Renegotiating Authority in EU Energy and Climate Policy

Anna Herranz-Surrallés, Israel Solorio, Jenny Fairbrass

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2021
• Print ISBN: 9781032001708
• eBook ISBN: 9781000462463
• Topic: Politics & International Relations
• Subtopic: Politics
• Index: Politics & International Relations

In the context of multiple crises, EU Energy and Climate policy is often identi?ed as one of the few areas still exhibiting strong integration dynamics. However, this domain is not exempt from contestation and re-nationalization pressures. This collection seeks to understand those contradictory integration and disintegration tendencies by problematizing
the notion of authority: When, why, and by whom is EU authority in Energy and Climate policy conferred and contested? What strategies are used to manage authority con?flicts and to what e?ffect? These questions are examined in some of the knottiest aspects of EU energy and climate policy, for example, the adoption of the landmark Governance of the Energy Union Regulation, the long-drawn-out attempts to complete the EU's internal energy market, the struggle to achieve ambitious EU targets in renewable energy and energy efficiency beyond 2020, the blurring of economic and security instruments in external energy policy, or the heated discussions over the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline.
The chapters in this book were originally published as a special issue of the Journal of European Integration.

Renegotiating authority in the Energy Union: A Framework for Analysis

Anna Herranz-Surrallés, Israel Solorio and Jenny Fairbrass

ABSTRACT

In a context of multiple crises, European Union (EU) energy policy is often identified as one of the few areas still exhibiting strong integration dynamics. However, this policy domain is not exempt from contestation and re-nationalization pressures. This collection seeks to understand better the contradictory integration and fragmentation tendencies by problematizing the notion of authority. While authority lies at the heart of European integration theory, less attention has been given to explaining when and why previously conferred authority becomes contested and how authority conflicts are addressed. In framing this collection, we build on sociological approaches to examine systematically the conferral of authority (what counts as authority and how it comes to be recognized) and its contestation (the types of contestation and strategies for managing authority conflicts). We focus this analytical discussion on the Energy Union, being an example of ‘hybrid area’, which sits uncomfortably at the nexus of different policy areas.

Introduction

In the context of multiple crises that have had centrifugal effects on the European Union (EU), energy policy is often identified as one of the few policy areas that continues to exhibit strong integration dynamics, so much so that it has been labelled as a ‘catalyst’ for European integration in dangerous times (Delors, Andoura, and Vinois 2015, 1). The Energy Union initiative, one of the top priorities of Jean-Claude Juncker’s Commission (European Commission 2015) and, more recently, a centre-piece of the European Green Deal advanced by Ursula von der Leyen (European Commission 2019), encapsulates this ambition. At the time of its launch in early 2015, the European Commission Vice-president for the Energy Union referred to it as ‘undoubtedly the most ambitious European energy project since the European Coal and Steel Community, some 60 years ago’ and one that ‘has the potential to boost Europe integration the way Coal and Steel did in the 1950s’ (Šefčovič 2015). Despite this optimism, however, unlike other recent ‘Union’ concepts adopted within the EU, such as the Banking or Fiscal Union, the Energy Union has not, so far, led to any additional transfers of competence from the member states to the EU level or the development of new institutions. On the contrary, in some dimensions of EU energy policy the efforts have been in the opposite direction, as member states strive to retain or re-claim authority.

Consequently, EU energy policy seems to capture well the so-called ‘post-functionalist’ dilemma (Hooghe and Marks 2009). On the one hand, functional efficiency in the provision of public goods, such as financial stability, security or climate change mitigation, requires more governance beyond the state. On the other hand, EU institutions and policies are becoming more politicized and contested domestically. The latest wave of integration theory has explicitly or implicitly attempted to understand better the extent and consequences of this dilemma, by examining the role of crises (Ioannou, Leblond, and Niemann 2015; Schimmelfennig 2017; Tosun, Wetzel, and Zapryanova 2014), politicization (de Wilde, Leupold, and Schmidtke 2016; Costa 2018), or even theorizing (dis)integration (Jones 2018, Vollaard 2014). What brings these approaches together is the conclusion that EU governance is becoming more complex and unpredictable, giving rise to new battle-lines and more hybrid institutional arrangements. So far, it has been unclear whether integration endures against all odds, is receding, or is mutating into new forms.

The special issue introduced here engages with this complexity in a crucial sectoral domain. It does so taking inspiration from global governance theory, which has long tried to understand how societies resolve the tension between the imperative towards cooperation in a globalizing world and the contrary desire to maintain autonomy. Central to those debates is the notion of authority beyond the state. Some global governance studies have examined the different ways in which authority is migrating away from states (Kahler and Lake 2004; Rittberger et al. 2008), why authority is conferred, and when it becomes contested (Sending 2015; Zürn 2018). Terms such as ‘liquid authority’ (Krisch 2017) have recently been coined to capture the growing informal, complex, and unstable relations in global governance.

Our focus is, therefore, on the renegotiation of authority in the EU. Anchoring the discussion in global governance theory brings a number of advantages. First, the emphasis on authority allows not only an examination of the formal allocation of competences (often the focus of integration theories) but also of how and why actors gain authority beyond the formal boundaries set by the treaties. Second, it directs our attention to questions about why authority conflicts emerge and how they are managed or mitigated. Finally, it allows us to trace whether contestation leads to actual authority shifts, not only in the vertical direction (upwards or downwards between the local, national and European levels), but also horizontally (between public and private or majoritarian and non-majoritarian actors).

Energy policy is a critical case with which to investigate the transformation of authority patterns in the EU. As a starting point, given that the historical roots of European integration lie in energy cooperation, this policy has a special symbolic weight. Additionally, due to the fact that energy is an area that sits at the cross-roads of different policy domains and areas of competence, ranging from EU exclusive competence (competition policy), to shared competence (climate policy, single market) and intergovernmental domains (security of supply), and includes both an internal and external dimension, it provides a wide range of examples to analyse the extent and consequences of the post-functional dilemma. As a ‘flagship initiative’ of the Juncker Commission and a crucial pillar for the success of Von der Leyen’s European Green Deal, the Energy Union is also a perfect test case for assessing how the EU executive manages this confluence of integrationist and centrifugal pressures.

In framing this collection, this introductory piece aims to accomplish four main tasks. First, it provides an overview of the potential and challenges facing the Energy Union. Second, it develops a novel analytical framework. Third, it summarises the main findings of the volume. Lastly, the article concludes with some forward-looking reflections on EU energy policy and the broader implications for other areas of EU policy-making.

Energy Union: ‘saviour’ or ‘foe’ of European integration?

Despite the fact that European integration is rooted in the regional energy cooperation that emerged in the 1950s, for decades, energy was considered as a ‘less European’ policy area than others (Keay and Buchan 2015, 2). Whilst European energy regulation dates back to the 1970s, it is generally accepted that until recently energy was a ‘matter of minor importance on the EU agenda’ (Boasson and Wettestad 2013, 1). In fact, the EU did not acquire formal competence concerning energy until the 2009 Treaty of Lisbon, previously secured obliquely via competences associated with competition and environmental policy (Tosun and Solorio 2011).

Over the past ten years, the growing functional necessity for increased cooperation has gradually overcome some of the traditional resistance from national governments in ceding their control over energy issues. Crucially, on the one hand, the energy security crises of late 2000s exposed the vulnerability of individual member states and sparked an EU-wide debate on the need for energy diversification (Herranz-Surrallés 2016). On the other hand, the global demand for urgent action on climate change and the EU’s ambition to be an international leader further compelled the need for coordinated action regarding energy among its member states (Wurzel, Connelly, and Liefferink 2017). Moreover, competitiveness pressures made the completion of the internal energy market a priority for the EU (Eikeland 2011). Together these factors facilitated a ‘supranational turn’ in energy policy, through the 2020 Climate and Energy Package and the Third Internal Energy Market Package adopted in 2009 (Wettestad, Eikeland, and Nilsson 2012, 67). Subsequently, EU institutions have also gradually acquired a central role in securing energy supply, previously a jealously guarded domain of state sovereignty (Maltby 2013). As an example of the growing optimism around EU energy policy, in 2010 Jerzy Buzek and Jacques Delors presented the idea of a European Energy Community, conceived as ‘the next chapter in the history of European integration’ (Buzek and Delors 2010, 1).

However, despite the hope for a rapid consolidation of a comprehensive and coherent EU energy policy, the initiatives above-mentioned also triggered a debate about the degree of power transferred to the EU, emanating from the member states’ reluctance to relinquish their central position with respect to core aspects of the policy (such as the energy mix or relations with external suppliers). The pattern of contested authority claims and counter-claims (i.e. reclamation) among and between member states and EU institutions persists. This became evident during the discussions concerning the 2030 Energy and Climate Framework in 2014, when some member states pressed for less ambitious and less binding targets in comparison to those contained in the 2020 framework, exposing the internal fissures within the EU and between its member states with regard to the policy and its governance (Solorio and Bocquillon 2017, 34–35; Szulecki and Westphal 2014). The gradual development of an internal EU energy policy also prompted intense political controversy and legal action among external actors, mainly the Russian Federation, which accused the EU of discriminatory actions and of seeking the extra-territorial application of its rules (Kuzemko 2014; Romanova 2016).

With the above-mentioned in mind, the appearance of the concept of ‘Energy Union’ at the centre stage of the EU’s policy agenda was presented as a ‘saviour’ for the European integration. In April 2014, following the crisis in Ukraine and the Russian intervention in Crimea, the then-Prime Minister of Poland, Donald Tusk, called for the creation of an Energy Union to combat Europe’s energy dependence on Russia and return ‘the European project to its roots’ (Tusk 2014). Much of the emphasis of Tusk’s project concerned the security of supply in the gas sector, neglecting the debate about the internal energy market and the climate agenda that had previously characterized the EU’s activities in this policy area (Boersma and Goldthau 2017; Szulecki et al. 2016). While Tusk’s proposal was not free from criticism, its main merit was to gain media attention and political interest in the notion of the ‘Energy Union’.

In this context, the European Commission president, Jean-Claude Juncker, made the Energy Union a top priority on his agenda, widening the range of objectives to include negotiating powers vis-à-vis third countries, as proposed by Tusk, and developing a greater role for renewable energy (Juncker 2014). To coordinate the Commission’s efforts, Juncker created the position of ...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Series Page
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Table of Contents
• Citation Information
• Notes on Contributors
• 1 Renegotiating authority in the Energy Union: A Framework for Analysis
• 2 Conferring authority in the European Union: citizens’ policy priorities for the European Energy Union
• 3 EU energy policy integration as embedded intergovernmentalism: the case of Energy Union governance
• 4 Private authority in tackling cross-border issues. The hidden path of integrating European energy markets
• 5 Contested energy transition? Europeanization and authority turns in EU renewable energy policy
• 6 Defusing contested authority: EU energy efficiency policymaking
• 7 Power, authority and security: the EU’s Russian gas dilemma
• 8 Gazprom’s Nord Stream 2 and diffuse authority in the EU: managing authority challenges regarding Russian gas supplies through the Baltic Sea
• 9 EU foreign policy and energy strategy: bounded contestation
• Index