Climate for Collaboration: Analysis of US and EU Lessons and Opportunities in Energy and Climate Policy

Abstract

Energy research Centre of the Netherlands (ECN) ECN Policy Studies is part of the Energy research Centre of the Netherlands (ECNThe authors would like to thank Ron Benioff, Pieter Boot, David Kline, Xander van Tilburg and Ryan Daley for the time they contributed to reviewing the report and for their useful comments. We would also like to thank the supporting staff that assisted with the formatting and graphics. Any remaining errors are the responsibility of the authors. AbstractThis paper aims to improve mutual understanding between the EU and US with regard to climate change and energy policy, suggesting specific opportunities for transatlantic cooperation in this area. A background on the environmental, legislative, and economic contexts of the EU and US as they relate to climate policy sets the context. This is followed by an overview of how cap & trade, renewable energy, and sustainable transportation policies have taken shape in the EU and the US. Some observations and lessons learnt within each of these areas are highlighted. Building on these insights, recommendations are made regarding the carbon market, possibilities for new technologies to bridge the valley of death, and best practices and standards.

Comparative analysis of climate governance in China and Germany

“…Some scholars have attempted to analyze the challenges and effects of national climate governance, such as the impact of changes in political system on climate governance [4], how political conditions shape the emergence of climate governance and how climate institutions subsequently structure climate politics [5], and how multilateralism, bilateralism and transnationalism affect climate governance [6]. In addition, climate governance varies substantially within countries due to development stages, political-institutional contexts and policy steering mechanisms, some scholars therefore have conducted comparative studies among J u s t A c c e p t e d countries or regions, aiming to, for instance, figure out how cap and trade, renewable energy, and sustainable transportation policies have taken shape in the EU and the US [7]; compare the institutional arrangements used by the EU and China to pursue climate change adaptation, comprising framework policies, programmatic actions and specific actions [8]; recognize similarities and differences in the international stance and domestic policies on climate change between China and India because of their similarities in facing the dual challenges of economic development and climate change mitigation [9]; contrast the nature and scope of change in the domestic climate governance of India and South Africa [10]; compare the policy differences between the EU and the US in terms of emission reduction targets and effects, carbon taxes, emission trading systems, energy policies, and climate change adaptation policies [11]; identify institutional settings, the nature of policy mechanisms, and the degree of multi-actors' involvement to evaluate the effectiveness of governance in China and the US based on the "polity-policy-politics" framework [12]; compare the evolution process and governance system characteristics of China, the UK, and Germany's climate change adaptation strategies to propose policy recommendations for China from the dimensions of knowledge, technology, and funding [13]; compare climate change policy systems and institutional settings of major global economies, differentiate their climate governance models, and identify the dominant factors of each climate governance system [14].…”