42 Brigitte Wolkinger et al.
for prosumers. Yet the Austrian climate policy rather follows past patterns of
gradual improvement and does not provide a clear framework that would reduce
uncertainty and most of the implementation risks. Neither the opportunities
nor the need for fundamental changes to the stable, wealthy, and consensusseeking Austrian society are well enough understood.
While short- term goals or decisions are associated with risks, long- term goals
are seen as introducing a broad set of socio- economic opportunities. A ‘missionoriented’ approach could be a solution, i.e. a truly ‘entrepreneurial state’ which
not only corrects market failures but also actively creates and shapes (new)
markets through investing and signalling credibility: a state that consciously
takes on risks that the private sector either will not or cannot accept. This,
however, could lead to the ‘public risk–private benefit’ issue (Mazzucato, 2016).
In particular, in the energy sector the low- carbon transition is seen as a way
towards a better quality of life, a more inclusive way where citizens are more
involved in the energy system beyond their narrow role in reducing emissions.
The stronger need for co- operation between the public and the private sector
to mitigate transition risks will increase the overall societal resilience to ecological, social, and economic challenges. Sector coupling may also increase the
efficiency of the economy and lead to overall carbon management of the
economy instead of implementing individual and sectoral measures. Carbon
management is more than just decarbonisation: it includes synchronisation of
material and energy cycles in a sustainable circular economy, and allows for CO 2
emission reduction by using intelligent grids and electricity from renewables in
combination with chemical storage.
With a new set of risks emerging, policies need to be designed in an intersectoral way. These policies will reduce and achieve more effective management
of the risks in individual sectors but will also need new institutional formats and
policy processes to design them. If Austria aims to remain or become a frontrunner in innovation, a detailed planning process for a risk- reducing climate and
industrial policy far beyond the 2030 horizon needs to be initiated.
References
Anderl, M., Burgstaller, J., Gössl, M., Haider, S., Heller, C., Ibesich, N., Kuschel, V.,
Lampert, C., Neier, H., Pazdernik, K., Poupa, S., Purzner, M., Rigler, E., Schieder, W.,
Schneider, J., Schodl, B., Stix, S., Storch, A., Stranner, G., Vogel, J., Wiesenberger,
H., Winter, R., Zechmeister, A. (2017a). Klimschutzbericht 2017 [online]. Umweltbundesamt, Wien. Available at: www.umweltbundesamt.at/fileadmin/site/publikationen/
REP0622.pdf [accessed 22 January 2018].
Anderl, M., Haider, S., Pazdernik, K., Schmidt, G., Schodl, B., Schwarzl, B., Titz, M.,
Weiss, P., Zechmeister, A., Stranner, G., Elisabeth Schwaiger, Pfaff, G., Pinterits, M.,
Poupa, S., Purzner, M., Schmid, C., Moosmann, L., Lampert, C., Kriech, M., Friedrich,
A. (2017b). Austria’s National Inventory Report 2017. Submission under the United
Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and under the Kyoto Protocol [online].
Environment Agency, Vienna, Austria. Available at: www.umweltbundesamt.at/fileadmin/site/publikationen/REP0608.pdf.
for prosumers. Yet the Austrian climate policy rather follows past patterns of
gradual improvement and does not provide a clear framework that would reduce
uncertainty and most of the implementation risks. Neither the opportunities
nor the need for fundamental changes to the stable, wealthy, and consensusseeking Austrian society are well enough understood.
While short- term goals or decisions are associated with risks, long- term goals
are seen as introducing a broad set of socio- economic opportunities. A ‘missionoriented’ approach could be a solution, i.e. a truly ‘entrepreneurial state’ which
not only corrects market failures but also actively creates and shapes (new)
markets through investing and signalling credibility: a state that consciously
takes on risks that the private sector either will not or cannot accept. This,
however, could lead to the ‘public risk–private benefit’ issue (Mazzucato, 2016).
In particular, in the energy sector the low- carbon transition is seen as a way
towards a better quality of life, a more inclusive way where citizens are more
involved in the energy system beyond their narrow role in reducing emissions.
The stronger need for co- operation between the public and the private sector
to mitigate transition risks will increase the overall societal resilience to ecological, social, and economic challenges. Sector coupling may also increase the
efficiency of the economy and lead to overall carbon management of the
economy instead of implementing individual and sectoral measures. Carbon
management is more than just decarbonisation: it includes synchronisation of
material and energy cycles in a sustainable circular economy, and allows for CO 2
emission reduction by using intelligent grids and electricity from renewables in
combination with chemical storage.
With a new set of risks emerging, policies need to be designed in an intersectoral way. These policies will reduce and achieve more effective management
of the risks in individual sectors but will also need new institutional formats and
policy processes to design them. If Austria aims to remain or become a frontrunner in innovation, a detailed planning process for a risk- reducing climate and
industrial policy far beyond the 2030 horizon needs to be initiated.
References
Anderl, M., Burgstaller, J., Gössl, M., Haider, S., Heller, C., Ibesich, N., Kuschel, V.,
Lampert, C., Neier, H., Pazdernik, K., Poupa, S., Purzner, M., Rigler, E., Schieder, W.,
Schneider, J., Schodl, B., Stix, S., Storch, A., Stranner, G., Vogel, J., Wiesenberger,
H., Winter, R., Zechmeister, A. (2017a). Klimschutzbericht 2017 [online]. Umweltbundesamt, Wien. Available at: www.umweltbundesamt.at/fileadmin/site/publikationen/
REP0622.pdf [accessed 22 January 2018].
Anderl, M., Haider, S., Pazdernik, K., Schmidt, G., Schodl, B., Schwarzl, B., Titz, M.,
Weiss, P., Zechmeister, A., Stranner, G., Elisabeth Schwaiger, Pfaff, G., Pinterits, M.,
Poupa, S., Purzner, M., Schmid, C., Moosmann, L., Lampert, C., Kriech, M., Friedrich,
A. (2017b). Austria’s National Inventory Report 2017. Submission under the United
Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and under the Kyoto Protocol [online].
Environment Agency, Vienna, Austria. Available at: www.umweltbundesamt.at/fileadmin/site/publikationen/REP0608.pdf.