A new IEEP paper for UK NGOs looks at the risks and opportunities for environmental policy of possible Brexit outcomes. Crashing out without a deal would pose significant risks, while the Withdrawal Agreement has valuable elements which mitigate some environmental downsides of Brexit.
IEEP welcomes the urgency of the Commission’s SDG reflection paper “Towards a sustainable Europe by 2030” and strongly supports the development of an overarching EU SDG strategy. To support further policy action, here is our ‘a-day-after’ analysis of the paper.
Two documents, central to Brexit and its aftermath, have been endorsed by the UK government and the European Council (for the EU27). In principle, one of these, the Agreement, will enter into force at the time of the UK’s departure from the EU. Taken together, they have potentially significant implications for the environment and environmental policy.
Leading up to IEEP's Think 2030 conference, experts express their views on Europe's most pressing sustainability issues in the Think 2030 blog series, Pathways to 2030.
The tenth edition of Pathways to 2030 features Nick Molho, Executive Director of the Aldersgate Group. The next European Commission must adopt a more positive stance on the value of regulations. Far from being a drag on the economy, well-designed environmental regulations can increase business investment in innovation and skills and drive competitiveness, he argues.
The Brexit negotiations enter what should be the final stages at the end of 2018, with an outline agreement on the future relationship. A new IEEP paper sets out what is needed to avoid the risk of environmental standards being lowered for competitive advantage.
As the UK and EU negotiators focus on the future relationship, our briefing note looks at how environmental legislation could be treated, and in particular what counts as an “equivalent” commitment. Getting this right matters; both to avoid competitiveness disputes, and to deliver green goals.
In environmental terms there are at least two ways of looking at the prospects for 2018. Viewed through the rather sober lens of EU process, it has the look of a project completion and tidying up period with limited long term impetus to the last full year of the current European Parliament and Commission.
A newly published study for the European Commission by IEEP and partners investigates civil society’s role in improving the effectiveness of environmental taxes to reduce pollution and better manage natural resources.
Martin Nesbit, head of climate and governance and David Baldock, senior fellow at IEEP spoke at an evidence session of the House of Lords' Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006 Committee on 28 November.
On Wednesday 15th of November the European Parliament is expected to adopt a resolution on an EU Action Plan for nature, people and the economy. The Action Plan, intended to boost the implementation of the EU’s Birds and Habitats Directives, was presented by the European Commission in April this year following an in-depth fitness check.
Over the years the EU has had a major impact on ensuring that governments do what they promise on the environment. As the UK leaves, both the British Government and the EU-27 need to think about how to replicate those benefits in future.
Juncker’s State of the European Union speech sets an ambitious path for a stronger Europe, and while his ambition for climate leadership is welcome, he was mostly silent about wider environmental sustainability.
When the UK leaves the EU, it will lose an important element in the enforcement of environmental legislation and standards. The European Commission’s monitoring of Member States’ action to implement agreed legislation, backed up by the European Court of Justice’s ability to impose effective sanctions, has been a key driver in delivering environmental improvements.
In the immediate aftermath of President Trump’s decision to leave the Paris agreement, the sixth largest economy of the world, California, signed an agreement with China to fight climate change. While non-binding, such cooperation represents a “trickle-up” approach to global climate change governance and is part of a wave of initiatives from non-state actors including civil society, the private sector and local authorities.