Cooperation on Renewable Energy Sources (RES) in Europe is expected to contribute to energy and climate policy goals and bring multiple benefits at the national, regional and European levels. For this reason, the Cooperation Mechanisms of the RES Directive 2009/28/EC were originally designed to encourage the collaboration of countries and contribute to the achievement of the 2020 EU RES target in a cost-effective manner while providing Member States (MS) with flexibility to meet their national RES objectives. These mechanisms will allow MS to achieve their national RES target in cooperation with other MS and include statistical transfers, joint projects and joint support schemes. However, their use has been limited, leading to skepticism about their future use. The aim of this article is to identify the factors that influence MS decision to use the Cooperation Mechanisms and to rank their importance. The empirical analysis is based on a comprehensive, in-depth literature review and a dedicated survey to MS. Our results show that, indeed, a wide array of drivers and barriers have influenced and will influence the future use of the Cooperation Mechanisms. The main drivers and barriers in the past significantly differ to those influencing the future use. Furthermore, the perception of the relevance of the drivers and barriers by the MS differs depending on whether the countries have already met or are having difficulties to meet their 2020 RES target domestically and on whether they have actually used the Cooperation Mechanisms or not. Some policy implications on how to overcome the existing barriers to the use of those mechanisms are derived from the analysis.

Since its founding institutions the European Economic Community and Eratom, the European Union has paid great attention to energy issues. However, its powers have been updated in relatively recent times. Similarly, the EU has promoted in the post-Kyoto Protocol environmental issues with a leading by example approach and implementing an ambitious plan to decarbonize the economy with the energy transition and emission limitation through a market instrument, the emission trading system. The European emissions trading system has been the most ambitious management of negative externalities related to GHG set-up at the international level. The EU now considers that the costs of ecological industrial transition could limit the ability of European industries to compete in the globalized market with industries not subject to similar limits and costs. The EU intends to adopt a carbon adjustment tax at the border, to limit the phenomenon of reallocation and compensate for environmental costs. This paper analyses the various proposals and their advantages and disadvantages. The focus is on the charge on emissions mechanism, which is one of the three proposals the European Economic and Social Committee suggested to the European Commission for further investigation in view of the current competitive asymmetry now recognized by the EU Commission itself. The charge on emissions would value industrial emissions directly within the VAT and use the blockchain to track the emissive supply chain of products.