Policy coherence for sustainable development and environmental security: A case study of European Union policies on renewable energy

Abstract

Policy coherence for sustainable development (PCSD) and environmental security are crucial for achieving sustainable development, yet their intersections remain largely unexplored. In this article, we combine these two approaches to examine renewable energy policies of the European Union (EU). The EU is a key actor championing sustainable development, often considered to be a ground breaker particularly in environmental policies. At the same time, the EU aims to be a significant global security actor, and it has also recognised the role of environmental change as a factor for security. In this article, we explore whether the EU coherently integrates the sustainable development dimensions (society, environment, economy) in its renewable energy policies through inductive and deductive content analysis of key policy documents. Our analysis shows that the EU's renewable energy policies are not fully coherent with all dimensions of sustainability, particularly with respects to societal considerations and impacts on third countries.

The water–energy–food–land–climate nexus: Policy coherence for sustainable resource management in Sweden

“…The literature is inconsistent in its definition of policy coherence, and terms like coherence, integration, coordination and consistency have been used interchangeably (Bogers et al, 2022; den Hertog & Stross, 2011; Häbel & Hakala, 2021; Lazaro et al, 2022; Nilsson & Weitz, 2019; Nilsson et al, 2012; Weitz et al, 2017). In the environmental and natural resources domain much research has focused on policy integration (Bogers et al, 2022; Jordan & Lenschow, 2010; Weitz et al, 2017) and policy interactions (Bennich et al, 2020; Liu et al, 2018; Nilsson & Weitz, 2019; Oberthur & Gehring, 2006), with emphasis on the institutional arrangements associated with the policy‐making process, or environmental policy integration, particularly with regard to EU policies (Ahlström & Sjåfjell, 2023; Grohmann & Feindt, 2023; Kurze & Lenschow, 2016).…”

How green are our laws? Presenting a normative coherence for sustainable development methodology

“…First, “securitization” of sustainability is increasingly occurring at the supranational and domestic levels. Recent studies (Galán Castro et al, 2021; Häbel & Hakala, 2021) have shown how securitization processes, which define traditionally non‐security issues in security terms, undermine sustainability strategies. Second, security is a priority issue in Mexico where drug‐related violence, organized crime and femicides have dominated the political agenda for over a decade (Yanes Pérez et al, 2020).…”

“…NCSD embraces this approach to development. Much of the literature on norms in global affairs focuses on power (Nye, 2005) and how norms can be sources of power in foreign policy (Häbel & Hakala, 2021; Koff, 2020). Norms are often considered to be strategic rhetorical commitments rather than tools for transformative change (see Šehović, 2019), leading to ineffective or insufficient implementation (Nhengu, 2020).…”

A simulation model of climate policy analysis for sustainable environment in Pakistan

“…Numerous publications have hailed the carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology as the “silver bullet” to solving the CO 2 emissions problem, particularly with regard to big point‐source emissions. While claiming that CCS is a realistic option, Green Peace and the European Renewable Energy Council (GPEREC) are unwilling to support the technology at the expense of sustainable and renewable alternatives 33 . They imply that while they are aware of CCS's efficiency in lowering CO 2 emissions, they do not see a necessity to stop investing or supporting renewable technologies in favor of CCS alone 34 .…”

“…While claiming that CCS is a realistic option, Green Peace and the European Renewable Energy Council (GPEREC) are unwilling to support the technology at the expense of sustainable and renewable alternatives. 33 They imply that while they are aware of CCS's efficiency in lowering CO 2 emissions, they do not see a necessity to stop investing or supporting renewable technologies in favor of CCS alone. 34 The International Energy Agency (IEA) approaches the CCS issue differently.…”