OPINION:IRELAND HAS a considerable challenge ahead to deliver on its climate commitments. Unless additional policy measures are agreed and implemented, Ireland is on course to overshoot its EU emissions targets as early as 2014. But in Ireland, as elsewhere, consensus on climate policy has been difficult to achieve, often resulting in stasis.
Minister for the Environment Phil Hogan last week announced a road map for climate policy and legislation. Key milestones include a public consultation on climate legislation this month, and agreement by Government on the broad outline of this legislation by the end of the year. The Minister took the opportunity to reiterate his commitment that a climate law should go through an open and inclusive legislative process, and a policy brief published by the Institute of International and European Affairs today is a contribution to this important debate.
A climate law would have implications for all areas of government policy and economic activity for at least the next 40 years. It has the potential to be one of the most significant legislative initiatives of the Government. But, while there may be broad political agreement on the necessity for legislation, there is a lack of consensus – not to say confusion – about what a climate law should seek to achieve.
Should a law introduce a binding emissions reduction target for Ireland? Should it decide between the differing types of measures that could be introduced to reduce emissions (for example, between incentives, regulations or taxes)? And should it decide which sectors – industry, agriculture, residential or transport – measures might target?
We argue that the main purpose of a law is not to set any of these decisions in stone, but rather to create an effective framework within which such decisions can be made.
Our analysis of past performance reveals an implementation gap in Irish climate policy (a trend by no means unique to Ireland). Although comprehensive packages of measures to address Ireland’s climate challenge were outlined in strategy documents in 2000 and again in 2007, many measures were not implemented, or only implemented after considerable delay. Nor was progress systematically reviewed.
The public interest can suffer as a consequence; many of the measures contained in these strategies (such as the upward revision of building regulations, or revamped spatial planning) could have improved the quality of life of Irish citizens, decreased energy bills and reduced Ireland’s need to purchase carbon offsets.
A legally defined climate policy framework has the potential to bridge this historical implementation gap and to deliver a least-cost response to Ireland’s challenge. A poorly designed law could, however, add unnecessary red tape and increase the costs of delivering emissions-reduction targets.
Drawing on various domestic and international examples of climate legislation, we argue that the first thing a law could do is make emissions-reduction targets more immediate. Right now Ireland has an EU reduction target for 2020, which seems distant on the horizon for politicians and the public alike. It might be useful to approach this, and future targets, in shorter five-yearly compliance periods. This would ensure greater political accountability for delivering targets, making long-fingering less likely.
A law could also establish an independent expert body, somewhat similar to Ireland’s Fiscal Advisory Council, with responsibility for publishing a five-year plan. This plan would suggest which measures should be introduced, and in which sectors, based on the principle of cost-effectiveness and protecting the competitiveness of each sector.
There could then be a political debate involving all stakeholders. Crucially, this debate would be framed within what is in Ireland’s best interests rather than what is in the interests of any one sector or group. The final decision would remain political.
The expert body could also serve as a watchdog. It could conduct an annual review of progress in relation to Ireland’s targets, and present a report to the relevant Oireachtas committee. This would alert policymakers and the public when progress is lagging.
The publication of all expert advice is essential to enhance transparency and political accountability and to allow active participation from civil society. And while its independence would be paramount, it could be contained within an existing body to avoid unnecessary cost.
Onerous or complex target-setting is a key pitfall to be avoided. Ireland’s 2020 target is already legally binding and is one of the most challenging of all the 27 EU member states. Additional targets, or annual reduction targets, could greatly increase the cost. Nevertheless, legislation that includes a target for 2050 would be useful to establish an overall goal.
A climate law is therefore not about setting challenging new targets, choosing which measures to introduce, or deciding which sector of the economy to target. Legislation could instead seek to address the problems of the past by creating a framework that results in effective policy implementation.
A badly designed law has the potential to damage competitiveness at a time when the country can least afford it. A good law could serve to prompt long-term thinking, and act as a foundation for the transition to a clean, smart and green economy.
Joseph Curtin and Gina Hanrahan are researchers on The Institute of International and European Affairs climate change group. He has worked as a consultant with the OECD on projects including assessing climate policy of countries such as Norway, Israel, Italy and Germany