The workshop gives an overview of mitigation options, possible set of policy instruments, and how they influence decisions (engage, improve economics, support innovation etc.), outline for the analytic approach and discussion of the day.
Karsten Neuhoff (DIW Berlin) and Diana Quezada (Climate Strategies)
In this session we discussed individual policy instruments with the objective to assess:
The focus was on the following instruments: Engagement instruments (e.g., networks, training, advice), Ecodesign, Standards, Contract for Differences, Public Procurement, Waste Management. We also discussed what are the policy options, in the absence of a global carbon pricing system, to deliver effective carbon prices while ensuring carbon leakage protection, and in particular focus on the role of: (i) Benchmark based charge on consumption of carbon intensive materials and (ii) Border adjustment.
Opening comments: DIW Berlin team, Eugenie Joltreau (University Paris Dauphine)
In this session we first discussed criteria for good design of policy package for the material sector. These may include:
Based on these criteria we will discuss, if a subset of potential policy instruments can be sufficient to unlock individual mitigation options, in particular:
Opening comments: Hugo Trappmann (Blechwarenfabrik Limburg GmbH), Moritz Mues (German Federal Ministry for the Environment), Manuela Ojan (HeidelbergCement)
Evaluation of policy instruments in an abstract space is difficult and often controversial. Therefore, in this session we wanted to test, whether in an (existing) policy package trade-offs between different policy instrument can be better assessed? We focused on three examples that have emerged in the preparation of the workshop:
Opening comments: Paul Ekins (UCL Institute for Sustainable Resources), Manuel Haußner (University Erlangen-Nürnberg), Christopher Beauman (EBRD)
The purpose of policy packages is often not understood, explained and justified. This limits political effort in the implementation and as a result limiting visibility and credibility reduces the effect on firms. In this final session we aimed to answer the question of what can help to explain the logic of a policy package and to manage its implementation to support the portfolio of mitigation options? In particular, we discussed:
Opening comments: Oliver Sartor (IDDRI), Arjan Geveke (BEIS, UK Government)