Policy Mapping: Approaches and Lessons Learned.

Transcription

1 Policy Mapping: Approaches and Lessons Learned. Partnership for Market Readiness (PMR) Fifth PMR Technical Workshop: Policy Mapping & Effective Instruments for GHG Mitigation in Urban Transport Dr. Felix Chr. Matthes Washington DC, 14 March 2013

2 Disclaimer The views and opinions presented here are partly based on results from research commissioned by the German Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Protection and Reactor Safety, the German Federal Environment Agency and the European Commission. The contents of this presentation does not necessarily reflect any official position of Germany or the European Union.

3 Policy Mapping Dimensions Policy mapping is an important step on the way towards (market based) climate policy instruments Identifying the need for policy instruments Specifying the role of (market based) climate policy instruments in the policy mix Policy mapping is an important element for the design of (market based) climate policy instruments Considering the role of policy interactions Policy mapping must consider economic basics, the real world framework and political preferences It is a complex and often controversial exercise It is worth to be done in a systematic manner

4 mln t CO2e Policy mix depends on the specifics of political goals: Time horizon & capital stocks 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 Starting point: A wide range of existing (traditional) policies 2020 Goal % compared to Goal % compared to 1990 Aviation (national & international) Non-ETS sectors EU ETS (proxy data from 1990 to 2004) 2,000 1,000 Starting points: Limited policy coverage in many MS, long-living assets 2050 Goal % compared to Öko-Institut 2012

5 Policy Mapping Dimensions Generic (economical) assessments, e.g. Effectiveness Economic efficiency The nature of the (climate) policy goals, e.g. Level of ambition Timing Other policy goals, e.g. Energy policies (energy efficiency, renewables etc.) Distributional policies The political and regulatory framework, e.g. Governance capabilities & traditions National, regional & international market structures

6 Abatement costs [ /t CO2e] Advancing the policy mix needs a careful look into (mitigation) potentials Pricing policies will be complementary: locked (and homogeneous) potentials: regulations, targeted incentive programs etc. as primary mechanisms Pricing policies will be complementary: innovation-intensive potentials, regulations, targeted incentive programs etc. as primary mechanisms Pricing policies will/can work and be effective & efficient: matured/competitive (and heterogeneous) potentials, incremental innovation: ETS, tax or other mechanisms Memo-item: pricing policies for heavily infrastructurerelated potentials?! Abatement potential [mln t] Öko-Institut 2010

7 Targets Targets Climate policy = Carbon pricing & more T (I 2 +C) I m (F,L, P) + s(b,p,t) + (I i +M i ) Linking Allocation Auctions & revenue spending International initiatives & markets Remove specific barriers* Cap Strengthen specific players* Support specific technologies* Fair & liquid markets with manifold players Infrastructures Innovation Internalization Capabilities Scarcity * Evaluate, modify & eliminate specific policies, if necessary Öko-Institut 2010

8 Analysis of policy interactions: a crucial element of policy design In the real world there will/should be a policy mix Different political goals (not necessarily consistent) Different capabilities of different policy mechanisms Market structures & regulatory framework Different governance capabilities & political traditions However, the different policies will (significantly) interact Analysis of policy interactions is a crucial element for designing/adjusting the policy mix Analysis of policy interaction is an crucial element of preparation for advanced pricing mechanisms, especially those targeting quantity control Policy interactions should be reflected in the relevant design features of advanced pricing mechanisms

9 /t CO2 Economic efficiency results from a uniform (!) price: Implicit CO2 prices from other policies Uniform CO2 prices: neither among (EU) jurisdictions nor for (different) commodities DE PL CZ AT FR LU NL BE DK DE PL CZ AT FR LU NL BE DK Gasonline (unleaded) Diesel (for transport) Eurostat, Öko-Institut 2013

10 mln t CO2 Policy interactions: emission reductions from renewables under the EU ETS 1,400 Geothermal 1,200 1,000 Solar & ocean Wind Biomass The good news: real emission contributions match with trend reflected for cap definition 800 Hydro The bad news: coincidently Integrated package Baseline Integrated package Baseline Historical data NREAP (2011) 2020 projection (2008) 2030 projection (2008) Öko-Institut 2012

11 A simple test for policies & politics: Preference analysis (at the example of ETS) Policymakers (should) prefer emissions trading because it is an extremely transparent tool to achieve climate policy objectives (the cap provides accountability) because they can deal with distributional issues (allocation) because they raise funds for (climate) policies (from auctions) Epistemic communities (should) prefer emissions trading Because cost-effectiveness is built into the system Companies (should) prefer/accept emissions trading because they have the flexibility (choice) to implement emissions abatement measures or to buy allowances (which is cheaper than many alternative climate policy instrument) because they must improve their respective management capabilities and get an indicator (the carbon price) which helps to make more rational internal decisions

12 Thank you very much Dr. Felix Chr. Matthes Energy & Climate Division Büro Berlin Schicklerstraße 5-7 D Berlin