Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Publications
  3. Publishing partners
  4. Intersentia
  5. Content Listing

Refine listing

Refine listing

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

7719 results in Intersentia

Page 179 of 386

  • Preface

    • By Martha M Roggenkamp, PhD, Professor of Energy Law and Director of the Groningen Centre of Energy Law, University of Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands, Catherine Banet, PhD, Associate Professor, Scandinavian Institute of Maritime Law, Petroleum and Energy Law Department, Oslo, Norway.
  • Edited by Martha M. Roggenkamp, Catherine Banet
  • Book:
    European Energy Law Report XII
    Published by:
    Intersentia
    Published online:
    31 January 2019
    Print publication:
    20 November 2018, pp v-vi

  • Summary

    The editors are very pleased to present the European Energy Law Report XII. The European Energy Law Report is an initiative taken by the organisers of the European Energy Law Seminar, which has taken place on a regular basis in the Netherlands since 1989. The aim of this seminar is to present an overview of the most important legal developments in the field of international, EU and national energy and climate law. Whereas the first seminars concentrated on the developments at European Community (EC) level, which were the result of the establishment of an Internal Energy Market, the focus has now gradually switched to the developments at national level following the implementation of the EU Directives on internal electricity and gas markets, promoting renewable energy sources, mitigating climate change and securing energy supply. This approach can also be found in these reports.

    Similar to the previous European Energy Law Reports, this book includes chapters based on papers presented at the 28th European Energy Law Seminar, which was organised on 23 and 24 January 2017 and which examined a wide range of issues involving the promotion of renewable energy sources and the need to secure a regular and reliable energy supply. The book consists of five parts: ‘ Developments in the EU and EU Energy Law“Promoting Renewable Energy Production: Cross-border Projects and Dispute Settlement” Energy Consumers as Renewable Energy Producers: The Concept of Prosumers ‘Balancing Renewable Electricity Production with Supply Security: National Experiences with Capacity Mechanisms’ and ‘Promoting the Use of Sustainable Gas and Security of Gas Supply ’. Where necessary, the chapters have been updated up to June 2018.

    We are grateful for the support of the speakers at the seminar and their cooperation in rewriting their papers for the purpose of this book. We also would like to thank the authors and co-authors who did not speak at the seminar but who were willing to participate in this project so that we could provide you with a ‘complete’ picture of all the topics discussed. Finally, we would like to acknowledge the help and support of the publisher in publishing this book. We are confident that these reports will be part of an important and long-lasting tradition in this field.

  • Chapter XII - The Use of Power-to-Gas in Refineries: Regulatory Challenges from an EU and German Perspective

  • from PART V - Promoting The Use Of Sustainable Gas And Security Of Gas Supply
    • By Martha M Roggenkamp, PhD, Professor of Energy Law and Director of the Groningen Centre of Energy Law, University of Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands.
  • Edited by Martha M. Roggenkamp, Catherine Banet
  • Book:
    European Energy Law Report XII
    Published by:
    Intersentia
    Published online:
    31 January 2019
    Print publication:
    20 November 2018, pp 251-270

  • Summary

    INTRODUCTION

    The impact of climate change concerns on the energy sector is undisputed and has led to various governmental initiatives to limit greenhouse gas emissions. Since the 1990s a wide range of measures and instruments have been developed on EU and national level to combat climate change. In the EU these measures vary from the introduction of a CO 2 emissions trading regime to the promotion of renewable energy sources and energy efficiency measures. These measures have a direct impact on the fossil fuels sector and the electricity generation sector. One of the sectors that will be affected by these changes is the refinery sector. Oil refineries transform crude oil into a range of usable products such as liquefied petroleum gas (LPG), petrol, kerosene, jet fuel, diesel oil and fuel oils. It is an energy intensive process and refineries consequently also emit large quantities of greenhouse gasses, in particular CO 2. In order to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, the EU has put in place a range of instruments varying from an EU emissions trading system (EU ETS) to measures focusing on energy savings and energy efficiency (including the use of waste heat), as well as the possibility for carbon capture and storage. Apart from reducing greenhouse gas emissions, there are also other attempts to make the refinery sector more sustainable by using ‘green’ hydrogen instead of natural gas in the refinery process.

    So far little has been written about the impact of these climate goals on the refinery sector: this chapter tries to fill this lacuna by presenting a brief overview of some of the challenges the refinery sector faces and how law can play a role in addressing these issues. It will focus in particular on the need to make the refinery sector and its end product – the transport fuel – more sustainable by using ‘green’ hydrogen instead of natural gas in the refining process. By doing so, the focus will be on the EU and Germany. The reason for choosing Germany is this country's strong focus on energy transition and the large number of pilot projects involving ‘green’ hydrogen.

    The chapter will therefore begin with the current EU and German climate policy. This will be followed by a brief description of the refinery sector and refinery process.

  • Chapter V - Danish-German Cooperation on the First Cross-Border Tenders for Renewable Energy: A Blueprint for Future Cross-Border RES Projects?

  • from PART II - Promoting Renewable Energy Production: Cross-Border Projects And Dispute Settlement
    • By Dijana Dmitruk, Advisor, Centre for Energy Resources, Danish Energy Agency, Danish Ministry of Energy, Utilities and Climate, Copenhagen, Denmark
  • Edited by Martha M. Roggenkamp, Catherine Banet
  • Book:
    European Energy Law Report XII
    Published by:
    Intersentia
    Published online:
    31 January 2019
    Print publication:
    20 November 2018, pp 113-132

  • Summary

    INTRODUCTION

    In July 2016, Denmark and Germany concluded a cooperation agreement (CA) on a pilot project allowing the realisation of the two first cross-border tenders of financial support for renewable electricity in Europe. The tenders were technology specific and related to the generation of electricity from solar photovoltaic installations (solar PV). The outcome of the pilot was surprising: solar PV projects with planned locations in Denmark secured all the winning bids in the two cross-border tenders with historical low prices for solar PV in this part of the world.

    This chapter provides insight into the legal framework of this pilot cooperation, focusing on certain key elements of the CA. Based on the practical experience gained from the Danish – German cooperation, it also draws some lessons in terms of what to keep in mind when designing these kinds of crossborder projects. Finally, the chapter provides some concluding remarks and reflections for future cross-border initiatives, asking whether this cooperation could serve as a blueprint for future cross-border renewable energy projects.

    A BRIEF BACKGROUND

    In the spring of 2014, when the European Commission was considering the Danish applications on State aid for solar PV and wind electricity, the Commission put the legality of the Danish public service obligation (PSO) charge into question. At that time – and to a certain extent still today – financial support for electricity from renewables in Denmark was mainly financed through a PSO charge. The PSO charge is applied on all electricity bills in Denmark with the purpose of financing public support for renewable electricity.

    More precisely, the Commission raised concerns as to whether the PSO charge was in compliance with Articles 30 and/or 110 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). The concern was whether there could be a risk that the charge had a discriminatory effect on imported electricity from renewable sources and thus: ‘ If domestic electricity production is supported by aid that is financed through a charge on all electricity consumption, including consumption of imported electricity, then the method of financing, which imposes a burden on imported electricity not benefitting from this financing, risks having a discriminatory effect on imported electricity from renewable energy sources and thereby violate Articles 30 and/or 110 of the Treaty.’

  • Chapter 5 - The Results of the Second Wave

  • Letizia Paoli, Jonas Visschers, Cedric Verstraete, Elke van Hellemont
  • Book:
    The Impact of Cybercrime on Belgian Businesses
    Published by:
    Intersentia
    Published online:
    31 January 2019
    Print publication:
    20 November 2018, pp 67-92

  • Summary

    In this section we present the results of the analyses of the second wave (November 2017 – February 2018). Before entering into detail, we report that the questionnaire was completed primarily by high-level representatives of the participating businesses: 33.9% of the respondents classified themselves as CEO or member of the executive board; 14.4% as Chief Information Security Officer; 14% as managing director; 10.3% as other IT staff and 4.1% as executive director. This suggests that the respondents had a good evidence base to assess both victimization and impact correctly.

    The section is structured as follows. First, we discuss the extent to which businesses have been confronted with cybercrime in the 12 months preceding the survey; this includes both the victimization prevalence for each cybercrime type, and the incidence of each type. Next, we focus on the business representatives’ perceptions of the likelihood of their business being attacked in the following 12 months. Third, we estimate the harms to material support, that is, the staff and other costs that the businesses have incurred as a result of cybercrime incidents in the 12 months before the survey, as well as to assess the severity of the financial impact of these incidents. Fourth, we discuss the business representatives’ assessments of the non-material harm that the businesses have experienced as a result of cybercrime in the same time span.

    VICTIMIZATION IN THE PAST 12 MONTHS

    Half of the businesses in our sample (53.6% or 125 businesses) have been victims of one of the five cybercrime types, at least once in the last 12 months. Specifically, illegal access to IT systems is the most prevalent: 32.7% (or 83 businesses). About a fift h of the respondents reported being victims of data/ system interference (20.2% or 49 businesses), or cyber extortion (18.9% or 47 businesses). Slightly more than a tenth of the respondents indicated that their business had been a victim of internet fraud (12.6% or 30 businesses) or cyber espionage (10.6% or 29 businesses). Figure 3 provides more insight into the incidence of cybercrime in the 12 months before the survey in our sample.

    For three of the cybercrime types, there were more repeated victims than single victims: 79.5% of the victims report repeated incidents of illegal access to IT systems, 65.3% of data/system interference, 66.6% internet fraud.

  • Chapter XIII - Security of Gas Supply: The New European Approach

  • from PART V - Promoting The Use Of Sustainable Gas And Security Of Gas Supply
    • By Ruven Fleming, PhD, Assistant Professor of Energy Law, Groningen Centre of Energy Law, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
  • Edited by Martha M. Roggenkamp, Catherine Banet
  • Book:
    European Energy Law Report XII
    Published by:
    Intersentia
    Published online:
    31 January 2019
    Print publication:
    20 November 2018, pp 271-291

  • Summary

    INTRODUCTION

    The EU introduced a new security of gas supply regulation in November 2017, which replaces the security of gas supply regulation of 2010. It is only the second regulation on gas security of supply that the EU has ever issued. Before that, gas security of supply was mainly governed by the light-touch rules of Directive 2004/67 and was considered to be largely provided for by the principles governing the internal European energy market.

    This notion changed considerably with the 2006 and 2009 Russia – Ukraine gas crises, which had a detrimental effect on the amount of gas that was received in Europe, causing, inter alia, Italian and German gas-fired power plants to shut down. 5 Subsequently, Regulation 994/2010 was put into place as an explicit response to the crises.

    The new Regulation (EU) 2017/1938 is the successor to Regulation 994/2010 and is supposed to deal with the latter's perceived shortcomings. Many instruments of the predecessor Regulation (EU) 994/2010 will stay in place unchanged and those have been discussed elsewhere. This contribution will therefore focus on the innovations and changes being brought in by Regulation (EU) 2017/1938.

    After providing a background on the development of Regulation (EU) 2017/1938, the chapter will make some remarks on its structure and aims. The chapter then focusses on the main innovation of Regulation (EU) 2017/1938, the imposition of obligatory solidarity between Member States in a gas crisis. This is to be achieved by two means: first, directly connected Member States are being clustered into so-called risk groups, and second, the new Article 13 of Regulation (EU) 2017/1938, which spells out concrete solidarity measures that Member States have to take in case of an emergency.

    BACKGROUND

    The EU deemed it necessary to introduce a new security of gas supply regulation after the Commission investigated the implementation of Regulation (EU) 994/2010 in October 2014. Although the EU insists that the old Regulation (EU) 994/2010 had a ‘significant positive impact’ on the security of gas supply in the Union, the October 2014 report identified areas in which improvements could further bolster the security of gas supplies to the Union.

  • Chapter II - EU Case Law and the Energy Sector

  • from PART I - Developments In The EU and EU Energy Law
    • By Berend Jan Drijber, Advocate General at the Hoge Raad, the Dutch Supreme Court. Until 1 October 2017 he was a partner with Pels Rijcken & Droogleever Fortuijn N.V. in The Hague, The Netherlands.
  • Edited by Martha M. Roggenkamp, Catherine Banet
  • Book:
    European Energy Law Report XII
    Published by:
    Intersentia
    Published online:
    31 January 2019
    Print publication:
    20 November 2018, pp 43-62

  • Summary

    INTRODUCTION

    This contribution reviews the case law of the Luxembourg-based European Court of Justice (ECJ or the Court) regarding the energy sector from mid-2016 to the turn of 2017/18. Most decisions are preliminary rulings at the request of a national court of one of the EU Member States (Article 267 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU)). The ECJ also hears cases brought by the European Commission (the Commission) against one or more Member States (Article 258 TFEU), as well as appeals against rulings of the General Court on points of law (Article 263 TFEU). The General Court hears at first instance the administrative law appeals against decisions of EU institutions and EU agencies.

    The chapter is organised as follows. It starts by discussing cases concerning certain internal market rules (section 2). It goes on to look at two cases involving a dispute on capacity allocation (section 3). The next topic is a series of cases regarding free CO 2 emission allowances (section 4). Subsequently, the chapter discusses cases relating to renewables that reflect the energy transition from fossil sources to renewable energy (section 5). Finally, it deals with disputes involving the rules on State aid, which is an area of growing importance for the energy sector (section 6).

    INTERNAL MARKET

    ANODE

    In a liberalised market, prices are set by the free play of supply and demand in the market. For social reasons a Member State may wish to protect certain categories of end users, such as households, against increases in energy prices.

    This French case concerns the regulation of prices for the supply of natural gas to consumers in order to protect security of supply and territorial cohesion. Energy suppliers have a statutory obligation to apply tariffs calculated in accordance with cost-based criteria drawn up by public authorities. ANODE, an association of suppliers operating at retail level, challenged the compatibility of this tariff regulation with the public service provisions in Article 3 of the Directive 2009/73, the Third Gas Directive and the general provision on services of general economic interest laid down in Article 106(2) TFEU. In essence, ANODE argued that these rules do not provide a proper justification for rules restricting the free play of market forces.

  • Chapter VI - Prosumer Legislation in Germany

  • from PART III - Energy Consumers As Renewable Energy Producers: The Concept Of Prosumers
  • Edited by Martha M. Roggenkamp, Catherine Banet
  • Book:
    European Energy Law Report XII
    Published by:
    Intersentia
    Published online:
    31 January 2019
    Print publication:
    20 November 2018, pp 135-150

  • Summary

    INTRODUCTION

    Germany has plenty of energy legislation. The reason is that German politicians like energy law, or rather the use of it to implement their political goals. For many decades the energy industry has been a key focus area of German policy. A great number of laws and their amendments cover the desired – or undesired – form of energy generation and supply. Since the 1990s a key theme has been the promotion of renewable energies to achieve the Energiewende (energy turnaround), ie the change from nuclear and conventional fuels to renewable energy sources. Starting with the initial Energy Feed-in Act (Stromeinspeisegesetz) of 7 December 1990, the German energy industry has undergone numerous changes. Further changes have been strongly influenced by different versions of the Renewable Energy Sources Act (EEG), the successor of the Energy Feed-in Act.

    The concept of ‘prosumers’ has not been at the forefront of German renewable energy interest. However, recent interest in controlling the costs of the Energiewende has led to specific rules for prosumers. In recent years, the need to allocate costs and to integrate the ever growing quantities of renewable energy 6 into the energy market has become increasingly important. As renewable energy installations are often not owned by traditional energy supply companies, the number and range of actors in the energy sector has increased. 7 In addition to the conventional larger energy generators more and more private households, farmers, energy cooperatives and other independent power producers have started to generate electricity from renewable energy sources. 8 Furthermore, several (often larger) power consumers have built their own (conventional and renewable) generating plants due to a commercially favourable regulatory framework, as prosuming leads to particular benefits. Consequently, prosuming, ie combining production and consumption, has attracted more interest. With decreasing costs of photovoltaic installations and possible battery storage, the potential for becoming prosumers, particularly in the private residential sector, is now further increasing in another area.

    The term ‘prosumer’ does not as yet appear in German energy law. Despite the growing popularity of prosumption, the overarching concept is not recognised in German law, neither in the Renewable Energy Sources Act nor in any other of the various energy statutes. 9 In Germany issues relating to ‘prosumption’ are dealt with under the heading of ‘ self-supply ’ (Eigenversorgung), often also referred to as ‘auto-supply’, ‘auto-generation’ or ‘self-consumption’.

  • Chapter XI - The French Capacity Mechanism

  • from PART IV - Balancing Renewable Electricity Production Withsupply Security: National Experiences With Capacity Mechanisms
    • By Thomas Herman, Associate, Herbert Smith Freehills, Paris, France, Emma France, Lawyer, Herbert Smith Freehills, Paris, France
  • Edited by Martha M. Roggenkamp, Catherine Banet
  • Book:
    European Energy Law Report XII
    Published by:
    Intersentia
    Published online:
    31 January 2019
    Print publication:
    20 November 2018, pp 231-248

  • Summary

    INTRODUCTION

    The need for the adoption of a capacity mechanism in France has primarily been justified by reasons of security of electricity supply. Following a market-based and country-wide approach, the French authorities have made the choice of a Capacity Market as the main capacity remuneration mechanism. The rules for the Capacity Market have been progressively developed since 2010 until the adoption of a detailed regime in 2015. Despite delays related to legal proceedings and the need to rapidly adjust the capacity mechanism design in order to secure State aid approval, the first capacity auction took place in December 2016. This chapter analyses the Capacity Market introduced in France by examining: the evolution of its legislative and regulatory framework and related litigation; its current regime; the modifications induced by the European Commission's decisions on State aid control; and finally an overview of the market practices and some perspectives.

    BACKGROUND FOR THE INTRODUCTION OF A CAPACITY MECHANISM IN FRANCE

    SECURITY OF SUPPLY AS A PRIMARY CONCERN

    The security of the supply of electricity to consumers, which can be defined as: ‘the ability of energy systems to satisfy continuously and at a reasonable cost, the expected market demand’, has been the focus of the French energy transition.

    The latter has recently been reaffirmed as part of the ‘Multiannual Energy Programme’ (programmation pluriannuelle de l’énergie, PPE) of 2016 which sets out the Government's energy policy for the next five years, in accordance with the objectives defined in the 2015 Energy Transition Law for Green Growth. The PPE is subject to a revision process in 2018.

    Security of supply is a complex issue as a constant balance must be maintained in the network between the production and the consumption of electricity. Additional complicating factors are related to the fact that, on the one hand, electricity cannot be stored in sufficient quantities, and, on the other hand, electricity consumption is variable depending on the time of day and the season.

    In France, the main challenge facing security of supply is caused by the winter consumption peak due to consumption that is ‘highly heat sensitive’, given the predominance of electric heating.

European Energy Law Report XII
  • Volume 12
  • Edited by Martha M. Roggenkamp, Catherine Banet
  • Published by:
    Intersentia
    Published online:
    31 January 2019
    Print publication:
    20 November 2018
  • The European Energy Law Reports are an initiative taken by the organisers of the European Energy Law Seminar which has been organised on an annual basis since 1989 at Noordwijk aan Zee in the Netherlands. The aim of this seminar is to present an overview of the most important legal developments in the field of International, EU and national energy and climate law. Whereas the first seminars concentrated on the developments at EC level, which were the results of the establishment of an Internal Energy Market, the focus has now gradually switched to the developments at the national level following the implementation of the EU Directives with regard to the internal electricity and gas markets. This approach can also be found in these reports.This volume includes chapters on “Developments in EU Energy Law”, “Renewable Energy: Cross-border Projects and Dispute Settlement”, “Capacity Reserve Mechanism”, “Prosumers”, and “New Developments in the European Gas Market”.

  • Chapter 1 - Literature Review

  • Letizia Paoli, Jonas Visschers, Cedric Verstraete, Elke van Hellemont
  • Book:
    The Impact of Cybercrime on Belgian Businesses
    Published by:
    Intersentia
    Published online:
    31 January 2019
    Print publication:
    20 November 2018, pp 5-30

  • Summary

    Our literature review consists of three parts. First, we consider the main juridical and academic definitions of cybercrime. Second, we briefly discuss the different bodies of literature on the cost, impact and harms of crime, as well as the related research design of measuring and assessing them. Third, we critically review the previous studies attempting to estimate the cost, impact and harms of cybercrime.

    THE DEFINITIONS OF CYBERCRIME

    As many other broad categories of crime, cybercrime too, is a contested concept. There is no consensus regarding the definition of cybercrime, either in the academic literature (e.g., Clough, 2015; Wall, 2007), or in legal and policy documents. As noted in a 2013 review of the UN Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC, 2013), many of these documents do not even define cybercrime per se, but identify specific acts that constitute cybercrime. To confuse matters further, the terms “computer,” “e-,” “internet,” “digital” and “information crime,” are oft en used substitutes for cybercrime. Hence, for example, Clough (2015: 9) states that “there are almost as many terms to describe cybercrime as there are cybercrimes.” Along similar lines, Van der Hulst & Neve (2008, in Domenie, Leukfeldt, van Wilsem, Jansen & Stol, 2013: 2) conclude:

    A common definition and conceptual framework is lacking for this field of crime. A veritable arsenal of terminology is used, sometimes in combination with the prefixes cyber, computer, e-, internet, digital or information. Terms are bandied around, applied randomly, reflect overlap in content or reflect important gaps.

    For researchers, the lack of a clear definition is problematic. A shared definition would not only help delineate the scope of the problem under investigation, but also facilitate discussions among scholars and provide a basis for comparing their research findings (ENISA, 2016a: 82; Gordon & Ford, 2006: 13). This definitional cacophony at least partially reflects the fact that cybercrime is studied from a wide variety of disciplines, ranging from social sciences to computer sciences (Jaishankar, 2010). Computer scientists and security companies, for example, tend to use a rather technical lexicon unfamiliar to many conventional social scientists. In addition, these “technological” studies often emphasize specific techniques (e.g., malware or phishing) that can be deployed in order to commit several offences labelled as cybercrime in criminal law.

The Impact of Cybercrime on Belgian Businesses
  • Volume 5
  • Letizia Paoli, Jonas Visschers, Cedric Verstraete, Elke van Hellemont
  • Published by:
    Intersentia
    Published online:
    31 January 2019
    Print publication:
    20 November 2018
  • Information technology offers unprecedented opportunities to individuals, businesses and the public sector but also creates new vulnerabilities to crime. Impressive cybercrimes have been reported in the media in recent years, demonstrating the grave harm that even a single cyberattack can cause. Yet no systematic assessment of the impact of cybercrime on Belgian society and economy had been conducted until the start of the research project Belgian Cost of Cybercrime (BCC) in 2013, which was funded by the Belgian Service Science Policy Office (BELSPO) and coordinated by the KU Leuven Centre for IT & IP Law (CiTiP), in collaboration with the KU Leuven Institute of Criminology (LINC).Building on that large multidisciplinary project, the book assesses the impact of cybercrime on businesses based in Belgium, drawing from a thorough conceptualization of both cybercrime and its impact. Using data collected through two surveys sent to more than 9,000 representatives of Belgian businesses, the authors report that most of the responding businesses are confronted with at least one type of cybercrime every year and some of them suffer serious harm from these incidents. Lastly, the book calls for the identification and implementation of effective preventive measures targeting the different types of cybercrime.

  • Chapter III - Renewable Energy Investment Disputes: Recent Developments And Implications For Prospective Energy Market Reforms

  • from PART II - Promoting Renewable Energy Production: Cross-Border Projects And Dispute Settlement
    • By Nikos Lavranos, PhD, Independent Legal Advisor for Investment law & Arbitration, NL-Investmentconsulting, Haarlem, The Netherlands., Cees Verburg, PhD researcher, Groningen Centre for Energy Law, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
  • Edited by Martha M. Roggenkamp, Catherine Banet
  • Book:
    European Energy Law Report XII
    Published by:
    Intersentia
    Published online:
    31 January 2019
    Print publication:
    20 November 2018, pp 65-94

  • Summary

    INTRODUCTION

    There has always been a strong relationship between investment disputes in the energy sector and international investment law, with the former often contributing to the development of the latter. Historically, most of the energyrelated investment cases concerned the mining sector or the conventional electricity sector. In recent times, an increasing number of cases concern disputes that have arisen in the renewable energy sector.

    Over the last few decades States, including Member States of the European Union (EU), have increasingly acknowledged the importance of renewable energy sources (RES) for a variety of reasons, including climate change mitigation and the reduction of energy dependency. In order to increase RES energy production, EU Member States have adopted support schemes aimed at incentivising RES investments.

    In some countries, these initiatives were so successful that the States were subsequently confronted with guaranteed payments to RES producers at such high levels that – in the eyes of those States – the support schemes became untenable when the financial crisis, starting in 2008 – 09, hit many EU Member States. Consequently, several EU Member States adopted measures which reduced payments or fundamentally altered remuneration parameters – sometimes even with retroactive effect.

    Unavoidably, this has resulted in an unprecedented high number of investment disputes. Besides numerous court proceedings before domestic courts, international RES investment disputes have arisen under the Energy Charter Treaty (ECT), the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and several bilateral investment treaties (BITs).

    Moreover, since many investment disputes have been brought by European investors against EU Member States, the European Commission (EC) has regularly intervened as amicus curiae in support of the EU Member States claiming that arbitral tribunals lack jurisdiction since EU law supersedes the ECT and BITs. Accordingly, the EU – through the EC – is also involved as a nondisputing party in these disputes.

    The increased levels of RES production are confronting the energy markets, especially the electricity market, with challenges – of a technical, organisational and legal nature. Therefore, the EC took the first steps in late 2016 to reform the energy markets within the EU in order to facilitate a transition to sustainable, well-functioning and liberalised energy markets.

  • Chapter I - Brexit and its Impact on the Energy Sector: Pulling the Plug?

  • from PART I - Developments In The EU and EU Energy Law
    • By Silke Goldberg, Partner, Herbert Smith Freehills LLP and PhD researcher at the Groningen Centre of Energy Law, London, United Kingdom.
  • Edited by Martha M. Roggenkamp, Catherine Banet
  • Book:
    European Energy Law Report XII
    Published by:
    Intersentia
    Published online:
    31 January 2019
    Print publication:
    20 November 2018, pp 13-42

  • Summary

    INTRODUCTION

    Following the referendum on 23 June 2016 and the subsequent General Election in June 2017, the nature of the UK's future relationship with the EU remains uncertain. It seems more likely than not, however, that the status quo of remaining within the internal energy market is unfeasible.

    Yet, the prevailing mood in the UK energy sector seems to be that a divorce of sorts, ie a complete physical separation of the UK and EU electricity markets, is undesirable. Commercial incentives to sustain, and nurture, further market integration between the UK and the EU by way of interconnectors (both in the electricity and gas industry) seem to remain strong; as are concerns about the knock-on effects of Brexit for the security of energy supply and regulatory uncertainty.

    The current negotiation timetable, however, does not seem likely to produce anything tangible for the sector until later in the Brexit negotiations as energy is not one of the high priority areas to be dealt with early on in the negotiations.

    This is likely to result in prolonged – and unprecedented – regulatory uncertainty across the energy sector. Comments from some EU companies have suggested they too hoped that pragmatism might trump politics in the energy sector.

    This chapter will provide a brief overview of key themes for the energy sector which are likely to be affected by Brexit as well as a brief outlook for the immediate future as the Brexit negotiations take shape in a more tangible way:

    The areas discussed in this chapter include:

  • – tariffs on energy imports/exports by the UK as a non-EU state;

  • – interconnectors;

  • – security of energy supply post-Brexit;

  • – the Isle of Ireland and its Single Electricity Market (SEM);

  • – the UK's membership of the European Atomic Energy Community (Euratom); and

  • – the UK's commitments to climate change targets and the EU emissions

  • trading system (EU ETS).

    • By necessity, as the negotiations are a moving feast, this chapter comments on general themes affecting the Brexit negotiations and the likely post-Brexit relations between the EU and the UK as applied to the energy sector, rather than providing a detailed commentary on the progress, or otherwise, of the ongoing Brexit negotiations.

  • Chapter 6 - Comparison of the Two Waves

  • Letizia Paoli, Jonas Visschers, Cedric Verstraete, Elke van Hellemont
  • Book:
    The Impact of Cybercrime on Belgian Businesses
    Published by:
    Intersentia
    Published online:
    31 January 2019
    Print publication:
    20 November 2018, pp 93-102

  • Summary

    In this chapter, we outline the most important similarities and differences in the results of the two survey waves. We stress that caution is needed in interpreting the results, as these are not based on longitudinal data, but on two crosssectional studies. This means that the respondents in the second survey wave were not necessarily the same as the first one.

    If we compare the victimization rates of cybercrime between the two waves, we observe a substantial decrease in the percentage of businesses reporting victimization of at least one type of cybercrime (from 66.5% in the first wave to 53.6% in the second wave; see figure 4 for a visual representation). In particular, the victimization rates of illegal access to IT systems and data/system interference are substantially lower in the second wave than in the first wave (32.7% compared to 50.0% and 20.2% compared to 44.0%, implying declines of -17.3% and -23.8%, respectively). The percentage of businesses reporting victimization of cyber extortion has also decreased, but to a lesser extent (from 24.1% to 18.9%: -5.2%). However, the victimization rate of cyber espionage has increased from 3.6% in the first wave to 10.6% in the second wave (+7%). The percentage of businesses admitting victimization of internet fraud is more or less equal in both waves.

    In both waves, we see that, for illegal access to IT systems, data/system interference and internet fraud, there are more repeated victims than single victims. For cyber espionage, on the contrary, there are more single victims than repeated victims in both waves; for cyber extortion there are more repeated victims in the first wave, but more single victims in the second wave.

    A comparison of the incidences of each cybercrime type reveals that businesses in the second wave (M = 0.96, SD = 1.74; M = 0.35, SD = 0.77; M = 0.27, SD = 0.62, respectively) are less oft en confronted with illegal access to IT systems, data/system interference and cyber extortion than businesses in the first wave (M = 1.53, SD = 1.98; M = 0.91, SD = 1.25 and M = 0.41, SD = 0.83, respectively; t (559.13) = 3.653, p < .001; t (491.10) = 6.330, p < .001 and t (514.58) = 2.308, p = .021, respectively).

  • Chapter 4 - The Results of the First Wave

  • Letizia Paoli, Jonas Visschers, Cedric Verstraete, Elke van Hellemont
  • Book:
    The Impact of Cybercrime on Belgian Businesses
    Published by:
    Intersentia
    Published online:
    31 January 2019
    Print publication:
    20 November 2018, pp 49-66

  • Summary

    In this chapter we present the results of the analyses of the first wave (June- August 2016). Before entering into detail, we report that the questionnaire was filled in primarily by high-level representatives of the participating businesses: or 37.8% of the respondents classified themselves as CEO or member of the executive board; 19.5% as managing director; 10.7% as Chief Information Security Officer; 10.7% as other IT staff and 5.9% as executive director. This suggests that the respondents had a good evidence base to assess both victimization and impact correctly.

    The chapter is structured as follows. First, we discuss the extent to which businesses have been confronted with cybercrime in the 12 months preceding the survey, this includes, both the business victimization prevalence for each cybercrime type, and the incidence of each type. Next, we focus on the business representatives’ perceptions of the likelihood of their business being attacked in the following 12 months. Third, we estimate the harms to material support, that is, the costs of cybercrime that the businesses have experienced in the 12 months before the survey. Fourth, we discuss the business representatives’ assessments of the non-material harm of cybercrime that the businesses have experienced in the same time span. Finally, we give an overview of the technical and procedural measures businesses have taken to prevent cybercrime victimization.

    VICTIMIZATION IN THE PAST 12 MONTHS

    Two thirds of the businesses in our sample (66.5% or 181 businesses) have been victims of cybercrime, at least once in the last 12 months. Specifically, illegal access to IT systems and data/system interference are much more prevalent than the other types: 50% of the businesses (or 155 businesses) report illegal access to their IT systems and 44% (or 128 businesses) data/system interference. Less than a quarter admit cyber extortion (24.1% or 68 businesses), and still fewer internet fraud (12.9% or 35 businesses) and cyber espionage (3.6% or 10 businesses).

    The majority of the businesses have suffered repeated attacks. The data shows that 83.2% of the 155 victims report repeated attempts at illegal access to their IT system; 72.7% of the 128 victims experience repeated incidents of data or system interference, and 57.4% of the 68 victims report repeated cyber extortion incidents.

  • Chapter 2 - Conceptualization of the Key Concepts

  • Letizia Paoli, Jonas Visschers, Cedric Verstraete, Elke van Hellemont
  • Book:
    The Impact of Cybercrime on Belgian Businesses
    Published by:
    Intersentia
    Published online:
    31 January 2019
    Print publication:
    20 November 2018, pp 31-38

  • Summary

    This chapter presents our definitions of the main concepts of the study, namely “cybercrime” as well as “impact,” “harms” and “costs” (of cybercrime), along with our justifications for our choices.

    CYBERCRIME

    Following the approach adopted by legal texts, policy documents and other studies (e.g., UNODC, 2013), the present project does not define cybercrime per se, but rather identifies specific acts that constitute cybercrime. Specifically, and unlike most other studies on the cost and impact of cybercrime, we have developed a “technology-neutral” typology of cybercrime, i.e., a typology that is independent of the specific techniques used by cybercriminals. The typology largely draws from the Council of Europe's Convention on Cybercrime, and the Belgian act on cybercrime, but also incorporates the insights from the academic literature on the topic. The typology entails five types of cybercrime that might target businesses:

    A. Illegal access to IT systems

    B. Cyber espionage

    C. Data or system interference

    D. Cyber extortion

    E. Internet fraud

    The first three types belong to the category of “computer-integrity crimes” (Gordon & Ford, 2006: 14) and the latter two largely to the category of “computer-assisted crimes” (Wall, 2007: 50). Our conceptualization of the three computer-integrity crimes is based upon the Council of Europe's Convention and Belgian cybercrime law. In fact, the incidents of illegal access to IT systems, cyber espionage and data/system interference, correspond, respectively, to the offences of “illegal access” (art. 2), “illegal interference” (art. 4) and “data” and “system interference” (art. 5–6) in the Convention. The type “cyber extortion” has no direct correspondence in the Convention; it is rather the cyber version of a standard offence in Belgian and other national criminal laws. The last type, “internet fraud,” draws from the offence of computer-related fraud defined by the Convention (Council of Europe, 2001: 6; art. 8) as well as two other more traditional types of fraud that frequently target businesses online.

    ILLEGAL ACCESS TO IT SYSTEMS

    This first type is comprised of illegal access to IT systems. The generic term “IT system” exemplifies the technology-neutral way in which the survey is draft ed. Following the Council of Europe's 2001 convention, an IT system is conceived as “any device or a group of interconnected or related devices, one or more of which, pursuant to a program, performs automatic processing of data” (Convention on Cybercrime, 2001, art. 1, a).

Page 179 of 386