Fixing the EU Emissions Trading System? Understanding the Post-2012 Changes

Jon Birger Skjærseth and Jørgen Wettestad
Additional contact information
Jon Birger Skjærseth: Jon Birger Skjærseth is Senior Research Fellow at the Fridtjof Nansen Institute. His research interests are international environmental cooperation, EU environmental policy, national environmental policy and the strategies of multinational companies, particularly in the fields of climate policy and marine pollution. He has published numerous books and articles, including: EU Emissions Trading: Initiation, Decision-making and Implementation (2008, with Jørgen Wettestad); International Regimes and Norway's Environmental Policy: Crossfire and Coherence (2004); Climate Change and the Oil Industry: Common Problem, Varying Strategies (2003, paperback edition, 2009 with Tora Skodvin), Environmental Regime Effectiveness-Confronting Theory with Evidence (2002, with Edward L. Miles, Arild Underdal, Steinar Andresen, Jørgen. Wettestad and Elaine M. Carlin) and North Sea Cooperation: Linking International and Domestic Pollution Control (2000).
Jørgen Wettestad: Jørgen Wettestad is Senior Research Fellow at the Fridtjof Nansen Institute in Oslo, Norway. His main research interests include EU energy and climate policy, the functioning and effectiveness of international environmental regimes, and domestic air pollution and climate politics. His most recent book is (together with Jon Birger Skjærseth) EU Emissions Trading: Initiation, Decisionmaking and Implementation (2008). He has published numerous articles on EU emissions trading.

Global Environmental Politics, 2010, vol. 10, issue 4, 101-123

Abstract: This article explains why the significant changes in the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) for the 2013-2020 phase were adopted in 2008. The combination of a more stringent EU-wide cap, allocation of emission allowances for payment, and limits on imports of credits from third countries have strengthened the system for the post-2012 period. This will promote reduction in greenhouse gases compared to the old system. The main reasons for these changes are, first, changes in the positions of the member states due to unsatisfactory experience with performance of the EU ETS so far. Second, a "package approach" where the EU ETS reform was integrated into wider energy and climate policy facilitated agreement on the changes. Third, changes in the position of nonstate actors and a desire to affect the international climate negotiations contributed to the reform. (c) 2010 by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Date: 2010
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (8)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdfplus/10.1162/GLEP_a_00033 link to full text (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:tpr:glenvp:v:10:y:2010:i:4:p:101-123

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
https://mitpressjour ... rnal/?issn=1526-3800

Access Statistics for this article

Global Environmental Politics is currently edited by Steven Bernstein, Matthew Hoffmann and Erika Weinthal

More articles in Global Environmental Politics from MIT Press
Bibliographic data for series maintained by The MIT Press ().