Search Climate Insights Directory

The document evaluates EU countries' positions on the Effort Sharing Regulation (ESR), which covers 60% of EU greenhouse gas emissions. Using a scoring system across five categories—starting point, land use loopholes, ETS surplus loopholes, governance, and ambition levels—it ranks Sweden as the leader and Poland as the lowest performer. The brief argues that most EU countries are pushing for loopholes that undermine the Paris Agreement, with the European Commission's own proposal scoring only 20 out of 100 points.

The EU Climate Leader Board ranks EU member states on their support for the Effort Sharing Regulation across five categories: starting point, ETS surplus loophole, land use loophole, governance, and ambition level. Sweden ranks highest with a score of 67, while Malta ranks lowest with a score of 2. The analysis concludes that no EU country is currently doing enough to make the regulation compatible with the Paris Agreement.

A coalition of 31 networks and organizations calls on EU Environment Ministers to reform the EU ETS by excluding coal investments from the Modernization Fund and article 10c, maintaining the 2013 base year for eligibility to prevent lignite plant subsidies in Greece, and establishing a Just Transition Fund.

In 2016, the European power sector saw a significant shift from coal to gas generation, which drove a 4.5% decrease in CO2 emissions. While renewable energy's share of the electricity mix rose slightly to 29.6%, growth was below previous trends due to poor weather conditions, although record-low auction prices for wind and solar suggest future potential. Electricity consumption remained largely stagnant, barely offsetting economic growth. The EU Emissions Trading System (EU-ETS) continued to suffer from a structural oversupply, with the surplus exceeding 3 billion tonnes of CO2 for the first time.

The WACC Strategic Plan 2017–2021 establishes a framework to promote 'communication for all' as a fundamental human right. The organization aims to support marginalized populations—specifically those denied communication rights based on gender, status, or identity—through advocacy, capacity-building, and the creation of global networks. Key initiatives include the Global Media Monitoring Project (GMMP), the development of a Communication Rights Index, and a campaign to end news media sexism by 2020. WACC aligns its goals with the UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the Paris Agreement, positioning communication as essential for achieving these global targets.

The document provides executive summaries of national reports for Bulgaria, Estonia, Germany, Greece, Italy, Serbia, and the UK. It evaluates various energy efficiency scenarios—including Business as Usual (BAU) and those incorporating the impact of socio-economic barriers—using LEAP modelling and a Decision Support Tool (DST). The analysis consistently shows that while ambitious energy efficiency measures can meet EU targets, the presence of socio-economic barriers significantly reduces potential energy savings and GHG reductions across most studied countries and sectors.

The author argues that the European radical right is moving toward becoming a dominant political force by utilizing a 'common political playbook' of delegitimizing institutions and reforming state architecture to maintain power. This movement is characterized by opposition to minorities, migration, European integration, and 'gender ideology', with Russia and Turkey serving as strategic reference points. To counter this, the author proposes a three-part Green strategy: exposing the hypocrisy and foreign ties of nationalist movements, 'Europeanising' the Green movement to coordinate support across borders, and addressing the root causes of radical right popularity by championing progressive cultural identities and combating neoliberal economic precarity.

The cement industry in 20 European countries generated €5 billion in windfall profits between 2008 and 2015 due to the EU ETS, which the document argues subsidises pollution and hinders decarbonisation. These profits were derived from surplus allowances (€2.7 billion), cost-pass through (€2.1 billion), and offsets (€0.1 billion), with the highest gains in Spain, Italy, and Germany. The brief identifies failures such as low carbon prices and benchmarks that incentivise high-carbon clinker production, noting that European production is less energy efficient than that of India. To drive decarbonisation, the author recommends ending free allocations, introducing 100% auctioning with benchmarked border levelling to prevent carbon leakage, and replacing clinker benchmarks with cement benchmarks.

The document analyzes the patterns of clandestine migration from North Africa to Europe, noting that while North Africans are a smaller group than sub-Saharan migrants, they are often innovators of new smuggling routes. It identifies three primary corridors: the central Mediterranean (increasingly popular via Libya), the eastern Mediterranean (via Turkey and the Balkans), and the western Mediterranean (declining due to security). The author argues that migration is primarily driven by economic desperation and youth unemployment rather than conflict, and that securitized border responses fail to address these root causes.

The open letter argues that the EU ETS currently sustains coal infrastructure through low carbon prices and the misuse of Article 10c and the Modernisation Fund. The signatories call for a tighter ETS cap to increase carbon prices and the explicit exclusion of coal-related investments from funding mechanisms to avoid locking Central and Eastern Europe into coal dependency.

A coalition of networks and organizations calls for an ambitious revision of the EU ETS to stop the use of Article 10c and the Modernisation Fund for fossil fuel capacity, particularly in Central and Eastern Europe. They advocate for a higher carbon price to disincentivize coal and the redirection of funds toward energy efficiency and renewable energy.

The author argues that the Euro and Schengen crises create opposing dependencies between the EU's centre and periphery. While the Euro crisis increased the centre's dominance by making the periphery dependent on financial support and austerity, the Schengen crisis makes the centre dependent on the periphery to manage external borders and migration. Rather than destroying the EU, these overlapping crises are likely to result in a more integrated core and an expanded, graduated periphery.

The author contends that the current political crisis in Europe, often labeled as the rise of 'illiberal democracy,' is more accurately described as the rise of 'authoritarian capitalism.' This shift is driven by the incompatibility of global economic integration, national states, and democracy, which has left marginalized groups—described as 'vagabonds'—vulnerable to right-wing exploitation. The text argues that left-wing parties have failed by adopting economic liberalism and neglecting the working class, and suggests that only a return to egalitarian principles and a confrontation with the capitalist system can restore democratic legitimacy in Europe.

The text examines the systemic neglect of young people in the EU, highlighting extreme youth unemployment and poverty rates, particularly in Spain and Greece. It argues that the lack of political representation—evidenced by the high average age of parliamentarians—has pushed youth toward political extremes. The author notes that youth mobilization is now reshaping the political landscape, fueling both progressive movements (like the 15M and Podemos in Spain) and nationalist or extremist parties (such as the FPÖ in Austria and Front National in France), concluding that the future of EU integration depends on addressing these youth-led dynamics.

The author contends that the EU's political elite, characterized as older white males, have ignored the needs of the youth, resulting in extreme unemployment and poverty rates, particularly in Southern Europe. This systemic exclusion has fueled a wave of political activism and voting shifts across Europe, driving both progressive movements like Spain's 15M and the rise of extremist or nationalist parties. The text warns that the future of European integration depends on whether leaders begin to include young people in decision-making processes.

The EU-Turkey deal, implemented in March 2016, aimed to reduce irregular arrivals by establishing a 'one in, one out' resettlement formula for Syrian refugees. While the author notes the deal and accompanying border closures in Eastern and South Eastern Europe have successfully deterred arrivals, this has come at a high humanitarian cost. Refugees are now stranded in squalid conditions in Greece, Macedonia, and Serbia, or are forced onto more dangerous smuggling routes, including the Libya-Italy crossing. The author argues that the deal may undermine the international principle of 'non-refoulement' and that the EU's focus on deterrence has created a 'homemade humanitarian crisis'.

The author criticises the EU-Turkey deal reached on 18 March 2016, asserting that it fails to end irregular migration and instead leads to human rights violations, including the forced return of migrants and appalling detention conditions in Greece. The text argues that the EU is using non-binding 'statements' to avoid democratic scrutiny and parliamentary oversight. It proposes alternatives such as the yearly resettlement of 500,000 refugees over six years, humanitarian admission programmes, and labour mobility programs to replace the current focus on deterrence and criminalisation.

The text describes a shift in Greece, specifically on Lesbos, where initial support for refugees has been replaced by efforts to criminalise volunteers. It details how the Greek government and Frontex have used legal technicalities—such as building permits and immigration laws—to arrest or fine those providing medical aid, shelter, and rescue services. The author contends that deterring volunteers will lead to more deaths and that authorities should instead focus on their legal obligation to provide asylum.

The author contends that the rise of right-wing and left-wing populism in Europe is fueled by the failure of national governments to deliver common EU policies for social division, climate collapse, and economic instability. The text advocates for a 'Green New Deal' to steer capital toward ecological modernization, a collaborative taxation policy to end corporate tax dumping, and systemic reforms to increase transparency and reduce the influence of economic lobbies within EU institutions. It specifically calls for the cessation of free trade agreements like TTIP, CETA, and TiSA, arguing they limit European democracy.

The author calls for a shift from technocratic management to bold common European policies to combat the rise of right-wing populism and national sovereignty movements. Key proposals include a 'Green New Deal' to direct excess capital into ecological modernization, a coordinated fight against corporate tax dumping, and the strengthening of civil society and transparency to reduce the influence of corporate lobbies. The author specifically advocates for the rejection of trade agreements like TTIP, CETA, and TiSA, which are viewed as constraints on democratic governance.