1

COMM

PreParation Kit

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie

Preparation Kit

2

Contents

LIBECommittee on Civil Liberties, Justice & Home Affairs

TRANCommittee on Transport & Tourism

ECON Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs

FEMMCommittee on Womens’ Right and Gender Equality

DEVECommittee on Deve

CLIMCommittee on Climate Change

ITRECommittee on Industry, Research & Trade

JURICommittee on Legal Affairs

AFCOCommittee on Constitutional Affairs

AGRICommittee on Agriculture & Rural Affairs

Clauses

4

12

19

27

34

42

52

59

66

76

88

Preparation Kit

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie 3

It’s not every day that we get to discuss current affairs. It’s even rarer that we get to discuss the affairs of the future. Yet this session will offer you the chance to do both, in the context of imagining the Europe of Tomorrow, today.

In politics, too often we think too small. Day-to-day matters are of course important but thinking about the bigger picture, debating the multiple visions that exist for our world, and exploring what these could mean for us is even more relevant. To not challenge, debate and influence the world we want to live in 50 years from now is, at best irresponsible, at worst, reckless.

How will we find a solution to climate change, a disjointed and dysfunctional European transport network, food security and data protection rights if our view of the future is limited to the next five years? How will we be able to stride towards improvements in equal pay, overseas development, space exploration and the ethics of research if we have no conception of what the possible solutions to these challenges look like?

The chairs team of the session have put in a monumental effort to make these overviews as good as possible. We want to give you as good an introduction to your topic as we can – the responsibility is now on you to read your overview carefully, follow the links therein and use this booklet as the springboard for further research. The better prepared you are, the more you will get out of this session.

We are the generation who will have to face up to these obstacles – it’s only right that we should be the ones leading the debate. Let’s get that debate started on the 4th of March.

I can’t wait to see you there,Niall,President of the 18th National Session of EYP Ireland

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie

Preparation Kit

4

LIBE

As EU citizens share more personal data online than ever before, what provisions should be made in the EU’s proposed ‘Data Protection Compact’ to safeguard the digital rights of all Europeans?

By Gustaf Westin (SE)

Introduction and ExplanationUse of the internet has never been as widespread as it is today. Thanks to innovation, the internet has been made significantly faster, easier and more far-reaching over the past decades than could ever have been imagined. It has given us unlimited opportunities to connect with people anywhere around the world, enjoy music, movies and other kinds of culture that would previously have been out of reach, and has provided a dynamic sphere for businesses to grow. A completely new way of interacting has developed, in the form of social media. However, as we roam the internet, we often give away more information about ourselves than we think. With every action we take on the internet, be it searching for something in a search engine, uploading a picture on a social media platform or reading an article on a news site, we leave a digital footprint. This digital footprint is almost always stored somewhere, and the information stored could potentially end up in the wrong hands if not handled with enough care. Data breaches can result in gross violations of privacy, as seen in the 2014 hacking of Apple’s iCloud service, where hundreds of private pictures, mostly belonging to celebrities, were posted online. Article 8 of the Charter of Fundamental rights of the European Union states: “Everyone has the right to the protection of personal data concerning him or her”1, and effective and up to date rules and laws are needed to safeguard that right. Data protection legislation is a way of achieving transparency surrounding violations of privacy. It works from the premise that every individual is his/her own, including his or her own 1 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2010:083:0389:0403:en:PDF

The Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs

Preparation Kit

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie 5

LIBE

information. Then it creates ways for you, as an individual, to keep track of your own information and to prevent the misuse or disclosure of it. Collection of information is not rare. Data is used constantly by everyone from public authorities to insurance companies, from private companies to social media platforms. Private information could be used for, for example, in criminal investigations or for security reasons. Collection and processing of information by either official authorities or private entities is by no means only done with malicious or unlawful intent, but could be if not handled with enough care. The EU adopted its first comprehensive Data Protection Directive in 1995, at a time in which less than 1% of the EU’s citizens used the internet regularly, as opposed to around 75% today2. Consequently it became outdated. A necessity to renew and modernise these laws prompted the European Commission to propose a comprehensive reform of the 1995 rules in 2012, known as the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). Although most agree that data protection is important to safeguard fundamental rights of the EU’s citizens, many of the regulations have been subject to intense debate, and implementation is still in progress.

Relevant questions:1) What are the biggest challenges we face when it comes to data

protection today?2) Should the current composition of the General Data Protection

Regulation be changed? What could be added or even left out?

Main ConflictsOne of the most controversial components of the GDPR, is the issue of the so called “Right to be forgotten”. A lot of criticism has been directed against the proposal, with some fearing it would threaten freedom of speech on the internet and even lead to censorship. Wikipedia co-founder Jimmy Wales, for example, stated that the right to be forgotten will result in an internet “riddled with memory holes”3. The fact that the responsibility to remove links 2 http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-12-46_en.htm 3 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/wikipedia/11015901/EU-ruling-on-link-removal-deep-

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie

Preparation Kit

6

LIBE

and search results to third-party sites may lie with a search engine has evoked protests from companies like Google and Yahoo that claim it would pose a formidable and perhaps overwhelming task to handle all requests about removal. In a blog post named “Our thoughts on the right to be forgotten”, Google stated that “Ultimately, responsibility for deleting content published online should lie with the person or entity who published it.”4 Former commissioner for justice, fundamental rights and citizenship, Vivianne Reding, answered to the critique, saying Google already faces millions of requests relating to copyright infringement every month. She stated: “It is possible to handle the copyright question, so it should also be possible to handle the takedown requests on personal data questions.”5 Proponents maintain that the right is important to secure the privacy of the EU’s citizens. On a larger scale, many people argue that data protection is, mainly, an individual responsibility, and that individuals themselves should be more careful about what information they give away on the internet, and that putting the responsibility on someone else would only promote more careless behaviour by internet users. Critics argue that taking responsibility away from individuals and replacing it with a legal framework, they may create unreasonable expectations for privacy and a false sense of safety and security online. Questions have also risen around the new “one-stop-shop” principle. Although many agree this will make it easier for companies, some foresee communication problems due to language differences. British and Irish Data Protection Authorities (DPA) As may also have to face a greater number of companies choosing them, as non-European companies doing business in the EU would probably choose a DPA with English as its language. There are also problems with implementation of the GDPR. Expertise and education on matters of privacy and data protection is already scarce and with the GDPR this need will only grow. Many companies that have not previously implemented strict data protection will also have to change their practices to meet new standards. There has also been resistance from some national ly-immoral-says-Wikipedia-founder.html 4 http://googlepolicyeurope.blogspot.de/2012/02/our-thoughts-on-right-to-be-forgotten.html 5 http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/jun/04/eu-commissioner-right-to-be-forgot-ten-enforce-copyright-google

Preparation Kit

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie 7

LIBE

governments. In 2012, the Swedish parliament ruled that the GDPR contradicts the principle of subsidiarity6, i.e. that data protection is better run by national governments. In the UK it is held that data protection is a so called negative right, i.e. something the government is not necessarily obliged to provide. There has also been resistance from some national governments, including Sweden and Germany, concerning the fact that the same rules will apply to both the private and the public sector. In Sweden, for example, there are a number of special laws for different government authorities like the tax agency and the police, which Swedish authorities mean gives a higher level of protection for different pieces of personal information in separate registers. Critics, in turn, say having a single law for all kinds of data storages would be much easier and safer for individuals.Relevant Questions:

1) Does the right to be forgotten threaten freedom of speech on the internet, or is it necessary to protect the rights of Europe’s citizens?

2) How can expertise and knowledge about privacy matters be boosted?3) Is there merit to the critique by national governments like Sweden

and the UK?

Main Actors· The European Commission – The body responsible for

proposing new laws and reforms to existing data protection legislation. Also monitors and evaluates the implementation of new legislation and is responsible for penalising actors who do not comply with rules. Data protection specifically is a part of the responsibilities of the Commissioner for Justice, Consumers and Gender Equality, Věra Jourová, as well as the Vice President for Digital Single Market, Andrus Ansip. In January 2015, both said in a joint statement, that the finalisation and implementation of the GDPR is one of the Commissions top priorities for 20157.

· Member states’ authorities – Responsible for implementing

6 The principle that the EU may only intervene if it is able to act more effectively than Member States.7 http://ec.europa.eu/justice/newsroom/data-protection/news/20150128_en.htm

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie

Preparation Kit

8

LIBE

regulations decided upon by the EU, such as the GDPR, in their respective countries. Also responsible for national Data Protection Authorities, to which companies handling private information are obliged to report, and to which companies have to report in the case of data breaches.

· European citizens – Individuals using the internet and whose private information needs to be handled with care. Lapses, illicit behaviour by companies and carelessness can lead to information ending up in the wrong hands and the invasion of privacy. Measures like the right to be forgotten increases individuals’ legal rights at the expense of those of data companies’.

· Private companies – Companies handling data and private information. They are interested in a legal framework as simple and harmonised as possible. Companies could also be subject to large penalties if they do not comply with EU rules. Different kinds of regulations may increase or decrease their responsibilities, for example higher data protection requirements.

Relevant questions:1) Is there a need to balance Member States’ national sovereignty with

the harmonisation of data protection legislation? 2) Is there a conflict between a good business climate for private

companies and extended legal rights of citizens? If so, what is the best way to balance those two factors?

Measures and SolutionsThe GDPR8 is the EU’s plan to harmonise all data protection legislation in the Union under a single law. The legislation package has been approved by the European Parliament, and is still being discussed by the Council of the EU. The swift implementation of the GDPR is one of the Juncker Commission’s top priorities for 2015, and they are hoping for a complete agreement before the end of the year. The package is comprised by a number of different 8 http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-12-46_en.htm

Preparation Kit

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie 9

LIBE

measures, among others:· A right to erasure: A variant of the so called right to be

forgotten. This is a concept making it possible for individuals to request the removal of data, links or search results from the internet by data companies, search engines or websites, unless there is a legitimate reason to retain it. Should a company fail to do so, it could face high financial penalties.

· A one-stop-shop principle: A principle stating companies will only have to deal with one Data Protection Authority (DPA), either in the country the company is based, or depending on which DPA it chooses. With companies no longer having to deal with 26 different DPA’s, it is expected to greatly decrease administrative costs for businesses.

· In the case of a data breach, companies will now be obliged to report the breach to their respective DPA as soon as possible (if possible within 24 hours), and inform all affected users.

· A requirement for every European institution and enterprise of a specific size to appoint a so called Data Protection Officer (DPO). The main job of a DPO is to ensure that all handling of personal information or data within the institution is done in accordance with EU regulations. This position is a novelty in most member states.

· Companies based outside the EU will now have to abide by the same data protection laws as European-based companies when doing business in the EU. Earlier, no such requirement was in place, and European companies consequently had to abide by stricter rules than non-European.

· Increased powers to national DPA’s: DPA’s will be given the power to fine companies up to 2% of their global annual revenue, and there have been discussions about raising possible sanctions to 5%.

· A right to data portability: Individuals will be able to transfer electronic information, for example a Facebook friends list or iTunes music, to a competitor without hindrance.

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie

Preparation Kit

10

LIBE

Relevant questions1) Are there other measures we could take to protect citizens’ privacy,

in addition to those proposed in the GDPR?

ConclusionThe issue of data protection is more pressing and more important today than ever before. The internet has given us unlimited opportunities and possibilities, and the number of people and businesses taking advantage of it is constantly growing. But with this new phenomenon, new challenges have arisen, and the need for a renewal of our old rules is pressing. Proponents of the newly proposed General Data Protection Regulation believe the solution lies therein, while some think it should be modified, and others believe the solution lies elsewhere. What is the best alternative for the EU on the matter of data protection, and what is the best way to protect our citizens’ privacy and integrity?

Relevant questions:1) What would be the consequences for society and for the internet

without sufficient data protection? 2) How can we satisfy the needs of all involved actors?

Key TermsData protection, right to be forgotten, GDPR, data breach, internet privacy, data storage, search engine,

Further Reading· European Commission: Data Protection Day 2015;

http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-15-3802_en.htm

· European Commission press release, proposition for a reform of data protection rules;

Preparation Kit

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie 11

LIBE

http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-12-46_en.htm · European Digital Agenda: Internet usage among EU citizens;

https://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/sites/digital-agenda/files/scoreboard_life_online.pdf

· “The right to be forgotten online: Will it ruin the Internet?”;http://www.macleans.ca/news/world/the-right-to-be-forgotten-online-will-it-ruin-the-internet/

· “Why Small Businesses Are Lucrative Targets for Cyber Criminals”https://blog.spideroak.com/20140624100000-why-small-businesses-are-lucrative-targets-for-cyber-criminals

· “EU Debates Which Nation Will Regulate Web Privacy”http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/27/technology/with-european-data-rules-come-a-need-for-a-cop.html

· European Parliament’s Video Introduction to EU Data Protection [1:49] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6eHBzppf4YQ

· An overview of EU data protection reform http://ec.europa.eu/justice/data-protection/document/review2012/factsheets/1_en.pdf

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie

Preparation Kit

12

TRAN

“Following on from the European Commission’s (EC) publication of the ‘Roadmap to a Single European Transport Area,’ what steps should now be taken towards the creation of a competitive, sustainable and resource efficient European transport system by 2050?”

By Katie Kilcoyne (IE) and Clemens Rawert (VP) (DE)

Introduction and ExplanationAt first glance, transport does not seem like one of the most urgent problems that we have in the European Union (EU) today. The major developments in the transport sphere (such as the shift to air travel, reduction in costs and more competition) all seem well to us and if we look around we will agree that much progress has been made. Yet transport plays a major role in the European economy (it contributes around 5% of the EU’s GDP and directly employs 10 million people1) and is crucial to its citizen’s mobility. Improvements in logistics can be the edge that sets Europe apart from other economies in the world and make the life of the ordinary citizen easier, safer and Europe more interconnected. Thus, the European Commission has laid out the “Roadmap to a Single European Transport Area” (henceforth “The Roadmap”). A single European Transport Area means accessibility of transport for all, access to open markets for companies from any country and common safety and quality standards across the Union. Furthermore, with the EU committed to reducing its carbon emissions resulting from transport by 60%, and the overall level of emissions by 85-90%2 before 2050, an important goal of the roadmap is to make transport more sustainable. A number of targets such as the phasing out of conventional fuels in urban transport or the 1 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/;ELX_SESSIONID=TQ6SJNLTMyJmXLbhRYXl-GcKCYhjTwNp3GF8HPbykPpq1Qf1TFy0G!777643339?uri=CELEX:52011DC0144 – Roadmap to a Single European Transport Area 2 http://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/brief/eu/ - see(1) - basis level for both: 1990

The Committee on Transport and Tourism

Preparation Kit

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie 13

TRAN

shift from road cargo to freight trains are thus highlighted therein.3 But not only has the transport economy to be sustainable it is also in need of harmonisation on a technical and economic level. Even today the transport sector has significant barriers to entry.4 The EC is aiming to reduce frictions and open up the market to companies all over Europe.

Relevant Questions:- Why is transport such an important issue? How does it affect

people and the economy?- What areas does the European Commission Roadmap examine?

What are the options laid-out therein?

Main ConflictsPerhaps the greatest conflict we face is how to achieve sustainable transport with our current dependence on conventional fuels. To achieve the objectives laid-out in the roadmap it will be necessary to find alternatives to transport’s over-reliance on oil without sacrificing its efficiency and compromising mobility in the sector. Long-distance road freight can no longer solely rely on oil when alternative reliable non-fossil fuel alternatives to oil are currently available5. However alternative fuels are often more expensive, thus creating a clash between economic efficiency and environmental sustainability. One of the key problems pointed out by the Roadmap is that due to fragmentation, the European transport network adds up to less than the sum of its parts. The market for transportation is significantly distorted by existing monopolies and differing technical standards which makes harmonisation on a European level difficult. For decades all European countries have maintained their own systems using their own technology (electric vs. diesel motors, different track gauge sizes etc.). The EU still has a long way to go to open the transport system to pan-European competition. Economically speaking the transport sector has been heavily 3 see (1)4 A barrier to entry is defined as a circumstance that makes it difficult to enter a particular market.5 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renewable_energy

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie

Preparation Kit

14

TRAN

distorted as a result of national states owning or having owned much of its infrastructure (roads, railways, airlines, harbours6). Competition has often been prevented and economically non-viable structures were maintained. Recently Europe has seen both more competition and an increasing amount of government planned routes. What is the ideal level of involvement of the state? Does it play an important role in providing transport in spite of financial gains or does it hamper the development of a cheaper, more efficient transport system by imposing rules and regulations? The EC is tasked with ensuring that there is competition in the single market and has the power to propose legislation in this area however national governments often see transport as being a strategic interest and one over which they would wish to keep some level of control. With these two views clashing a common solution for the EU has not yet been reached. The Roadmap aims to significantly increasing the amount of cargo that is transported by rail and by sea while decreasing cargo transported on roads. In light of the technical and economic challenges mentioned above that all arise in the railway sector is this a move that could possibly be executed keeping in mind the realities? Research and development is the main driver of innovation. Innovation that is urgently needed to reshape the way transport is provided and how it can be executed in a beneficial manner for all. There are technical conflicts appearing here also, with a need for increased innovation in terms of smaller, lighter and more ecological transport vehicles leading to the uptake of Intelligent Transport Systems7.

Relevant questions;- How prominent a role and influence can the EU have in terms of

overcoming these key conflicts?- Out of the aforementioned key conflicts, which could be considered

the most prominent and complicated to overcome, therefore requiring special attention?

6 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_of_Rotterdam#Administration, http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamburger_Hafen_und_Logistik#-Seit_20077 http://ec.europa.eu/transport/themes/its/index_en.htm

Preparation Kit

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie 15

TRAN

Main ActorsEuropean Commission:· The European Commission is the executive arm of the EU. It is the organ proposing legislation and drafting major policies. “The Roadmap to a Single European Transport Area” was also drafted by the EC. It oversees, develops and guides future policy and its implementation. Transportation is a shared competence. This means that the Member States can legislate on it as long as the European Union has not. The EC is thus at the core of change and coordination efforts and must seek to incorporate all Member States interests so as to ensure approval for its plans.Private Companies:· Private corporations provide much of Europe’s transport. They operate in plenty of areas and almost exclusively provide for the mobility of goods. As the interests of corporations might not in all cases align with the interests of the EU (e.g. emissions reductions, barriers to entry) these conflicts have to be noted and understood. Privately owned companies react to incentives meaning the economy responds to the framework it is given e.g. by liberalisations or the introduction of a subsidy. A successful pan-European policy must thus take these incentives into account.National Governments:· National governments play a hugely important role. They implement the shared EU legislation on transportation and they legislate, subsidise and coordinate transport themselves. The infrastructure ‘heritage’ we see in Europe today is to a large extent due to a level of state activity.The Member States also own much of the transportation infrastructure themselves. This varies from country to country yet more often than not the state owns public transport systems, highways and the railroads. Therefore national governments play a major role in establishing common standards and possibly opening up the market to further competition. But also innovation and research and development are domains that the Member States stimulate and shape for the future.

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie

Preparation Kit

16

TRAN

Relevant Questions:· Which authority (or authorities) is best suited and has the

competences to address what issues in the transport sector?· What is the EU’s specific role in the area of transport? What

competences can it exercise in the area? 8

Measures and SolutionsThe Roadmap stands at the core of the EU’s efforts to better the world of transport. It is made up of forty initiatives for the next decade to; “implement a competitive transport system that will increase mobility, remove major barriers in key areas and fuel growth and employment.” These measures ambitiously plan to simultaneously dramatically reduce Europe’s dependence on imported oil and cut carbon emissions. A Single European Transport area implies common rules on all kinds of transports. The most developed of these initiatives is the Single European Sky (SES)9 which is similar to the concepts of the Single Rail Area10, the Single Freight Area and the Maritime Blue Belt11. These concepts like the SES aim at harmonising regulation and legislation in their respective field on a European level and thus having operations in each Member State under the same standards. The Single European Sky aims at replacing the highly segmented aviation control and implement a Single European supervision that divides the European airspace into functional blocks that are operated by one authority for all countries. While these plans were welcomed by many in the nineties they have not been implemented to date because of the concerns and regulatory problems of national governments12. Other potential solutions could encompass increasing the efficiency of transport and of infrastructure use with information systems and market-based incentives, as well as further research and development into alternative green sources of energy for electric motors.8 http://ec.europa.eu/citizens-initiative/public/competences/faq9 http://ec.europa.eu/transport/modes/air/single_european_sky/index_en.htm 10 http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-14-643_en.htm 11 http://ec.europa.eu/transport/modes/maritime/news/bluebelt_en.htm 12 http://www.euractiv.com/specialreport-future-aviation-qu/eu-single-sky-ambitions-remains-news-528718

Preparation Kit

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie 17

TRAN

An important initiative that has been introduced by the EC is the Trans-European Transport Network (TEN-T)13. The TEN-T is an attempt to focus funds and efforts on thirty ‘core’ European transport routes. The program is set to have a budget of around €20 billion until 2020 to develop important transport lines for freight and people. Common rules and standards for European transport is the ultimate vision of the European Commission. Its active task is to reconcile the interests of all involved parties in order to achieve a solution that works best for the citizen.

Relevant questions;- How can the EU ensure that an efficient and improved transport

area be established yet simultaneously keep to the planned 60% reduction in carbon emissions by 2050?

- An imperative part of this topic is that the transport area must be sustainable. How can the EU ensure that the solution will be as long term as possible?

ConclusionAs the EU grows towards a future of becoming even more linked and interconnected, methods of travel within the EU must in turn, also evolve and develop. The ease and efficiency of a sustainable travel area within Europe would undeniably benefit the citizens of the EU hugely. Although the goal of reducing carbon emissions appears to be a solid barrier in the traction of this project, it could also be viewed as a challenge, the direction to which the EU must take in its implementation. Provided we utilise and develop our resources in green energies and eco-fuels, which will simultaneously lessen our dependence on imported oil and gas, the EU could potentially achieve its noble aim of reducing carbon emissions while implementing this proposed transport area - a feat which would certainly launch the EU as a trailblazer for other nations in terms of environmental protection and awareness.

13 http://ec.europa.eu/transport/infrastructure/tentec/tentec-portal/site/en/abouttent.htm

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie

Preparation Kit

18

TRAN

Key termsEuropean Transport, Logistics, Sustainability, Competitiveness, Harmonisation, Single European Transport Area Required Readinghttp://ec.europa.eu/transport/facts-fundings/statistics/doc/2014/pocketbook2014.pdf - Statistics on Transport in the European Unionhttp://www.euractiv.com/sections/transport/single-european-sky-we-have-problem-303626http://www.economist.com/news/business/21638109-high-speed-networks-are-spreading-fast-face-rising-competition-problems-down-linehttp://www.theverge.com/2015/2/2/7966437/6-reasons-to-be-terrified-about-the-future-of-transportation - Possible dangers (U.S. publication)http://www.euractiv.com/transport/building-trans-european-transport-network/article-157280 - The TEN-T programhttp://www.euractiv.com/specialreport-future-aviation-qu/eu-single-sky-ambitions-remains-news-528718 - The challenges facing the Single European Skyhttp://www.euractiv.com/transport/europe-rails-rough-ride-integrat-linksdossier-514760 - The single rail areahttp://www.euractiv.com/transport/eu-divided-single-liberalised-eu-news-513753 - Challenges facing the single rail area

Preparation Kit

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie 19

ECON

With the European Commission (EC) tabling an enabling policy framework for a circular economy in the European Union (EU), how can both the EU and its Member States better manage existing resources and realign the production process through the use of existing infrastructure and enabling technologies to ensure industrial sustainability?

By Caoimhe Healy (IE) and Morgan McDonagh (IE) IntroductionThe world is experiencing the largest, fastest rise in global prosperity in history. Three billion people1 are expected to join the ranks of the middle class by 2025, all aspiring to the lifestyle and standard of living we in the west have grown so accustomed to. The resulting increase in global consumer demand will have serious socio-economic, political and environmental implications.

Up to now the vast majority of economic growth and prosperity has been based on a linear ‘take-make-consume and dispose’ model. This system, which is based on the extraction of finite, increasingly rare, raw materials, and which produces mountains of waste, is no longer sustainable. Demand for resources is growing, the cost of basic commodities increased 150% from 2002 to 2010,2 driving up costs for businesses and consumers; the extraction and transportation of many resources, from oil to rare earth metals, is either unstable, unreliable or both, increasing uncertainty and political tension while the environmental damage caused by the extraction, processing and disposal of natural resources has led to rising sea levels, air and water pollution, and a whole host of other problems.

1 Fusion Observatory Report: February 20142 “Mounting on Pressure”, World Economic Forum, 2014

The Committee on Economic & Monetary Affairs

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie

Preparation Kit

20

ECON

An alternative model, the circular economy, has been put forward as a solution to these problems. In a circular economy materials are reused, repaired, refurbished and recycled, instead of being disposed of once they have reached the end of their useful lives. There is no longer any ‘waste’, just a constant circulation of resources that are used to make new products. In a circular economy resources are used and managed efficiently so as to extract as much value as possible throughout their lifecycle. A circular model would potentially make for a more efficient, competitive and environmentally friendly Europe. The EC estimates that transitioning towards a circular economy could increase resource productivity by 30%, save European businesses €600 billion and create 2 million jobs by 2030.3

Relevant Questions1. How can the EU move towards a circular economy?2. What challenges does growing world prosperity present to the EU?3. Why is the development of a circular economy important to the EU?

ChallengesWhat is the best way to achieve a transition from the wasteful, linear economy to a sustainable, circular one? The European Commission’s paper “Towards a Circular Economy” primarily focuses on waste management and recycling4. This was widely regarded as a practical and do-able step forward, but is it enough? Does it account for the full consumption and reusing of all materials? The European Environmental Bureau also stated it does not sufficiently emphasise the idea of designing products and materials with the intention of disassembling them for reuse as raw materials,5 a crucial and critical concept in a circular economy.

Businesses, consumers and the economy in general remain ‘locked in’ to the current linear system. The existing financial system rewards conventional investment and models, seeing these as less risky and limiting the level of investment in new, 3 COM(2014) 3984 http://ec.europa.eu/environment/circular-economy/pdf/circular-economy-communication.pdf 5 COM(2014) 398

Preparation Kit

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie 21

ECON

innovative technologies. The higher up-front costs involved with environmentally friendly production limits investor willingness to get involved with such projects, further reducing investment. This, in turn, reduces the likelihood of more radical legislation being enforced.6

January 2007 marked the publication of the European Commission’s first venture into an EU energy policy, which had an emphasis on fighting climate change with a binding target of a 20% cut in greenhouse gases by 2020, under José Manuel Barroso. In March 2010, the Barroso Commission announced “Europe 2020”, a proposal for a major 10-year strategy aimed at reviving the European economy.7 It targets “smart, sustainable, inclusive growth” with greater co-ordination between national and European policy. The Juncker Commission can use these steps as a framework to further develop strategies and projects that will help in the transition to a circular economy.

Knowledge and awareness of how the circular economy works, and its benefits, is limited at all levels in the EU, from ordinary citizens to the Member States. One 2014 survey8 found that nearly 50% of Belgian, French and UK Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) had not heard of the concept at all. There are varying levels of development, knowledge and commitment between Member States. Sweden only landfills 1% of all its waste.9 19% of the UK economy is estimated to be circular10 but these are only part of the picture.

Established consumer behaviour also hinders the development of the circular economy. People are used to buying, using and then throwing out products. The circular economy is a relatively new concept that requires a drastic shift in mind-set and change of habit for everyone. It requires a shift to the “return and renew” ideal. This is also coupled with a lack of action – the innovative ideas are there, but the motivation to act is lacking.

6 COM(2014) 3987 http://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/index_en.htm 8 Fusion Observatory Report: February 2014 9 The Swedish Recycling Revolution10 The Guardian, 10 things you need to know about the circular economy

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie

Preparation Kit

22

ECON

Relevant Questions1. What has prevented the transition towards a circular economy up

to now?2. How can the current linear nature of the economy be broken?3. Why has there been a lack of motivation and action up to this point?

Main ActorsThe circular economy involves everyone, from the EU to

individual citizens, from multi-national corporations right down to the local bakery. Already there have been moves towards the implementation of circular industrial processes.

At a higher level again, there is the involvement of EU Institutions, including the European Parliament, the European Council and the European Commission. They are tasked with conceiving and producing legislation and recommendations that targets citizens, businesses and Member States. Last month, the EC adopted a zero-waste programme, establishing a legal framework for an EU-wide circular economy. Within the EU, the environment is a shared competence meaning both the EU and Member States can pass legislation on it.

There are a number of Member States that are active in developing initiatives in the field of the circular economy, including Germany, the UK, France and The Netherlands. However, other Member States still lack the knowledge to get started on transitioning to a circular economy. There are a number of factors contributing to this including funding, lack of initiative and innovation and the country’s ability to work and function within the EU.

Business too, has an important role to play. Big corporations, including H&M, Renault and Vodafone, have shown their support for a circular economy.11 For the transition from a linear to a circular economy to be successful, there needs to be participation and motivation at all levels of society. Unfortunately, there is an imbalance between understanding circular economies and actually practising them amongst European businesses. Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs) are the backbone of the European economy 11 Ellen MacArthur Foundation, The Circular Economy 100

Preparation Kit

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie 23

ECON

and are considered crucial to an effective circular economy. It is vital that SMEs understand, accept and implement the ideals of a circular economy.

Individual citizens and the choices that they make are central to the full implementation of the circular economy. It is the decisions made by individuals when buying, using and disposing of products and services which most influence the economy and which can drive change.

Other bodies which work towards the implementation of the circular economy include the Ellen MacArthur Foundation, The Product-Life Institute and many economists, scientists and other thinkers. Relevant Questions

1. Who needs to take leadership and responsibility for the transition to the circular economy?

2. What can the EU do to change Member State, business and consumer behaviour?

3. What role do independent bodies such as the Ellen MacArthur Foundation have to play?

Measures & Solutions Some existing EU policies and incentives are working towards the implementation of a circular economy. In July 2014, the European Commission published the communication “Towards a Circular Economy”. It establishes an EU enabling framework that combines smart regulation, market-based instruments, incentives and information sharing, as well as support for voluntary approaches. It focuses on research, unlocking investment, supporting business and consumers, and modernises waste policy. The package included some legally binding targets most of which are aimed at increasing recycling and reducing the amount of waste sent to landfills. At the fore of this proposal was a target to increase resource productivity by 30% by 2030, and to improve cooperation between the European Commission and Member States to ensure more effective implementation of such targets.

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie

Preparation Kit

24

ECON

Waste legislation has been a larger driver of resource efficiency to date by establishing a waste hierarchy; placing waste prevention on top, followed by reuse, then recycling and finally disposal. Chemicals policy aims to phase out certain harmful toxins from the production system entirely. Finally, climate policy incentives have increased energy efficiency and the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, driving up resource productivity.

“Horizon 2020”12 is a flagship initiative aimed at securing Europe’s global competitiveness. It is a research and innovation program with €80 billion available from 2014 to 2020, in addition to the private investment money it will attract. This will provide opportunities for business and innovation projects that support a circular economy. It promises more breakthroughs, discoveries and world-firsts by taking great ideas from the lab to the market. Its simple approach of reducing red tape and time makes sure new projects get off the ground quickly – and achieve results faster.

The “Green Action Plan for SMEs”13 developed in 2014, aims to improve research and increase financial support for SMEs in order to improve their sustainability and resource efficiency. It promotes entrepreneurship, eco-innovation, knowledge exchange, public-private partnerships and various forms of education, in the hope of transitioning SMEs towards more circulatory production cycles.

The Cradle to Cradle concept, promoted by the Ellen MacArthur Foundation, amongst others, proposes dividing all materials into two separate categories; biological materials and technical materials. Biological materials are designed to re-enter the biosphere safely through decomposition and can be used as fertiliser to grow food. Technical materials are non-degradable materials designed to circulate at high quality without entering the biosphere. The idea is to eliminate the concept of ‘waste’ and that all materials perpetually circulate.14

The cascading principle aims to extract as much energy and value from biological materials as possible. Instead of chopping down a tree to burn in a furnace, extra value can be gained through 12 http://ec.europa.eu/programmes/horizon2020/ 13 http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/sme/public-consultation-green-action-plan/index_en.htm 14 Ellen MacArthur Foundation, The circular model - brief history and schools of thought11 The Guardian; “Five countries moving ahead of the pack on circular economy legislation”

Preparation Kit

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie 25

ECON

successive uses – first as a piece of furniture, then as a timber product, such as sawdust packing, and eventually incineration and heat or energy creation.

Rethinking the way we view ownership has been put forward as a step towards the circular economy. Instead of buying, using and then disposing of products from washing machines to cars, the consumer pays to use a product which is still owned by a retailer or manufacturer who maintains services and then replaces the product, reusing and reclaiming all reusable components. There are already many everyday, if overlooked, examples of the “sharing economy” in place, this system of paying for the use of a product rather than the ownership of it. Two of the most globally successful “sharing economy” enterprises are Airbnb and Uber. City bike schemes and car sharing schemes are examples of more locally successful elements of the “sharing economy”.

The problem with many of these proposed solutions is that existing technologies, business models and behaviours are keeping the economy ‘locked-in’ to the linear model. It is often cheaper to chop down mature trees than to source used furniture. Where would a person interested in licensing, instead of buying, a fridge go?

Relevant Questions1. What existing measures are already leading to the transition to the

circular economy?2. Are these suggested solutions the best way forward or are there

other, better ways to tackle this problem? ConclusionThe benefits of a circular economy to businesses, consumers and the environment are clear. What can the EU do to ensure the continued transition to a fully circular economy? Can the process be sped up? What measures, policies and infrastructure already in place could be better utilised? What is the best way to ensure that this new economy benefits all Europeans and can deliver the promised jobs, economic growth and sustainability? Can we rethink and redesign

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie

Preparation Kit

26

ECON

our future? Key TermsLinear economy, Circular economy, Biological Material, Technical Material, Resource Productivity, Cascade Principle, Biomimicry, Regenerative design, Cradle to Cradle, Industrial Ecology, Sharing Economy.

Further Readinghttp://ec.europa.eu/environment/circular-economy/http://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/series/circular-economyhttp://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2014/dec/12/european-commission-to-decide-fate-of-circular-economy-package http://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org http://ed.ted.com/featured/2Yy019iv#watch http://www.product-life.org/http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zCRKvDyyHmI http://www.forbes.com/sites/valleyvoices/2015/01/20/the-circular-economy-great-idea-but-can-it-work/

Preparation Kit

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie 27

FEMM

A recent European Commission (EC) press release stated that “women still work on average 59 days ‘for free’ every year compared to their male counterparts.” In the light of such research, what needs to be done to address the European gender pay gap?

Eloïse Bodin (FR) & Patrick Lavelle (IE)

Introduction and Explanation:The gender pay gap represents the difference between men and women’s hourly earnings1. It is a well known fact today that such a gap exists in every European country, varying only in severity. Changes to the pay gap in recent decades has not matched the continuous positive change in female labour market participation rates. Rather in recent times the pay gap has fluctuated in many Western countries and even increased in some, in what many call a ‘Stalled Revolution’. In the European Union (EU), women earn an average of 16.4%2 less than men for the same job. This figure rises to over 20% in several Member States, such as Slovakia and Hungary. This issue is of great importance to the EU because such inequality violates the fundamental rights of many citizens and gives rise to many other forms of gender inequality. And differences persist in spite of the introduction of equal pay legislation more than thirty years ago.

Main Conflict: Despite the discussions and the decisions that were made, the EU is still struggling when it comes to the gender pay gap. Indeed it is not an easy problem to tackle since much of the problem comes directly from cultural habits and norms. 1 http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-14-160_en.htm 2 http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-14-190_en.htm

The Committee on Womens’ Rights & Gender Equality

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie

Preparation Kit

28

FEMM

Even though there has been much progress over the last century, discrimination still exists against women in the labour market. Prejudice and stereotypes about women give rise to statistical discrimination, whereby an individual woman is judged based on the qualities and characteristics an employer thinks typical of her gender, and therefore not entirely as an individual. Prejudices and stereotypes can have other less visible effects. Women may not be assigned certain tasks and duties due to an employer considering them unsuitable for women. However such actions can damage a woman’s career progressions, as such tasks and duties can often be critical for career advancement. Widespread gender beliefs in society have resulted in women’s work, competencies and contributions often being undervalued. This gives rise to valuative discrimination, whereby women are paid lower wages than men, for the same work. Employers have also been shown to discriminate against women because of stereotypes which lead them to expect women to work less due to ‘familial duty’. Such perceptions see female employees as likely to cost the firm money during maternity leave, and as having a high likelihood of leaving the workforce after pregnancy. Work-family conflict is another important explanation of the gender pay gap. Despite improvements, women in society are still burdened with the vast majority of household and child-caring work, even in couples where both partners work full-time. Many occupations are still highly unaccommodating to family life. Research has thus shown the preferences of men and women to diverge with the onset of parenthood3. Men continue to value job characteristics such as prestige and pay, along with women without children, while mothers diverge in also taking job flexibility into account, in order to balance their family duties. This often leads women to take lower paying jobs, which better accommodate their motherhood responsibilities. Indeed the burden of children leads many women to only work part-time, with women therefore constituting the vast majority of part-time workers in the EU. These problems are particularly acute for mothers in single-parent families. This effect of motherhood on the earnings of women lead to the coining of the term the ‘motherhood wage penalty’.

3 http://qz.com/175300/women-pay-a-steep-price-for-their-more-flexible-work-schedules/

Preparation Kit

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie 29

FEMM

The reduction in the proportion of females at each step up the job ladder of a firm is a major explanation behind the pay gap. As well as what has already been discussed, cultural practises offer a reason for this. The networks an individual builds up can prove critical for career progression. Men can find it easier to build social connections with those higher up the male-dominated work hierarchy, for example through sport and school networks, and thus find themselves advantaged when it comes to promotion. This is often referred to as the ‘old boys’ club’. Furthermore, motherhood has been shown to negatively affect career progression, with many mothers finding it difficult to get back on the ‘promotion ladder’ to higher positions after maternity leave and baby breaks, due to unaccommodating workplace structures. Common beliefs and stereotypes about gender have given rise to occupational segregation, one of the factors behind the pay gap. This term refers to the phenomenon whereby men and women are concentrated in different occupations. Societal norms and pressures lead men and women to pursue different career occupations. Indeed subject choices (and limits to those choices) in school and university put men and women on different career trajectories. Female dominated occupations become ‘feminised’, such as teaching and clerical work, and due to the undervaluation of women’s labour, these occupations come to be worse paid relative to male dominated occupations. Worryingly even in female dominated occupations, the proportion of men increases at each step up the career ladder, which can be seen in the example of school principals.

What are the explanations behind the gender pay gap?What role do societal attitudes and stereotypes play in this?How does motherhood affect earnings?

Main ActorsEmployers: Employers are the gatekeepers to the labour market. They control both the hiring process and the assignment of promotions and tasks in the workplace.

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie

Preparation Kit

30

FEMM

EU Member States: National governments lead decision-making about gender equality policies. Furthermore they can control the many policy areas which have externalities on gender equality, such as employment and education policies. The EU has an assisting role and supports Member States in achieving gender equality, for example via different treaties and strategies. European Commission: The European Commission proposes legislation relating to gender equality and ensures Member States are compliant with the provisions for equality in the treaties and directives of the EU. In recent years its focus has included ensuring better application of existing legislation, integrating the fight against the pay gap into employment policies, and supporting the exchange of good practices across the EU. European Parliament and the Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality (FEMM): Although the European Parliament does not have full legislative power, it can give political signals and has control over the budget legislation, policies and many political actions affecting women. It drafts reports on the Commission’s proposals on women’s rights, organises public hearings and defines budget priorities for Women’s Programmes. FEMM is the committee of the European Parliament, which focuses on gender equality issues. European Institute for Gender Equality (EIGE): EIGE is an autonomous body of the EU, which supports gender equality in the EU by analysing and publishing related data. Non-governmental Organisations (NGOs): Many NGOs lobby the EU and national governments for greater efforts towards improving gender equality. The European Women’s Lobby (EWL) is the largest umbrella organisation of women’s associations in the EU, which works closely with European Institutions and civil society partners.

What role do employers play in perpetuating the pay gap?What is the scope of the EU’s ability to tackle the pay gap given its assisting role?

Preparation Kit

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie 31

FEMM

Measures & Solutions Equal pay for equal work is regarded as one of the founding principles of the EU, with it inscribed in the EU’s Treaties4 since 1957. Currently, the principle is embedded in Article 157 of the “Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union” (TFEU)5. This article has provided the basis for European directives on equal pay, which the European Commission ensures is transposed (incorporated into the national law of each EU Member State) and applied correctly. The “Strategy for equality between women and men 2010-2015” represents the EC’s work on gender equality for the period 2010-2015. “Equal pay for equal work and work of equal value” is one of its central priorities6. The strategy consists of a stimulation for developments of measures on a national level as well as providing a basis for good interaction between the other institutions and various stakeholders. The European Commission seeks to maintain an overview on equal opportunities between women and men at European Commission level and to discuss the question of mainstreaming7 a gender perspective into all EU services and policies. Mainstreaming a gender perspective is the process of assessing the implications for women and men of any planned action, including legislation, policies or programmes, in any area and at all levels8. Paid parental leave policies form a key action of most Member States to enable parents to both work and have children. However the structure of such policies has impacted on the pay gap, with differences between Member States arising from their varying policies. New mothers mostly get between 14 and 22 weeks, and new fathers between two days (Greece) and three months (Italy) of paid leave. Such policies are believed to have a significant effect on how childcare and housework are divided between men and women9.

4 http://europa.eu/eu-law/decision-making/treaties/index_en.htm 5 https://europadatenbank.iaaeu.de/user/view_legalact.php?id=16 6 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52010DC0491&from=EN 7 http://eige.europa.eu/content/activities/gender-mainstreaming-methods-and-tools 8 United Nations Economic and Social Council definition 1997: http://www.ilo.org/public/english/bureau/gender/newsite2002/about/defin.htm 9 http://www.theguardian.com/money/shortcuts/2013/nov/29/parental-leave-rights-around-world

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie

Preparation Kit

32

FEMM

In Sweden, parents are entitled to 480 days of paid parental leave. In two-parent families, 60 days are reserved for each parent, with them free to divvy up the remaining 360 days. Fathers are estimated to take about 24% of the total amount of parental leave days, considerably more than most EU Member States10. It is argued that such a policy has incentivised mothers and father to share childcare more equally, contributing to a culture of greater equality in housework and child-caring, with consequential positive effects for reducing the pay gap. Views on childcare vary radically between Member States. Some countries see it as a social right and offer state-provided childcare for parents, such as Sweden which guarantees heavily subsidised childcare to all parents. Such a policy is believed to reduce the work-family conflict faced by mothers. In other countries, subsidies are limited and child care services are only provided through the private market at high prices, such as in Ireland11.

What efforts has the EU made to tackle the gender pay gap?What consequences have different paternal leave policies had for the pay gap?Does state-supported child-care reduce the pay gap?

Conclusion Given that the pay gap remains an entrenched feature of the European labour market, is it time for more action to be taken? What steps are necessary to achieve through gender equality in this area? Do the solutions lie at a national or European level, or both? Does the solution lie in equalising work-family conflict for both genders, or are there underlying causes which need addressing?

What can the EU do to better address the gender pay gap? What criteria should be taken into account when solving it? What are the underlying limits of any potential solution?

10 http://europa.eu/epic/countries/sweden/index_en.htm 11 http://europa.eu/epic/studies-reports/docs/rr-554-dg-employment-childcare-brief-v-0-16-final.pdf

Preparation Kit

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie 33

FEMM

Required ReadingsOfficial EU website on the gender pay gap:http://ec.europa.eu/justice/gender-equality/gender-pay-gap/causes/index_en.htm European Commission report “Tackling the gender pay gap in the European Union”:http://ec.europa.eu/justice/gender-equality/files/gender_pay_gap/140319_gpg_en.pdfPage 2-15Eurostat statistics on the pay gap:http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Gender_pay_gap_statistics Look at the Main Statistical FindingsEuropean Commission communication on tackling the pay gap between men and women:h t t p : / / e u r - l e x . e u r o p a . e u / l e g a l - c o n t e n t / E N / T X T /PDF/?uri=CELEX:52007DC0424&from=EN Page 1-10Article on Swedish efforts to reconcile work and family life:http://europa.eu/epic/countries/sweden/index_en.htm Economist article “Why Swedish men take so much paternity leave”:http://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2014/07/economist-explains-15

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie

Preparation Kit

34

DEVE

After the partial success of the United Nation’s (UN) Millennium Development Goals and with UN Member States about to commence negotiations on the post-2015 Development Agenda, which global development goals should the European Union (EU) emphasise from now until 2030 to ensure a feasible global development policy?

By Ellen O’Doherty (IE) & Waltter Roslin (FI)

Introduction and Explanation: In 2000, the UN put forward a vision of global reform and development. These reforms aimed to promote freedom, equality, solidarity, tolerance, and respect for the planet and shared responsibility over the planet’s resources. The eight millennium development goals are to eradicate hunger and extreme poverty, to achieve universal primary education, to promote gender equality and empower women, to reduce child mortality, to improve mental health, to combat HIV/AIDS, malaria and other diseases, to ensure environmental sustainability and to develop a global partnership for development.1 At times these goals seem unattainable, and despite some valiant successes such as completing goal number one, under the headings of poverty, slums and water, the remaining seven goals outlined in the MDGs have yet to be met. The problems, which the MDGs aimed to tackle span across a number of diverse areas; social issues, health, education, human rights, equality and climate change. Due to the broad nature of the topics involved, the EU faced difficult decisions when deciding which developmental issues needed to be prioritised and targeted by the 28 EU Member States or, which were the most feasible. Now as the MDGs are expiring, and facing into the post-2015 development agenda, the question of feasibility and practicality arises again when contemplating the next steps for global development policy. Which 1 http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A%2F68%2F202

The Committee on Development

Preparation Kit

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie 35

DEVE

objectives are the most pressing and which are the most realistically achievable? Furthermore, many have questioned whether fighting the development agenda on so many fronts can be effective and wonder if a more streamlined approach would be better.

1) Bearing in mind that over the last fifteen years, only one MDG was realised, is it feasible to continue the post-2015 Development Agenda with the same amount of goals?

2) Given current economic, political and social factors how can the EU evaluate what is feasible and what is not?

Main ConflictsThe issue of global development faces multiple conflicts. On the one hand, whilst all EU Member States have agreed to spend the equivalent of 0.7% of their annual gross national product on overseas development2, there exists a scarcity of resources in national finances, ultimately leading to cuts in the overseas development aid budget. Thus a conflict between commitments and financial prioritisation of the Member States. In times of economic stability, foreign aid thrives whilst during economic turmoil the opposite happens. What follows then is the matter of prioritisation. As they currently stand, the MDGs aim to simultaneously tackle the world’s issues, however maybe we should consider the possibility of a domino effect after the solving of even just one issue. As an example, if clean water and sanitation can be provided to everyone wouldn’t it also reduce the risk of diseases, or if more primary education can be provided equally to all genders, wouldn’t it directly empower women as they grow older? Considering this domino effect could be vital when giving the challenges of fighting on multiple fronts in a world with limited resources. All global issues have an air of urgency about them, however maybe prioritisation may be more effective in the struggle for a more equitable world. Setting goals is one thing; finding policies which will make them a reality is another. The field of development economics has not yet come to a consensus on what ‘works’ as far as overseas development is concerned and many economists now hold the 2 http://www.unmillenniumproject.org/press/07.htm

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie

Preparation Kit

36

DEVE

belief that solutions may vary from country to country – in other words, a ‘one-size fits all’ approach simply doesn’t exist. Without knowing the best approach to take in each circumstance, and in the absence of agreement on over-arching policies which can apply to all developing regions, how can NGOs, IGOs and national development agencies realistically expect to solve the world’s problems? Lastly having multiple actors working on the field of global development, from the individual Member States, to IGO’s such as the EU and the UN and lastly multiple NGO’s it is often questioned whether their individual efforts can cause more harm than good. Would it be more effective to try and direct actors to work in a uniform manner? This could however lead to the loss of diversity and prove as a disincentive for some to carry on the work they are doing already as all causes are not as “attractive” for some actors.

1) Is there a discrepancy between the goals that involve humanitarian aid and human rights promotion, such as poverty eradication and the goals that involve scientific efforts or changes to the practices of commercial companies such as desertification and overfishing, are these moral issues or just a question of resource management and feasibility?

2) Should the prioritisation of certain issues be left for Member States to decide individually according to the states’ beliefs or should it be an EU wide decision to allow the effective coordination and pooling of resources?

Main Actors: Global development encompasses multiple actors, from national to supranational to intergovernmental. From the EU’s perspective the most vital actors are the different European legislative organs and the Member States, as global development is a shared competence of the Union3. Thus cooperation between the Member States and the Union are necessary, as the Union has highlighted its own aims for global development, more specifically the eradication of poverty 3 As stated in Article 4 (4) TFEU In the areas of development cooperation and humanitarian aid, the Union shall have competence to carry out activities and conduct a common policy; however, the exercise of that compe-tence shall not result in Member States being prevented from exercising theirs.

Preparation Kit

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie 37

DEVE

in a context of sustainable development4 whilst different Member States may have their own visions on the matter. The EU provides over 50% of all global development aid, thus being the world’s leading donor5. The question however is should there more of an uniform policy to enable more of a directed aid programs, instead of the Member States carrying out their own goals combined with the goals of the Union?6

The UN functions as an initiator and a platform for the communication and exchange of ideas. It primarily coordinates conferences to set up general goals its members commit to reach. As a supervisor for the MDG’s the UN is responsible for recording their success and create initiatives to tackle the issues as well as provide information for any NGO’s or countries willing to join the efforts. Outside of the direct influence of the EU are the numerous NGO’s both within and outside of the Union’s borders. Often focusing on direct issues in developing countries often linked to the nature of the NGO, (UNICEF for matters concerning children and Amnesty on human rights to name a few). The benefit of having wide reaching goals enables these individual organisations to contribute to their success, however further cooperation is often limited to knowledge sharing. Most NGO’s are left outside of the decision making process of the UN or the EU, as they are left out of the negotiations, and only the most influential ones can afford effective lobbying. The Red Cross is one of the exceptions as they are allowed to have a representation within the UN, however without any voting rights. Global development policies are drafted via multiple platforms., The UN often tries to create general goals, whilst the EU focuses on something more specific, however also keeping in mind that as both the Union and its Member States are all part of the UN they are also partially liable for the fulfilment of the general goals. Thus should the EU with the upcoming negotiations bring forth its own plans for development policies whilst they might clash with development policies countries on other continents?

4 https://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/policies/european-development-policy_en5 ibid6 For an interesting discussion concerning the competence question see http://www.odi.org/publica-tions/7298-european-union-balance-competences-development-cooperation-humanitarian-aid-report

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie

Preparation Kit

38

DEVE

1) Should the EU follow the Asian example in banding together states to deal with issues on a super national level or can more progress be made through local governance and community activism, or should the EU embrace a combination of both?

2) Should achieving the post-2015 agenda be solely the concern of local, national and supranational governance and what level of involvement should be encouraged amongst NGOs?

Measures & Solutions The EU has taken its first steps in trying to realise a plan for action after the expiration of the MDG’s, however only little has been realised so far. The EU has named 2015 as the year of Development in hopes of giving the matter more media publicity, also in its communications the Commission has stated its intentions in focusing in combatting poverty to ensure sustainable development7, however there is still a lack of concrete decisions on the focus and more importantly how these goals are to be achieved. This also ties to the upcoming negotiations on the next MDGs as the EU is currently forming its stance on the matters it brings up the question “Should the post-2015 framework follow the logic of the MDGs (with new time-lines, and with or without new goals/targets/indicators) or embody a fundamentally different approach?”8 Since 2013, the UN has introduced the Millennium Development Goals Acceleration Framework, which is a coordinated effort by the United Nations Development group. The acceleration framework is intended to ensure the fulfilment of the MDG’s and distinguish matters hindering them, now as there is only a year remaining, this information may be vital to determine how to improve the current measures taken. While fulfilling the existing commitments and promises on the MDGs remains an utmost priority, the need to focus on the goals that are most off-track is apparent. During the course of the last 15 years, it has become apparent that the countries that require the most assistance achieving the MDGs are the least developed, landlocked, small island states and countries affected by or recovering from conflicts 7 https://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/sites/devco/files/com-2015-44-final-5-2-2015_en.pdf8 https://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/policies/european-development-policy/what-after-2015_en

Preparation Kit

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie 39

DEVE

or disasters. One measure implemented by the UN under the Millennium Development Goals Acceleration Framework is the systematic identification of bottlenecks and the implementation of local solutions. This Acceleration plan has been implemented in over 46 countries. Looking towards the future however, the most important measure that is currently pending is the discussions surrounding the post-2015 Development Agenda. The ‘World We Want’ goals are currently being established through an innovative partnership of local and national consultations in nearly a hundred countries and through social media platforms. Whilst many of the goals still remain to be achieved, the ones that have had the most success have been primarily in relation with reducing global hunger, providing drinking water for slums and combatting HIV. According to the UN Rapport9 the most effective solutions created policies that foster robust and inclusive economic growth, accompanied by measures to improve the access of poor and excluded people to quality basic services, have produced gains in many countries. This is concretely done through investments in structural frameworks of the developing countries trying enable the local citizens to partially combat the situation themselves. There are many opinions on what form of financial aid is beneficial in the longer run10.

1) Should the EU assist lesser-developed countries struggling to realise development goals, or should the EU solely concentrate on the development goals that affects member states?

2) Is an acceleration plan a sufficient mean to aim fulfilling the goals not yet reached?

3) Should the EU more actively pursue a unified and exclusive development policy to maximise the contributions of each Member State and create frameworks for the NGO’s to operate?

9 http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A%2F68%2F202-seesectionIIB.10 If interested Dambisa Moyo gives in alternative view on Development Aid in her book Dead Aid http://books.google.ie/books/about/Dead_Aid.html?id=154Z1x2Nj-4C&redir_esc=y, also Ernesto Siroli provides his own opinion through his experiences of forms of aid in Africa in this partially comical Ted Talk http://www.ted.com/talks/ernesto_sirolli_want_to_help_someone_shut_up_and_listen?language=en

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie

Preparation Kit

40

DEVE

Conclusion Now that fifteen years has passed from the introduction of the MDGs it is clear that a more desired success would have been expected attention needs to be directed into the future. Through the Post 2015-Development Agenda the UN will set itself new goals to reach, however it is crucial that the next fifteen will not be spent reaching for the sky, instead feasible aims and solutions are needed to eventually tackle these global issues already responsible for the torment of billions of unfortunate citizens. As most of the work for the UN is ultimately channelled through its Member States, the Union is now tasked with prioritising its schemes for global development. It would be foolish to claim that the current aims would not share a critical importance, however having limited resources and limited time a review of the approach EU Member States have taken towards achieving these goals in the past is of utmost importance. Fifteen years might be too little to save the planet, however it is plenty of time to make it more bearable.

Key Terms Key terms: Global Development, Foreign aid, EU Foreign Policy, NGO’s, Millennium Development Goals, Post 2015-Development Agenda,

Further ReadingA good summary on the whole matter from the Union’s perspective, a must read, has also multiple links to communications and other documents, so definitely take time going through this website: https://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/policies/european-development-policy_en

A UN press release on Ban Ki-Moon’s 2015: A Time For Global Action Campaign http://www.undp.org/content/undp/en/home/presscenter/pressreleases/2015/01/08/time-for-global-action-on-sustainable-development-saysun-secretary-general-ban-ki-moon-/

Preparation Kit

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie 41

DEVE

The World We Want website’s page on dialogues https://www.worldwewant2015.org/dialogues2015 2013 UN report outlining the progress of the MDGs and the 2015 Acceleration Plan: http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/68/202

A 2014 UN report on the post-2015 Development Agenda http://www.un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/69/700&referer=http://www.un.org/en/documents/&Lang=E

Report outlining the opportunities to realise the post-2015 agenda at local and national level http://issuu.com/undevelopmentgroup/docs/delivering_the_post-2015_developmen/0

General Global Development Platform of the Guardian, use discretion whilst reading the articles, but they can provide intriguing insights to the issues of Global Development http://www.theguardian.com/global-development

An interesting talk concerning global development, do keep in mind that it was filmed in 2005 and factually some matters might have changed drastically, however the speaker does provide interesting points that raise up questions concerning the current matter at hand. Also take a look at the comments, at times they also provide good arguments both against and in favour. https://www.ted.com/talks/bjorn_lomborg_sets_global_priorities

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie

Preparation Kit

42

CLIM

As the European Council agrees a binding tar-get of 40% less greenhouse gas emissions by 2030, and with the Energy Roadmap 2050 com-mitting the European Union (EU) to a reduc-tion of 80-95% by 2050, what measures should the EU take to ensure energy security while si-multaneously striving to meet its environmen-tal commitments?

By James Bradfield (IE) and Joana Cavaco (PT)

Introduction and ExplanationOn the 23rd of October 2014, the European Council adopted a Eu-ropean-wide target of reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 40% by the year 2030 against 19901 levels. Although Europe is coping well with the demands of the “2020 Growth Strategy”2, this new commitment is seen as an effective way of ensuring a coor-dinated approach to decarbonising3 the energy sector among all Member States post 2020. While an undeniably noble ambition, some have criticised a lack of detail in how the Member States are to achieve this. In December of this year, the nations of the world will gath-er in Paris for the United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP21) in order to put into place a legally binding and universal agreement on climate change. Connie Hedegaard, European Com-missioner for Climate Action said “We have sent a strong signal to other big economies and all other countries: we have done our homework, now we urge you to follow Europe’s example.”4 Sim-ilarly proud was the former President of European Commission, José Manuel Durão Barroso who added, “No player in the world 1 Find those figures here: http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/2013/sbi/eng/19.pdf ;2 Where the matter of climate change was addressed through the 2020 Climate and Energy pack-age;3 The decarbonisation of the power sector means reducing its carbon intensity; that is, the emis-sions per unit of electricity generated; 4 Find the full press-release here: http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_STATEMENT-14-337_en.htm ;

The Committee on Climate Change

Preparation Kit

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie 43

CLIM

is as ambitious as the EU.” The target of 40% by 2030 is designed as a step in the path to-wards an 80—95% reduction in GHG emissions in the EU by 20505. Agreed in 2009, this aspirational target is a result of a study con-ducted by the European Climate Foundation (ECF) into the facts behind the goals as well as the possible implications. The Roadmap is described as, “A practical guide to a prosperous, low-carbon Eu-rope, a discussion of the feasibility and challenges of realising an 80% GHG reduction objective for Europe, including urgent policy imperatives over the coming five years.”6

Creation of a competitive European energy market is one of the main objectives of the new Juncker Commission and is dis-cussed in detail as an important objective of the Roadmap. The aims of European Energy Union are as follows:

· Creating a European Energy Union – by pooling resources, connecting networks and uniting EU power when negotiat-ing with non-EU countries.

· Diversifying the EU’s energy sources – so Europe can quickly switch to other supply channels if the financial or political cost of importing from the East becomes too high.

· Helping EU countries become less dependent on energy im-ports.

· Making the EU the world number one in renewable energy and leading the fight against global warming7.

Thus the energy union is being prioritised for geopolitical reasons (being less reliant on volatile Eastern neighbours, in par-ticular the Russian Federation), reasons of energy security and di-versity of supply, greater competition among energy suppliers in the EUs energy markets (which should lead to lower prices for consumers) and to help Europe meet its environmental objectives by increasing the proportion of the EU energy supply coming from renewables.

5 Find more about the Roadmap here: http://www.roadmap2050.eu/; 6 http://www.roadmap2050.eu/ 7 http://ec.europa.eu/priorities/energy-union/index_en.htm

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie

Preparation Kit

44

CLIM

Relevant questions● How is the energy union relevant to Europe’s fight to reduce carbon

emissions?● What are the possible advantage and disadvantages of energy union?● What would be the practical implications of energy union

Main conflictsThe biggest conflict facing energy union is the trade-off between a competitive energy market and the need to reduce carbon emis-sions. How can the EU ensure that the cost of energy remains suf-ficiently low that companies can continue to operate and invest in Europe while also aiming to shift towards alternative energies which are often more expensive to produce? While carbon capture and geological storage (CCS)8 is a rel-atively new technology that is yet to prove whether it could be an important contributor to reducing emissions from the energy field, the actual mix of energy sources to be used in the single market remains a considerable point of controversy. The EU stresses its “neutral on nuclear’’9 stance in the Roadmap, making no detailed forecast or recommendation regarding the potential of nuclear en-ergy - making countries like Poland10 re-think their stance regard-ing the Roadmap. Furthermore the EU has made no commitment as to the scale of the diversification of energy sources. There are no figures for the amount of energy we are going to get from var-ious sources, be it nuclear, wind or solar for example. The Mem-ber States have highly divergent positions on what energy sources should be used in the production process – any attempts by the EU to impose restrictions on any particular energy source, though probably necessary to reach the decarbonisation commitment,

8 Carbon capture and geological storage (CCS) is a technique for trapping carbon dioxide emitted from large point sources such as power plants, compressing it, and transporting it to a suitable storage site where it is injected into the ground. This technology has significant potential to help mitigate climate change both in Europe and internationally, particularly in countries with large reserves of fossil fuels and a fast-increasing energy demand;9 Find the full press release by the European Commission regarding the Roadmap here: http://eu-ropa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-11-914_en.htm?locale=en ;10 Poland has repeatedly objected to any language in EU texts pointing towards deeper carbon cuts to guide decision-making for the years following 2020, when the EU is set to meet a binding target of a 20% emissions cut from 1990 levels;

Preparation Kit

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie 45

CLIM

could be met with stiff opposition from certain member States11

A single European super-grid would allow electricity pro-duced in one Member State be used in another through the use of thousands of kilometres of cables facilitating the integration of large-scale renewable energy into the system and allowing regions rich in one source of energy to trade with regions who have natu-ral endowments of others. This gives the system greater stability as many renewable sources are dependent on the exigencies of the weather. However relatively little attention has been paid to mod-elling a European electricity and gas transmission network linked to neighbouring countries energy grids12- rather the focus is usual-ly on improving links between the Member States. Furthermore, the super-gird raises the question of the cost of the project. Modernising Europe’s energy infrastructure will be a considerable burden – most likely to be borne by citizens as pub-lic goods usually require considerable government investment. To add to this fact, the Roadmap doesn’t clearly mention the costs involved in the decarbonisation process - cumulative grid invest-ments alone could be €1.5 to €2.2 trillion between 2011 and 2050 according to the Roadmap, and the risk of carbon leakage13 (when companies relocate their production outside Europe due to the increased costs of abiding to anti-emissions regulations) could become economically harmful to the EU14. Whereas much of this value will have to be front-loaded to provide the infrastructure to theoretically support the projected deployment of renewable en-ergy sources this could easily be under-estimated given the uncer-tainties of such long term projections15. The European Union Emission Trading Scheme (ETS) will have to be reviewed to establish whether or not it is having any positive effect in reducing the impact heavy fuels and their use across the union. As it stands, the ETS is a ‘cap and trade’ system 11 For example, Poland is heavily reliant on coal and is sceptical of attempts by the EC to reduce the amount of energy coming from this source 12 You can find more about super grids here: http://www.energy-regulators.eu/portal/page/portal/LDP_HOME/Events/Projects_Series/Energy%20NetRegulation%20%20CCP/First_Workshop/paper_Von-Hirschhausen.pdf ; 13 Read more about it in the ‘’Measures and Solutions’’ section;14 The risks of carbon leakage: http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/sep/15/eu-pollut-ers-to-land-5bn-windfall-under-carbon-leakage-proposal ;15 Which bring us to the fact that all the interim 2030 milestones in an earlier version of the Road-map were removed from the final text, to lack of transparency by the EC which creates uncertainty among Member States and potential investors;

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie

Preparation Kit

46

CLIM

which means that companies are given an annual emissions quo-ta; this figure is the maximum they can emit. If the company does not use its entire quota, it can sell off the remaining allowances to other companies who have used up all of their own credits16. How-ever, there is an argument that the total amount of allowances sold by the EU each year is too high, and thus there is no incentive for companies to actually reduce the amount of emissions they pro-duce17. The lack of certainty over the future of the ETS scheme also acts as a disincentive for companies to actually invest in improv-ing processes and research and development as these are seen as investments which may not pay if the ETS is scrapped somewhere down the line. Should a single regulatory framework for the new, integrated market result from energy union? On February 4th, Maroš Šefčovič, vice-president of Energy Union, predicted that single market reg-ulations will be set up and a single supervisor appointed to reg-ulate the energy market in the EU18. Others have criticised these comments, saying that adopting a laissez-faire approach, where energy providers would simply operate in an open market rather than one controlled from Brussels, would be more beneficial to the union19. Lastly the EU must address the issue of energy efficiency. In 2013 energy consumption had fallen back to 1990 levels - so the EU is on track to continue reducing the actual demand for energy. This is an important element of energy union – while diversifying and ‘greening’ the supply of energy is of the essence, reducing the amount we use is also an important step towards reducing carbon emissions – measures encouraging more energy efficient build-ings, electricity fittings and approaches such as a ‘polluter pays’ model could be considered20.

Relevant questions:

16 http://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/ets/index_en.htm 17 http://www.euractiv.com/sections/energy/germany-wants-robust-single-energy-mar-ket-odds-britain-311351 18 http://www.euractiv.com/sections/energy/single-supervisor-mooted-energy-union-sef-covic-pushes-holistic-approach-31184419 http://www.euractiv.com/sections/energy/single-supervisor-mooted-energy-union-sef-covic-pushes-holistic-approach-311844 20 http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2012/jul/02/polluter-pays-climate-change

Preparation Kit

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie 47

CLIM

· Can the EU simultaneously make the energy sector more competi-tive while also reducing carbon emissions?

· Taking into consideration that nuclear energy reduces energy gen-erated from fossil fuels, lowering greenhouse gas emissions substan-tially, should the EU consider it as a viable option to help achieve the targets of the Roadmap? What other options are available?

· Can the creation of pan-European super-grids actually ensure the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions while fostering global coop-eration towards climate change?

Main ActorsEU citizens: As citizens of a planet that has become increasing-ly dependent on fossil fuels and therefore carbon emissions, we will all be affected by these new measures. With predicted changes coming to the energy market, citizens will face a challenge to re-duce their own emissions both to save money and to help the EU reach the new targets. How can the EU incentivise the every-day citizen to committing to these reductions? Energy suppliers: There is set to be major reform in the meth-ods used in supplying the EU with energy. Traditional producers of fossil fuels such as oil companies will not welcome the new ob-jectives as it throws doubt over their future. Conversely, the green energy sector is set to explode with demand coming from all over the EU. Important players here include: FORATOM,21 AEBIOM22 and the EWEA23 as they are some of the key industry representa-tives and lobbyists. Member States national governments: similar to citizens, governments must also rethink their emissions policy but on a larger scale. For some countries there may be more suitable green technologies than others and as result they must decide how best to conform to the new goals set out by the European Council. This may also go for countries who have built their economy around fossil fuel exports. Energy is a shared competence meaning MS governments have the power to adopt binding acts themselves, 21 The European Atomic Forum is the voice of the pro-nuclear movement in Europe.22 The European Biomass Association is the lobbying group in favour of setting up a Eu-ropean-wide market for sustainable bioenergy23 The European Wind Energy Association is the major pro-wind power group in Europe.

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie

Preparation Kit

48

CLIM

however this is only the case if the EU has not, or has chosen to not exercise their own competence. The European Institutions: The European Commission, who have drafted and put forward the Energy Roadmap, prepare pro-posals which the European Parliament and the Council of the EU will have the final say on. The EC is preparing to publish propos-als on the single energy market in the weeks to come. The heavy Industry sector: Those involved in heavy industry are currently responsible for ⅓ of all energy consumption globally and are held accountable for 40% of the world’s total carbon diox-ide emissions. What can heavy industrialists do to ensure that the sector is modernised to such an extent that will still be financially viable going forward?

Relevant questions· What further measures can each individual citizen take to help de-

crease domestic emissions, and achieve these ambitious goals?· How will industry adapt to cutting emissions while continuing to

produce essential goods and services and what effect could this have on the European economy?

Measures and SolutionsIn order to lead the international effort on environmental sustain-ability, the commitment to reduce emissions by 20% below 1990 levels was put on the top of the “Europe 2020” growth strategy, however, this quest officially started in 1991 when the EC issued the first Community strategy to limit carbon dioxide emissions and improve energy efficiency. In 1997, with the Kyoto Protocol24, the EU-1525 committed to reducing their collective emissions26 by 8% - a target which has on average been achieved. In 2014 the EC decided to reinforce its climate and energy tar-

24 Find more information about the protocol here: http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/convkp/kpeng.pdf; 25 Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Greece, Spain, France, Ireland, Italy, Luxemburg, The Nether-lands, Austria, Portugal, Finland, Sweden and the United Kingdom;26 Find the concrete number of their collective emissions here: http://ec.europa.eu/clima/poli-cies/g-gas/docs/table_emm_limitation_en.pdf ;

Preparation Kit

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie 49

CLIM

gets for 2020 with an integrated policy for the period of 2030, so the “2030 Framework for Climate and Energy”27 policies were put into force. Besides further emphasising the already mentioned goals of Europe 2020, the 2030 framework aims to build a competitive and secure energy system that ensures affordable energy for all con-sumers, increases the security of the EU’s energy supplies, reduces our dependence on energy imports and creates new opportunities for growth and jobs. Included as well is the reform of the EU Emis-sions Trading System (ETS),28 national targets for emissions that allow each Member State to have country specific binding targets to reduce their greenhouse emissions, National Renewable Energy Targets29 in order to raise the share of renewable energy consump-tion and the much desired legalisation of CCS30.

The aforementioned 2050 Roadmap31 is the European long-term policy that lays out the options for fighting climate change while leading Member States towards a decarbonised Europe, however there are other initiatives, treaties, legislation, recommen-dations and directives to be considered on this European quest for ecological sustainability. On the 25th of February, the EC is planning to announce new specific measures for building an energy union. Existing research and proposals on creating the energy union are summarised in the “Power Perspectives32’ document prepared by the EC and it is likely that many of the proposals announced later this month will be drawn from here.

27 Find the 2030 policy here: http://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/2030/index_en.htm ;28 The EU emissions trading system (EU ETS) is a cornerstone of the European Union’s policy to combat climate change and its key tool for reducing industrial greenhouse gas emissions cost-effectively. The first - and still by far the biggest - international system for trading greenhouse gas emission allow-ances, the EU ETS covers more than 11,000 power stations and industrial plants in 31 countries, as well as airlines. Find full legislation here: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX-:02003L0087-20140430&from=EN ; 29 Under the Renewable Energy Directive, Member States have taken on binding national targets for raising the share of renewable energy in their energy consumption by 2020. Find the cooperation mechanisms here : http://ec.europa.eu/energy/en/topics/renewable-energy/renewable-energy-directive/cooperation-mechanisms ; 30 The legal framework for a safe and legal geological storage of carbon dioxide: http://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/lowcarbon/ccs/directive/index_en.htm ; 31 Find the Roadmap for moving to a competitive low carbon economy in 2050 here: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/resource.html?uri=cellar:5db26ecc-ba4e-4de2-ae08-dba649109d18.0002.03/DOC_1&for-mat=PDF ;32 http://www.roadmap2050.eu/attachments/files/PowerPerspectives2030_ExecutiveSum-mary.pdf

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie

Preparation Kit

50

CLIM

Relevant questions· Is the EU’s current stance and legislation regarding climate change

given sufficient weight in the Member States policy-making pro-cess?

· What measures need to be taken to bring a sustainable and environ-mentally friendly energy union into existence?

ConclusionSo the message is clear. The EU needs to work with Member States governments in reducing carbon emissions. How we will do that is very much up to the ensemble of options we choose to impose from the 2050 Roadmap. How quickly relies very much on the speed with which the EU expects the Member States to acclima-tise to these new processes. The Roadmap itself is a clear sign that decarbonisation is an aim that the EU is taking very seriously. It remains to be seen how exactly the EU will replace the fossil fuels which for generations, we have relied on almost entirely. The big-gest single question is what type of energy is going to fill this void and how is that going to affect the energy market as a whole?

Key termsGreenhouse gases (GHG); Decarbonised Europe; 2030 Framework for Climate and Energy Policies; Roadmap 2050; Renewable ener-gies; Carbon capture; Pan-European super-grid;

Required ReadingEU Energy Roadmap 2050: http://epthinktank.eu/2012/08/17/eu-energy-roadmap-2050; Ensuring Europe’s energy supply- the role of nuclear energy: http://www.foratom.org/public/position-papers/8630-foratom-po-sition-paper-on-security-of-energy-supply/file.html ;A brief analysis of the 2030 goals: http://www.carbonbrief.org/blog/2014/10/analysis-who-wants-what-from-the-eu-2030-cli-

Preparation Kit

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie 51

CLIM

mate-package/; Explanation of carbon capture: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ROEFaHKVmSs; Demand and decarbonisation: http://projects.exeter.ac.uk/igov/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/WP-6-Demand-and-Decarbonisa-tion-in-2050.pdf ; The Energy Union: http://www.energypost.eu/brussels-gives-first-glimpse-means-energy-union/; The prospects of a European super grid: http://www.energy-reg-ulators.eu/portal/page/portal/LDP_HOME/Events/Projects_Se-ries/Energy%20NetRegulation%20%20CCP/First_Workshop/pa-per_VonHirschhausen.pdfThe effects of the exclusive usage of renewable energies by EU Member States: http://www.economist.com/news/eu-rope/21594336-germanys-new-super-minister-energy-and-econo-my-has-his-work-cut-out-sunny-windy-costly ; A brief explanation of the different stances regarding the decar-bonising process across Europe: http://www.economist.com/news/europe/21595954-poland-moves-step-closer-its-own-nucle-ar-energy-different-energiewendeSome arguments against the current decarbonisation process: http://www.iea.org.uk/blog/the-folly-of-europe%E2%80%99s-de-carbonisation-planThe EU energy policy: http://gef.eu/uploads/media/History_of_EU_energy_policy.pdf; The future for renewable energies in Europe: http://www.ener-gies-renouvelables.org/observ-er/stat_baro/barobilan/barobi-lan13-gb.pdf ;

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie

Preparation Kit

52

ITRE

“In light of the European Commission’s (EC) communication on the European Union’s (EU) Space Industrial policy, how can the EU coordinate the institutions of the EU, the Member States and the European Space Agency (ESA) so as to allow for innovation, new technological developments and economic growth in the Union?”

Lee Moran (IE) and Christine Meiser (DE)

Introduction and Explanation“Houston, we have a problem!” When we think about space and the policy governing this we often tend to focus only on the big exploration missions that entail putting a man on the moon or dropping research vehicles on Mars. However, space systems and technologies are an essential part of our daily lives and keep on gaining importance without us properly noticing. Vital services such as telecommunications and weather forecasting are highly dependent on space. Space is an often used tool to address and ultimately solve many of the global challenges we have to face in the twenty-first century - challenges that Europe must take a leading role in addressing and actively solving. EU space policy making took flight with the 2007 “Space Industrial Policy”1, driven by the EU’s fear of falling behind other countries in terms of technological capacity. In 2009, with the Lisbon Treaty coming into force, the Member States attributed a stronger role in space affairs to the EU, making space policy a ‘parallel competence’2. However it is important to note that because of the European dual approach, which means that space affairs form a bridge between several industrial policies and the Common European Foreign and Security Policy (CSDP),3 decision making 1 http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/enterprise/industry/l33242_en.htm 2 http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/space/policy/index_en.htm 3 http://www.eeas.europa.eu/csdp/

The Committee on Industry, Research & Energy

Preparation Kit

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie 53

ITRE

in the area has become more complex. The 2011 communication on the European space policy4 sets out to encourage cooperation between Member States to harmonise aspects of their space laws to make cooperation easier. It encourages the Member States to focus on integrating into a single agency platform, while also encouraging individual pursuits from Member States agencies and providing support. Motivating all the policy developments in the sector are the important technological achievements attained through European space research. Key research programmes, such as the Copernicus programme, the Space Situational Awareness programme and many more, are flagships for the European space industry and have a considerable impact on the day-to-day lives of the EU’s 500 million citizens. While space research could be an easy target for national budget cuts; space research is expected to greatly contribute to the Europe 2020 objectives, especially as far as smart and sustainable growth is concerned. Furthermore, space research is expected to play an important role in maintaining the security of citizens, while increasing Europe’s competitiveness and reducing its dependency on imported space technologies.

Main ConflictThe main challenge for the EU’s space programme in the years to come will be to cope with the current unstable economic situation in which the EU finds itself. Balancing budgetary constraints with the endowments for vital research projects has already proven to be a very difficult exercise. With cutbacks in public funding pertaining to space research will it become necessary to prioritise certain areas of research over others? The European Space Agency (ESA), which is a non-political entity, which is not governed or controlled by the European Union or any affiliated institution, has a budget of €4 billion this year but is in some financial difficulties. To give an example, each Member State funds the ESA through a GNP based programme spending mechanism. The average EU citizen pays approximately €11.50 a year in taxes to fund space programmes. In the US it is 4 times this amount5.4 http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/space/policy/jobs-growth/industrial-policy/in-dex_en.htm 5 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cKb5H5zjyKo

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie

Preparation Kit

54

ITRE

Another major conflict within the topic relates to the decision making process in this area. This follows from the Westerwelle report in which major Member States call for more cooperation in the area of the CSDP6. This would mean that the strenuous intergovernmental procedures present in the matter of space policy would be phased out. Each Member State of the EU is free to run their own space programmes as they see fit, which can lead to duplication. Furthermore, differing regulations in all aspects of space exploration are present in the EU. The ESA Member States are reliant on non-EU based states to import components of their satellites and so there is a reliance on the technologies of non-EU European states. The EU and the ESA want to see this change and so the aforementioned communication or the Communication on the “EU Space Industrial Policy: Releasing the Potential for Growth in the Space Sector” has been drafted to create a common EU Space Industrial Policy. What role for the private sector in European Space policy? More and more companies are becoming involved in space research. Is this growth of the private sector beneficial to the EU’s need for a competitive space market or does the drive for profit in the private sector hamper the EU and ESA’s desire for long term research? What role could Public Private Partnerships (PPPs) play in bridging Europe’s funding gap? Initiatives like Alphasat7, a joint venture of a family of geostationary satellites between Airbus and the French space agency also prove that PPPs can be a vital asset for future space research and a way to include the private sector into the funding of research projects, but there is disagreement over the extent to which they should be utilised.

Related Questions:1. In the light of limited resources and budgetary limitations, should

the EU focus more on international and private sector cooperation (not only within Europe’s borders but with other international space agencies) when implementing its space strategy?

2. What should the priorities for the EU’s space programme be? Should there still be room for costly long-term exploration operations?

6 http://gr2014.eu/sites/default/files/di%20domizio%20Space%20systems%20and%20CSDP%20-%20a%20capability%20development%20perspective_Rev4.pdf 7 http://www.esa.int/Our_Activities/Telecommunications_Integrated_Applications/Alphasat

Preparation Kit

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie 55

ITRE

Main Actors European Commission: The Directorate-General (DG) Enterprise and Industry of the EC is responsible for the implementation of the space-related competencies that are part of the industrial policy of the EU, such as the Copernicus Programme8. The new directive on the dissemination of high resolution earth observation satellite data (HRSD) also comes under the remit of the Commissioner for the Digital Agenda9

European Space Agency: The ESA is an intergovernmental organisation dedicated to the exploration of space and strongly affiliated with, though not an agency of, the EU. The ESA makes use of the European Spaceport in Kourou (French Guyana) and is in charge of several space exploration and research missions. National Governments: Especially Member States with a strong national space policy and independent space agencies (e.g. Germany, France and Italy) retain a high degree of sovereignty in this matter. Those countries have particular influence on the policy making in this field, whether it be directly (through financing) or indirectly (through lobbying). European Defence Agency: This Agency is responsible for cooperation in the CSDP in order to improve the capabilities of the European defence system. Programmes such as the Space Situational Awareness programme fall under its responsibility. It works together with the ESA on a variety of issues. Private Sector: Companies who have a vested interest in Space and have developed their own technologies for exploration and HRSD for example Virgin Galactic or Airbus.

Related Questions:1. How can we further stimulate EU integration and cooperation in

the matter of space policy?2. Should the EU strive towards the integration of the European Space

Agency that is capable of unifying both civil and military aspects of space policy into the EU framework?

8 http://www.copernicus.eu/ 9 http://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie

Preparation Kit

56

ITRE

Measures & SolutionsIn an effort to deepen cooperation, there are some bilateral cooperation agreements that are worth mentioning in this context. The “2003 EU–ESA Framework Agreement”10 strives to establish a mutually beneficial framework for the execution of missions and research activities and was one of the contributing factors leading to the creation of the European Space Policy. The 2011 “EDA–ESA Administrative Arrangement”11 aims to provide a structured relationship and puts forward the objective of developing European capabilities in the area of crisis management. The 2007 “European Space Policy”12 is still the foundational document relating to space affairs in the EU. It puts forward the main goals for the European space sector. Europe needs an effective space policy that will allow the EU to take the global lead in selected strategic policy areas. This policy document has been added to by, amongst others, the 2011 EC Communication on a Space Strategy that Benefits its Citizens13. Herein the Commission proposes the strategic priorities for space policy and research. The strategy attaches great importance to the development of flagship programmes like Copernicus14, Space Situational Awareness and Galileo15. These initiatives are designed to put the EU in a leading position regarding space research relating to the environment and alleviate us from our dependence on the US dominated GPS system. The 2013 Commission proposal for a “Directive on dissemination of Earth observation satellite data for commercial purposes”16 was put into action to give better access to information collected and stored by High Resolution Satellite Data (HRSD) appliances since this data is critical for all aspects of governance and business but also for environmental observation and security and defence. All HRSD appliances registered in the EU are registered to one Member 10 http://www.esa.int/About_Us/Industry/Industry_how_to_do_business/ESA_and_the_EU_the_start_of_a_new_partnership 11 http://www.esa.int/About_Us/Paris_Air_Space_Show/Signing_of_EDA_ESA_Administrative_Arrangement 12 http://www.eubusiness.com/topics/space 13 http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/en/intm/122342.pdf 14 http://www.eubusiness.com/topics/research/gmes-copernicus/ 15 http://www.eubusiness.com/topics/space/galileo-midterm-review/ 16 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52014PC0344

Preparation Kit

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie 57

ITRE

State and are subject to individual Member States regulations as of 2014; this has posed challenges as HRSD legislation about access to its information differs from Member State to Member State. The directive plans to make it easier for cross-border business cooperation and hopes it will create a culture of investment in the Space sector and lead to home-grown EU business providing the space programmes with the components they need.

Related Questions:1. Which measures should be taken to foster innovation in the sector

of space research in order to further new applications of existing technologies?

ConclusionEspecially with the signings of the agreements in 2004 and 2007, the EU and ESA have shown an explicit desire for a more unified and comprehensive European Space Policy. While some consider the ESA to be de facto under the competency of the EU, should this be the case? Should the EU bring the ESA under its umbrella of responsibilities or should it continue to be an independent but co-operative organisation within Europe? Does the non-political element of the ESA benefit the organisation as it does not get caught up in political issues or be used as a political tool by the EU? Faced with a need for growth in the market, and the challenges of cutbacks to national budgets, should the EU/ESA delve deeper into PPPs? Should the EU in times of economic hardship continue to increase spending on costly long term projects which have the potential to benefit science and its citizens? Finally what projects should be prioritised by the EU Space policy and under what framework can they be provided?

Key termsEuropean Space Agency (ESA), Public Private Partnerships, Dual approach in space policy, Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP), Copernicus Programme, Galileo

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie

Preparation Kit

58

ITRE

Further Readingh t t p : / / e u r - l e x . e u r o p a . e u / l e g a l - c o n t e n t / E N / T X T /PDF/?uri=CELEX:52013DC0108&from=ENhttp://www.europarl .europa.eu/RegData/bibliotheque/briefing/2013/130613/LDM_BRI%282013%29130613_REV1_EN.pdfhttp://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/en/intm/137341.pdfhttp://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/space/policy/jobs-growth/industrial-policy/index_en.htmhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cKb5H5zjyKoht tp : / /www.pddnet . com/news/2015/02 /way- forward-europe%E2%80%99s-space-industry https://www.theparliamentmagazine.eu/articles/opinion/eu-needs-competitive-and-independent-space-policyhttps://www.theparliamentmagazine.eu/articles/opinion/eu-space-policy-needs-innovation-stay-race-against-us http://www.thespacereview.com/article/2687/1

Preparation Kit

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie 59

JURI

Considering the ruling of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) in the case of Brüstle v Greenpeace, what criteria should the European Union (EU) put in place when awarding scientific research grants so as to strike a balance between right to life, enhancing prospects for patients suffering from incurable illnesses, and protecting freedom of research?

By Anna Nichols (IE)

Introduction and Explanation:In October 2011, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) handed down a landmark judgment in the Brustle v Greenpeace case, setting important parameters for stem cell research and the patentability and protection of biotechnological inventions in Europe. Dr Oliver Brustle, a neuropathologist and stem cell research expert had found a way to produce specialised cells through the use of stem cells for treating debilitating neurological conditions such as Parkinson’s disease, Motor Neurone Disease, Multiple Sclerosis and Alzheimer’s. Brustle obtained a patent for his research in Germany, which would have allowed him exclusive rights to further develop and research this ground-breaking discovery that could potentially provide a cure for diseases that affect a significant proportion of the European population and cost Europeans $798 billion in 2010 alone.

However, Brustle’s patent was subsequently opposed by Greenpeace who sought to have the patent deemed invalid on the grounds of its use of cells obtained from human embryonic stem cells. The ECJ sided with Greenpeace on the issue, declaring that the EU’s ban on the patentability of “human embryos for commercial and industrial purposes” includes the use of human embryonic stem cells for scientific research purposes, since the granting of a patent would in principle involve commercial and industrial uses. Although Brustle argued that such a ban couldn’t

The Committee on Legal Affairs

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie

Preparation Kit

60

JURI

apply to the subject matter of his patent, the ECJ declared that this was not the case and deemed Brustle’s discovery unpatentable. For the scientific community, the judgment was deemed a blow for the progress of future research in Europe, with many fearing that investment in the field would migrate overseas and threaten to compromise the maintenance of high research standards and accessibility of new treatments across the continent.1

1. What are the ramifications of the EU’s current definition of an embryo?2 How does this affect its research and development policies?

2. Why would the protection of scientists’ freedom to research be considered to be so important?

3. What connection is there between research and the current economic cost of brain disorders in Europe?

Main Conflict:From a pro-Brustle perspective, using embryos for scientific

research is an attack on human life and autonomy for the sake of commercial interests within the EU, meaning the outcome of the judgment is crucial for giving a legal footing to the protection of such rights. From an anti-Brustle viewpoint, the protection of researchers’ freedom is integral to the facilitation of further medical developments and the improvement of the day-to-day lives of sufferers of neurological disease. The nature of such biomedical research is often considered to be “high-risk high-gain”, where many of the projects funded will be of little profitable application, while some will be hugely beneficial. Since the ability to predict which side research will fall under is almost impossible, stable and guaranteed funding are crucial for any research at all to be carried out. Consequently, many fear that rulings such as Brustle could extensively damage research in Europe, given the limitations and disincentives its places on researchers and those funding it.1 http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:IKiWVNW8r_gJ:eclj.org/pdf/Synthetic%2520analysis%2520of%2520the%2520ECJ%2520case%2520of%2520Br%25C3%25BC-stle%2520v%2520Greenpeace%2520and%2520its%2520ethical%2520consequences.pdf+&c-d=3&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=ie2 The ECJ held that the concept of “human embryo” should be construed broadly, and therefore it took the view that any human ovum must be regarded as being a “human embryo”, as soon as it is fertilised, if that ovum could develop into a human being.

Preparation Kit

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie 61

JURI

From the perspective of the European Commission (EC), the ruling is only applicable to patents, and not to the actual giving of research grants. This conflicts with the pro-Brustle interpretation that the ruling was far broader and wide ranging than this, due to the case being centred on the ethical implications of how research is conducted. For this reason, several parties believe that the case is applicable to far more than just patents. The variety of interpretations and subsequent rules made around the issue, particularly between Member States, complicates the situation and potentially discourages cutting edge research from being carried out in the EU, particularly since different sets of specific rules must be followed when carrying out research in different Member States. This potential for confusion is a hindrance on the development of research in the EU, which is something that the EC is keen to avoid, given the importance of Research and Development (R&D) in its Europe2020 Strategy,3 a core framework for addressing prevalent societal challenges and creating smart growth and jobs.

1. Where does the EU’s current policy draw the line regarding these two arguments?

2. Should that line be redrawn? Would that better balance the concerns of both sides?

Main Actors:The main actors within this problem are either directly involved with the conflict outlined above or seek to bridge a gap and provide a centre for knowledge-sharing between both sides of the argument. For example, EuroStemCell is a European Commission (EC) funded initiative that aims to provide citizens with reliable and independent information about stem cell research, uniting over 90 European regenerative medicine and stem cell research labs in a coordinated effort to help the public engage with their research, bringing together scientists, clinicians, social scientists and teachers. EuroStemCell also works closely with other stem cell related projects such as Neurostemcellrepair, a European stem

3 ec.europa.eu/europe2020/pdf/themes/15_research__development.

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie

Preparation Kit

62

JURI

cell consortium that specifically focuses on neural cell replacement for diseases such as Parkinson’s and Huntington’s Disease, and hopes to “close the gap” between development and clinical implementation of stem cell therapies. However, anti-stem cell groups such as Greenpeace, various religious groups and in the case of Member States such as Germany and Italy, national governments, tend to be strongly influential in the prevention of further research in these areas. Although these groups differ significantly in their manifestations, they are underpinned by a common concern about the ethical ramifications of such research and its ability to compromise rights surrounding consent and autonomy in particular.4 As of 2012, each Member State government has its own regulatory framework on embryonic stem cell research. Although this allows for the diverse philosophical and moral frameworks of each Member State to be upheld within its laws, such diversity is often touted as the root of the controversy in this area.

Another important actor to be considered is the European Patent Office (EPO), who “support[s] innovation, competitiveness and economic growth across Europe through our commitment to high quality and efficient services delivered under the European Patent Convention.”5 Its principal aims include strengthening co-operation between the states of Europe in respect of the protection of inventions and providing the means for such protection to be obtained in Member States by a single procedure for the grant of patents and by the establishment of certain standard rules governing patents so granted. Although the EPO is not exclusively tasked in dealing with embryonic stem cell research, it is clear that it takes a strong line in favour of protecting freedom of research.6 However, it should be noted that the EPO is composed of 38 member states, (28 of which of are EU Member States) and is a body external to the EU, meaning that the regulations it passes are not necessarily authoritatively binding on EU Member States.

When outlining criteria for research grants, whose interests should the EU prioritise? Can Member States be a part of the EPO while prohibiting certain kinds of research? Do private or public groups 4 http://www.epo.org/news-issues/issues/biotechnology.html5 http://www.epo.org/about-us.html6 www.wipo.int/edocs/mdocs/scp/en/scp_15/scp_15_3-annex6.pdf Article 53(c) of the European Patent Convention (the legal document that gives the EPO its statutory footing) also outlines this.

Preparation Kit

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie 63

JURI

hold more influence in such issues?

Measures & Solutions:The European Research Council (ERC)7 lays out a number

of basic criteria for research proposals. Under Horizon2020, research proposals are assessed under the pillars of excellence (in particular innovation potential), impact and quality and efficiency of implementation, with an overarching emphasis on responsible research and innovation (RRI). RRI in particular demands that the projects in question bring together a variety of societal actors (researchers, citizens, policy makers, business, third sector organisations, etc.) to work together during the whole research and innovation process in order to better align both the process and its outcomes with the values, needs and expectations of society. However, critics of such criteria claim that it is too focused on the financial feasibility and objective quality, leaving potential researchers unclear as to whether or not their project may be deemed suitable for funding on a subject matter basis, especially given that the ethics of a proposal are dealt with under a separate assessment process.8

This separate process is outlined in EU law under Directive 98/44/EC, which establishes that the Commission’s European Group on Ethics in Science and New Technologies (EGE)9 is to evaluate all ethical aspects of biotechnology. Under advice from the EGE, each proposal involving hESC (human embryonic stem cell) must successfully pass a scientific evaluation where the necessity of using the stem cells to achieve the scientific objectives outlined in the proposal must be assessed by independent scientific experts. Once the scientific evaluation is passed, proposals are then subjected to a stringent ethical review based on the rules outlined in the European Charter of Fundamental Rights and the Council of Europe’s Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine 1997. The key aspects of success in the review include the source of the hESC, protecting the privacy of participants and ensuring that the research is carried out in line with the laws of the relevant

7 http://erc.europa.eu/8 http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/data/ref/h2020/grants_manual/pse/h2020-evalua-tion-faq_en.pdf9 The EGE is an independent, multidisciplinary pluralist body that was set up in 1991 to give independent advice to the EC on such matters in connection with relevant EU legislation and policies.

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie

Preparation Kit

64

JURI

Member State.10 Despite these processes generally assuaging the fears of most human rights defenders, for many the stringency and gruelling nature of such assessments has the potential to deter further crucial research in this area.

1. Is the current assessment process too hard on potential researchers?2. Is it possible to lay out clearer research grant criteria regarding subject

matter?3. Does the non-binding nature of a number of these measure affect their

efficacy?4. What should the EU do about conflicting legislation and documents in

order to clarify its stance on the situation?5. ConclusionIn conclusion, it is clear that the matter is hand is somewhat complex, involving a large number of actors and pre-existing measures, all of which need to be brought together and considered in order to find the most effective solution possible. However, it is specific in its scope in terms of solely dealing with the giving of research grants, an important factor to keep in mind for further research. While ethical and moral concerns need to be addressed, fears about losing valuable researchers, competitiveness and the potential to find a cure for some of the most debilitating diseases on the continent also need to be examined. The EU is at a crossroads in terms of how best to deal with the research conundrum. It needs to comprehensively deal with the fears of both sides of the argument in order to create as clear and coherent a research criteria outline as possible.1. Can the EU balance citizens’ personal and moral ethical concerns with

the demands of the competitive modern scientific research market?2. What concerns are specific or unique to the research area of neurological

diseases and stem cell research?

Key Terms 10 MEMO-07-122.

Preparation Kit

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie 65

JURI

EuroStemCell, legal definitions of an embryo, neurological diseases and embryonic stem cell research, European Research Council, Directive 98/44/EC, International Stem Cell Corporation (Appellant) v Comptroller General of Patents (Respondent), Europe2020 R&D, European Patent Office, Horizon 2020 Biotechnology, EGE

Further Reading• http://www.oxbridgebiotech.com/review/business-develop-

ment/ip-blog-brustle-v-greenpeace-the-patentability-of-stem-cells-in-europe/

• http://www.oneofus.eu/docs/france/Syntheticanalysisofth-eECJcaseofBrustlevGreenpeaceanditsethicalconsequences.pdf● http://www.eurostemcell.org/stem-cell-

map?type=regulations● http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/

TXT/?uri=CELEX:31998L0044● http://www.neurostemcellrepair.org/● http://cordis.europa.eu/fp7/home_en.html● https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PnvzR1hQGs0● http://erawatch.jrc.ec.europa.eu/erawatch/opencms/

information/country_pages/eu/euorganisation/europeanorg_mig_004

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie

Preparation Kit

66

AFCO

As Turkey announces a new EU accession strategy, designed to speed up its stalled attempts to join the union, in the midst of allegations of corruption in the highest levels of government and the silencing of opposition and the press, what kind of relations should the EU seek to build with the candidate country?

Peter Barlow (IE) & Nora Wilhelm (VP) (CH)

IntroductionTurkish-European Union (EU) relations have been fraught with difficulty in the recent past. The violent and authoritarian Turkish response to peaceful protest led to a rift between Ankara and Brussels. Moreover, it further emphasised the inconsistencies between EU policies and those of the Turkish government. However, relations between the two countries have been on the mend of late. This has preceded a renewed Turkish attempt to achieve accession to the EU1. However, Jean Claude Juncker, President of the European Commission, has stated that no new state will enter the EU during his 5 year mandate2. In light of this, how can the EU manage its relationship with Turkey effectively? In 2005 Turkey was given the status of ‘candidate country’3. This implies that Turkey is in negotiations with the EU regarding eventual membership. However, there is still a long way to go as many ‘chapters’ have yet to be negotiated including the EU’s primary concerns regarding the judiciary and law and order4. The issue of Turkish accession has been a longstanding issue in the EU. An EU containing Turkey would be a radically different place. The sheer size of the Turkish nation compared with those in the EU poses a serious question as to how the EU could successfully

1 For a full copy of the Turkish accession strategy see Turkish Accession strategy2 Source: BBC News3 Source: europa.eu4 For a full list see Negotiations between EU and Turkey

The Committee on Constitutional Affairs

Preparation Kit

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie 67

AFCO

integrate such a country. Indeed, the cultural disparity between the predominantly Christian EU and the substantial Muslim population in Turkey may put further strain on the accession of Turkey. However, Turkey also represents a key aspect of the EU’s ongoing attempt to tackle the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria [ISIS] particularly regarding the fighters attempting to travel to Iraq and Syria through Turkey. Indeed, Turkish co-operation in this capacity has led to a warming of relations in this regard5. While this is the case, the EU must also consider the widespread reports of corruption surrounding the current Turkish government as well as the limited press and individual freedoms. Thus, the question of Turkey continues to be divisive in the EU with differing opinions among different Member States.

Key QuestionsHow close should EU-Turkish relations be considering their human rights record?

What attitude should the EU have towards Turkish membership?

Main ConflictThere are several inconsistencies between Turkish foreign policy and the policies pursued by the EU. Indeed, if Turkish accession were to take place, the EU would then have borders with extremely volatile regions such as Iraq and Syria. Moreover, there has been severe condemnation of Turkish actions in its treatment of Kurds highlighted during the fight against ISIS. However, Turkey has been cooperative with regard to humanitarian relief for Syrian refugees. There exists a number of areas in the Middle East in which Turkey can be of help in humanitarian terms. Turkey remains a secular democratic ally to the EU in its efforts to stabilise the Middle East. Both the EU and Turkey are looking for increased actions to halt foreign fighters going to join ISIS6. Indeed, it provides scope for

5 Source: euractive.eu6 Information on co-operation regarding ISIS: News Article

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie

Preparation Kit

68

AFCO

the EU and Turkey to develop cooperation on security matters. There exists a particularly difficult situation in Northern Cyprus7. Cyprus has acceded to the EU, however Turkey still lays claim to the northern part of the island. Indeed, Turkey’s refusal to recognise the Republic of Cyprus8 illustrates the current impasse. There have been several efforts at mediation of a settlement which have ultimately been fruitless. This is perhaps the greatest stumbling block in Turkey’s accession to the EU. Moreover, Turkey has been uncooperative regarding the crisis in the Ukraine which has parallels with the Cypriot situation. Turkey has failed to condemn Russia over its actions in Ukraine. Though it has expressed support for the integrity of Ukraine, it has failed to introduce any sanctions in this area. Turkish accession to the EU faces major obstacles in the long run. The EU is a predominantly western bloc of nations formed out of and influenced by strong Judeo-Christian traditions while Turkey’s heritage is that of a predominantly Muslim country. Though it is constitutionally a secular republic, Turkish accession to the EU would have a dramatic effect on the current ethnic and cultural make-up of the Union - Turkey’s population is 99% Muslim9. While the EU preaches inclusivity and multiculturalism, only 8% of its population are Muslim. The argument has been made that Turkey is culturally incompatible with the EU. Countries such as France and Germany have expressed scepticism about the possibility of accession - however, countries like Britain and Sweden have been far more welcoming in considering the prospect of eventual Turkish accession. It is important to consider that Turkey would be one of the most populous countries in the EU if accession took place. Indeed, with Turkey’s high birth rate, its population may become larger than any other by the time accession takes place. Therefore, this would present a huge shift in the economic and cultural disparities existing in the EU. The Turkish Economy has been improving for quite some time. Economists have branded the Turkish economy a CIVET country. This implies that it may have the potential to achieve growth periods similar to China or India in recent years10. Moreover, 7 Comprehensive account of EU attitude to Cyprus issue: europa.eu8 Source: EU Policy Document9 Source: Nationmaster10 Source: Investopedia

Preparation Kit

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie 69

AFCO

the Turkish Economy would also be a very large economy in the EU if accession took place. However, Turkey’s accession would also place a strain on the economy of the EU. If Turkey were to join the EU, the EU’s funds would have to address widespread poverty in the country. While Turkey is a large economy and has successfully weathered the economic crisis with high growth rates throughout11, GDP per capita in Turkey is only $10,97112. The need for infrastructural development would place a difficult strain on the EU finances. The foremost concern among Member States is problems with maintaining law and order as well as human rights. Furthermore, corruption in Turkish politics has been prevalent. Indeed, these issues were brought into focus by the recent unrest in Turkey. Last year, there were massive protests in Turkey regarding corruption in the state. This highlights a difficulty in accepting such an administration into the EU. The response of the Turkish government to the demonstrations was violent and authoritarian13. This illustrated an incompatibility between the Turkish administration of government and EU attitudes to constitutional liberty. However, a new government has since come into office in Turkey and they have put socio-economic reform on their agenda in their latest strategy to enter the EU.

Key QuestionsWhat relationship should the EU seek with Turkey for the foreseeable future?How can the EU bring Turkey into line on issues where there are difficulties?What further measures (if any) can the EU introduce to foster cooperation with the Turkish state on security matters in the future?

Main Actors European Commissioner on Expansion and European Neighbourhood Policy: In charge of overseeing the entry of new 11 Source: World Bank12 Source: World Bank13 Source: Reuters article

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie

Preparation Kit

70

AFCO

Member States to the Union and maintaining relations with nations that border the EU. Turkish EU Affairs Ministry: The part of the Turkish government responsible for negotiations to enter the EU. It is also responsible for the Turkish strategies relating to Turkish alignment with the EU. European External Action Service: Responsible for EU delegations to foreign countries throughout the world (in this case Turkey). It produces reports on progress with Turkey and manages day to day relations with the country. Greece: Has very close ties with Cyprus. It is extremely opposed to Turkish membership. It strongly condemns the occupation of Turkish Cyprus. It has support on this issue from Germany14. Cyprus: Currently, a large portion of Cyprus is occupied by Turkey. The Cypriot government does not recognise any claim of Turkey this area of Cyprus. The Turkish government would not negotiate with the Cypriot government when it represented the EU in the capacity as President of the European Council15. Pro-Turkey Member States: There are some Member States that look favourably upon Turkish accession. Among these are Sweden and the UK16.

Measures and SolutionsCo-operation on ISIS and the Middle EastProblems between Turkey and the EU such as those listed above have existed for many years. However, it is perhaps useful to examine examples of previous co-operation between Turkey and the EU. Indeed the current crisis regarding fighters from the EU going through Turkey to support ISIS is an area of common ground between the two. Presently, both sides are looking for tougher restrictions on people’s ability to move from the EU to join ISIS17. However, cooperation on this level is complicated by the long 14 Source: Reuters15 Source: Reuters16 Source: Independent17 Source: ibtimes

Preparation Kit

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie 71

AFCO

standing rights of EU citizens to free travel.

Turkey has looked for greater co-operation on this issue, such as asking the EU to provide it with information regarding citizens moving there, but EU countries have been tentative to act to introduce further security measures in this respect. Turkey has already acted in a humanitarian capacity towards the crisis; 1.5 million Syrian refugees are registered in Turkey18. The EU has been supportive of Turkey in this effort through aid and by taking refugees. It may be possible for the EU and Turkey to build on this relationship.

Closer Relations with TurkeyTurkish accession has faced some major obstacles, however Turkey remains as committed as ever to realising membership of the EU. They have launched a new strategy to increase support for the EU domestically in Turkey19. Moreover, they have also launched a project to bring Turkey into line with the EU in the area of constitutionalism which is the chief concern of many in the EU20. It also indicates political and socio-economic reform as well as a strategy concerning the EU communications infrastructure21. This indicates the appetite for accession present amongst Turkish politicians. Indeed, the minister for European Affairs has called accession “the most important modernisation project after the proclamation of the Republic of Turkey”22. With regard to Turkish accession, there exists a framework for Turkey to follow in order to achieve membership. This framework establishes the goals and rules of the negotiations process. Moreover, it outlines conditions for suspension of talks as well as the negotiation procedures.23 In fact, the EU has recognised that Turkey has fulfilled the Copenhagen criteria24 for membership since 2004. Issues such as passport type, migrant management and

18 Source: UN Relief Agency19 Source: Euractive.eu20 Source: Todayzaman21 This is the Turkish communications strategy: Turkish Communications strategy22 Source: euractive.eu23 The EU-Turkey negotiations framework24 Copenhagen Criteria: Copenhagen Criteria Summary

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie

Preparation Kit

72

AFCO

public order still must be addressed but Turkey is making progress in this regard. The Commission DG responsible for Expansion has produced reports detailing progress of the talks and has been the primary EU representative in this capacity25. However, there have been calls for the suspension of talks between Turkey and the EU. These have come from various political voices within the EU, particularly in Germany. These have come in response to difficulties such as the Cypriot situation, the domestic crisis in Turkey and the scepticism regarding Turkish compatibility with the EU. The negotiations process is far from completion. Many ‘chapters’ are still unopened and only one has been closed - research and development. Among the large number of areas unopened are the crucial issues of judiciary and fundamental rights, free movement of peoples and law and order26.

Domestic Areas of CooperationOpportunities for cooperation also exist in domestic policy. European Energy policy relies heavily on Turkey. Indeed, Turkey is an observer member of the Energy Community Treaty27. Moreover, it has expressed an interest in achieving full membership since 200928. It depends even more heavily than the EU on imported oil and gas from places like Russia and Iran. It imports 70%29 of its energy needs. 25% of Turkish energy is generated through hydroelectric power stations30. The energy treaty aims at increasing energy security and renewable energy appears to have great potential in Turkey. Thus, this is an area of possible co-operation between Turkey and the EU.

Economic Co-operationTurkey’s membership would also provide incredible opportunities for the EU. Turkey would be the largest economy in the EU and would provide a huge new market for exporters in the EU. Moreover, there currently exists a customs union between Turkey 25 Source: europa.eu26 Full list of negotiation topics: europa.eu27 Energy Community Treaty Summary: europa.eu28 Information on Energy treaty expansion: Energy Community29 Source: World Bank Data30 Source: europa.eu

Preparation Kit

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie 73

AFCO

and the EU31. Indeed, the EU is Turkey’s largest trading partner while Turkey is a large trade partner for the EU32, this allows for preferential treatment in the EU of certain goods from Turkey. However, this preferential treatment of resources does not apply to labour which precludes free movement of people. Indeed, this does not apply to all goods merely coal, steel and agricultural products. Membership would mean that there would be no restrictions on movement of goods, services and people between Turkey and the EU. While the Turkish economy is seen as incompatible with the EU due to widespread poverty, the EU has released a strategy paper for the period 2014-2020 which aims to help Turkey towards a situation where it can effectively accede33. Moreover, this strategy allows the EU to allocate funding so as to develop Turkey’s insufficient infrastructure in a wide variety of areas.

EU identityFurthermore, the EU must also address the issue of what kind of Union it wants to be going forward. How far can diversity in the EU go? Indeed, the question must be asked as to whether Turkish culture is compatible with EU membership in light of the fact that it is so radically different to contemporary member states. If the EU continues to bring Turkey closer, it will have to deal with the substantial opposition on the parts of various member states.

Key QuestionsHow can the EU reconcile cooperation with Turkey and the anti-Turkish sentiment in the EU?To what extent should the EU seek closer relations or indeed sever ties with Turkey?Should the EU perceive Turkey as an ally or as a competitor in terms of foreign policy regarding Cyprus and the Middle East?How can the EU continue to build on their Economic relationship

31 More information regarding the customs union EU-Turkey Customs Union 199532 Source:europa.eu33 Pre accession assistance strategy

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie

Preparation Kit

74

AFCO

with Turkey?

ConclusionEU-Turkish relations are key to the future of the EU. Issues such as ISIS, energy and foreign policy all depend on the relationship between the EU and Turkey. However, in light of recent scandals in Turkey, a new debate has begun in the EU. Corruption in the Turkish government highlighted during the protests illustrated a severe difficulty for the EU in its attempt to achieve better relations with Turkey. The EU can choose to distance itself from Turkey. It can condemn Turkey for its authoritative actions and corruption. Alternatively, it can stay the course. There are many areas in which Turkey and the EU can co-operate, particularly regarding foreign policy towards the Middle East. Indeed Turkey could represent a massive opportunity for the EU terms of energy security and economic growth. Ultimately the EU faces a choice. It can look to further integrate Turkey with EU legal infrastructure and develop economic ties through measures like the Customs Union. Alternatively, the EU could look to Turkey as a nation incompatible with EU membership and distance itself from the problems faced by the Turkish government. Indeed, the EU can choose to strengthen relations with Turkey outside of the accession programme. It could look for more initiatives like the Energy Community Treaty. Fundamentally, the EU is at a crossroads. The choices made now will determine the face of the EU for decades to come.

Required readingReport on EU enlargement regarding Turkey; https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RS22517.pdfEU Commision press release on Turkish accession; http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-14-1173_en.htmTurkish Government policy on EU-Turkish Relations; http://www.mfa.gov.tr/relations-between-turkey-and-the-european-union.en.mfa

Preparation Kit

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie 75

AFCO

Article assessing effectiveness of Turkish support against ISIS; http://www.ibtimes.com/eu-seeks-more-turkish-support-isis-struggle-1740351News Article discussing Cypriot situation; http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/67752/andrew-jacovides/turkeys-cyprus-problemA positive think tank’s report on EU-Turkish relations; http://carnegieeurope.eu/2014/12/10/moment-of-opportunity-in-eu-turkey-relationship

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie

Preparation Kit

76

AGRI

In response to increasing challenges to global food security; how can industry, Member State governments and European Union institutions work together to achieve a sustainable intensification of European agriculture?

By Meadhbh Costello (VP) (IE) & Caley Routledge (UK)

IntroductionThe World Health Organisation (WHO) defines food security as existing “when all people at all times have access to sufficient, safe, nutritious food to maintain a healthy and active life”1. Between now and 2050, it is estimated that growth in the global population and changing diets in less developed countries will cause a 60% increase in food demand2 and that this will threaten food security. At the same time, the depletion of fossil fuels has caused an increase in demand for biofuels, the production of which will compete with food production for biomass. Additionally, climate change and the depletion of natural resources further challenge food security. It has been suggested that there is a serious threat of food demand not being met by 2050, leading to increased hunger and political instability3. Though the 2008-2012 spike in food prices placed food security and food production on the global agenda, intensive and industrialised food production has a critical impact on the environment; emissions into the atmosphere, a reduction in and diminution of the quality of water supplies, soil erosion, pollution through pesticides, and the loss of biodiversity and wildlife habitats4. This is mainly due to use of mechanical tillage and agrochemicals in industrialised nations and extractive productive methods as well as overgrazing in developing countries. Current food production systems damage the ecosystem and compromise 1 http://www.who.int/trade/glossary/story028/en/ 2 P.2 http://www.iss.europa.eu/uploads/media/Brief_24.pdf3 http://ec.europa.eu/research/agriculture/scar/pdf/scar_feg_ultimate_version.pdf 4 For more information on the impact of different agricultural processes on the environ-ment: http://ec.europa.eu/research/agriculture/scar/pdf/scar_foresight_environment_en.pdf

The Committee on Agriculture & Rural Affairs

Preparation Kit

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie 77

AGRI

the capacity of the Earth to produce food in the future. There is now need for farmers to take up more sustainable, productive and profitable agricultural practices that do not damage the environment, and for policymakers to support this process.Sustainable intensification means the production of more food from the same area of land while reducing the environmental impacts and has been highlighted as central to ensuring global food security. It is important to bear in mind that a move to sustainable intensification will depend on local conditions, particularly the current productivity and environmental performance of the agricultural system. Sustainable intensification can therefore mean increasing either agricultural or environmental output per hectare, not only the former. What should the sustainable intensification of agriculture in the European Union (EU) look like and will this be enough to overcome the challenges of global food security?Questions:

What is global food security?What are the threats to global food security?What is sustainable intensification?How best can the EU support the sustainable intensification of agriculture?

Main Conflicts:Farming MethodsAt present the standard farming practice is to plough before planting a crop in order to loosen soil and create a weed free seed bed. Mineral fertilisers are then used to replace nutrients absorbed from the soil by the crops. Most agencies that advise farmers on technology choices recommend that increased production should come from more frequent tillage, higher levels of fertiliser and pesticide application and the use of genetically engineered seeds. Over the years this type of farming has allowed global food production to increase with growing demand, but it has been recognised that these practices are unsustainable, both economically and environmentally. However, most governments and the international community continue to promote agricultural

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie

Preparation Kit

78

AGRI

practices that lead to long-term damage to soil thereby undermining future food supply. To ensure global food security for the future, it is therefore essential to move toward environmentally friendly farming systems. Essential for this is an increase in the quantities of organic matter in and on soil. This allows for an increase in surface protection and enhances the moisture holding capacity of soil and thus the availability of nutrients to crops. Farmers should adopt good agricultural practices5 that are environmentally friendly. Examples of sustainable farming include agro-ecology6, biodynamic farming7, organic farming8, integrated farming9, conservation agriculture10 or precision farming11. Of these farming systems only organic farming has acquired formal recognition and definition in national and European legislation, but still only occupies on average 4.5% of agricultural land across EU Member States. Versions of all of these practices exist in Member States, but they vary on specific practices permitted and disallowed. Though farmers may employ one of these farming systems that is not to say that they are sustainable economically or environmentally, i.e. they may implement measures concerning reducing greenhouse gases but make no efforts in relation to biodiversity. Of course the adoption of new practices can be costly for farmers, particularly when at a farm level it can be difficult to know where investments in sustainability are best utilised.

Research and Development. Sustainable intensification suggests the simultaneous improvement of productivity and environmental management of agricultural land. However, there is no single path towards sustainable intensification for all agricultural systems. This 5 For more information on good agricultural practices: http://www.flagshipfarms.eu/good-practive-matrix.php and p.7 http://www.fao.org/ag/ca/CA-Publications/ICM19.pdf 6 For more information on agro-ecology: http://agro-ecoinnovation.eu/the-project/ 7 For more information on bio-dynamic farming: https://www.biodynamics.com/what-is-biodynamics 8 More information on organic farming: http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/organic/organ-ic-farming/what-is-organic-farming/index_en.htm 9 For more information on integrated farming: http://sustainable-agriculture.org/integrat-ed-farming/ 10 For more information on conservation agriculture: http://www.ecaf.org/index.php?op-tion=com_content&task=view&id=30&Itemid=53 11 For more information on precision farming: http://www.irishexaminer.com/farming/technology/precision-farming-278654.html

Preparation Kit

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie 79

AGRI

is particularly important as there is such a wide variance in agricultural systems between the different regions of the EU. Further to this, sustainable intensification can mean an improvement in environmental management or an increase in agricultural output, it does not only mean an increase in output. One of the central debates has been what concept of sustainable intensification should the EU apply to such a diverse agricultural system. Considering a) the majority of pressure for the production of additional food is coming from outside Europe, b) Europe already has one of the most intensive agricultural sectors in the world, and c) the area of agricultural land in Europe has been slowly declining in recent years; the most pressing issue for the EU is that the past intensification of land has resulted in negative impacts on the environment that undermines Europe’s agricultural system. Though there has been widespread support for sustainability to take a central role in the agricultural policies of the European Union, there are strongly held differences over how the concept is to be interpreted and included in policy. On such a technical issue, European policies must be grounded in evidence from field research. European policy has been significantly more focused on wider rural development and agri-environmental policy but there has been a lag in evidence from farm-level to support these policies. This lack of evidence creates difficulties in stimulating policy change towards sustainable intensification. Where research has taken place the lack of consistent systems of measures creates difficulties in comparing results across studies and over time. For example there is little agreement on how best to measure sustainability in agricultural practices. Despite the existence of sets of sustainability indicators such as the Indicator Reporting on the Integration of Environmental Concerns into Agricultural Policy (IRENA), a review of 49 academic and other investigations into the sustainability of farming systems found 500 different indicators of sustainability12.

The Common Agricultural Policy The Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) was launched in 1962 as a partnership between Europe and its farmers. Since 1992, 12 http://www.risefoundation.eu/images/pdf/si%202014_%20full%20report.pdf

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie

Preparation Kit

80

AGRI

environmental concerns have become an increasingly important aspect of the CAP agenda as policymakers recognise the long-term instability of agricultural practices. Despite the closeness of the objectives of the CAP and sustainable intensification, and recent reforms to the CAP, sustainable intensification has yet to be recognised as a goal or a target of the CAP. Though the recent reforms to CAP made some references to improving the sustainability of the agricultural sector, it has been criticised for not going far enough and even by some as “green-washing”13 the CAP without any meaningful reforms. The most prominent issue from the 2014-2020 reforms has been the issue of the “greening” requirements and incentives for direct payments; grants paid to farmers in order to support their incomes and remunerate them for their production of public goods. As of 2015, 30% of direct payments will become dependent on meeting the “greening” criteria covering crop diversification, maintenance of permanent grasslands and the establishment of arable land for ecological focus areas14. Farmers’ associations have criticised the EU for the lack of assistance for farmers in the implementation of these new rules, particularly for small land holders15. Enforcement, monitoring and evaluation of these requirements has been weak and it has been hard to demonstrate compliance with measures. Further to this, the increased cost and reduction in supply due to implementation and carrying out of these green measures will result in increased prices for agricultural produce.

The effect of imports The EU is the world’s largest agricultural importer and second largest agricultural exporter. The impact on agricultural production of exports into the EU has come under investigation, since importing resources from other countries can have a negative impact on the environment. One study estimates that the EU alone absorbs around 85% of Africa’s agricultural exports16. Some of the main suggestions to help Europe reduce its external agricultural 13 Greenwashing: exhausting more time, energy and money on ‘appearing’ environmen-tally friendly than actually investing in minimising environmental impact 14 http://www.farmersjournal.ie/section-3-greening-156156/15 http://www.agriland.ie/news/eu-wide-concern-caps-greening-implementation/16 https://www.tcd.ie/iiis/policycoherence/eu-agricultural-policy/developing-countries.php

Preparation Kit

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie 81

AGRI

footprint are to reduce food waste, encourage dietary change among EU citizens, and increase productivity in EU agriculture. However, by adopting certain agricultural processes such as organic farming with the aim of reducing environmental impact of European agricultural production, this could result in the increase of the EU’s reliance on importing agricultural produce thereby increasing its external environmental footprint. Further actions to limit the EU’s external environmental impact are much more complex and politically sensitive, for example encouraging a shift to environmentally friendly agricultural practices in developing countries or seeking global agreements on environmental practices.

Beyond Sustainable Intensification Though an increase in food production and environmental protection are necessary to keep up with the expected increase in demand for food, it is debatable whether sustainable intensification alone is sufficient to combat hunger and ensure global food security. Currently, there is enough food in the world to feed everyone, yet unbalanced power structures, poor infrastructure and careless attitudes towards food create poverty on one hand and food waste in wealthy countries17. It is argued that changes in how we produce food must be combined with changes in how we use food, such as reducing food waste in our food systems and changing the dietary habits of our citizens, to ensure global food security for the future18. Food waste is the amount of food still suitable for consumption that is lost as a result of human action or inaction. It is roughly estimated that one third of food produced is wasted globally19. Food losses occur at every stage of the food supply chain from agricultural production, manufacturing and processing, and through food preparation and cooking. Regulation, technical measures and economic incentives are just some of the approaches to reducing food waste at all levels of the food supply chain. Questions:

17 http://www.oxfam.ca/there-enough-food-feed-world18 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-2809203419 P.1 http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/etudes/join/2013/513515/IP-OL-JOIN_ET%282013%29513515_EN.pdf

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie

Preparation Kit

82

AGRI

How can the EU support farmers to make changes to their farming practices? What practices should the EU encourage?Considering the need for a new CAP post 2020, how should sustainable intensification be integrated into the CAP?Should changes be made to the greening payments of pillar one? If so, what changes?How can the European Union reduce its external environmental impact?Is sustainable intensification sufficient to ensure global food security by 2050?If not, what else must be done to ensure global food security by 2050?

Main Actors: Decision Makers in the Common Agricultural Policy: The European Commission collaborates with stakeholders before drawing up proposals. Proposals made by the Commission are then decide on by both the Council of Agricultural Ministers representing each of the Member States and the European Parliament. Member States are then responsible for the day to day management and enforcement of the CAP in their countries. In general the CAP requires co-decision between the Council of Ministers and the European Parliament. One exception remains, Member States keep the upper hand in the area of quantitative restrictions of the CAP. This essentially concerns the quotas, particularly quotas in the fisheries sector. In this case, decisions are made under the special legislative procedure where the Commission proposes and the Council of Ministers decides. Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development (AGRI): AGRI is one of many Committees of the European Parliament. The purpose of these committees is to instruct legislative proposals through the adoption of reports, the proposal of amendments and the appointment of a negotiation team during negotiations with the Council of Ministers. AGRI mainly deals with the Common Agricultural Policy but also processes legislation on forestry, on

Preparation Kit

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie 83

AGRI

veterinary and plant-health matters, animal feeding stuffs provided such measures are not intended to protect against risks to human health, and on animal husbandry and welfare. Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO): The FAO is an intergovernmental United Nations (UN) organisation which acts as a neutral forum for the negotiation of agreements and policy debate between its 191 members. The FAO is also a source of information and knowledge for developing countries in the modernisation of their agricultural practices. The EU is a member of the FAO and recognises the FAO as an essential actor on sustainable agriculture and food security. The FAO also hosts the Committee on World Food Security, a multi-stakeholder platform designed to coordinate global efforts on food security. Farmers and Farmers Associations: Farmers Associations seek to further the interests of its members on a national and international level, and lobby policymakers to ensure policy changes reflect their interests. Changes in agricultural practices on a farm-level are essential for sustainable intensification to occur. Measures and Solutions The Common Agricultural Policy (CAP): Member States of the EU share the common goals of aiming to improve agricultural productivity so that consumers have a stable supply of affordable food, and to ensure that farmers can make a reasonable living. As all EU Member States share these goals, a common European policy allows for the achievement of these goals through European wide coordination and substantial financial support. The CAP is comprised of two pillars. The first pillar is support of farmers’ incomes through market intervention and direct payments. The second pillar is support for the development of rural areas through Rural Development Programs. Since the 1980s, the CAP has progressively adapted strategies aimed at increasing sustainability and environmental protection. In 2010, debate on CAP reform began and after intensive negotiations an agreement was reached for the new CAP 2014-202020. European Innovation Partnership for Agricultural Productivity and Sustainability (EIP-AGRI)21: The EIP-AGRI

20 http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_MEMO-13-631_en.htm21 http://ec.europa.eu/eip/agriculture/en/content/EIPAGRIabout

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie

Preparation Kit

84

AGRI

works to encourage competitive and sustainable farming that achieves more and better from less. The EIP-AGRI launched in 2012 as part of the Europe 2020 strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth. This strategy sets the strengthening of research and innovation as one of its five main objectives and supports a bottom up approach to agricultural innovation. The EIP-AGRI brings together agricultural sector stakeholders in both the public and private sector to promote the sharing of knowledge and the achievement of results more quickly. EIP-AGRI seeks to achieve both technological and policy innovation. The EIP-AGRI network is run by the European Commission (DG Agriculture and Rural Development) Indicator Reporting on the Integration of Environmental Concerns into Agricultural Policy (IRENA22): A report published by the European Commission in 2000 identified a set of environmental indicators that would provide information on the state of the environment in agriculture, understand and monitor the links between agricultural practices and their effects on the environment and access the extent to which agricultural and rural development policies promote environment friendly farming activities and sustainable agriculture. Agri-environmental indicators make a valuable contribution to policy evaluation but a number of limitations must be overcome to arrive at a fully operational set of agri-environmental indicators. For example, further work is needed in regards to improving deficiencies in the data sets, extending the indicators to new Member States as well as improving methods and concepts related to the indicators.

ConclusionCurrent methods of agricultural production are undermining the earth’s future capacity of producing food. Sustainable intensification has been recognised as key for mitigating further environmental damage from food production and for ensuring future global food security. However there are many obstacles in the areas of research and development to be overcome in order to adopt the concept of sustainable intensification into agricultural practices. Further to this, sustainable intensification requires changes to be made on a farm level that are supported by policymakers. Recent efforts 22 http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/envir/indicators/index_en.htm

Preparation Kit

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie 85

AGRI

towards greening the Common Agricultural Policy has been met with different levels of criticism. Some environmental NGOs see it as not going far enough to protect the environment, while farmers and interest groups see measures such as the green requirements introduced for direct payments as confused and detrimental to the livelihood of farmers. Post 2020 CAP reforms need to assess the impact of recent reforms as well as the sustainability of current agricultural practices. Policymakers must also consider whether sustainable intensification of European agriculture is enough to ensure global food security or whether changes in Europe’s external environmental food print and food systems are needed. Questions:

How best can the EU balance the protection of farmers’ livelihoods and agricultural sustainability?What should future reforms to the Common Agricultural Policy include?How can the EU promote cooperation and coherence between policy making at an EU level and the impact on the ground?Is sustainable intensification enough to ensure global food security?

Key TermsSustainable Intensification, Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), Global Food Security, Food Waste, Food Systems, Greening the CAP, Direct Payments, CAP Reforms, CAP post 2020

Further ReadingWebsite of the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations: http://www.fao.org/home/en/ in particular “Sustainable Production Intensification”: http://www.fao.org/3/a-i3920e/i3920e14.pdf Website of Big Facts on Climate Change: http://ccafs.cgiar.org/bigfacts/#about=true The Sustainable Intensification of European Agriculture:http://www.risefoundation.eu/images/pdf/si%202014_%20

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie

Preparation Kit

86

AGRI

full%20report.pdf Greening CAP Payments: A Missed Opportunity:http://www.iiea.com/ftp/environmentnexus%20papers/Greening%20CAP%20Payments_A%20Missed%20Opportunity-IIEA-environex_project-2013.pdf Some Thoughts on CAP post 2020: http://www.risefoundation.eu/images/docman-files/Some_thoughts_on_the_CAP_post_2020[1].pdf Video: Sustainable Intensification: The Future of Farming in Europe? http://royalsociety.tv/rsPlayer.aspx?presentationid=1113 Technology Options for Feeding 10 billion people: Options for Cutting Food Waste:http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/etudes/join/2013/513515/IPOL-JOIN_ET%282013%29513515_EN.pdf

Preparation Kit

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie 87

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie

Preparation Kit

88

Introductory phrasesThe introductory clauses of a resolution explain the problem that needs to be solved. Essen- tially, this section contains everything but proposing action to be taken to solve the problem. Keep in mind that the selection of the introductory phrases will be a first step to determine whether the resolution will be more general or more specific, more radical or softer in its approach. Introductory phrases are lettered, underlined and separated by commas. Below are indicated some common introductory phrases, but the list is non-exhaustive

Acknowledging with (deep) gratitude etc. AffirmingAlarmed (by)AnxiousAppreciatingApprovingAware (of)Basing itselfBelievingBearing in mindCognisantCommendingConcerned (by)ConfidentCongratulatingConsciousConsidering ContemplatingContinuing to take the view ConvincedDeclaringDeeply alarmedDeeply concerendDeeply convincedDeeply regrettingDeploringDesiringEndorsingEmphasisingExpectingExpressing its appreciation Explressing its concernExpressing its regretFirmly convinced FulfillingFully alarmedFully aware

Fully believingFurther deploringGravely concernedGuided (by)Having adoptedHaving approvedHaving consideredHaving examinedKeeping in mindNoting with (deep) appreciation Noting furtherObservingPaying tribute Pointing out Profoundly concerned ReaffirmingRealisingRecallingReconfirming RecognisingReferring (to )RegrettingReiterating its conviction RemindingSeekingSeriously concerned StressingStrongly emphasises Strongly support-ing Supporting (fully)Taking into consideration Taking note ofViewing with appreciation Welcoming

Preparation Kit

18th National Session of EYP Ireland | www.eyp.ie 89

Operative PhrasesThe operative clauses of a resolution describe the actions that need to be taken in order to solve the problem. Operative clauses should be organized in a logical progression, and each clause should contain a single idea or policy proposal. Keep in mind that not all resolutions of the European Parliament are binding. Therefore, it is important to choose the operative phrases and the wording of the operative clauses accordingly. Operative phrases are, like the introductory phrases, underlined. However, each op-erative clause begins with a number, ends with a semicolon and the final clause ends with a full stop. Below are indicated some common operative phrases, but the list is non-exhaustive.

AcceptsAffirmsAppealsAppreciates ApprovesAsksAuthorisesCalls (for/upon) CommendsConcursCondemnsConfirms Congratulates ConsidersDecidesDeclares (accordingly) DeploresDesignatesDirectsDraws attention (to) EmphasisesEncouragesEndorsesExpresses its appreciation Expresses its belief Expresses its thanks Expresses its hope Further concursFurther inviteFurther proclaimsFurther recommends Further remindsHas resolved (to)Hopes

InstructsInvitesNotes with appreciation Notes with approvalNotes with interest Proclaims Proposes ReaffirmsRecognises Recommends RegretsReiterates RemindsRepeatsRequestsResolvesSeeksSolemnly affirms Solemnly declares Strongly condemns Strongly urge SuggestsSupports Takes note (of ) TransmitsTrustsUrges Welcomes