Int’l cps- brag lab- wave 1 Theory
Download 1.09 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- EU has Clean Tech and Low Carbon leadership now, but U.S compete for funding
- U.S science leadership directly edges European companies for investement and market share
- EU Leadership precarious and Key to climate leadership, U.S surge would steal patents and innovation
- EU clean tech leadership key to legitimacy and international climate goals
Clean TechEU Success in Clean Tech uniquely key to solve warming, U.S doesn’t have the legitimacy to encourage global action to solveParker ’10 [August 12 2010, Charles F Parker is a faculty member of theDepartment of Government at Uppsala University, “Climate Change and the European Union's Leadership Moment: An Inconvenient Truth?” http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1468-5965.2010.02080.x/full] The EU's goal, as it states in its own words, is nothing short of ‘[l]eading global action’ against climate change ‘to 2020 and beyond’ with the aim of limiting climate change to 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels (Council, 2007, pp. 10–11). The Union, in its quest to play a leading role in international climate protection, has provided high-profile support for the Kyoto Protocol and is now vigorously throwing its diplomatic weight behind the effort to successfully negotiate a comprehensive successor arrangement. In the late 1980s, the US began to disengage from international environmental governance and under George W. Bush's administration the US completely abdicated its leadership role, particularly in the area of climate change. The EU has stepped into this void and has attempted to shoulder the mantle of leadership. How exactly has the EU attempted to lead the global efforts to combat climate change? An examination of the EU's actions reveals that it has deployed all three modes of leadership in important ways, but it has primarily relied on directional leadership. In terms of structural leadership the EU – the world's largest market, largest exporter, most generous aid donor and largest foreign investor – is well endowed to offer economic, technological and diplomatic incentives. The EU's vast internal market underpins all Union action, provides it with a powerful bargaining chip and gives it an excellent potential to create and alter incentives. The ability to act as a gatekeeper for those who want access to the EU market and the ability to enforce EU standards on trading partners is an extremely valuable power resource. The sheer scale of the internal market also means that the EU can offer and take actions that will have a dramatic environmental impact. Despite these advantages, the EU has struggled to translate its material resources into influence. This difficulty can in part be attributed to the EU's unique characteristics – its status as an intergovernmental actor and the challenges this presents for truly acting as a Union – and highlights how its leadership efforts are enabled and constrained by its complex agency-structure dynamics. As others have demonstrated, the EU's leadership impact has not been commensurate with its structural power (Elgström, 2007). Nonetheless, it was the EU's ability to leverage its structural leadership that played an integral role in its successful mission to salvage the Kyoto Protocol. In 2001 President Bush attempted to scuttle the Kyoto Protocol by announcing that the US was withdrawing from further involvement with it. The EU responded to Bush's gambit by taking on the mission to save the Protocol. In the face of US hostility and opposition, the EU successfully rounded up enough followers for the Protocol to enter into force. It was the EU's support for Russian WTO membership that was the final carrot that induced Russia to ratify the Protocol, which paved the way for Kyoto to enter into force (Vogler, 2005). An EU–Russian energy deal that would nearly double the price of Russian natural gas by 2010 was also a vital sweetener. As President Putin noted at the time: ‘The European Union has made concessions on some points during the negotiations on the WTO. This will inevitably have an impact on our positive attitude to the Kyoto process. We will speed up Russia's movement towards ratifying the Kyoto Protocol’.1 In the run-up to the 2009 Copenhagen conference, the EU once again displayed a willingness to exercise its structural leadership. On the inducement side, it promised funding to developing countries for actions to mitigate and adapt to climate change if a satisfactory post-2012 agreement was reached (Council, 2008b, pp. 6–7). Conversely, the spectre of imposing border tax adjustments on goods from countries with less stringent climate regulations has been raised by the French as well as Commission President Barroso (BBC News, 2008a). The Union's power resources also play a role in the second and historically most important leadership mode: directional leadership or leading by example. The EU, drawing on its capacity and potential to act, has attempted to demonstrate its commitment to fighting climate change by adopting a number of binding measures to reduce its emissions without corresponding reductions in other countries. The EU has also taken unilateral action by making the first move in putting future commitments on the table and putting into place policy instruments, such as the EU Emissions Trading Scheme (EU-ETS). Under the Kyoto Protocol, the 38 industrialized countries are required to reduce their emissions by at least 5 per cent below 1990 levels by 2012. The EU-15 agreed to an even larger target, committing to a collective GHG emissions reduction of 8 per cent. Prior to the start of serious international negotiations for the post-2012 arrangements the Union took autonomous action to drastically reduce its emissions. At its 2007 spring summit the EU launched its 20-20-20 by 2020 plan (Council of the European Union, 2007, pp. 10–23). The EU committed to reduce its emissions by at least 20 per cent by 2020 and it dangled the carrot of increasing that cut up to 30 per cent if a satisfactory global agreement was reached. The EU also committed to increasing its share of renewable energy to 20 per cent and improving its energy efficiency by 20 per cent by 2020. In January 2008 the Commission released a blueprint for implementing and achieving these goals. Eleven months later the work carried out under the co-decision procedure produced a first-reading agreement on an energy and climate package. The EU has also developed and, in 2005, launched the EU-ETS. This established the world's largest company-level market for trading CO2 emissions. The EU, which sees itself as the world leader in this emerging market wants the EU-ETS to serve as the ‘pillar of a global carbon trading network’ (Commission, 2007, p. 2). It further envisions a future framework that enables comparable emission trading arrangements in different regions to be linked together. The EU, which sees the ETS as a vital tool for developed countries to reach GHG reductions in a cost-effective manner, believes the efficacy of the ETS will be further enhanced by the revisions enacted by the 2008 climate package. The revised ETS directive, which will apply from 2013 to 2020, brings new industries into the ETS, covers two additional GHGs, reduces the Community-wide quantity of allowances issued each year, introduces full auctioning from 2013 in the power sector and will phase in auctioning for the manufacturing sector (with exceptions for sectors at risk of ‘carbon leakage’). The EU's promotion of the revised ETS as a model that is ‘fit to go global’ and serve as the ‘nucleus’ for building a global carbon market (Commission, 2008) provides a good example of how the EU's directional leadership dovetails with its policy entrepreneurship activities. Although the idea for emissions trading was originally a US idea initially resisted by the Europeans, the EU has now fully embraced the concept and repackaged it as its own. In fact, the ETS has become a political pet that the EU has aggressively implemented and promoted. The EU's directional leadership in this area has already had an impact as the positive and negative lessons of the EU-ETS have been studied by emission trading initiatives being set up in the US and other countries. By taking the lead in committing to sharp unilateral GHG reductions, adopting an aggressive climate and energy plan, with binding targets for renewable energies and launching the EU-ETS, the EU is attempting to spotlight that building a low-carbon economy is compatible with energy security, economic growth and competitiveness. Finally, it is the Union's view that by taking action itself, demonstrating the utility of that action and by promising to take even more aggressive action in the future, it can credibly ask others to act as well. The hoped for demonstration effects from leading by example are also linked to idea-based leadership. The Union has been an active policy entrepreneur for climate protection. It worked hard to make its voice heard on problem definition, agenda setting, goal setting and promoting policy solutions regarding the climate threat. The Union has embraced the scientific conclusions from the IPCC; already in 1996 the European Council endorsed the goal that global warming must be limited to no more than 2 degrees Celsius above the pre-industrial level. In addition to defining the nature of the problem, the EU has conducted its own analysis and put forward its own proposals for what must be done (Council, 2008a). According to the EU Commission's analysis, GHG emissions must be stabilized by 2020 and then reduced to 50 per cent of 1990 levels by 2050 if the world is to avert a 2 degrees temperature rise. The Union has also laid out its vision for meeting these goals and how the burden should be shared among the developed and developing countries. The Union argues that the developed countries must shoulder the lion's share of the burden over the coming decades. The Union has called for the EU and other developed countries to enter into a new international agreement requiring collective emission cuts of at least 30 per cent below the 1990 level by 2020. According to the EU, the developed countries should aim for cuts of 60 to 80 per cent by 2050 (Council of the European Union, 2007, p. 12). The Union wants these goals and commitments to be enshrined in a post-2012 international agreement containing binding rules with well-developed monitoring and enforcement mechanisms. The Union also has a timeline in mind and it attempted to get the international community to accept a 2009 deadline for a new agreement. This review of the Union's climate leadership actions and climate protection goals has revealed that the EU has laid out an extensive leadership agenda for itself. It has also demonstrated that the Union's own actions are an integral part of these plans. The EU aspires to show leadership by ‘setting a convincing example’ and demonstrating that actions to reduce GHG emissions are ‘economically and technologically feasible’, which raises the issue of performance EU has Clean Tech and Low Carbon leadership now, but U.S compete for fundingEC ’11 [January 2011, European commission leads research and analysis for the European Union, Cleantech investment: a key component for Europe’s sustainable future, http://ec.europa.eu/environment/ecoap/about-eco-innovation/business-fundings/eu/624_en.htm] In a report published in December 2010, the EVCA identified the critical role of venture capital in delivering Europe’s low-carbon goals and supporting the creation of new jobs. It also outlined the additional support required for entrepreneurial cleantech small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). Europe has been at the cutting edge on the international stage. From electric vehicles to software applications for environmental-quality monitoring, Europe is a leading investor in cleantech. However, maintaining this high level of leadership requires even greater commitment, given the increasing performance of other players, such as in the USA and China. This is where venture capital can provide support to commercialise technologies and create jobs in high-tech growth industries. The EU has set ambitious targets to reduce carbon emissions, increase use of renewable energy and improve energy efficiency. Meeting these targets requires new businesses and technologies, and intelligent use of capital. Indeed, venture capital is already investing in innovative technologies, services and support infrastructure. In 2009 alone, venture and growth capital investments in Europe totalled more than €1 billion in over 300 European cleantech companies. Moreover, as the EVCA points out, approximately 85% of the capital required to provide Europe with low-carbon growth came from the private sector. Europe would benefit even more from an effective policy framework allowing for increased and accelerated investment across the full cleantech spectrum. The EVCA report highlights the following priorities: Use of public-sector finance to launch a multi-annual programme for private sector managed funds of funds; Adopting measures to harness the power of public procurement for SME research and development – public procurement in the EU accounts for 17% of EU gross domestic product (GDP), facilitating the involvement of young entrepreneurial companies would increase their growth potential; Reducing regulatory uncertainty – for instance, the creation of a robust solar-panel manufacturing industry in Germany has been partly achieved through predictable policy mechanisms designed to stimulate demand; and Making the EU 2020 smart growth strategy target for energy efficiency binding – this would help motivate many of Europe’s venture-capital- backed cleantech companies. Europe’s historical leadership in eco-innovation field gave it an early lead in cleantech investment. Although the sector has rapidly developed over the last decade, there are always new challenges and prospects, with venture capital having a central role. U.S science leadership directly edges European companies for investement and market shareNorton Fullbright ’10 [ July 2010, norton rose llp is a leading international legal practice. they offer a full business law service from our offices across europe, the middle east and asia pacific., “Cleantech investment and private equity: an industry survey” http://www.nortonrosefulbright.com/files/cleantech-investment-and-private-equity-an-industry-survey-pdf-5mb-30 016.pdf]
In the near term, however, cleantech market participants operate in a business environment that is increasingly competitive along a number of dimensions. This report — our fifth annual — explores the theme of global competitiveness, for it can be argued that achieving competitiveness — with existing technologies and within the sector — is the strongest force at work in cleantech today. First, cleantech must compete with incumbent technologies on an unsubsidized basis. As we observe in our analysis of pure-play Gil Forer Leader, Global Cleantech Center Ernst & Young cleantech public companies (see p. 7), the combination of economic recession and diminishing governmental financial support in the US and Europe is taking a toll on financial results. Yet business leaders in a number of the cleantech verticals are coming to the seemingly contrarian conclusion that now is the time to develop a roadmap to the end of subsidies rather than ask for more. They recognize that success depends on driving the efficiencies, innovations and business models needed to compete head-on with traditional technologies. Then, there is greater competition in the sector than ever before. As cleantech matures, the field has become crowded in many of the industry verticals. With the sluggish economy and waning subsidies, competition has become intense, particularly in wind and solar. While the restructuring occurring in these two industries is painful, stronger global players will emerge from the process. And as we note in our article on solar and wind (see p. 25), the resulting fall in prices for renewable generating equipment is hastening installations and competitive prices for renewable energy in markets around the world. Countries continue to vie for competitive advantage through cleantech. Over the past year, we have seen significant new national commitments to cleantech, such as China’s clean energy and efficiency initiatives under its 12th Five Year Plan and Saudi Arabia’s US$100 billion solar development plan. In the report, we focus on Brazil’s efforts to promote wind and biofuels to meet its burgeoning eneokrgy needs, enhance energy security and provide economic development (see p. 41). Corporations, too, are increasingly treating their energy strategy as a competitive differentiator. As we highlight in the findings of our global survey of corporate energy executives (see p. 1), the energy mix has become a strategic issue at the C-suite level of billion-dollar corporations, especially given that a considerable — and growing — share of operating costs is spent on energy. Energy efficiency measures and the use of renewable energy by corporations are set to rise significantly over the next five years. In this context, only those corporations with a bcomprehensive and diverse energy strategy will be able to create a competitive advantage in a more resource-efficient and low-carbon economy. While the failures sometimes garner more attention than the successes in times like these, it is important to recognize the rapidly emerging cleantech market of stronger players with greater scale, who are better able to compete with industry incumbents on price and performance. In this report, you will find in-depth articles providing insight into different facets of the cleantech market, interviews with leading cleantech executives, roundtable discussions among key market participants and perspectives from Ernst & Young’s global cleantech leaders. We hope that our report proves to be a valuable source of cleantech business insight and a helpful contribution to the ongoing discussion of how to advance the cleantech agenda globally. / EU Leadership precarious and Key to climate leadership, U.S surge would steal patents and innovationThe Climate Group ‘14 [ February 6 2014, The Climate Group is an award-winning, international non-profit. Our goal is a prosperous, low carbon future. We believe this will be achieved through a ‘clean revolution’: the rapid scale-up of low carbon energy and technology. “EUROPE RISKS LOSING OUT TO CHINA AND THE US ON RENEWABLES,” http://www.theclimategroup.org/what-we-do/news-and-blogs/europe-risks-losing-out-to-china-and-the-us-on-competitive-renewables-study-warns/ ] Europe risks losing its foothold as a major competitive renewables market to China and the US if it doesn't regain leadership on climate and green energy policies, warns a new study. The report by Climate Strategies, a European economic research institute, says that if Europe doesn't enact policies to tackle climate change and grow investment in renewables it will miss out on jobs and industry monopoly to competitors. Authors attest that while the EU was bailing out its banks in the euro crisis, countries such as China, India, the US and hundreds of others, were busy investing heavily in renewable energy. Michael Grubb, Chair of Energy and Climate Policy at Cambridge University and Climate Strategies Board member, said: “Europe cannot compete in the global economy based on cheap resources. Like Japan in the 1980s, it must compete on innovation and efficiency. Europe currently has a good position on patents across most low carbon technology sectors, but this risks being rapidly eroded. Europe is not ahead on energy efficiency, and renewable energy targets now exist in 138 countries. 66 countries, including Australia, South Korea, South Africa, Canada and Brazil have emulated the feed-in-tariffs widely used in Europe.” The trend of renewables growth being increasingly dominated by countries outside of Europe is evidenced in another report released today by the Global Wind Energy Council, that reveals 2013's global cumulative installed wind power capacity growth of 12.4% was led by China and Canada. Today's Climate Strategies study further warns that Europe could lose its position as a pioneer of emission reduction solutions, which would also damage the region economically. The study concludes that Europe must stay competitive on innovation and energy efficiency to attract long-term investment. It states: "Europe should remain a part of the leading pack. This not only increases its international credibility in the field of global climate protection, but also has potential to create or maintain strategic economic advantages in sectors that are growing globally. The security of supply can be increased by reducing dependence on energy imports. In addition, clear climate change policy can create an attractive environment for investment in clean technologies, particularly insofar as it reduces policy uncertainty. Such investments can create new growth sectors and much needed jobs in Europe and thus also contribute to Europe’s economic recovery." The study comes at a pivotal moment when Europe is debating its new post-2020 climate and energy policy package. Many clean tech businesses and NGOs agree the EU must secure ambitious energy and climate policies for 2030 to reap the economic rewards of a low carbon economy. EU clean tech leadership key to legitimacy and international climate goalsDechezleprêtre 2014 [February 2014, ,Antoine Dechezleprêtre is a faculty member at Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment, The London School of Economics and Political Science “Staying with the leaders Europe's path to a successful low-carbon economy” http://www.swp-berlin.org/fileadmin/contents/products/fachpublikationen/Droege_staying_with_the_leaders_AcrobatNochmal2.pdf] Europe is not alone …. A diverse group of countries and regions is now advancing policies to enhance energy efficiency in building, industry and transport; to increase deployment of and industrial capacity in renewables; and to price carbon. … and needs to remain part of this leading group to secure energy supply, attract long-term investments and drive innovation that will enhance economic performance and unlock underutilised human and private financial resources to create new jobs. A stable European energy and climate policy environment, consistent with international climate goals, is crucial to future prosperity and will maintain the credibility of the European idea and its international legitimacy by accepting responsibility for its emissions. Falling behind would leave Europe more exposed to the inherent volatility in global fossil fuel markets. By staying among the countries leading the way in the low-carbon transition, Europe can instead benefit economically from a low-carbon economy. European economic competitiveness is not determined by energy prices. For 92% of manufacturing, energy bills are on average less than 1.6% of revenue (based on data for Germany). While it is important to contain energy costs, they do not determine the international competitiveness of European industry, or of the European economy overall. Europe spends a similar proportion of its GDP on energy as the United States and other major competitors. Prices stimulate higher efficiency and countries with higher energy prices are often more energy efficient, which limits the impact of higher energy prices on bills. … but a few key sectors deserve (and get) special treatment. 8% of manufacturing industries spend more than 6% of their revenue on energy. For some of their energy intensive processes, energy price differentials to the rest of the world can matter. Directory: wp-content -> uploads -> 2014 2014 -> For want of a nail 2014 -> Stop Militarizing Law Enforcement Act of 2014 2014 -> Ihbb asian Championships 2014 middle school bowl Round 4 First Quarter 2014 -> Ihbb european Championships 2014 Bowl Round 4 First Quarter 2014 -> International History Bee and Bowl 2013-14 Asian Division Question Set Bowl Round Six 2014 -> United states patent and trademark office 2014 -> Coffs harbour eisteddfod vocal syllabus 2014 -> Listen News Programs Schedule pledge now 2014 -> Slow club announce third album complete surrender Download 1.09 Mb. Share with your friends:
|