Green ideas supported, but modernisation is a pressing need

The new Greek gov­ern­ment of cen­tre-left Pan­hel­lenic Social­ist Move­ment (PASOK) has strong “Green” beliefs. The run-up to Copen­hagen and the work­ings of Copen­hagen prop­er were close­ly fol­lowed in the media and by pub­lic opin­ion, while a feel­ing of “lost oppor­tu­ni­ty” was the main judg­ment on Copenhagen’s results. Giv­en the ever-pre­sen­t/la­tent anti-Amer­i­can feel­ing in Greece, the fact that the USA were (along with Chi­na) hes­i­tant in fol­low­ing the EU and adher­ing to the active envi­ron­men­tal agen­da of Copen­hagen led to strong pub­lic sen­ti­ment deplor­ing the lack of progress and of tan­gi­ble results of the con­fer­ence.11Emm. Dous­sis: Seal the Deal: A new approach to Cli­mate Change [in Greek], in: From Bush to Oba­ma: Inter­na­tion­al Pol­i­tics in a Chang­ing World, Papazis­sis Athens 2010, p. 240.

There is sup­port for stronger EU envi­ron­men­tal ini­tia­tives in the fol­low-up to Copen­hagen. Both the inter­nal imple­men­ta­tion of mea­sures (in a direc­tion enhanc­ing the so called ‘20–20-20’ objec­tives) and the inter­na­tion­al efforts at bind­ing emis­sions ceil­ings are deemed nec­es­sary for cli­mate change to be cred­i­bly faced. Still, the fact that Greek indus­try – espe­cial­ly pow­er pro­duc­tion through the burn­ing of lig­nite – is vis­i­bly trail­ing the goals set for emis­sions lim­i­ta­tion is lit­tle dis­cussed or realised.22For an over­all assess­ment of Copen­hagen, see Spy­ros Kou­velis: What did not hap­pen in Copen­hagen [in Greek], Inter­na­tion­al and Euro­pean Pol­i­tics (Vol. 17), p. 161; Theodore Sky­lakakis: Copen­hagen: Great Expec­ta­tions, a Painful Let-down [in Greek], in: Inter­na­tion­al and Euro­pean Pol­i­tics (Vol. 17), p. 165; Dim­itris Papadi­moulis: After Copen­hagen, Where to? [in Greek], in: Inter­na­tion­al and Euro­pean Pol­i­tics (Vol. 17), p 168.

    Footnotes

  • 1Emm. Dous­sis: Seal the Deal: A new approach to Cli­mate Change [in Greek], in: From Bush to Oba­ma: Inter­na­tion­al Pol­i­tics in a Chang­ing World, Papazis­sis Athens 2010, p. 240.
  • 2For an over­all assess­ment of Copen­hagen, see Spy­ros Kou­velis: What did not hap­pen in Copen­hagen [in Greek], Inter­na­tion­al and Euro­pean Pol­i­tics (Vol. 17), p. 161; Theodore Sky­lakakis: Copen­hagen: Great Expec­ta­tions, a Painful Let-down [in Greek], in: Inter­na­tion­al and Euro­pean Pol­i­tics (Vol. 17), p. 165; Dim­itris Papadi­moulis: After Copen­hagen, Where to? [in Greek], in: Inter­na­tion­al and Euro­pean Pol­i­tics (Vol. 17), p 168.

The reports focus on a report­ing peri­od from Decem­ber 2009 until May 2010. This sur­vey was con­duct­ed on the basis of a ques­tion­naire that has been elab­o­rat­ed in March and April 2010. Most of the 31 reports were deliv­ered in May 2010.

The EU-27 Watch No. 9 receives sig­nif­i­cant fund­ing from the Otto Wolff-Foun­da­tion, Cologne, in the frame­work of the ‘Dia­log Europa der Otto Wolff-Stiftung’, and finan­cial sup­port from the Euro­pean Com­mis­sion. The Euro­pean Com­mis­sion is not respon­si­ble for any use that may be made of the infor­ma­tion con­tained therein.