![Sample our Engineering & Technology journals, sign in here to start your access, latest two full volumes FREE to you for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5933/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Engineering-Tech.jpg"})
Abstract
This paper deals with two phases of liberalization in the field of electricity. It does so by utilizing archival material and quantitative data, combining and contrasting it with work done by scholars of European integration. After an overview of interwar electricity discussions on international governance, it discusses the two post-World War II phases. During the first a non-political organization informally arranged to lift interwar restrictions on international electricity flows, and turn it into a reliable operating system. The second phase brought a complete transformation of the existing regime, initiated by the European Commission, turning electricity exchanges into trade flows.
Acknowledgements
This paper profited from an earlier discussion in Eindhoven with Jean-François Auger, Paul Edwards, Luciano Segreto, Judith Schueler, and Christian Henrich-Franke, as well as from ongoing discussions with Erik van der Vleuten. Johan Schot and Frank Schipper also made various remarks and suggestions. I am indebted to the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NWO) for their support of the projects Transnational Infrastructures and the Rise of Contemporary Europe (dossier nr 277-53-001), When Europe Goes Critical (dossier nr 231-53-001), as well as Transnationalising the TVA (dossier nr 016.104.060).
Notes
1. Brondel, ‘Histoire interne.’
2. Ibid.
3. UCPTE, Rapport annuel 1986-1987, 95.
4. Commission of the European Communities, ‘Single European Act’; Schmidt, Liberalisierung, 297.
5. Brondel and Morton, ‘The European Community,’ 346.
6. The addition of ‘neo’ is to separate this phase from the nineteenth century classical liberalism, and embedded liberalism that prevailed since the end of the Second World War. While the first emphasized a limited role for government and liberty of individuals, government intervention and planning characterized the second. The neo-liberal turn gained strength since the 1970s, and implies trade and capital market liberalization, as well as deregulation and a decreased role of the state in economic affairs.
7. Lagendijk, Electrifying Europe, chap. 4.
8. The EEC became the European Community (EC) in 1967, and changed into European Union (EU) in 1992.
9. Stone Sweet and Sandholtz, ‘European Integration,’ 298–9.
10. Ibid., 297.
11. For a recent discussion see Hausman, Wilkins, and Hertner, Global Electrification.
12. One of the main propagandists of this principle was German engineer Georg Klingenberg (1870–1925). For more of his principles see Faridi and Engels, Diskurse, 15ff.
13. Varaschin, Etats et électricité, 142.
14. Hughes, Networks of Power, 216ff.
15. Hughes, ‘The Evolution,’ 71.
16. Gugerli, Redeströme, 287ff.
17. Siegel, Die Elektrizitätsgesetzgebung, 165–81. Especially see articles 1 and 27. Ibid., 564–5.
18. This was the case in Czechoslovakia (1919), Finland (1919), Luxembourg (1924), Norway (1917), and Poland (1922). United Nations Economic Commission for Europe, Transfers, 62–7.
19. Gilbert, Kahn, and Newberry, ‘Introduction,’ 3.
20. For Belgium see CAPAS, Évolution, 52; for France see Bouneau, ‘Transporter,’ 792–3.
21. This is documented for France and the United States in Coutard, ‘Imaginaire.’
22. Génissieu, ‘Échanges,’ 1001 and 1015.
23. Landry, ‘Exchange,’ 1117.
24. For a more thorough discussion of the role of the League of Nations, see Lagendijk, Electrifying Europe, 61ff.
25. Oliven, ‘European Super Power Lines.’ The plan by Oliven has been discussed in several places, see amongst others Boll, Entstehung und Entwicklung, 62–5 and Maier, Erwin Marx, 101–5.
26. Laborie, and Schot, Buiter, and Anastasiadou, this volume; Schot and Lagendijk, ‘Technocratic’; Lagendijk, ‘‘‘To Consolidate Peace.’’’
27. ‘Session spéciale de la Conférence Mondiale de l’Énergie, Stockholm 1933,’ n.d., registry file 9E box R-4286, League of Nations Archives, Geneva.
28. Högselius, ‘The Internationalization,’ 259.
29. OEEC, Interconnected Power Systems, 24. My emphasis.
30. Walter Cisler and C.W. DeForest to George Perkins, 26 October 1948, Record Group 469, file 2.2, box 1, National Archives of the United States, College Park, MA.
31. ‘Hochreutiner, René.’
32. Merlin, ‘In Memory of Pierre Ailleret.’
33. ‘In Memoriam Charles Crescent.’
34. Hochreutiner, ‘L’Interconnexion,’ 6–7.
35. OEEC, Interconnected Power, 24.
36. ‘Esquisse d’un plan de developpement de l’economie electrique des pays interconnectes,’ 6 April 1951, fonds OEEC, file 1156.2, document EL(51)4, Historical Archives of European Union, Florence, Italy. The original members in 1951 were Belgium, the Federal Republic of Germany, France, Italy, Luxembourg, The Netherlands, Austria, and Switzerland.
37. Ibid., 72. UCPTE, ‘Cooperation,’ 40.
38. UCPTE, Rapport Annuel 1951–1952, 5ff.
39. Notes of Réunion du Comité Restreint, 25 April 1952, UCPTE Archive, Brussels, 2. This was related to the non-convertibility of European currencies shortly after the Second World War.
40. Notes of Réunion du Comité Restreint, 14 February 1953, UCPTE Archive, Brussels, 3.
41. Notes of Réunion du Comité Restreint, 25 January 1954, UCPTE Archive, Brussels, 3.
42. Letter of Myrdal sent to European ministers of foreign affairs and relevant international organizations, 30 October 1951, registry fonds GX, file 19/6/1/4-3815, Archives of the United Nations Organisation Geneva.
43. Notes of Réunion du Comité Restreint, 4 October 1954, UCPTE Archive, Brussels, 5.
44. Notes of Réunion du Comité Restreint, 3 October 1955, UCPTE Archive, Brussels, 1–2.
45. UCPTE, 1951–1976, 166.
46. Hochreutiner, ‘L’Interconnexion.’
47. Cahen, ‘The Problem’; Cahen and Pélliser, ‘La compensation.’
48. UCPTE, Rapport Annuel 1976–1977, 103.
49. Notes of Réunion du Comité Restreint, 5 October 1956, UCPTE Archives, Brussels, 7.
50. UCPTE, 1951–1976, 166.
51. Verbong, ‘Dutch Power Relations,’ 226 and 237.
52. IEA, Lessons, 45.
53. For more on issues of reliability and safety, and blackouts, see Van der Vleuten and Lagendijk, ‘Transnational Infrastructure,’ and Van der Vleuten and Lagendijk, ‘Interpreting.’
54. Commissie van de Europese Economische Gemeenschap, Nota, 3.
55. Council of Ministers of the European Union (hereafter: CM), fonds 3: Negotiations for the Treaties institutionalizing the EEC and EURATOM, File Nego 65: Comité Intergouvernemental créé par la Conférence de Messine, Commission de l’énergie classique. Projet de rapport, MAE 441 f/55 mvo, 10 October 1955, Central Archives of the Council of the European Union, Brussels (hereafter CACEU).
56. There was a separate Nuclear Energy Commission.
57. Comité Intergouvernemental créé par la Conférence de Messine, Rapport, 126ff. The Messina Conference was an attempt to make further progress in terms of the European integration process started by the European Coal and Steel Community. The Messina Report prepared the way for the Treaties of Rome.
58. CI créé ec. 30.8.1955. MAE 230 f/55 jv. Projet de sommaire des conclusions No. 6, 7 et 8, 4, Collection Council of Ministers of the European Union, fonds 3: Negotiations for the Treaties institutionalizing the EEC and EURATOM, 66 ac-b – CI: commission de l’énergie classique, juillet-début septembre 1955, CACEU.
59. Notes of Réunion du Comité Restreint, 5 October 1956, UCPTE Archive, Brussels, 7.
60. Lecture René Hochreutiner, ‘Gemeinsamer Markt und europäische Freihandelszone,’ at Vorort des Schweiz. Handels- und Industrie-Vereins, in Zurich on 4.6.1957, 82 Verband export. Werke 1934–1959, 8190 (A) 1981/1, 37, Schweizerische Bundesarchiv Bern.
61. File 9: Division Economie et Energie, No. 624: Groupe de travail interexécutif ‘Politique énergétique.’ Annex to Meeting of Interexecutive Working Group, 27 July 1959, ‘Procedure pour l’elaboration d’une politique de l’énergie,’ Historical Archives of the European Commission, Brussels, High Authority of European Coal and Steel Community collection. This point is also made by Cailleau, ‘Energy.’
62. Brondel and Morton, ‘The European Community,’ 343.
63. Commission of the European Communities, ‘First Guidelines.’
64. Matláry, Energy Policy, 16.
65. Commission of the European Communities, ‘First Guidelines,’ 7.
66. Hassan and Duncan, ‘Integrating Energy,’ 166.
67. Bulmer et al., Policy Transfer, 1.
68. Commission of the European Communities, Community Energy Policy, 8.
69. Ibid., 9.
70. Commission of the European Communities, Guidelines, 7 and 9.
71. Ibid., 31.
72. Ibid., 37.
73. Helm, ‘Energy Policy,’ 174.
74. Commission of the European Communities, The Internal Energy Market, 18–23.
75. Ibid., 72.
76. Auto-producers are (mostly industrial) companies that produce their own electricity needs. They favored an open network, so that they would be able to sell their surplus power when possible.
77. Commission of the European Communities, The Internal Energy Market, 72–3.
78. Padgett, ‘The Single European Engery Market,’ 59.
79. The Commission mentioned the disconnection of Ireland and Greece in this context. Commission of the European Communities, The Internal Energy Market, 68–9.
80. Commission of the European Communities, ‘Treaty,’ art. 129b.
81. Matláry, Energy Policy, 19–20. This paralleled EC initiatives in the domains of telecommunications and transport. Eventually the target date for an electricity market was postponed to mid-2007.
82. Moravcsik, ‘Negotiating the Single European Act,’ 20.
83. Eising and Jabko, ‘Moving Targets,’ 743.
84. Moravcsik, ‘Negotiating,’ 20–1 and 26–7ff.
85. Eising and Jabko, ‘Moving Targets.’
86. Gilbert, Kahn, and Newberry, ‘Introduction.’
87. Padgett, ‘Between Synthesis,’ 231.
88. Part of this was due to the fact that France wanted to maintain the status of Électricité de France with the so-called Single Buyer model. Schmidt, ‘Commission Activism,’ 177.
89. Eising, ‘Policy Learning,’ 93.
90. Commission of the European Communities, Working Paper, Annex I.
91. Moravcsik, ‘Negotiating,’ 20–1 and 44–5. Green Cowles, ‘Setting the Agenda.’
92. Eising, ‘Policy Learning.’
93. UNIPEDE, Annual Report 1992, 60–1.
94. Thue, ‘Connections’; Van der Vleuten and Lagendijk, ‘Transnational.’
95. Thue, ‘From Large Technical Systems.’
96. Notes of Réunion Spéciale du Comité Restreint, 20 April 1988, UCPTE Archive, Brussels, 3.
97. Ibid.
98. Commission of the European Communities, The Internal Energy Market.
99. Notes of Réunion Spéciale du Comité Restreint, 12 October 1988, UCPTE Archive, Brussels, 13.
100. Notes of Réunion du Comité Restreint, 14 October 1987, 13, UCPTE Archive, Brussels.
101. Notes of Réunion Spéciale du Comité Restreint, 20 April 1988, UCPTE Archive, Brussels, 2.
102. UCPTE, Rapport Annuel 1989, 11.
103. Lyons, 75 Years, 45.
104. Notes of Réunion Spéciale du Comité Restreint, 20 April 1988, UCPTE Archive, Brussels, 2.
105. UCPTE, ‘Cooperation,’ 41.
106. Ibid., 40.
107. Bial, ‘UCTE Security.’
