Search

Global warming combined with low carbon transition plans is threatening the future of high energy consumption industry sectors in the European Union (EU). The need to respond to environmental challenges is demonstrated by support for international level energy policies and legal requirements, such as the Kyoto Protocol which the EU supports, and increased EU-level environmental legislation and energy policies. The effect of these initiatives is gradually transforming industrial activities in the EU. However, since not all countries have adopted these policies, evaluation of their net effect needs to take account also of side-effects such as delocalization of industry activity and the legal environmental frameworks in the countries where companies have chosen to relocate. This paper analyses EU energy policy and its impact on a particular energy intensive industry, the European ceramic tile sector. The discussion in this paper is not about the purpose of EU legislation, but about its effects on a specific industry. The effect of policy on industry is not a new topic, but the question of the unwanted effects of environmental and energy policy on European industry is becoming more relevant as the struggle to achieve a post-carbon Europe increases. In focussing on a specific set of EU legislation on a particular industry this article adds to the debate by showing the negative effects of policy mechanisms. The need for a scientific evaluation of the systemic changes required for a transition to a resource-efficient, green and competitive low-carbon economy outlined in the 7th Environment Action Programme is highlighted. It is suggested that the EU should periodically re-evaluate its Emissions Trading Scheme legislation to include specific actions and a follow up system which would prevent the best performing environmental companies from delocalizing or shutting down. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Main problem addressed in this paper is assessment of quality of current methodologies for expressing environmental tax revenue, since measurements' outcomes have significant influence on the future environmental policies and legislation. The main goal of this paper is to analyze the existing way of measuring financial effects of environmental taxation in EU27 and propose new methodology approach, based on use of ETE – Environmental Taxation Efficiency as a new indicator suggested by authors. The first phase of the study involves the analysis of quality of measuring two existing methodologies (based on the use of GDP and total revenues). In second research stage, the authors apply the newly proposed methodology for determining a composite ETE indicator that, apart from existing indicators, takes into account the environmental taxation effects per capita, as an indicator unjustifiably neglected in previous methods of measuring. Measurement of environmental taxation by using a newly-proposed composite indicator shows significant differences in ranking compared to two current methodologies in use. Only 6 countries showed a very similar rank, regardless of the methodology applied. Differences by more than ten ranking positions were found in 12 countries. The overall results showed significant differences in ranking of all EU-27 countries by using all four indicated methodologies, which clearly points to the conclusion that further improvements are needed. ETE methodology limits predominant role of GDP and introduces a social component which should serve as a basis for further development of a unique methodology for establishing efficient environmental taxation implementation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article examines, through three case studies, whether German industrial plants suffer from a negative impact on competitiveness caused by stringent environmental legislation. A micro-level analysis showed that abatement initiatives had, in general, been implemented without economic damage and did not touch on the core business. Moreover, German sample plants ranked environmental pressure as relatively unimportant compared with other competitive pressures. Finally, the low absolute levels of compliance costs, at least in two of the case studies, explained why environmental regulations cannot have a great influence on competitiveness in the chosen sectors. High productivity levels were not among the essential factors explaining our findings. It implies for our case studies that also plants with lower productivity can withstand high compliance costs. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]