renewable energy at a disadvantage compared to
other energy sources, the German government
led a coalition of the willing in designing IRENA’s mission. Its focus is on being a global voice
and knowledge source for renewables (including
renewable technologies and patents), providing
policy advice on renewables and serving as a
network hub for member states. It is open to all
UN members, lending it a high degree of legitimacy, and all members have equal weight in the
decision-making process. Given its soft mandate
and focus on information, stakeholder engagement and agency are relatively high, with member states generally sending officials from their
energy rather than climate or environment ministries to IRENA council meetings.
Nonetheless, there was initial resistance to the
creation of IRENA. Reasons for abstaining varied, from reservations about renewables and fears
of action against fossil fuel and nuclear interests,
to scepticism about the creation of a new international organisation (given inefficiencies and
deadlock in existing ones) and the financial
burden imposed on member states. Several IEA
member states, including France, the UK, USA,
Canada, Italy, Japan and Australia did not want
to create a rival to the IEA. Some emerging
economies raised sovereignty concerns: Brazil
was concerned that IRENA would try to limit its
use of biofuels and large hydropower, for
instance. While it took many years to gain
political traction, most of the original abstainers
ultimately joined. Membership now stands at 75
countries, including China, and 26 of 28 IEA
member states.
Many of these stakeholders are unlikely supporters at first glance. This includes the United
Arab Emirates (UAE) and Nigeria, both OPEC
countries. The UAE has taken a significant role
in funding several IRENA initiatives and largely
kept the organisation afloat in its initial phases
with the support of Germany. The decision to
locate the headquarters in Abu Dhabi sent a
strong political message about IRENA and
renewables in that even oil exporting countries
recognise their economic potential and are willing to contribute to IRENA. This message has
become stronger following the collapse in oil
prices in recent years, which has forced exporters
to reconsider the role of fossil fuels in supporting
economic growth and in turn, political stability.
Annex A.5: The G20’s Growing Role
in Global Energy Cooperation
The G20 is the most prominent of several global
governance initiatives adopting a coalition of the
willing approach. The global financial crisis in
2008 gave it new impetus and prompted it to
broaden its scope from economic cooperation to
energy and climate change. Like shifts in energy
governance before it, this expansion was partly
driven by exposure to high prices and volatility
in oil markets; removing distortions and inefficiencies in energy markets was identified as a
key line of defence. Moreover, at a time when
non-OECD oil demand was about to overtake
that of the OECD, and the representativeness and
agency of the IEA were increasingly questioned,
the G20 offered a forum that included established
and emerging powers, as well as accounting for
more than 80% of total primary energy demand
and at least 50% of global fossil fuel trade.
The commitment to phase out inefficient and
wasteful consumption subsidies was made at the
G20 Pittsburgh Summit in 2009. Designing a
robust reporting, but politically acceptable,
mechanism proved challenging, given that price
reform remains primarily an area of national
competency. Gaps in the conceptual framing of
the commitment—from lack of consensus
regarding what constitutes a subsidy to varying
interpretations of terms like “inefficient”,
“wasteful consumption”, “rational circumstances” and “market stability”—led to discrepancies in the reporting of existing subsidies and
those required to be phased out. While some
have questioned the effectiveness of the commitment for this reason, it has successfully
694
W. Jigang and P. Webb
other energy sources, the German government
led a coalition of the willing in designing IRENA’s mission. Its focus is on being a global voice
and knowledge source for renewables (including
renewable technologies and patents), providing
policy advice on renewables and serving as a
network hub for member states. It is open to all
UN members, lending it a high degree of legitimacy, and all members have equal weight in the
decision-making process. Given its soft mandate
and focus on information, stakeholder engagement and agency are relatively high, with member states generally sending officials from their
energy rather than climate or environment ministries to IRENA council meetings.
Nonetheless, there was initial resistance to the
creation of IRENA. Reasons for abstaining varied, from reservations about renewables and fears
of action against fossil fuel and nuclear interests,
to scepticism about the creation of a new international organisation (given inefficiencies and
deadlock in existing ones) and the financial
burden imposed on member states. Several IEA
member states, including France, the UK, USA,
Canada, Italy, Japan and Australia did not want
to create a rival to the IEA. Some emerging
economies raised sovereignty concerns: Brazil
was concerned that IRENA would try to limit its
use of biofuels and large hydropower, for
instance. While it took many years to gain
political traction, most of the original abstainers
ultimately joined. Membership now stands at 75
countries, including China, and 26 of 28 IEA
member states.
Many of these stakeholders are unlikely supporters at first glance. This includes the United
Arab Emirates (UAE) and Nigeria, both OPEC
countries. The UAE has taken a significant role
in funding several IRENA initiatives and largely
kept the organisation afloat in its initial phases
with the support of Germany. The decision to
locate the headquarters in Abu Dhabi sent a
strong political message about IRENA and
renewables in that even oil exporting countries
recognise their economic potential and are willing to contribute to IRENA. This message has
become stronger following the collapse in oil
prices in recent years, which has forced exporters
to reconsider the role of fossil fuels in supporting
economic growth and in turn, political stability.
Annex A.5: The G20’s Growing Role
in Global Energy Cooperation
The G20 is the most prominent of several global
governance initiatives adopting a coalition of the
willing approach. The global financial crisis in
2008 gave it new impetus and prompted it to
broaden its scope from economic cooperation to
energy and climate change. Like shifts in energy
governance before it, this expansion was partly
driven by exposure to high prices and volatility
in oil markets; removing distortions and inefficiencies in energy markets was identified as a
key line of defence. Moreover, at a time when
non-OECD oil demand was about to overtake
that of the OECD, and the representativeness and
agency of the IEA were increasingly questioned,
the G20 offered a forum that included established
and emerging powers, as well as accounting for
more than 80% of total primary energy demand
and at least 50% of global fossil fuel trade.
The commitment to phase out inefficient and
wasteful consumption subsidies was made at the
G20 Pittsburgh Summit in 2009. Designing a
robust reporting, but politically acceptable,
mechanism proved challenging, given that price
reform remains primarily an area of national
competency. Gaps in the conceptual framing of
the commitment—from lack of consensus
regarding what constitutes a subsidy to varying
interpretations of terms like “inefficient”,
“wasteful consumption”, “rational circumstances” and “market stability”—led to discrepancies in the reporting of existing subsidies and
those required to be phased out. While some
have questioned the effectiveness of the commitment for this reason, it has successfully
694
W. Jigang and P. Webb