The EU's energy policy and its driving forces




DOI: 10.17976/jpps/2022.03.06


For citation:

Borovsky Yu.V., Shishkina O.V. The EU's energy policy and its driving forces. – Polis. Political Studies. 2022. No. 4. P. 67-79. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2022.03.06



Abstract

The energy crisis, which the EU faces since Autumn 2021 and especially dramatically since March 2022, has once again brought up the issue of stable and affordable energy supply. The mechanisms of crisis management at the EU’s disposal did not allow it to react to the situation effectively, although the new energy resources price spike was caused by ‘old’ reasons, known to the EU from its experience of 1970-1980s: the resources deficit and political instability in the supplier region. What was new was that paradoxically, the EU energy policy, instead of preventing or at least smoothing the crisis, made it worse. The authors consider the driving forces that stand behind the development of EU energy policy and, proceeding from that, explain why, with a chronic energy resources deficit, the EU was steadily abandoning its long-term contracts with suppliers and calling on its member states to proceed with a nuclear phase-out. Why, under the conditions of post-pandemic energy growth of demand on the world market and an unprecedented price spike, it took these seemingly illogical steps: it refused to start the newly built gas pipeline Nord Stream-2 and was keen to buy costly LNG from alternative suppliers and to continue the development of unreliable and expensive renewable energy while gas prices on the spot markets kept breaking the records. To define the driving forces of the EU’s energy policy both international relations (realism, liberalism, social constructivism and neo-Marxism) and European integration theories (intergovernmental approach, institutionalism, neofunctionalism and communication theory) are applied to cover each aspect. Rational approaches such as realism and liberalism, as well as neofunctionalism and some other theories do not yield any insights into the driving forces and practical steps taken by the EU during the 2021-2022 energy crisis. Theories, which have social approach at their basis – social constructivism, neo-Marxism, etc., offer a more logical explanation of the EU’s decisions. 

Keywords
EU, energy policy, European Union, energy security, theories of international relations, realism, liberalism, constructivism, theories of European integration.

Дополнительные материалы

Приложение 


References

Aoun, M.-C. (2015). European energy security challenges and global energy trends: old wine in new bottles? IAI (Istituto Affari Internazionali) Working Papers, 3(15).

Bloom, P. (2017). The ethics of neoliberalism. The business of making capitalism moralNew York, NY: Routledge.

Boykoff, M.T. (2011). Who speaks for the climate? Making sense of media reporting on climate change. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511978586

Buzan, B., & Hansen, L. (2009). The Evolution of International Security Studies. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

Buzan, B., & Wæver, O. (2003). Regions and powers: the structure of international security. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

Deutsch, K. (1966). Nationalism and social communication. An inquiry into the foundations of nationalism. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Eyl-Mazzega, M.-A. (2019). Russia-Ukraine gas relations: the mother of all crises or a new start to 2030? Édito Énergie (Ifri), April 19. https://www.ifri.org/sites/default/files/atoms/files/eylmazzega_russia_ukraine_ gas_2019.pdf

Haas, E.B. (1964). Beyond the nation state. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Hardt, M., & Negri, A. (2000). Empire. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Heinrich, A., & Szulecki, K. (2019). Energy securitization: applying the Copenhagen school’s Framework to energyIn K. Szulecki (Ed.), Energy Security in Europe. Divergent Perceptions and Policy Challenges (pp. 33-61)Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-64964-1_2

Hoffmann, S. (1966). Obstinate or obsolete? The fate of the nation-state and the case of Western Europe. Deadalus, 95(3), 862-915.

Keohane, R.O. (2005). After hegemony: cooperation and discord in the world political economy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Lindberg, L.N. (1963). The political dynamics of the European economic integrationStanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Luft, G., & Korin, A. (2009). Realism and idealism in the energy security debate. In G. Luft, A. Korin (Ed.), Energy Security Challenges for the 21st Century (pp. 335-349)Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger.

Lobell, S.E. (2010). Structural realism / offensive and defensive realismThe international studies compendium project. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190846626.013.304

Mearsheimer, J.J. (2001). The tragedy of great power politicsNew York, NY: W.W. Norton & Co.

Moravcsik, A. (1993). Preferences and power in the European community. A liberal intergovernmentalist approach. Journal of Common Market Studies, 31(4), 473-524. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5965.1993.tb00477.x

Morgenthau, H., Thompson, K.W., & Clinton, D. (2005). Politics among nations. 7th edition. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Education.

Natorski, M., & Herranz Surrallés, A. (2008). Securitizing moves to nowhere? The framing of the European Union’s energy policy. Journal of Contemporary European Research, 2(4), 70-89. https://doi.org/10.30950/jcer.v4i2.88

Özcan, S. (2013). Securitization of energy through the lenses of Copenhagen school. West East Journal of Social Sciences, 2(2), 57-72.

Pierson, P. (1996). The Path to European integration: a historical institutionalist analysis. Comparative Political Studies, 29(2), 123-163. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414096029002001

Pollack, M.A. (2005). Theorizing the European Union: international organization, domestic polity, or experiment in governance? Annual Review of Political Science, 8, 357-398. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.polisci.8.082103.104858

Scharpf, F. (1997). Games real actors play. Actor-centered institutionalism in policy research. New York, NY: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429500275

Schelly, C., Bessette, D., Brosemer K., Gagnon V., Arola K.L., Fiss A., Pearce J.M., & Halvorsen K.E. (2020). Energy policy for energy sovereignty: Can policy tools enhance energy sovereignty? Solar Energy, 205, 109-112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2020.05.056

Tranholm-Mikkelsen, J. (1991). Neo-Functionalism: Obstinate or Obsolete? A reappraisal in the light of the new dynamism of the EC. Millennium – Journal of International Studies, 20(1),1-22. https://doi.org/10.1177/03058298910200010201

Wallerstein, I. (2004). World-systems analysis an introduction. Durham, London: Duke University Press.

Walt, S.M. (1985). Alliance formation and the balance of world power. International Security, 9(4), 3-43.

Waltz, K. (1979). Theory of international politicsNew York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

Weichlein, S. (2012). Soziale Kommunikation: Karl W. Deutsch und die Folgen. In P. Kolář, M. Řezník (Eds.), Historische Nationsforschung im geteilten Europa 1945-1989. (pp. 29-41). Köln: SH-Verlag.

Yergin, D. (2020). The new map: energy, climate, and the clash of nations. London: Penguin Press.

 

Dedenkulov, A.V. (2015). EU: Evolution of priorities of European energy policy. Contemporary Europe, 1, 116-125. (In Russ.)

Kaveshnikov, N.Yu. (2015). European Union’s climate and energy strategy. Contemporary Europe, 1, 93-103. (In Russ.)

Khudaykulova, A.V. (2020). Explaining the security of the global South: Western and Non-Western approaches. Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. International Relations, 13(3), 394-417. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu06.2020.307

Vedernikov, M. (2020). Slovak-Russian relations: in search of a new forms of cooperation. Contemporary Europe, 1, 135-145. (In Russ.) 

Content No. 3, 2022

See also:


Alekseyeva T.A., Lebedeva M.M.,
What Is Happening to the Theory of International Relations. – Polis. Political Studies. 2016. No1

Simonia N.A., Torkunov A.V.,
European Union’s energy security and Russia. – Polis. Political Studies. 2014. No5

Arbatova N.K.,
Strategic Autonomy of the European Union: Reality or Good Intention?. – Polis. Political Studies. 2019. No6

Fadeyeva L.A.,
Twists of European Integration. – Polis. Political Studies. 2018. No5

Voskressenski A.D.,
World regional studies and the prospects of non-western (sinocized) international relations (IR) theory. – Polis. Political Studies. 2013. No6

 
 

Archive

   2022      2021   
   2020      2019      2018      2017      2016   
   2015      2014      2013      2012      2011   
   2010      2009      2008      2007      2006   
   2005      2004      2003      2002      2001   
   2000      1999      1998      1997      1996   
   1995      1994      1993      1992      1991