Environmental integration and multi-faceted international dimensions of EU law: Unpacking the EU's 2009 climate and energy package

Common Market Law Review

Volumn 48, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 829-891

  Kulovesi, Kati ^a   Morgera, Elisa ^b   Muñoz, Miquel ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF EASTERN FINLAND   (Finland)

^b UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH   (United Kingdom)

^c BOSTON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 79958016909     PISSN: 01650750     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (252)

1. See information on the Commission website:.
2. For an overview of the relevant developments, see Kulovesi, Book review of The International Climate Regime: A Guide to Rules, Institutions and Procedures by Farhana Yamin and Joanna Depledge
3. Legal Aspects of Implementing the Kyoto Protocol Mechanisms: Making Kyoto Work edited by David Freestone and Charlotte Streck, XIX Finnish Yearbook of International Law (2008), 389-398
4. Jordan and Rayner, "The evolution of climate policy in the European Union: An historical overview" , in Jordan et al. (Eds.), Climate Change Policy in the European Union. Confronting Dilemmas of Mitigation and Adaptation? (CUP, 2010), p. 76.
5. Commission, "20 20 by 2020. Europe's climate change opportunity", COM(2008)30 final, 23 Jan. 2008, pp. 2-3.
6. Oberthür and Roche Kelly, "EU leadership in international climate policy: Achievements and challenges", (2008) The International Spectator, 42-43
7. Von Homeyer, "The evolution of EU environmental governance", in Scott (Ed.), Environmental Protection: European Law and Governance (OUP, 2009), p. 26.
8. It has been argued that after the failure of the Treaty Establishing a Constitution for Europe in 2005, climate change emerged as an opportunity to enhance the EU's legitimacy and as a window of opportunity to advance both internal and external EU policy
9. Lehmann, "Fallout from Copenhagen: Has the EU lost its global relevance?", (2010) YaleGlobalOnline, , accessed 21 Feb. 2011.
10. Lehmann identifies the EU as the "major victim of Copenhagen", arguing that the Conference was a "humiliation for the EU" and a sign of its declining influence
11. Oberthür, "EU leadership on climate change: Living up to the challenges", in European Commission, The European Union and World Sustainable Development: Visions of Leading Policy Makers & Academics (Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, 2008), p. 50.
12. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (adopted 9 May 1992, entered into force 21 March 1994) 1771 UNTS 107 (UNFCCC)
13. These links are illustrated in Oberthür and Pallemaerts (Eds.), The New Climate Policies of the European Union: Internal Legislation and Climate Diplomacy (VUB Press, 2010).
14. Final Act of the 1986-1994 Uruguay round of trade negotiations (adopted 15 Apr. 1994, entered into force 1 Jan. 1995) 1867 UNTS 14 (WTO Agreements).
15. Convention on Biological Diversity (adopted 5 June 1992, entered into force 29 Dec. 1993), 1760 UNTS 79 (CBD).
16. The UN General Assembly, at its 64th session, adopted Resolution 64/236 (2010), convening in 2012 a UN conference on sustainable development at the highest possible level, including Heads of State and Government or other representatives, with a two-fold focus on the "green economy" in the context of sustainable development and poverty eradication; and on the institutional framework for sustainable development
17. Kelemen, "Globalizing European Union environmental policy", Princeton annual workshop on European integration, 1 May 2009, , accessed 8 Nov. 2010.
18. Kelemen mentions examples related to climate change, genetically modified organisms, trade and environment, as well as chemicals
19. De Witte, "International law as a tool for the European Union", 5 EuConst (2009), 265-283
20. See also Vedder, "Diplomacy by directive: An analysis of the international context of the Emissions Trading Directive", SSRN Working Paper, SSRN-id 1477371, accessed 8 Nov 2010.
21. Presidency Conclusions of the Brussels European Council, 8-9 March 2007, 7224/1/07, pp. 10-12, at 19-18.
22. A number of measures to achieve the 20% energy efficiency goal had been identified previously in Commission, Action plan for energy efficiency: Realizing the potential, COM(2006)545 final, 19 Oct. 2006.
23. Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive 2003/87/EC so as to improve and extend the greenhouse gas emission allowance trading system of the Community, COM(2008)16 final, 23 Jan. 2008.
24. Proposal for a Decision of the European Parliament and of the Council on the effort of Member States to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions to meet the Community's greenhouse gas emission reduction commitments up to 2020, COM(2008)17 final, 23 Jan. 2008.
25. Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources, COM(2008)19 final, 23 Jan. 2008.
26. Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the geological storage of carbon dioxide and amending Council Directives 85/337/EEC, 96/61/EC, Directives 2000/60/EC, 2001/80/EC, 2004/35/EC, 2006/12/EC and Regulation (EC) No 1013/2006, COM (2008)18 final, 23 Jan. 2008.
27. Elements of the final compromise regarding the energy and climate change package as agreed by the European Council at its meeting on 11 and 12 Dec. 2008, 17215/08.
28. European Parliament, 17 Dec. 2008 and Council of the European Union, 6 Apr. 2009, 8434/09.
29. O.J. 2009, L 140/16.
30. O.J. 2009, L 140/63.
31. O.J. 2009, L 140/88.
32. O.J. 2009, L 140/114.
33. O.J. 2009, L 140/1.
34. O.J. 2009, L 140/136.
35. Art. 11 TFEU: "Environmental protection requirements must be integrated into the definition and implementation of the Union policies and activities, in particular with a view to pro-moting sustainable development". While the substance has not been changed with the Lisbon Treaty, it has been argued that the environmental integration principle is "less 'visible' than before" as it "sits alongside other similar provisions, for example, as to consumer protection, employment, animal welfare and discrimination".
36. See Lee, "The environmental implications of the Lisbon Treaty", 10 Environmental Law Review (2008), 134
37. Art. 191(1)-(3) TFEU: "1. Union policy on the environment shall contribute to pursuit of the following objectives: preserving, protecting and improving the quality of the environment, protecting human health, prudent and rational utilization of natural resources, [and] promoting measures at international level to deal with regional or worldwide environmental problems, and in particular combating climate change. 2. Union policy on the environment shall aim at a high level of protection taking into account the diversity of situations in the various regions of the Union. It shall be based on the precautionary principle and on the principles that preventive action should be taken, that environmental damage should as a priority be rectified at source and that the polluter should pay.... 3. In preparing its policy on the environment, the Union shall take account of: available scientific and technical data, environmental conditions in the various regions of the Union, the potential benefits and costs of action or lack of action, the economic and social development of the Union as a whole and the balanced development of its regions".
38. Dhondt, Integration of Environmental Protection into Other EC Policies (Europa Law Publishing, 2003), p. 84.
39. Joined Cases C-418 & 419/97, ARCO Chemie Nederland Ltd v. Minister van Volkshuisvesting, Ruimtelijke Ordening en Milieubeheer and Vereniging Dorpsbelang Hees et al. v. Directeur van de dienst Milieu en Water van de provincie Gelderland, [2000] ECR I-4475; and Case C-318/98, Criminal proceedings against Giancarlo Fornasar et al., [2000] ECR I-4785, where the Court interpreted EU waste legislation broadly.
40. For a more detailed discussion, see Morgera, "An introduction to EU environmental law (from the viewpoint of international law)", Edinburgh School of Law working paper (SSRN 2010), , accessed 8 Nov. 2010.
41. Jans and Vedder, European Environmental Law (Europa Law, 2008), p. 17.
42. They conclude that "only in very exceptional cases (i.e. manifest error of appraisal) measures will be subject of annulment because certain environmental objectives have not been taken sufficiently into account" (on the basis of Case C-341/95, Gianni Bettati, [1998] ECR I-4355).
43. See e.g. the Resolution on climate change and migratory species (UN Doc UNEP/CMS/Resolution 8.13, 2005) adopted by the parties to the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (adopted 23 June 1979, entered into force 1 Nov. 1983), 1651 UNTS 333; COP Resolution X.24, "Climate change and wetlands" (adopted 4 Nov. 2008) by the parties to the Convention on Wetlands of International Importance, especially as Waterfowl Habitat (adopted 2 Feb. 1971, entered into force 21 Dec. 1975), 996 UNTS 245; and World Heritage Committee decision 29 COM 7B.a (adopted 17 Jul. 2005) by the parties to the Convention concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage (adopted 16 Nov. 1972, entered into force 17 Dec. 1975), 1037 UNTS 151. An analysis on linkages between climate change and MEAs can be found in a forthcoming special issue of the Global Environmental Politics, edited by Jinnah and Muñoz, on climate change bandwagoning.
44. See "Climate change bandwagoning: The impacts of strategic linkages on regime design, maintenance, and death", 11 Global Environmental Politics (forthcoming 2011)
45. Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity have been increasingly addressing the environmental sustainability of response measures to climate change, such as ocean fertilization (for which they adopted a moratorium through COP Decision IX/16C, in 2008) and geo-engineering (for which a moratorium was adopted by the Conference of the Parties in Oct. 2010 - CBD COP decision X/33, para 8(w)).
46. See Morgera, "Far away, so close: A legal analysis of the increasing interactions between the Convention on Biological Diversity and climate change law", 2 Climate Law (forthcoming 2011)
47. Generally on the biodiversity impacts of mitigation and adaptation measures, see Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity, "Connecting biodiversity and climate change mitigation and adaptation: Report of the second ad hoc technical expert group on biodiversity and climate change" (Technical Series, No. 41, Montreal 2009).
48. European Parliament, Resolution on measures to counteract the rising concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere (the 'greenhouse effect'), O.J. 1986, C 255/272; Commission, Communication to the Council on the greenhouse effect and the Community - Commission work programme concerning the evaluation of policy options to deal with the greenhouse effect, COM(88)656, 16 Nov. 1988; and Council Resolution of 21 June 1989 on the greenhouse effect and the Community, O.J. 1989, C 183/4.
49. For a more detailed overview, see Mehling, "Emissions trading and national allocation in the Member States: An Achilles heel of European climate policy?", 5 YEEL (2005), 119-120
50. The negotiating process leading to the adoption of the UNFCCC was launched by UN General Assembly Resolution 45/212, 21 Dec. 1990.
51. Commission, Community strategy to limit carbon dioxide emissions and to improve energy efficiency, COM(92)246 final, 1 June 1992; Proposal for a Council Directive to limit carbon dioxide emissions by improving energy efficiency (SAVE programme), COM(92)182 final, 26 June 1992; Proposal for a Council Decisions for a monitoring mechanism of Community CO2 and other greenhouse gas emissions, COM(92)226 final, 30 June 1992; Proposal for a Council Directive introducing a tax on carbon dioxide emissions and energy, COM(92)226 final, 26 June 1992; and Specific Actions for Greater Penetration for Renewable Energy Sources, COM(92)180 final, 29 June 1992
52. Agenda 21 - Global programme of action on sustainable development, UN Doc. A/CONF.151/26/REV.1, vols. I - III, 3 - 14 June 1992 (Agenda 21).
53. Council and the representatives of the Governments of the Member States, "Towards sustainability", O.J. 1993, C 138/1, 42.
54. For analysis of European climate policy before UNFCCC COP 1, see also Grubb, "European climate change policy in a global context", in Bergesen et al. (Eds.), Green Globe Yearbook of International Cooperation on Environment and Development (OUP, 1995), pp. 41-50.
55. Council (EU), Conclusions of the 1939th environment Council meeting, 25 and 26 June 1996, Brussels, PRES/96/188
56. UNFCCC Decision 1/CP.16, Outcome of the work of the Ad Hoc Working Group on Long-term Cooperative Action under the Convention, advance unedited version, , accessed 21 Feb. 2011, para 4.
57. The text provides for a review of the 2°C target in light of best available science, including in relation to a 1.5°C target.
58. Metz, Controlling climate change (CUP, 2010), pp. 74-75.
59. Hansen et al. "Target atmospheric CO2: Where should the humanity aim?", 2 Open Atmospheric Science Journal (2008), 217-231.
60. The so-called "burden-sharing" agreement from 1998 was adopted in a legally-binding form through the Council decision of 25 Apr. 2002 concerning the approval, on behalf of the European Community, of the Kyoto Protocol to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change and the joint fulfillment of commitments thereunder, O.J. 2002, L 130/1, 1-3.
61. Commission, Climate change: Towards an EU post-Kyoto strategy, COM(98)353 final, 3 June 1998
62. Parliament and Council Decision 1600/2002/EC laying down the Sixth Community environment action programme, O.J. 2002, L 242/15.
63. Directive 2003/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 Oct. 2003 establishing a scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading within the Community, O.J. 2003, L 275/32.
64. Morgera and Marín Durán, "The UN 2005 World Summit, the environment and the EU: Priorities, promises and prospects", 15 Review of European Community and International Environmental Law (RECIEL) (2006), 1-18
65. Morgera, "Relevance beyond borders: Recent developments in the EU", 40 Environmental Policy and Law (2010) 234-236
66. Van Schaik and Egendorfer, "Improving the climate: Will the new Constitution strengthen the EU's performance in international climate negotiations?", Centre for European policy studies, Policy brief No. 63/Feb. Brussels, 2005.
67. The European Parliament called on the EU's High Representative and the Commissioner responsible for climate action to lead a new "climate diplomacy" in the resolution on the outcome of the Copenhagen conference on climate change (10 Feb. 2010), para 7.
68. "Commission creates two new Directorates-General for energy and climate action" (Europa Rapid Press Release), IP 10/164, 17 Feb. 2010.
69. On the procedures for collegiate decision-making within the Commission, see Chalmers et al., European Union Law (CUP, 2010), pp. 55-56.
70. Council Decision 2002/358/EC concerning the approval, on behalf of the European Community, of the Kyoto Protocol to the UNFCCC and the joint fulfilment of commitments thereunder, O.J. 2002, L 130/1.
71. On the US announcement and the Protocol's birthing difficulties, see Kulovesi, "How to prevent babies from being thrown away with the bathwater: Perspectives on the international climate regime from Buenos Aires to the future", in Morgera and Francioni (Eds.), The Future of Environmental Law: International and European Perspectives (The Working Group on Environmental Law: Collected Reports 2004 - 2005), EUI Working Papers Law, Law No. 2006/01, 23, , accessed 21 Feb. 2011.
72. Ellerman, Convery and De Perthuis, Pricing Carbon. The European Union Emissions Trading Scheme (CUP, 2010), pp. 28, 18-19.
73. Commission, "Towards a comprehensive climate change agreement in Copenhagen", COM(2009)39 final, 28 Jan. 2009.
74. On the Copenhagen outcome, see e.g. "Summary of the Copenhagen climate change conference", (12/459) The Earth Negotiations Bulletin (2009).
75. Rajamani, "The making and unmaking of the Copenhagen accord", 59 ICLQ (2010), 824-843
76. Bodansky, "The Copenhagen climate change conference: A post-mortem", 104 AJIL (2010), 230-240
77. Müller, "Copenhagen 2009, failure or final wake-up call for our leaders" (Oxford Institute for Energy Studies EV 49, Feb. 2010).
78. Meilstrup, "The runaway summit: The background story of the Danish Presidency of COP 15, the UN Climate Conference", in (2010) Danish Foreign Policy Yearbook, 113-135, , visited 21 Feb 2011.
79. On the EU's role in Copenhagen, see Kleine-Brockhoff, "Lessons of a memorably chaotic global gathering", Financial Times, 21 Dec. 2009.
80. Kanter, "EU blames others for 'great failure' on climate", New York Times, 22 Dec. 2009.
81. According to the Fourth Assessment Report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, developed countries should collectively reduce their emissions by 25-40% from 1990 levels by 2020 to have a reasonable probability of limiting global average temperature increase to below 2°C from pre-industrial times
82. See, Metz and al. (Eds.), Climate Change 2007: Contribution of Working Group III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (CUP, 2007), Box 13.7 at p. 776.
83. The relevant ministers from Germany, France and UK advocated their position and its positive economic implications in an opinion piece in the Financial Times
84. See Huhne, Röttgen and Borloo, "Europe needs to reduce emissions by 30%", Financial Times, 14 July 2010
85. Council (EU), Conclusion on the preparation for the 16th session of the conference of the parties to the UN framework convention on climate change, 29 November - 10 December 2010", 3036th environment Council meeting, Luxembourg, 14 Oct. 2010.
86. Commission, "Analysis of options to move beyond 20% greenhouse gas emission reductions and assessing the risk of carbon leakage", COM(2010)265 final, 26 May 2010
87. The issue is controversial both among the Member States and within the Commission. While DG-CLIMA supports the higher target, Energy Commissioner Günther Oettinger has argued that if the EU goes "alone to 30%, you will only have a faster process of de-industrialization in Europe".
88. See, "30% greenhouse gas emission cut still on the table", EurActive, 14 Feb. 2011, , accessed 21 Feb. 2011.
89. Schjolset, "Will it be late or never for the 30% EU target?", (9/42) Carbon Market Europe, 22 Oct. 2010.
90. Commission, "Europe 2020: A strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth", COM(2010)2020 final, 3 March 2010; and European Council, Conclusions of 17 June 2010, EUCO 13/10
91. European Parliament Resolution on the outcome of the Copenhagen conference on climate change, 10 Feb. 2010, para 7, , accessed 21 Feb. 2011.
92. The European Parliament "urged the EU to agree on a 'Roadmap for Mexico' which will include the discussion of climate policies in every strategic partnership and bilateral and multilateral cooperation agreement in order to create a more coherent external climate protection strategy"
93. "Renewed impetus in the fight against poverty: EU and ACP states initial revised Cotonou Partnership Agreement" (Press Release), 19 March 2010, accessed 21 Feb. 2011.
94. See also, Second revision of the Cotonou Agreement - agreed consolidated text, (11 March 2009), preamble para 13bis and Arts. 1, 11(1), 20(2), 29(3)(a) and 32 bis - the latter is a whole new article devoted specifically to climate change cooperation, accessed 21 Feb. 2011.
95. This concept is different from the requirement of environmental integration enshrined in Art. 11 TFEU. Normative integration simply refers to a legislative technique of ensuring clar-ity in the relationship between different relevant legal instruments.
96. For an application in the area of EU water law, see Grimeaud, "The EC Water Framework Directive - An instrument for integrating water policy", 13 RECIEL (2004), 27-39
97. See also Commission, "Energy efficiency: Delivering the 20% target", COM(2008)772 final, 13 Nov. 2008.
98. It is interesting to note that the EU's voluntary agreements concluded with the car industry in 1998 failed to achieve the agreed targets. The final compromise adopted as a part of the Package provides, inter alia, for "volume Phase-in", meaning that in 2012-2014, the target applies only to a proportion of the manufacturers' cars during the first year. It also provides for reduced excess emission premiums. There is also a long-term objective to reach 95 grams per kilometer by 2020, to be reviewed in 2013.
99. Several directives and regulations pre-dating the Package aimed to improve energy efficiency. One of them was Directive 2005/32/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 July 2005 establishing a framework for the setting of ecodesign requirements for energyusing products and amending Council Directives 96/57/EC and 2000/55/EC of the Parliament and the Council, O.J. 2005, L 191/29 (the Ecodesign Directive). In March 2009, the Commission adopted a Regulation under the Ecodesign Directive to gradually phase out the traditional incandescent light bulbs and replace them with fluorescent light bulbs that use 65-80% less energy, see Commission Regulation 244/2009 of 18 March 2009 implementing Directive 2005/32/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council with regard to ecodesign requirements for nondirectional household lamps, O.J. 2009, L 76/3. The Ecodesign Directive was amended and recast in 2009, see Directive 2009/125/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 Oct. 2009 establishing the framework for the setting of ecodesign requirements for energyrelated products, O.J. 2009, L 285/10. In 2009-2010, measures were passed known as the "energy efficiency package", and included: Parliament and Council Regulation 1222/2009 (25 Nov. 2009) on the labelling of tires with respect to fuel efficiency and other essential parameters, O.J. 2009, L 342/46; Parliament and Council Directive 2010/31/EU (19 May 2010) on the energy performance of buildings, O.J. 2010, L 153/13; and Parliament and Council Directive 2010/30/EU (19 May 2010) on the indication by labelling and standard product information of the consumption of energy and other resources by energy-related products, O.J. 2010, L 153/1.
100. Commission, "Community guidelines on State aid for environmental protection" (Notice), 2008/C 82/01, O.J. 2008, C 82/1. See also "State aid: Guidelines on State aid for the environment - frequently asked questions" (Europa Rapid Press Release), MEMO/08/31, 23 Jan. 2008.
101. The EU ETS estimated value was Riyaz63 billion of the overall Riyaz86 billion value of the global carbon market in 2008.
102. "Excutive Summary", in Capoor and Ambrosi, State and Trends of the Carbon Market 2009 (The World Bank, 2009), p. 1-2.
103. A critical assessment maintains that the EU ETS has locked-in current emissions and provided incentives for industries not to reduce (and even increase) their emissions
104. Sandbag, Cap or trap? How the EU ETS risks locking-in carbon emissions (Sept. 2010), , accessed 21 Feb. 2011.
105. The ETS Directive lists all six greenhouse gases covered by the Kyoto Protocol in accordance with its Annex A, namely carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons and sulphur hexafluoride. During the first two trading periods, the ETS has focused on carbon dioxide emissions from electricity generators, other combustion installations, mineral oil refineries, iron and steel production and processing, cement and lime, glass and ceramics, as well as the pulp and paper sector. From 2013 onwards, the ETS will also cover: carbon dioxide emissions from the production of bulk organic chemicals and non-ferrous metals; perfluorocarbons and carbon dioxide emissions from the aluminium sector; and carbon dioxide and nitrous oxide emissions from the production nitric, adipic, glyoxal and glyoxylic acid. Member states can unilaterally include additional activities and gases, subject to approval by the Commission.
106. "Summary for policymakers", in Pachauri and Reisinger (Eds.), Climate Change 2007. Synthesis Report. A Report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (CUP, 2007), p. 18.
107. Stern, The Economics of Climate Change. The Stern Review (CUP, 2006), p. 349.
108. Commission, "EU action against climate change. The EU Emissions Trading Scheme", , accessed 21 Feb. 2011.
109. Lutken and Michaelowa, Corporate Strategies and the Clean Development Mechanism. Developing Country Financing for Developed Country Commitments? (Edward Elgar, 2008), pp. 4-8.
110. The flexibility mechanisms are based on Art. 6 (JI), Art. 12 (CDM) and Art. 17 (emissions trading) of the Protocol to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, opened for signature 11 Dec. 1997, 37 ILM (1998) 22 (entered into force 16 Feb. 2005), Art. 2(3) (Kyoto Protocol).
111. Art. 3.1. of the UNFCCC provides that "The Parties should protect the climate system for the benefit of present and future generations of humankind, on the basis of equity and in accordance with their common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities. Accordingly, developed country Parties should take the lead in combatting climate change and the adverse effects thereof".
112. For discussion, see Rajamani, Differential Treatment in International Environmental Law (OUP, 2006)
113. Commission, "Preparing for implementation of the Kyoto Protocol", COM(1999)230 final, 19 May 1999 and Commission, "Emissions trading within the European Community" (Green Paper), COM(2000)87 final, 8 March 2000
114. Permit conditions and procedures were coordinated with Directive 96/61/EC concerning Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control, O.J. 1996, L 257/26.
115. The ETS has also experienced other problems, including a widespread value-added tax (VAT) fraud scheme run by criminal networks in a number of Member States
116. See, "Further investigation into VAT fraud linked to the carbon emissions trading system", Europol, 28. Dec 2010, , accessed 21 Feb. 2011.
117. A month before the hacking scandal, the Commission had issued a communication assessing current levels of protection of the carbon market from market misconduct or similar problems. See Commission, "Towards an enhanced market oversight framework for the EU Emissions Trading Scheme", COM(2010)796 final, 21. Dec. 2010.
118. Some of the key challenges during the first trading period included the identification of covered installations, organizing public consultations and lack of verified emissions data, which resulted in over-allocation of allowances
119. For the second trading period, emissions in the EU ETS sector have been capped at around 6.5% below their levels in 2005.
120. Some of the main questions for international climate policy include the continuity of the Kyoto Protocol beyond its first commitment period in 2012 and the ways of engaging the US and major emitting developing countries, such as China, in climate change mitigation efforts
121. For an overview, see Kulovesi and Gutíerrez, "Climate change negotiations update: Process and prospects for an agreed outcome in Copenhagen in December 2009", 18 RECIEL (2009), 229-243
122. Emissions trading: Commission welcomes vote to ban certain industrial gas credits (Europa Rapid Press Release), IP/11/56, 21 Jan. 2011. The European Parliament will subsequently have three months to comment on the proposal.
123. HFC credits have been qualified as a "loophole" and "market distortion" to the CDM and carbon markets
124. See, "Kyoto Protocol 'loophole' has cost $6 billion", (2007) Newscientist, , accessed 11 Nov. 2010.
125. Wara, "Is the global carbon market working?" 445 Nature (2007), 595-596
126. UNFCCC Secretariat, CDM statistics, , accessed 21 Feb. 2011.
127. The reason for such concerns is that HFC-23 is produced as a by-product of chlorodifluoromethane (HCFC-22) production, which is a gas that depletes the ozone layer and is also a powerful greenhouse gas
128. Note, however, that after industry lobbying, the ban will enter into force 4 months later than the Commission's original proposal, "EU waters down ban on industrial gas offsets", (2011) Carbon Market Europe
129. Directive 2008/101/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 19 Nov. 2008 amending Directive 2003/87/EC so as to include aviation activities in the scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading within the Community, O.J. 2009, L 8/3.
130. The 37th Session of the Assembly of ICAO adopted a resolution to reduce the impact of aviation emissions on climate change
131. See, "ICAO Member States agree to historic agreement on aviation and climate change", ICAO News release, PI0 14/10, 8 Oct. 2010, , accessed 21 Feb. 2011.
132. The Air Transport Association of America (ATA), American Airlines, Continental Airlines and United Airlines have challenged the inclusion of aviation emissions under the ETS before the UK High Court of Justice, which has requested a preliminary ruling from the ECJ, Case C-366/10 (O.J. 2010, C 260/9).
133. See also Petersen, "The legality of the EU's stand-alone approach to the climate impact of aviation: The express role given to the ICAO by the Kyoto Protocol", 17 RECIEL (2008), 196-204
134. For a recent critical assessment of the data concerning 2009 emissions, see Sandbag, "Rescuing the EU ETS from Redundancy" (Briefing Paper), , accessed 21 Feb. 2011.
135. The paper argues that after 5 years, the ETS has "failed to constrain the annual supply of carbon across capped sectors for any year except 2008", and given the significant drop in emissions in 2009 due to the recession, the second trading period of the ETS could "allow emissions to grow with no further need for domestic abatement until 2017 or later"
136. Around 95% of allowances were allocated free of charge during the first Phase and around 90% during the second Phase
137. On both occasions, the NAP process was also slow to administer. The fact that the allocations for the first trading period were not based on verified emissions also gave rise to problems. While the aim was to set the cap close to business-as-usual emissions during Phase I of the ETS, the price of EUAs eventually collapsed from its high at around Riyaz30 close to zero as monitored data released in the spring of 2006 concerning the first year showed that the cap was too lax and the actual emissions were lower than the allocations.
138. Ellerman et al. explain that: "The problem was that no Member State government had a good idea of the exact emissions within the ETS sectors", p. 37. During Phase II, the Commission took a stricter stance on the NAPs and verified emissions from 2005 were used as the baseline in setting the cap for 2008-2012, which is around 6.5% below 2005 emissions. However, NAPs have been subject to a number of legal challenges. The most notable cases concern NAPs by Estonia and Poland for the second trading period where the General Court found that the Commission had exceed its powers when significantly reducing the allocations. See Case T-183/07, Poland v. Commission, [2009] ECR II-3395 (appealed) and Case T-263/07, Estonia v. Commission, [2009] ECR II-3463 (appealed).
139. The linear factor was determined based on the EU's unilateral pledge to reduce emissions by 20% from 1990 levels by 2020 (i.e. by 14% from 2005 levels). The ETS sector will reduce emissions by 21% from 2005 levels by 2020, in other words, more than non-ETS sectors. The linear factor will continue beyond 2020 and it will be revised at the latest in 2025.
140. The Commission originally proposed to reach full auctioning in these sectors by 2020
141. See also the draft decision by the Commission determining transnational Union-wide rules for harmonized free allocation of emission allowances pursuant to Article 10(a) of Directive 2003/87/EC, as approved by climate change committee, 15 Dec. 2010, available at: , accessed 21 Feb. 2011.
142. Another issue that could compromise the effectiveness of the EU ETS is the use of international offsets. E.g. in 2009, while credits from international offsets accounted for only 4.3% of credits surrendered under the ETS, the share of credits from controversial HFC projects accounted for 59% of all CDM credits under the ETS.
143. Elsworth and Worthington, "International offsets and the EU 2009. An update on the usage of compliance offsets in the EU Emissions Trading Scheme", Sandbag Climate Campaign Report, July 2009) , accessed 11 Nov. 2010.
144. "EU ETS: Emissions fall more than 11% in 2009" (Europa Rapid Press Release), IP/10/576, 18 May 2010
145. Jinnah, Bushey, Muñoz and Kulovesi, "Tripping points: Barriers and bargaining chips on the road to Copenhagen", 4 Environmental Research Letters (2009), , accessed 21 Feb. 2011.
146. Essentially, developing countries emphasize the need for new, additional and predictable public funding from developed countries, while developed countries wish to place the emphasis on private and innovative funding sources
147. EU Council, "EU and global vision and targets and international ABS regime", (Environment Council Conclusions, 7536/10, 16 March 2010), para 19, indicating that "public and private finance, including innovative forms of financing, and finance associated with the Copenhagen Accord on climate change, should - based on appropriate criteria - include scope for payments for ecosystem services, where appropriate, including for both adaptation and mitigation, and should specifically support conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity within REDDplus, as appropriate, through the implementation of negotiated safeguards"
148. "EU climate approach puts world's poorest people at peril" (Oxfam Press Release, 2 March 2009), , accessed 21 Feb. 2011.
149. Commission, "Stepping up international climate finance: A European blueprint for the Copenhagen deal", COM(2009)475, p. 3, Sept. 2009. The Commission further specified that domestic private and public finance could deliver between 20-40%, the carbon market up to around 40%, and international public finance could contribute to cover the remainder.
150. Presidency Conclusions of the Brussels European Council, 29-30 Oct. 2009, 15265/1/09 Rev 1.
151. This is in line with the (unadopted) Copenhagen Accord, which included agreement by developed countries to provide "new and additional resources, including forestry and investments through international institutions, approaching USD 30 billion for the period 2010-2012". For text of the Copenhagen Accord, see UNFCCC, UN Doc FCCC/CP/2009/11/Add.1, annex to Decision 2/CP.15, 30 March 2010.
152. For criticism, see NGO Briefing Paper, The Preliminary Report on EU Fast Start Finance: NGO Comment and Analysis - Bare Bones, No Meat, 3 June 2010, , accessed 21 Feb. 2011.
153. "Summary of the Tianjin climate change talks", 12(483) The Earth Negotiations Bulletin (2010)
154. However, in a significant move, all emerging economies have recently communicated their national mitigation pledges to the UNFCCC Secretariat in the context of the Copenhagen Accord
155. For information on the pledges, see UNFCCC Secretariat's website , accessed 21 Feb. 2011.
156. The Cancun Agreements included a process to "anchor" such pledges formally under the UNFCCC regime
157. For a recent statement by the US under the UNFCCC that it "is not party to the Kyoto Protocol and does not intend to become such", see 12(466) The Earth Negotiations Bulletin (2010)
158. New Zealand already has a greenhouse gas emissions trading scheme. The US, Japan and Australia have all been planning to launch emissions trading schemes but their plans have run into political difficulties. Also China has been exploring options to launch emissions trading in certain energy-intensive industry sectors.
159. Commission Decision of 24 Dec. 2009 determining, pursuant to Directive 2003/87/EC, a list of sectors and subsectors which are deemed to be exposed to a significant risk of carbon leakage, O.J. 2010, L 1/10.
160. For an overview of legal concerns, see Dhar and Das, "The European Union's proposed carbon equalization system: Can it be WTO Compatible?", Research and information system for developing countries discussion paper No.156, 25 Nov. 2009, , accessed 21 Feb. 2011.
161. Art. 21(1) TEU: "The Union ... shall promote multilateral solutions to common problems, in particular in the framework of the United Nations".
162. "Questions and answers on the revised EU Emissions Trading System" (Europa Rapid Press Release), Memo/08/796, 17 Dec. 2008.
163. See e.g. "EU-Republic of Korea Summit (Joint Press Statement)", 6 Oct. 2010, where the leaders noted that the EU's emissions trading scheme experience is a useful example in strengthening global carbon market mechanisms, , accessed 21 Feb. 2011.
164. Gerrard, "Climate regulation without congressional action", (244/68) New York Law Journal (6 Oct. 2010), , accessed 21 Feb. 2011.
165. The RGGI is a regional emissions trading scheme for carbon dioxide emissions from the power sector in Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island and Vermont
166. For an overview other regional initiatives see, Pew Center, Regional intiatives, , accessed 21 Feb. 2011.
167. Strek, Mehling and Turek, "Prospects of linking EU and US Emission Trading Schemes: Comparing the western climate initiative, the Waxman-Markey and Lieberman-Warner proposals", Climate Strategies (Apr. 2009), , accessed 21 Feb. 2011.
168. The Decision contains provisions concerning the treatment of LULUCF emissions in the event that there is no international agreement by 31 Dec. 2010. At the UN climate change conference in Cancun (Dec. 2010), Kyoto protocol decision 2/CMP.6 contains agreement on LULUCF rules in the post-2012 period and an agenda for further negotiation.
169. Directorate-General for Climate Action (DG CLIMA), Brussels, 10 Sept. 2010. Public consultation on the role of EU agriculture and forestry in achieving the EU's climate change commitments.
170. Background note for public consultation, , accessed 21 Feb. 2011.
171. Essentially, the targets include a linear emission reduction pathway. The starting point is based on average emissions in 2008- 2010 and the end point is in 2020. According to Art. 3(3), banking is possible and a Member State may carry forward from the following year a quantity of up to 5 % of its annual emission allocation.
172. The Effort-sharing decision limits the annual use of credits to 3% of the Member State's greenhouse gas emissions in 2005, plus a possible additional share of its 3% annual quantity transferred by another Member State. Art. 5 also contains rather complex criteria according to which certain Member States may use additional credits amounting to 1% of their 2005 emissions.
173. Van der Grijp and Etty, "Incorporating climate change into EU development cooperation policy", in Gupta and Van der Grijp, Mainstreaming Climate Change in Development Cooperation (CUP, 2010), pp. 182-184.
174. There, is however, proposed CCS legislation in the US Senate
175. See "Rockefeller, Voinovich introduce carbon capture and storage development act of 2010" (14 Jul. 2010), , accessed 21 Feb. 2011.
176. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, "Special report on carbon capture and storage, summary for policy makers" (Report of working group III of the intergovernmental panel on climate change, Montreal, 22-24 Sept. 2005), , accessed 11 Nov. 2010, p. 3.
177. The technical options for storage include geological (underground and under the seabed) and dissolved in the water column. The latter option is generally rejected due to the great uncertainties regarding permanence and environmental impact.
178. Mace, "Carbon capture and storage: Legal issues", Sustainable Development Opinion (IIED, 2006), , accessed 21 Feb. 2011.
179. Commission, "Summary impact assessment: Commission staff working document accompanying the proposal for a Directive on the geological storage of carbon dioxide", SEC(2008)55, COM(2008)18 final, 23 Jan. 2008, para 10, where it is stated that "without CCS the cost of meeting a reduction in the region of 30% in 2030 in the EU could be up to 40% higher than with CCS".
180. Roggenkamp and Woerdman, "Looking beyond the legal uncertainties of CCS", in Roggenkamp and Woerdman (Eds.), Legal Design of Carbon Capture and Storage - Developments in the Netherlands, from an International and EU Perspective (Intersentia, 2009), pp. 347, 350.
181. Pointcarbon, , accessed 21 Feb. 2011.
182. For a more technical discussion, see Schurmans and Van Vaerenbergh, "The new proposed EU legislation on geological carbon capture and storage (CCS): A first impression of the Commission's proposed framework on CCS", 17 European Energy and Environmental Law Review (EEELR) (2008), 90-105
183. Directive 2008/1/EC concerning integrated pollution prevention and control, O.J. 2008, L 24/8.
184. Directive 85/337/EEC on the assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment, O.J. 1985, L 175, as amended (EIA Directive).
185. This takes into account the characteristics of the environment and distribution and activities of human population above the storage complex
186. This takes into account the sensitivity of particular species, communities or habitats linked to potential leakage events
187. Lee, EU Environmental Law: Challenges, Change and Decision-Making (Hart 2005), p. 172.
188. 1996 Protocol to the Convention on the prevention of marine pollution by dumping of wastes and other matter, 36 ILM 1 (1997)
189. See IMO, "Report of the 31st consultative meeting of the parties to the London Convention & 4th meeting of contracting of the contracting parties to the London Protocol" (30 Nov. 2009), LC 31/15, at Annex 5: Resolution Lp.3(4) on the amendment to Art. 6 of the London Protocol.
190. Report of the second meeting of the Ad Hoc Technical Expert Group (AHTEG) on biodiversity and climate change (28 Apr. 2010), UN Doc UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/14/INF/21, which at para 162 reads: "The biological and chemical implications of deep-sea injection of carbon dioxide, associated with carbon capture and storage, are at present largely unknown, but could have significant adverse consequences for marine organisms and ecosystems in the deep sea. Leakage from carbon storage on the sea bed could increase ocean acidification, which could have large-scale effects on marine ecosystems, including coral reefs".
191. Ospar Commission, OSPAR Decision 2007/1 to Prohibit the storage of carbon dioxide streams in the water column or on the sea-bed
192. Which does not seem to have gone unnoticed, as specific references to EU domestic legislative initiatives were mentioned in the submissions on CCS by Indonesia and Norway, in UNFCCC, "Views related to carbon dioxide capture and storage in geological formations as a possible mitigation technology", Submission from parties (13 Apr. 2010), UN Doc FCCC/SBSTA/2010/MISC.2, pp. 21 and 25 respectively.
193. Kyoto Protocol Decision 1/CMP.2, UN Doc. FCCC/KP/CMP/2006/10/Add.1, 2 March 2007, paras. 18-25.
194. See also "Summary of the twelfth conference of the parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change and second meeting of the parties to the Kyoto Protocol: 6-17 November 2006", 12(318) The Earth Negotiations Bulletin (2006), 12
195. Kyoto Protocol Decision 7/CMP.6, "Carbon dioxide capture and storage in geological formations as clean development mechanism project activities", advance unedited version, , accessed 21 Feb. 2011.
196. "Joint declaration on climate change between China and the European Union", following the 8th EU-China Summit (Presse 226), 12009/05, 7 Sept. 2005, , paras. 7 and 1.
197. Directive 2001/77/EC, O.J. 2001, L 283/33.
198. For a history of the 2001 Renewables Directives, see Lauber, "2004. REFIT and RPS: Options for a harmonized community framework", 32 Energy Policy (2004), 1405-1414.
199. Directive 2003/30/EC, O.J. 2003, L 123/42.
200. Directive 2002/91/EC, O.J. 2002, L 001 and Directive 2004/8/EC, O.J. 2004, L5 2/50.
201. Art. 194 TFEU.
202. Art. 192(2)(c) TFEU.
203. For a discussion on these market-based provisions of the Renewables Directive and their compatibility with the free movement of goods within the EU, see Johnston, Neuhoff, Fouquet, Ragwitz and Resch, "The proposed new EU Renewables Directive: Interpretation, problems and prospects", 17 EEELR (2008), 126-145
204. As, for example, in Directive 2001/77/EC on the promotion of electricity produced from renewable energy sources in the internal electricity market, O.J. 2001, L 283/33.
205. Scott, "The Multi-level governance of climate change" (Law and Governance in Europe Working Paper Series 009/10), in Craig and De Búrca (Eds.), The Evolution of EU Law, 2nd ed. (OUP, 2011), p. 48.
206. Commission, "Renewable energy: Progressing towards the 2020 target", COM(2011)31 final, 31 Jan. 2011.
207. The DESERTEC Foundation was established on 20 Jan. 2009 as a non-profit foundation with the aim of promoting the implementation of the global DESERTEC Concept "Clean power from deserts" all over the world.
208. See DESERTEC website at , accessed 9 Nov. 2010.
209. See e.g. Arts. 109 and 111 of the Stabilization and Association Agreement with Serbia (29 Apr. 2008); Art. 74 of the Euro-Mediterranean Agreement with Jordan (15 May 2002); Art. 57 of the Agreement on Trade, Development and Cooperation with South Africa (4 Dec. 1999); and Art. 16 of the Framework Agreement for Trade and Cooperation with South Korea (30 March 2001).
210. Morgera and Marín Durán, Environmental Integration in the EU External Relations: Beyond Multilateral Dimensions (Hart, forthcoming 2011)
211. "NGOs slam draft version of EU biofuel law", EurActive (11 Jan. 2008), , accessed 21 Feb. 2011.
212. CBD Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical and Technological Advice, "New and emerging issues relating to the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity: Biodiversity and liquid biofuel production" (25 Apr. 2007), UN Doc. UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/12/9.
213. On the international debate on biofuels, see also Morgera, Kulovesi, and Gobena (Eds.), Case Studies on Bioenergy Policy and Law: Options for Sustainability, FAO legislative study No. 102 (FAO, 2010), pp. 15-34.
214. For examples see Fargione et al., "Land clearing and the biofuel carbon debt", (2008) Science, 1235-1238.
215. Searchinger et al., "Use of U.S. croplands for biofuels increases greenhouse gases through emissions from land-use change", (2008) Science, 1238-1240.
216. The Renewables Directive contains additional text for bio liquids
217. Morgera, "CBD COP 10: Towards 2010 implementation", 40 Environmental Policy and Law (2010), 284
218. Summary of the 14th meeting of the Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical and Technological Advice to the Convention on Biological Diversity: 10-21 May 2010, 9(514) The Earth Negotiations Bulletin (2010), p. 12.
219. The provision indicates that greenhouse gas saving will be of at least 50% by 2012, and 60% by 2018
220. See also Commission, "The practical implementation of the EU biofuels and bioliquids sustainability scheme and on counting rules for biofuels", COM(2010)160/02, 19 June 2010, O.J. 2010, C160/8, 8.
221. The recitals refer to relevant questions of land degradation and desertification
222. Disagreement on these issues has to some extent been overcome in the context of the CBD, since the last meeting of the Conference of the Parties in late 2010 addressed biofuelsrelated questions linked to food and energy security, as well as "the consideration of land tenure and resource rights, including water, where relevant for the CBD implementation, and in particular the implications for indigenous and local communities" (Decision X/37 Biofuels and biodiversity (2010), para 2
223. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development and International Energy Agency, "Biofuel support policies: An economic assessment" (OECD, Paris, 2008), 49
224. In Feb. 2010 the Commission indicated that it did not intend to recommend binding sustainability criteria for solid biomass and biogas used in electricity, heating and cooling, but suggest voluntary criteria for Member States to include on national schemes, with the possibility to review this decision in 2011. "Commission adopts biomass sustainability report" (Europa Rapid Press Release), IP/10/192, 25 Feb. 2010.
225. "Solid biomass barometer, Eurobserv'ER, Nov. 2010", 200 Systèmes Solaires le journal des énergies renouvelables (Systèmes Solaires) (2010), 123.
226. "Biofuels barometer - Eurobserv'ER - July 2010", 198 Systèmes Solaires (2010), 73
227. "Biogas barometer, Eurobserv'ER, Nov 2010", 200 Systèmes Solaires (2010), 105
228. When the percentages of biofuels, blended in mineral oil derivatives, exceed 10% by volume, Member States shall require this to be indicated at the sales points
229. The countries include Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, Malawi, Mozambique, Sierra Leone, Indonesia and Malaysia
230. See, "Open letter to the Council, Parliament and the Commission of the European Communities", 6 Nov. 2008, , accessed 11 Nov. 2010.
231. In the Shrimp-Turtle case it was found that such trade measures can be compatible with WTO law at least in certain circumstances. See WTO Appellate Body report, "United States - Import Prohibition of Certain Shrimp and Shrimp Products, Recourse to Article 21.5 of the DSU by Malaysia", 22 Oct. 2001, WT/DS58/AB/RW.
232. CBD SBSTTA, "Agricultural biodiversity: biofuels and biodiversity" (11 Febr 2010) UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/14/12, para 12
233. Commission, "Communication from the Commission on voluntary schemes and default values in the EU biofuels and bioliquids sustainability scheme", COM(2010) 160/01, 19 June 2010, O.J. 2010, C 160/1, 4-5.
234. EUROLAT - Resolution of 15 May 2010, Seville (Spain), "Tackling climate change challenges together: for an EU-LAC coordinated strategy in the framework of the UNFCCC negotiations", , paras. 37-38.
235. Third European Union-Brazil Summit, Stockholm, 6 Oct. 2009 - Joint Statement, paras. 2-12, .
236. 2007 EU-US Summit Statement Energy Security, Efficiency, and Climate Change, , all accessed 2 Feb. 2011.
237. IARC, Institute for Development Policy and Management, "Trade sustainability impact assessment of the association agreement under negotiation between the European Community and MERCOSUR" (Final Report, March 2009), p. 99.
238. ECORYS research and consulting, "Trade sustainability impact assessment of the association agreement to be negotiated between the EU and Central America" (Draft final report, 7 Jul. 2009), pp. 90-91.
239. ECORYS research and consulting, "Trade sustainability impact assessment of the FTA between the EU and ASEAN" (Final Report, 19 June 2009), Volume I, Main findings and recommendations, pp. 60-61.
240. European Commission position paper on the SIA of the EU-Central America association agreement, June 2010, 4 and 6, .
241. European Commission position paper on the SIA of the EU-MERCOSUR association agreement, July 2010, , p. 5.
242. European Commission position paper on the SIA of the EU-ASEAN FTA, June 2010, , p. 9, all accessed 2 Feb. 2011.
243. According to the IPCC, "An effective carbon price signal could realize significant mitigation potential in all sectors"
244. This is an expression recently adopted by the CBD Conference of the Parties (Decision X/33, para 8(u), 2010)
245. However, the outcome concerning indirect land-use change has been considered as weak
246. Phillips, "European Parliament capitulates on biofuels deal", (2008) EuObserver, , accessed 21 Feb. 2011.
247. In the specific context of climate change, see Piebalgs (European Commissioner for development), "ACP-EU Parliamentary Assembly" (Speech at the ACP-EU Parliamentary Assembly, Tenerife 29 March 2010), , accessed 10 Nov. 2010, where Piebalgs proposed increasing cooperation in the area of climate change under the ACPEU framework, and increased policy dialogue on climate change, to better understand needs and expectations, share positions, and possibly promote convergence of visions ahead of the UN climate change conference in Cancun, Mexico, at the end of 2010.
248. References to cooperation in the specific field of climate change can be found at: Art. 54, Partnership and Cooperation Agreement with Kazakhstan (28 Jul. 1999); and Art. 103, Stabilization and Association Agreement with Croatia (28 Jan. 2005). Otherwise, more general cooperation clauses on global environmental issues or on the implementation of Multilateral Environmental Agreements that parties to the Agreement are parties to can also serve this purpose.
249. Marín Durán and Morgera, "Towards environmental integration in the European Community's external relations? An analysis of selected association agreements", 6 YEEL (2006), 179-210
250. In terms of climate-specific external initiatives of the EU, see Commission, EU action plan on climate change and development, COM(2003)85 final, 11 March 2003; Commission, "Building a global climate change alliance between the European Union and poor developing countries most vulnerable to climate change", COM(2007)540 final, 18 Sept. 2007; and funding for both in the thematic programme for environmental and sustainable management of natural resources including energy - see European Commission, "External Action: Thematic programme for environment and sustainable management of natural resources including energy", COM(2006)20 final, 25 Jan. 2006.
251. Commission, Background note for public consultations: Roadmap for low carbon economy by 2050, , accessed 21 Feb. 2011.
252. The public consultations were held from 27 Oct. until 8 Dec. 2010.