Abstract
AbstractThe co-legislators of the EU adopted in July 2023 a revised version of the Energy Efficiency Directive, implying that the ‘energy efficiency first’ (EE1) principle is made legally binding for member states, to apply in policy, planning and investment decisions exceeding euro 100 million each and euro 175 million for transport infrastructure projects. The EE1 principle complements two other guiding principles of EU energy and climate policy: cost-effectiveness and consumer protection. This article analyses the policy process and politics leading to the adoption of the EE1 principle as a legal institute in EU energy and climate policy. Policy core and secondary beliefs of four different advocacy coalitions are identified, and explained what are the paths to policy change. Lines of dispute among the coalitions related to (i) the purpose and meaning of energy efficiency policy, (ii) the size of projects covered (all projects or only very large projects) and (iii) which sectors to be covered (the public sector or both the public and private sectors). The adoption of the EE1 principle as a binding provision follows an ‘external shock’ to the political subsystem of energy efficiency, namely the Paris Agreement and the subsequent adoption of an EU climate law strengthening the EU climate targets for 2030 and 2050. In addition, it is a ‘negotiated agreement’ between the Council and the Parliament, undertaken as a deliberative problem-solving exercise rather than bargaining. The deliberative nature of the negotiations opened for ‘policy-oriented learning’ across belief systems in the subsystem.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference88 articles.
1. Bache, I. (2013). Measuring quality of life for public policy: An idea whose time has come? Agenda-setting dynamics in the European Union. Journal of European Public Policy, 20(1), 21–38. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2012.699658
2. Bayer, E. (2015). Efficiency first: Key points for the Energy Union communication. Regulatory Assistance Project https://www.raponline.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/rap-efficiencyfirstmemo-2015-feb-12.pdf. Accessed 1 Mar 2023.
3. Beach, D., & Pedersen, R. (2013). Process-tracing methods: Foundations and guidelines. University of Michigan Press.
4. Björkdahl, A. (2008). Norm advocacy: A small state strategy to influence the EU. Journal of European Public Policy, 15(1), 134–159. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501760701702272
5. Brandsma, G. J. (2015). Co-decision after Lisbon: The politics of informal trilogues in European Union lawmaking. European Union Politics, 16(2), 300–319. https://doi.org/10.1177/1465116515584497
Cited by
7 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献