From a political point of view, “it is now or never” for a green recovery of the European economy, said four economists, French, German, Italian and Spanish, during a videoconference organised on Tuesday 16 June, a few days before the European Council devoted to the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) 2021-2027 completed by the Recovery Plan for Europe (see other news).
All say that the post-Covid-19 recovery plan proposed by the Commission at the end of May (see EUROPE 12494/2) could have been more ambitious. But they call on the EU-27 to put this proposal into practice, believing that at the national level there is still a long way to go from words to deeds.
For Pascal Lamy, President Emeritus of the Jacques Delors Institute, the green dimension of the recovery plan is “unprecedented in the history of the EU”, it is “the backbone of the proposal”.
This dimension is satisfactory in terms of climate issues, energy transition, mobility and biodiversity. But, according to the former WTO Director-General, this “good software” must be combined with two very important other parameters: 1) social necessity; 2) these investment programmes need to be ready to use. There is a need for short-term programmes for decarbonation and energy savings in public and private projects.
On the other hand, according to Mr Lamy, the green dimension is much less central in national recovery programmes. And many questions remain to be decided by the Member States: where will the money come from, how will it be allocated per country, will there be macroeconomic conditionality, or green conditionality?
“It will take at least until early fall to reach an agreement. The money needs to be spent very quickly if we are to tackle the problem of job destruction”, said the former EU Trade Commissioner.
Natalia Fabra, professor of economics at the Carlos III University in Madrid, said green conditionality would be “a good lever for implementing EU policies”. According to her, the Spanish government is very committed with an ambitious ‘Energy/Climate’ plan. She said she hopes that the renewable energy sector will be able to invest massively.
Along the same lines, Maja Göpel, Secretary General of the German Advisory Council on Global Change (WBGU), considered that regulatory barriers to the development of renewables needed to be addressed.
According to her, the German recovery plan prioritises social issues, pays a lot of attention to industry and contains a correct hydrogen strategy. But, like Natalia Fabra, she would like to see electro-mobility promoted more. In addition, she deplored the absence of agriculture in the decarbonisation of the economy.
In Pascal Lamy's opinion, this issue has not been forgotten at the European level, but the mobilisation of the agricultural sector comes up against strong sensitivities. Knowing the difficulties with the so-called “frugal four” countries on the amount of expenditure and the reluctance of the countries of Central and Eastern Europe on greening, the Commission did not wish to add to the difficulties.
“But the problem must be tackled. Those who push for green transition should not leave agriculture aside”, Mr Lamy said.
Enrico Giovannini, Professor of Economic Statistics at the University of Rome Tor Vergata, co-founder of the Italian Alliance for Sustainable Development (ASviS), welcomed the fact that the Sustainable Development 2030 programme will serve as an overarching framework and be at the heart of the budgetary process of the ‘European Semester’ which will assess the compliance of national recovery plans with EU strategic objectives.
But many questions remain open, according to the former Italian Labour Minister: do member states accept the European Green Deal as the EU's green growth strategy? How to repay the debt incurred? “With potential new taxes at European level, including a carbon tax, it would be a huge step forward”, he said.
Pascal Lamy nevertheless specified that the European Border Carbon Adjustment mechanism, expected in a little over a year, will not be used to repay the debt. The German Maja Göpel, for her part, suggested “a corporate tax”. (Original version in French by Aminata Niang)