Discussion Paper

No. 2017-109 | December 11, 2017
Establishing an expert advisory commission to assist the G20’s energy transformation processes
(Submitted as Global Solutions Paper)


The ongoing transformation of the world’s energy systems requires an international monitoring to evaluate the transformation processes and to identify transferable leading practice policies. For this purpose, an independent scientific expert commission should be established for the G20. By actively involving political decision-makers in the discussion of the final results a broad basis of support can be ensured.

JEL Classification:

Q01, Q48, Q58


  • Downloads: 120


Cite As

Andreas Löschel and Philipp Großkurth et al. (2017). Establishing an expert advisory commission to assist the G20’s energy transformation processes. Economics Discussion Papers, No 2017-109, Kiel Institute for the World Economy. http://www.economics-ejournal.org/economics/discussionpapers/2017-109

Comments and Questions

Antonio Gómez Gómez-Plana - Spur or tie down research? Spur!
December 13, 2017 - 13:50

The initiative proposed is plausible and should be taken into consideration by the governments belonging to the G20 and those signatories of the Paris Climate Agreement.
I completely agree with the tasks 1 (Inform), 2 (Monitor) and 4 (Exchange). The virtues of each task have been well explained in ...[more]

... the discussion paper.
I have some comments on task 3 (Evaluate). I fully support authors' statement of the accessibility and replicability of empirical analysis. This is a key point and it should be mandatory for all the research used in this framework. In the same way, "a standardized meta-format for results would continue a valuable improvement both for researchers and policy experts and would facilitate the transfer of knowledge". But I am not completely sure of the about the point on the role of the expert commission to identify the leading practice policy options. Can it bias the incentives of the researchers? Does it drop the interest in addressing new policy options or new methodologies for researchers? Once the commission establishes a set of 'leadings', researchers will have incentives to do research on them, in order to provide results for, i.e., governments or scientific journals. Maybe this effect can tie down the research in other potentially good policies/methodologies.
Of course, from the discussion paper cannot be inferred that the purpose of the commission is to limit research. In fact, tasks 1 and 2 will spur research (see the research effect of GTAP - Global Trade Analysis Project, for example). But I wonder about this potential not-desired effect of task 3.
Finally, as an overall proposal, this can be an example of the commitment of the political and the scientific communities with one of the challenges in this century for the human beings.

Anonymous - Report
December 17, 2017 - 20:53

The proposed expert advisory commission constitutes a major undertaking which aims at fostering policy transfer and policy learning. It proposes evidence based policy making which could very well help to avoid repeating the costly mistakes which first-adopting countries have made in the past.
Internationally, there are, however, already institutions ...[more]

... which provide energy statistics and country reports. The authors acknowledge these initiatives and show links and potential for cooperation with international initiatives and agencies like IRENA, the IEA, or the MRV process. They rightly indicate that the duplication of work should be avoided and that the expert advisory committee will make use the agencies’ knowledge base. However, it should be made clearer what the proposed committee’s benefits are above and beyond the work of these existing agencies. This is not say that there are no such benefits, I would, however, like to see them spelled out.

Anonymous - Comments
December 17, 2017 - 20:55

• An update based on the results of the G20 summit in 2017 would be helpful as well as for example including the most recent NDC-figures in the introduction.
• The design of the indicators should also be linked to the SDG-indicators and their measurement (esp. goal 7&13).
• Page 10: The ...[more]

... point “Existing Policies und Monitoring” lists only three processes and committees in EU member states and one in Japan. Please check whether there are further relevant initiatives in G20 member states. For example, what about the EEA in the USA? Otherwise, only list multi-/international approaches?