This essay will discuss the following questions: Should we support or oppose energy subsidies? After three decades, UN efforts to address climate change have reached a dead-end.
In this essay, it will be argued that firstly, from a conceptual viewpoint, energy subsidies (ES) must not be considered a monolith. Secondly, from a more empirical viewpoint, it becomes clear that most ES benefit particular interests more than supposedly global economic and climatic interests, making the case for the opposition of these ES, whether they are fossil fuel subsidies (FFS) or such for renewable energy sources (RES).
Firstly, as expressions of political will ES play different roles across time and national contexts and are anything but uniform. A widely accepted definition that includes both FFS and RES stems from the International Energy Agency (IEA 1999). It understands ES broadly as any government action that is directed primarily at the energy sector and lowers the cost of energy production, raises the price received by energy producers or lowers the price paid by energy consumers.
These and further specifications are crucial since the notion of ES tends to hide more than the merely quantitative distinctness between FFS and RES. More precisely, it can be assumed that ES are – to different extents – interrelated with the energy
trilemma as a central challenge for energy governance. This is since, depending on the respective national context, they might affect its three competing aims of environmental sustainability, economic competitiveness and energy security differently and are equally subject to their preference order.
Table of Contents
1. Should we support or oppose energy subsidies?
2. ‘After three decades, UN efforts to address climate change have reached a dead-end.’ Discuss.
Objectives and Topics
This academic publication critically examines two major debates in global energy and climate policy: the economic and environmental rationale behind energy subsidies and the current effectiveness of the United Nations' climate change regime. The central objective is to challenge binary perspectives by arguing that energy subsidies are not monolithic and that UN climate governance has reached a crossroads of potential reform rather than an absolute dead-end.
- The conceptual and empirical differentiation between fossil fuel subsidies (FFS) and renewable energy subsidies (RES).
- The impact of energy subsidies on the "energy trilemma" (environmental sustainability, economic competitiveness, and energy security).
- The role of the Paris Agreement as an evolving framework for global climate governance (GCG).
- The emergence of new dynamics in international climate politics, including the role of non-state actors and the integration of the energy-climate-nexus.
Excerpt from the Book
‘After three decades, UN efforts to address climate change have reached a dead-end.’ Discuss.
Despite the recent COVID-19-induced fall of global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, May 2020 recorded the highest monthly atmospheric GHG load in three million years (McKibben 2020). This and other detrimental developments may suggest a climate-political dead-end. As this essay argues, however, global climate governance (GCG) finds itself at a crossroads: Depending on further developments before and the outcome of the postponed Conference of the Parties (COP) 26 in Glasgow in 2021, it might speed up heading either towards the road of success or the path of failure. This crossroads- rather than dead-end situation is the result of (1) the transformational potential of GCG and (2) the potential to overcome the ‘Paris Regime’s’ current effectivity barriers.
Firstly, GCG as an anything but static sub-field of global governance has experienced several reforms in the past and is likely to continue doing so (e.g. Kuyper et al. 2018). Here, due to the absence of a widely accepted definition, GCG can be broadly understood as “the sum of the many ways individuals and institutions, public and private, manage their common affairs” (Commission on Global Governance 1995, p. 2) regarding the anthropogenic climate change (CC). With a plethora of institutions on different levels, GCG is frequently considered a regime of a fragmented nature or even a ‘regime complex’ (e.g. Keohane & Victor 2011).
Consequently, GCG must not be equalised with the umbrella term ‘UN efforts’ which, since 1994, is largely but not solely embodied by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), laying at the heart of GCG (e.g. Hermwille et al. 2015). The UNFCCC’s and other UN organisations’ efforts within the wider climate landscape, in turn, is largely the outcome of CC-engagement by national/regional units (Parties to the Convention) and can hence be considered dynamic rather than static in nature.
Summary of Chapters
1. Should we support or oppose energy subsidies?: This chapter analyzes energy subsidies as non-uniform economic instruments that influence the energy trilemma and argues that their potential to benefit specific interests often overrides global climate and economic goals.
2. ‘After three decades, UN efforts to address climate change have reached a dead-end.’ Discuss.: This chapter evaluates the current status of global climate governance, suggesting that rather than failing entirely, the UN regime is at a critical juncture defined by transformational potential and the need to address structural effectiveness barriers.
Keywords
Energy subsidies, Fossil fuel subsidies, Renewable energy sources, Energy trilemma, Global climate governance, Paris Agreement, UNFCCC, Greenhouse gas emissions, Carbon budget, Energy security, Climate justice, Energy transition, Climate policy, Policy design, Non-state actors.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the core focus of this publication?
The document focuses on two critical areas: the multifaceted impact of energy subsidies on the global economy and environment, and an assessment of whether international climate efforts have reached a point of failure or are merely in a transitional phase.
What are the primary themes discussed?
The primary themes include energy governance, the environmental impact of fossil fuels versus renewables, fiscal impacts of subsidies, the effectiveness of the Paris Agreement, and the evolution of international climate cooperation.
What is the main research question regarding climate efforts?
The publication investigates the claim that UN-led efforts to mitigate climate change have reached a "dead-end" after thirty years, countering this with the argument that the system is actually at a "crossroads."
Which scientific methods are applied in the analysis?
The author employs a qualitative synthesis of existing academic literature, policy documents, and empirical data to contrast different policy viewpoints and institutional dynamics.
What topics are covered in the main body?
The main body examines the conceptual definition of energy subsidies, their role in the energy trilemma, their empirical effects on economic inequality, and the institutional evolution of global climate governance.
Which keywords define the work?
Key terms include energy subsidies, the energy trilemma, climate governance, the Paris Agreement, carbon budgets, and policy effectiveness.
How does the author characterize the difference between fossil fuel and renewable subsidies?
The author notes that while both are government interventions, fossil fuel subsidies historically aggravate fiscal imbalances and hinder a low-carbon transition, whereas renewable subsidies foster environmental sustainability despite potential distributional challenges.
What role does the "energy-climate-nexus" play in the author's argument?
The author argues that global energy governance and climate governance are increasingly merging, and that future success in climate policy depends on stronger integration of this nexus.
Why are non-state actors mentioned in the context of the Paris Agreement?
The author highlights that the Paris Agreement acknowledges non-state actors for the first time, seeing their involvement as a crucial strategic supplement to national actions, especially when state-level commitment fluctuates.
What does the author suggest to avoid a "climate-political dead-end"?
The author suggests that to avoid a dead-end, the regime must improve transparency, establish clearer reporting standards, close loopholes regarding climate justice, and move towards a stronger focus on concrete results rather than mere obligations.
- Arbeit zitieren
- Max Schmidt (Autor:in), 2020, Should we support or oppose energy subsidies?, München, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/978892
