Limitations of scope for aviation activities in the EU ETS

These Briefings are prepared by the Ex-Ante Impact Assessment Unit of the European Parliament for the relevant EP Committee(s) examining the European Commission proposal. The Briefing analyses whether the principal criteria laid down in the Commission’s own Better Regulation Guidelines, as well as additional factors identified by the Parliament in its Impact Assessment Handbook, appear to be met by the IA. It does not attempt to deal with the substance of the proposal. It is drafted for informational and background purposes to assist the relevant parliamentary committee(s) and Members of the European Parliament more widely in their work.The European Commission's Impact Asessment defines the problems and objectives of the proposed initiative clearly, and relies on comprehensive, and updated, sources of information. Overall, most of the objectives seem to be relevant, sufficiently measurable, and achievable, though not always specific or time-bound. The selection of policy options regarding the 2017-2020 period is not entirely convincing, especially considering that those included in the initial selection were quickly discarded.

The IA assesses, with a considerable level of depth, the environmental, economic, and social impacts of the options retained. The analysis is, in general, balanced, clear and comprehensive, and is supported by two quantitative models (AERO-MS, and PRIMES) previously used by the Commission. However, the choice of these models is not entirely convincing, for reasons highlighted in this briefing. The analysis of the competitiveness of small emitters (SMEs) is sufficiently broad, and includes specific sections dealing with competition between direct city-pair routes, between one-stop services, and between tourist destinations. However, it is not always easy to read and, at least in the case when the IA describes the impact of an increase in fuel prices, is sometimes not very clear.

The Commission consulted a broad range of stakeholders, whose views are described and analysed extensively. The IA seems to have addressed most of the RSB's recommendations. However, it keeps the full scope of the EU ETS as the baseline, whereas the RSB recommended the continuation of the current policy as a more realistic choice. In addition, sufficient information about EU and ICAO policies on aircraft technologies, operational measures and sustainable alternative fuels, as recommended by the RSB, still seems to be missing.

• Primary Source

EP: EPRS: Briefing: Implementation Appraisal: Ex-ante Impact Assessment http://www.europarl.europa.eu/thinktank/en/search.html?policyAreas=EXIMAS

EPRS: Briefing, September 2017: CO2 emissions from aviation http://www.europeansources.info/showDoc?ID=1223841

ESO: Background information: Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive 2003/87/EC to continue current limitations of scope for aviation activities and to prepare to implement a global market-based measure from 2021 (COM (2017)54) http://www.europeansources.info/record/proposal-for-a-regulation-amending-directive-2003-87-ec-to-continue-current-limitations-of-scope-for-aviation-activities-and-to-prepare-to-implement-a-global-market-based-measure-from-2021/

---