political momentum resulting from the conference, it became increasingly likely that the ECCP would continue in some form. This was officially confirmed in the Communication on the implementation of the first phase of the ECCP, which signalled that the second phase would be different from the first in that it would not adopt a sectoral approach. Rather, the second phase would be more ‘issue specific’ (or thematic) with technical meetings with stakeholders being arranged in a ‘flexible and problem-orientated way’, which would be overseen by the ECCP Steering Group.
At the time of writing, some proposals set out in the Communication have been published, eg those on promoting biofuels, uniform taxation for road hauliers and the promotion of CHP, and others are due in 2002. Four working groups – on forest-related sinks, agricultural soils, HFCs and linking Joint Implementation (JI) and the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) to emissions trading - are still ongoing and are due to finish their work in early 2003. A report will then be produced to summarise progress, both in the ongoing WGs and in implementing the first phase of the Programme.
III.5 Assessment of the ECCP
The Programme was first and foremost a Commission initiative that did not significantly involve the Council or the European Parliament in its formulation. From the outset the objective of the Programme was to identify cost-effective policies and measures that could be developed at the European level in order to complement the climate change strategies of individual Member States – ie common rather than co-ordinated measures. Some of the policies and measures identified were then to be taken forward by the Commission in the form of legislative proposals While the Council as such was not involved in the ECCP, Member States were engaged in that a number of officials attended Working Groups.
Strengths and Weaknesses of the ECCP The ECCP has succeeded in raising the profile and awareness of
climate change among stakeholders It has proposed additional policies and measures that will bring
about reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. There was a lack of transparency regarding the choice of, and
omission of, sectors for the initial set of working groups, eg the omission of
agriculture. Subsequently, the changes in structure and formation of subgroups within and
between the WGs also contributed to some problems of consistency and coverage. Although groups had terms of reference, it was not clear what
working methods were to be applied to achieve these. Instead of a thorough review of
evidence, proposals were often submitted by stakeholders with particular interests to
pursue. Independent experts were commissioned to advise on the work of
different working groups, but there was little scope for detailed analysis, and the
working relationship between these and the chairs of the groups was variable. There was no clear framework within which the policies and measures
were developed. Identification of measures in some Working Groups lacked transparency and
it was often not clear how the policies set out in the interim and final reports had been
selected, and why some were then taken forward by the Commission, while others were
excluded. Estimates of costs and savings tended to be top-down and not
undertaken on a comparable basis. This is in part because no proper analytical framework
was established and little new analysis could be undertaken as a result of time and
resource constraints. The volume of work undertaken in parallel by various Working Groups
and their sub-groups restricted the ability of NGOS, in particular, to engage fully in the
process, as a result of their limited resources. DG Environment made efforts to address
this problem, but was not completely successful in doing so. |
III.6 The ECCP and CAFE
The aim of CAFE, which is to be the thematic strategy on air pollution of the Sixth Environmental Action Programme, is to bring all of the EU’s air quality policy within a single, integrated programme. This will review existing legislation, improve the monitoring of air quality and identify priorities for further action to protect human health and the environment for air pollution on the basis of a rigorous analytical framework.
In comparison to the ECCP, CAFE presents a more developed model of an integrated and coherent thematic programme. However, the EU has a relatively long history of addressing air pollution and therefore its policy and policy process in the area is very well developed, not least through the prior experience of the Auto Oil and Auto Oil II Programmes. By contrast, EU climate change policy is relatively new. Consequently, policies to control greenhouse gas emissions are relatively underdeveloped and, as suggested by the results of the ECCP, there is a broad range of measures that can achieve cost-effective emissions reductions in the short- to medium-term. However, as EU policy develops, particularly in relation to measures to achieve further emissions reductions after 2012, a more integrated and coherent programme to identify priority measures may be necessary. In this context, CAFE may also provide useful examples in terms of methodologies and procedures.
III.7 Developing procedures for a coherent Council contribution to the ECCP
Having considered both Council and Commission integration procedures, there is clearly an argument for seeking greater coordination between the development of the Cardiff strategies and the work of the ECCP, for example. During the first phase, this might have been possible via the relevant sectoral working groups. Given that there are now no sectoral working groups ongoing within the Programme, this is clearly more difficult at present.
However, the work of thematic working groups in the second phase could be translated into measures to be taken forward by relevant formations of the Council. These would then need to be included in the those Councils’ annual operating programmes.