Under the Effort Sharing Decision, Member States are required to limit their greenhouse gas emissions between 2013 and 2020 by meeting binding annual limits which are set according to a linear path. The annual targets – known as annual emission allocations (AEAs) - follow a straight line between a defined starting point in 2013 and the target for 2020.
Member States which have taken on an emissions reduction target have to ensure that their emissions in 2013 do not exceed their average annual emissions for the period 2008-2010.
Member States which are allowed to increase their emissions must ensure that their emissions in 2013 do not exceed a level defined by a linear path starting in 2009. The linear path is based on the Member State's average annual emissions for the period 2008-2010. The path ends with the Member State's 2020 target which is based on its 2005 emissions.
The annual emission allocations (AEAs) for each Member State and year were approved by the EU Climate Change Committee in October 2012 and adopted by the European Commission in March 2013.
In October 2013, the AEAs were adjusted to ensure consistency with the enlarged EU Emission Trading System (EU ETS) scope for 2013-2020.
In August 2017, the AEAs for 2017-2020 were updated to ensure consistency with the latest international guidelines and methodologies for reporting emissions.
The greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions for the reference years 2005, 2008, 2009 and 2010 used in AEA calculations were reviewed by technical experts, in consultation with each Member State.
More details on the 2012 and 2016 comprehensive review can be found in the Documentation section. The latest AEAs for each Member State and year are published here.
To increase the cost-effectiveness of their emissions path, Member States are allowed certain flexibility in meeting their AEAs.
A strong monitoring and compliance system has been put in place to monitor Member States' action and help them take corrective measures if they fail to meet their targets.
Member States have to report on
If a Member State's emissions exceed its annual emission allocation even when the flexibilities are taken into account, they will need to take corrective measures.
In 2013 the Commission had to determine Member States' AEAs based on historical GHG emissions as reported according to the IPCC guidelines and UNFCCC methodologies valid at that time. In order to take account for later methodological updates, Article 27(2) of Monitoring Mechanism Regulation foresaw the possibility for the Commission to revise Member States' AEAs for the years 2017-2020. Therefore in 2016 the Member States' GHG inventory estimates for the reference years (2005, 2008, 2009 and 2010) were again reviewed by the Technical Expert Review Team, during a comprehensive review coordinated by the European Environment Agency. The 2016 final review reports for all Member States are available here.
The annual level of Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) and Joint Implementation (JI) mechanism credits any Member State can use in 2013-2020 is limited to 3% of its 2005 emissions.
However, the Effort Sharing Decision also allows certain Member States that have emission reduction targets, or which are allowed to increase emissions by up to 5% of 2005 levels, to use an additional 1% of credits. These credits can come only from CDM projects in least developed countries and small island developing states, and are not bankable or transferable. The Member States concerned are Austria, Finland, Denmark, Italy, Spain, Belgium, Luxembourg, Portugal, Ireland, Slovenia, Cyprus and Sweden.
Greater use of credits can increase the cost-effectiveness of reducing emissions. However, it also means that the emission reductions take place outside the EU, reducing the domestic benefits for the EU in terms of technological leadership and pollution reductions. The limits on credits aim to ensure that investments in cleaner technologies and renewable energy are triggered, thus putting Europe on the way to becoming a low carbon economy. From the same perspective, Member States are encouraged to use fewer credits than the maximum allowed.
To increase the cost-effectiveness of the emissions reduction path, several flexibility measures are provided. These include allowing Member States to bank and borrow emission budgets (5% max.) between years and to transfer (for example, by selling) over-achieved emission reductions to another Member State.
These flexibilities do not increase the total amount of greenhouse gas emissions in the EU; they only change the location of reductions and allow small changes in timing.
In addition, Member States may use Clean Development Mechanism credits and Joint Implementation mechanism credits from countries outside the EU (see point 5 above)
The national targets under the Effort Sharing Decision (ESD) foresee a linear reduction or limitation path in 2013-2020 (as does the EU ETS). In the ESD, Member States take on binding annual emission limits – known as annual emission allocations (AEAs) - in accordance with the reduction path and they must report their emissions to the European Commission each year. This will ensure a gradual move towards the agreed 2020 targets is achieved in sectors where changes take time, such as buildings, infrastructure, and transport.
The annual reports that Member States are required to make under the Effort Sharing Decision will cover not only their emissions but also the policies and measures they are undertaking and projections of their future progress. Together with the various flexibilities at their disposal, this should enable Member States to take timely action to ensure that they comply with their annual emission allocations.
If a Member State's report for a given year shows it is not in line with its annual limits, however, it will have to take corrective action.
Any shortfall in emission reductions will have to be achieved in the next year, multiplied by a factor of 1.08 as a penalty. On top of this, Member States will have to submit a corrective action plan to the Commission detailing, among other things, how and when they intend to get back on track towards meeting their 2020 targets. The Commission and the EU Climate Change Committee (comprising the Member States) can comment and give recommendations on the plans. In addition, there is a temporary suspension of the Member State's eligibility to transfer any AEAs and JI/CDM rights to another Member State.
The Commission can also launch an infringement procedure against the Member State concerned.
The combination of the mechanism for corrective action and the potential use of the infringement procedure strengthens the credibility of the EU's mitigation measures under the Effort Sharing Decision. It also gives greater certainty to Member States which achieve greater emission reductions than required and would like to sell their surplus emission allocations to another Member State.
This is because the 'global warming potential' (GWP) values for certain greenhouse gases that Member States use in their emissions reporting will change for the reporting year 2013 onwards. Greenhouse gas emissions are reported with two years delay, which means Member States will report on their emissions for the year 2013 in 2015. As the new GWP values did not yet apply when the Decision entered into force, the AEAs have been calculated by applying both the current GWP values and the future ones to ensure legal certainty and consistency between reported emissions and AEAs throughout the ESD commitment period. The new GWP values are taken from the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
Pursuant to Article 10 of the Effort Sharing Decision (ESD), the AEAs shall be adjusted if there is a change in the coverage of the EU ETS that affects the ESD. A general adjustment of Member States' AEAs was published by the Commission in October 2013 due to the extension of the EU ETS scope for the 2013-2020 period. As a result of activities included in the ETS that were previously covered by the Effort Sharing Decision, the AEAs were reduced by a quantity corresponding to the amount of ETS allowances issued to that Member State as a result of the scope extension.
In some cases, the AEAs also had to be adjusted because a Member State unilaterally (in addition to the general ETS scope change mentioned above) included an activity in the EU ETS that was not previously covered by the system, or because a Member State excluded certain small installations from the ETS from 1 January 2013.
Member States' annual emission allocations (AEAs) may change after 2013 for two reasons:
Yes, subject to the quantitative and qualitative restrictions defined in Article 5 of the Effort Sharing Decision.
Each Member State can annually use for compliance with ESD international project credits up to a limit which was calculated as 3 % of their 2005 ESD emissions. Unused parts of this annual entitlement may be transferred to other Member States or carried over to subsequent years.
12 Member States listed in Annex III of the ESD can annually use for compliance additional international project credits up to Limit which was calculated as 1 % of their 2005 ESD emissions. This additional entitlement is available when the first one has been exhausted. Contrary to the annual entitlement of 3%, unused parts of this additional entitlement may be neither transferred to other Member States, nor carried over to subsequent years.
Each Member State can use for compliance with ESD any project credits meeting the conditions established by ESD Article 5(1). A list of eligible project credits is regularly updated at the Documentation section under 'ESD General positive list'. The list contains several thousand items which are essentially:
In addition, the 12 Member States listed in Annex III of the ESD can use for compliance any project credits meeting the conditions established by ESD Article 5(5). The list of such project credits is much shorter, as it contains only projects in the Least Developed Countries and the Small Island Developing States. See 'ESD Special positive list' at the Documentation section.
Quantitative restrictions are applied through automatic checks in the Union registry, where both entitlements (3 % and if applicable an additional 1 %) are set for each year. For the 12 Member States listed in Annex III of the ESD the additional entitlement of 1 % becomes available when the entitlement of 3 % has been exhausted.
Qualitative restrictions are tracked and controlled through the introduction of automatic checks in the Union registry, based on lists of project credits established in accordance with ESD Article 5(1) and ESD Article 5(5). A project credit not included in one of these lists is considered not eligible for the ESD compliance.
No. The legislators have defined slightly different criteria for eligibility of international project credits for compliance with ESD and EU ETS.