Since the past decade, legislative processes around the globe are being rationalised by introducing ex ante evaluation. Legislators, politicians, and the public at large increasingly demand new laws to have a particular effect and no unwanted side-effects. Various instruments are applied that all have in common that they must predict the effect of new legislation. These instruments range from small tests into one specific topic, for instance the effect of a new piece of legislation on the environment, or on the economic position of small and medium sized enterprises, to a full swing regulatory impact assessment that assesses all probable and possible effects of new legislation. Until now, most publications on regulatory impact assessment praise such instruments as being extremely useful. Scepticism, however, is in order as well. Is it not as difficult to predict the future effect of a new set of rules in our complex society as it is to predict where our society as a whole is going? The answer to this sceptical question forms the heart of a new book published with Martinus Nijhoff Publishers. The newly established Research Group for Methodology of Law and Legal Research at Tilburg University, the Netherlands invited some of Europe’s top specialists in the field of ex ante evaluation of legislation, with a background in law, social science, political science, and law and economics. The result of their collaborate effort is a comprehensive, critical, book on the pros and cons and on the opportunities, limitations and challenges of ex ante assessment of legislation. This paper is a preprint version of the introductory chapter to this book.
This chapter discusses climate change mitigation and the role of law, taking a broad view on law. In the field of climate change mitigation law, law and policy are intimately connected, as law is primarily (but not only) used as an instrument to curb GHG emissions. Furthermore, since market based instruments play a pivotal role in mitigation policies, and since these policies also target consumer behavior, there is no sharp boundary between law and socio-economic disciplines. It firstly defines what climate change mitigation is, before discussing the history of climate change law and the interlinkage between climate change mitigation and adaptation.
Abstract This article assesses current and proposed European Union (EU) climate and environmental law, and the legal instruments associated with the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), to see whether soil carbon sequestration is sufficiently promoted as a promising example of ‘climate-smart agriculture’. The assessment shows that current and proposed policies and instruments are inadequate to stimulate large-scale adoption of soil carbon projects across Europe. Given the identified structural flaws, it is likely that this is true for all climate-smart agricultural practices. An alternative approach needs to be developed. Under EU climate policy, agriculture should be included in the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS) by allowing regulated industries to buy offsets from the agricultural sector, following the examples set by Australia and others. The second element of a new approach is aimed at the CAP, which needs to be far more focused on the specific requirements of climate change mitigation and adaptation. Yet, such stronger focus does not take away the need to explore new income streams for farmers from offsets under the ETS, as the CAP will never have sufficient funds for the deep and full transition of Europe’s agriculture sector that is needed.
