The Impact of the Rule of Law on Energy Policy in European Union Member States

Abstract

Research pertaining to the dual-tier political system within the European Union (EU), specifically concerning the genesis and execution of EU policies, has garnered substantial scholarly attention. These inquiries delve into multifaceted dimensions, encompassing institutional dynamics, procedural intricacies, questions of legitimacy, and intricate relational dynamics entailing international diplomacy with other actors within the realm of international law. Nonetheless, a particularly intriguing and underexplored facet remains: the influence of member states’ compliance with the rule of law on the implementation of EU policies, particularly within the realm of energy policy. This article aims to elucidate the nexus between the realization of energy policy objectives in EU member states and fidelity to the rule of law. The conundrum of establishing a correlation between the indicators of environmentally sustainable energy policy and commitment to upholding the rule of law remains uncharted territory within the existing body of literature. Our analysis centers on a dataset derived from publicly accessible sources, reflecting data from the year 2020.

1. Introduction

Research on the European Union’s two-tier political system in the domain of EU policy creation and implementation has been the subject of numerous studies. These studies delve into various facets, including institutional dynamics, procedural intricacies, questions of legitimacy, and the complex web of international relations with other entities under international law [1,2,3,4].

Nonetheless, an intriguing and underexplored aspect pertains to the influence of member states’ compliance with the rule of law—these being the national actors within the political system—in terms of the execution of EU policies that are the tangible outcomes of its operation. One such policy that warrants examination is the energy policy, as outlined in Article 194 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) [5].

Publications posit that the European Union operates as a two-level political system [6,7]. This implies that it comprises two tiers of governance: the national level, represented by the governments of the EU member states, and the EU level, represented by EU institutions [8]. This dual-tier structure necessitates a dynamic of cooperation and competition, including interactions among member state governments at the EU level [9].

Decisions at this level manifest as EU law, enacted by the Council of the European Union (comprising ministers representing member states) and the European Parliament. Within the Council of the European Union, decisions emerge as a result of negotiations and compromises among member states, with the precondition that such decisions provide added value compared to actions at the national level. EU law, as per the treaty provisions and the jurisprudence of the European Court of Justice (CJEU), holds primacy over national law. The obligation to implement and uphold European law within EU member states is an inherent aspect of European integration, which primarily aims to establish a unified EU market and facilitate the free movement of goods, services, persons, and capital among member states. To achieve this, EU member states must adhere to common rules and standards, necessitating full compliance with European law. Hence, the European Union is characterized as a legal community [10].

In the context of public policy management, we can also identify a two-tier political system in Europe. National governments wield substantial influence over the formulation of EU policies and take into account the repercussions of these policies by conducting their own public initiatives at the national level based on the regulations they have jointly approved, adopted, and implemented at the EU level.

The rule of law stands as one of the foundational values of the Union, as enshrined in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU). It also serves as a prerequisite for safeguarding all other fundamental values within the EU, including fundamental rights and democracy. Adherence to the rule of law is integral to the seamless operation of the EU. It underpins the effective application of EU law, facilitates the proper functioning of the internal market, fosters an environment conducive to investment, and nurtures mutual trust [11].

At its core, the rule of law finds its essence in the provision of effective judicial protection, hinging on the independence, credibility, and efficacy of national justice systems [12]. Democracy, as mandated by the Copenhagen criteria, is the requisite system for every EU member state. It entails the election of representatives in free and fair elections by citizens, who actively participate in the exercise of state and public authority. Civil rights, applicable to both citizens and non-citizens within a country, serve to constrain the exercise of power by the state.

While the rule of law, democracy, and civil rights each possess distinct meanings, they are mutually reinforcing and intrinsically interconnected. Civil rights, such as the active and passive right to vote or the right to a fair trial, represent tangible manifestations of democracy and the rule of law at their core. In the absence of the rule of law, which necessitates impartiality and independence within the judicial system, civil rights and checks on political power within a democracy remain hollow promises [13].

Unquestionably, the rule of law exerts a profound influence on the configuration and substance of policies created and implemented, particularly those arising from the obligations stipulated in normative acts. This domain extends to European policies, the directions of which emanate from the supranational level via the institutions of the EU’s political system, in substantial collaboration with its member states.

European policies, encompassing those formulated within the framework of the Energy Union [14], are not only implemented within member states but also wield substantial influence over national policies. This influence extends to the formulation and enactment of legislation and commitments undertaken by member state governments within the Council of the European Union at the EU level pertaining to the energy policies they enact across all member states. Observance and compliance with European law are not merely obligatory but also confer significant advantages upon EU member states. These shared regulations and standards establish a level playing field for both businesses and consumers within the unified EU market, thus fostering economic growth and heightened competitiveness [10]. However, this can only be realized when all national authorities uphold the rule of law within their respective domains.

The EU confronts a myriad of energy challenges, as delineated by Busch et al. [15] and Osička and Černoch [16]. These challenges encompass a broad spectrum, such as mounting import dependence, inadequate diversification, fluctuating and elevated energy prices, escalating global energy demand, the risks associated with the security of production and transit nations, the burgeoning perils of climate change, the imperative of decarbonization, sluggish progress in energy efficiency, the complications tied to the expanding deployment of renewable energy sources, the pressing need for enhanced transparency in energy markets, and the ongoing pursuit of greater integration and interconnection. Central to the EU’s energy policy are a range of initiatives designed to establish a cohesive energy market and ensure energy supply security, thereby fostering a stable energy sector [10,17].

EU energy policy is influenced by a range of factors [18,19], spanning diverse dimensions including political, legal, economic, technological, and social aspects. The prevailing approach to sustainable development postulates that (eco)energy constitutes, and will continue to constitute, the cornerstone of socio-economic progress [20]. Sustainable energy [21,22] serves as the solution to humanity’s energy demands. Eco-energy encompasses energy sources that can be harnessed without being depleted or requiring renewal [23]. Within this context, it is imperative to consider the concepts of the green economy and post-growth economy [24,25]. The green economy is epitomized by the “FIT for 55” initiative in the EU [26].

The core elements of the EU’s current energy policy agenda revolve around addressing energy security concerns and aligning energy targets with climate objectives [27]:

• Reducing greenhouse gas emissions by at least 55% by 2030 compared to 1990’s levels.
• Enhancing energy efficiency by 32.5%.
• Elevating the share of renewable energy in the overall energy mix to 42.5%, with an ultimate target of 45%.
• Lowering primary and final energy consumption by the EU by 11.7% in comparison to the 2020 projections by 2030, translating to 40.5% and 38%, respectively, versus 2007 projections.
• Expanding interconnections to encompass at least 15% of EU electricity systems.
• Achieving net greenhouse gas emissions of zero by 2050.

Nonetheless, the extent to which the EU has implemented these green indicators in its policies exhibits variations. The prevailing geopolitical situation and its economic implications pose challenges. The conflict in Ukraine has led several EU countries to halt or slow down programs aimed at realizing a green economy. Consequently, certain EU nations continue to adhere to the principles of the brown economy, grounded in fossil fuels and non-renewable energy sources, without diligently implementing the regulations and obligations arising from their EU membership.

Given the context of our analysis, it becomes imperative to explore and scrutinize the interplay within EU countries between a foundational pillar of the EU—namely, the rule of law—and one of its paramount contemporary endeavors, that of energy policy. Within this framework, a series of fundamental inquiries should be posed:

• To what extent does the rule of law and the degree of adherence to it impact the realization of policies stemming from the imperative of enacting EU laws and delivering solutions that align with them, particularly within the realm of energy policy?
• How does the rule of law influence the degree to which energy policies prescribed at the EU level are effectively enacted?
• Which specific aspects of the rule of law exert the most significant influence on the efficacy of implementing EU regulations and fulfilling commitments to fellow member states in the domain of energy policy?
• Can a lower level of adherence to the rule of law in a member state contribute to setbacks or distortions in the pursuit of energy policy objectives by individual states within the broader context of the EU’s political system?

The main goal of the article is to determine the impact of the rule of law on the effectiveness of implementing the objectives of the European Union’s energy policy. Specific objectives include:

• Demonstrating the relationship between the rule of law and the level of implementation of energy policy in EU member states,
• Highlighting the key components of the rule of law in the context of the efficiency of energy policy implementation,
• Determining the level of influence of these components on the progress of implemented energy policy,
• Raising awareness of the importance of law enforcement for the coherence of the jointly adopted policy, including the interconnection of these two areas to achieve the goals set by the EU,
• Identifying countries that act as “drivers” in implementing energy policy and those acting as “spoilers” deviating from adopted commitments to a “side track”,
• Presenting selected conditions of the state of the rule of law in relation to the implementation of EU energy policy commitments.

The hypothesis posited is that the state of the rule of law within EU member states has a direct impact on the implementation of energy policy, stemming from the commitments made within the European Union concerning its substance.

The issue of the correlation between the rule of law and energy policy is a pivotal facet that forms part of the broader widely debated discourse on the direction of the European Union in the face of evolving geopolitical, climatic, environmental, and economic changes [28,29,30]. In response to this challenge, the authors have undertaken an analysis focusing on the correlation between adherence to the rule of law in EU countries and green energy policy, with a particular emphasis on the Polish perspective. Remarkably, a comprehensive review of the existing literature revealed a scarcity of reports addressing this particular issue. Consequently, this article aims to bridge this knowledge gap.

Data analysis, according to the prepared methodology, was carried out in two stages. In the first stage, the analysis was carried out using a strategic group map. It should be noted that this is not a typical method used in mapping states. It is used to analyze the competitiveness of businesses [31,32]. However, the authors used it in this article because of its research capabilities. In this context, it is a new application of a well-known method. Next, the correlation of key factors depicting energy policy with key factors defining the rule of law was analyzed. We did not find this type of analysis in the literature.

Contribution to knowledge development: The content of the article allows for the identification of correlations between the level of rule of law in European Union countries and the fulfillment of obligations arising from EU policies, in this case, energy policy. These analyses enable the identification of countries and governments that demonstrate loyalty to EU commitments, pursuing their national interest in line with European interests, as well as those prioritizing other interests over European ones. The conclusions from the analysis presented in the article have utilitarian value, providing scientific foundations for EU institutions to introduce disciplinary solutions for member states that violate or fail to adhere to the rule of law, harming the dynamics of its implementation in the Union as a whole.

2. Theoretical Approach

2.1. Rule of Law—Selected Aspects

Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union states that “The Union is founded on the values of respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law, as well as respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities. These values are shared by the Member States in a society based on pluralism, non-discrimination, tolerance, justice, solidarity and equality between women and men” [33]. When we examine the European Union as a community of law within its two-tier political system, it becomes evident that the rule of law is founded on the premise that every member state, as well as other entities (including economic ones), shares and recognizes that all other member states and entities also uphold the same rule of law, guided by the principle of solidarity. In this framework, the rule of law aims to mitigate self-interest, both internally and externally (at the individual and national levels), and it safeguards the Union’s order and values through universal adherence to the law.

In light of the above, the European Union is not merely a common market driven by legal considerations; it is also a community of values and principles centered on respect for and the observance of the rule of law. Thus, the market must be in complete alignment with these principles. It is within this context that the so-called rule of law mechanism should be comprehended. Mik [34] explains that “according to the rule of law, all public authorities must always act within the limits of the law, in accordance with the values of democracy and fundamental rights, and under the control of independent and impartial courts. The rule of law has a direct impact on the life of every citizen—it is a prerequisite for equality before the law and the protection of individual rights, the prevention of abuse of power by public authorities, and the accountability of authorities (…). The rule of law includes accountability for the way the law is made, fairness in its application and efficiency in its operation.”

Taking the above into account, and guided by the jurisprudence of the CJEU, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), and the documents of the European Commission and the Venice Commission, it becomes possible to define the basic set of elements comprising the concept of the rule of law. Thus, it is based on the following (A new EU framework to strengthen the rule of law), available at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/PL/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELEX%3A52014DC0158, (accessed on 6 October 2023):

• Legality—meaning a transparent, accountable, democratic, and pluralistic process of passing laws,
• Legal certainty—which requires that regulations be clear and predictable and, as a rule, cannot be amended retrospectively,
• The prohibition of arbitrariness in executive action—which requires that the interference of public authorities in the field of the private activity of an individual or legal entity has a legal basis and is justified by reasons set forth in the law,
• Independent and effective judicial review—including review of respect for fundamental rights and an independent and impartial judiciary respecting the principle of the separation of powers,
• Equality before the law—Annex I to the communication.

All member states are both legally and politically obliged to uphold the rule of law, a requirement that arises not only from Article 2 but also from Article 7 of the TEU, which has been ratified by all EU member states. Article 7 provides a mechanism to hold member states accountable when they fail to meet their obligations. The essential components of the rule of law are comprehensively defined and developed within various binding EU laws, including the recently enacted Regulation (EU, Euratom) 2020/2092 of the European Parliament and the Council, dated 16 December 2020, which establishes a general system of conditionality to safeguard the Union’s budget [35]. The Council of the European Union, comprising ministers from all member states, adopted this regulation through a standard procedure in conjunction with the European Parliament, whose members are elected by citizens from all member states. These elements are also incorporated into the constitutions and laws of all member states, the European Convention on Human Rights, and the UN human rights treaties, all of which have been ratified by every EU member state [13].

It is important to note that the rule of law is not an concept externally imposed on EU member states. Rather, these states themselves have defined its fundamental elements at the supranational level of the EU for implementation within their national laws. At this level, these elements were subject to negotiation among these states and adopted unanimously. In the context of the EU’s two-tier political system, it is the EU legislator, consisting of the European Parliament and the Council of the EU, which identifies elements of the rule of law particularly relevant to specific policy areas. The Court of Justice of the European Union and the European Court of Human Rights provide clarification on how the various elements of the rule of law are to be understood within the context of specific cases. In turn, national courts are bound by the judgments of the CJEU when applying or interpreting the Union’s rule of law. The CJEU, in its decision-making process, also takes into account judgments from the ECHR concerning the essential elements of the rule of law [13].

The European Union is not just a common market; as previously mentioned, it also stands as a community of values and a source of rights for its citizens, as outlined in Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU). To fulfill this commitment to its citizens, all member states must maintain their status as functional liberal democracies that uphold the rule of law. Should the EU fail to ensure this, EU citizens working, residing, or investing in other member states cannot be confident that their rights, as enshrined in EU law, will be upheld. Problems with the rule of law can also erode the essential mutual trust required for legal cooperation between member states. For instance, if the independence of the judiciary is no longer guaranteed in one member state, the courts of another member state may face challenges in detaining individuals who commit serious crimes and extraditing them to the former. They may also encounter difficulties in recognizing divorce judgments issued in that country. These issues have a direct impact on the lives of EU citizens [13]. The respect for the rule of law is not only vital for the Union’s citizens but also for economic initiatives; innovation; investment; economic, social, and territorial cohesion; and the proper functioning of the internal market. The internal market thrives when supported by a robust legal and institutional framework [36]. The rule of law, particularly the effective prosecution of breaches of the independence of the judiciary, is critical to economic activity. It paves the way for a secure, predictable, and equitable environment for contracting and resolving potential disputes. In cases where there are significant deficiencies in the rule of law within an EU member state, businesses based in the EU, as well as shareholders and customers, stand to lose. A competitive company cannot fully benefit from the EU internal market when procurement procedures are manipulated and there is a lack of investigation or prosecution of fraudulent practices. The export of goods can become problematic when contractual disputes cannot be resolved by an independent court [13].

Simultaneously, the EC Communication “A New EU Framework for Strengthening the Rule of Law” [36] stipulates that the precise content of principles and norms under the rule of law may vary at the national level. While the implementation of these principles may therefore differ from one member state to another, it is in agreement with the perspective presented in the literature that there is no need for unification and uniform practice of these principles across all states [37].

The European Rule of Law Mechanism is an annual procedure for a dialogue on the rule of law between the Commission, the Council, and the European Parliament, with the participation of member states, national parliaments, civil society, and other stakeholders. The core element of this new procedure is the rule of law report. The main goal of the rule of law mechanism is to stimulate inter-institutional cooperation and encourage all EU institutions to contribute according to their institutional roles. This goal aligns with the longstanding interests of both the European Parliament and the Council. The Commission also invites national parliaments and authorities to discuss the report and encourages the involvement of other stakeholders at the national and EU levels. The mechanism prepares a report on the rule of law each year and conducts preparatory work with member states. The report serves as the basis for discussion in the EU and aims to prevent the emergence or exacerbation of problems. Identifying issues as early as possible with mutual support from the Commission, other member states, and stakeholders, including the Council of Europe and the Venice Commission, can assist member states in finding solutions to uphold and protect the rule of law [38].

Taking the above into account, in July 2022, the European Commission published the next edition of its cyclical “Rule of Law report” [39]. This document analyzes the state of the rule of law in each EU member state. The European Commission’s active engagement in the rule of law is grounded in Article 2 of the TEU, which lists the rule of law as one of the fundamental values upon which the entire EU is built.

Concerning the rule of law, and in response to clear violations by some member states, the European Union initiated practical enforcement. This process took the form of, for example, a regulation made by the European Parliament and of the Council on the general system of conditionality for the protection of the Union budget. It identifies violations of the rule of law as (1) jeopardizing the independence of the judiciary; (2) failing to prevent arbitrary or unlawful decisions by public bodies, including law enforcement agencies, failing to rectify such decisions or impose penalties on them, withholding financial and human resources affecting the proper functioning of such bodies, or failing to ensure a situation devoid of conflicts of interest; (3) limiting the availability and effectiveness of legal remedies, including due to restrictive procedural rules and the failure to enforce judgments, effectively prosecute law violations, file and support charges in connection with such violations, or impose penalties related to these violations [40]. In this legislation, the rule of law aspect relates to financial matters. Appropriate measures are taken when a violation of the rule of law in a member state is identified. In practice, this means affecting or seriously risking affecting—in a sufficiently direct manner—the sound financial management of the EU (member state) budget or the protection of EU (member state) finances.

2.2. Energy Policy—Selected Aspects

The EU energy sector is defined by Article 194 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) [17,41]: “Within the framework of the establishment or functioning of the internal market and taking into account the need to preserve and improve the environment, Union policy on energy shall aim, in a spirit of solidarity between Member States, (1) to ensure the functioning of the energy market; (2) to ensure security of energy supply in the Union; (3) to promote energy efficiency and energy saving and the development of new and renewable forms of energy; and (4) to promote the interconnection of energy networks.” The TFEU identifies other elements affecting energy policy: security of supply (Article 122 TFEU); energy networks (Articles 170–172 TFEU); coal (Protocol No. 37 sets out the financial consequences of the expiration of the European Coal and Steel Community Treaty in 2002); nuclear energy (the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community provides the legal basis for most of the EU’s nuclear activities); the internal market in electricity (Article 114 TFEU); and external energy policy (Articles 216–218 TFEU) [17]. According to the provisions made in the 2015 Energy Union, the five most important EU energy policy goals are [14]:

• Diversification of European energy sources, ensuring energy security through solidarity and cooperation among EU countries;
• Ensuring the functioning of a fully integrated internal energy market, allowing the free flow of energy in the EU through appropriate infrastructure and without technical or regulatory barriers;
• Improving energy efficiency and reducing dependence on energy imports, reducing emissions, and stimulating job creation and economic growth;
• Decarbonizing the economy and transitioning to a low-carbon economy in accordance with the Paris Agreement;
• Promoting research on low-carbon and clean energy technologies and prioritizing research and innovation to stimulate the energy transition and improve competitiveness.

The current European energy regulatory framework necessitates not only implementation but also involves a number of acts related to governance and electricity interconnection [42], the structure of the electricity market [43,44], emergency preparedness [45], energy efficiency [46,47], the energy performance of buildings [48,49], renewable energy [50,51], the structure of the gas market [52,53,54,55], the taxation of energy products [56,57], trans-European energy infrastructure [58], cooperation among energy regulators [59], and developments following the UK’s withdrawal from the EU [60]. Under the current energy framework, EU member states are required to establish 10-year integrated national energy and climate plans for 2021–2030 [61], submit biennial progress reports, and develop coherent national long-term strategies [61] to achieve the agreed energy targets and the goals of the Paris Agreement. New markets for decarbonized gases, such as hydrogen, were introduced as part of the review, and new regulatory proposals were submitted in the transportation sector, including the Alternative Fuels Infrastructure Regulation [62], the ReFuelEU Aviation initiative [63], and the FuelEU Maritime initiative. A comprehensive EU “Fit for 55” package was published in 2021, with the original goal of aligning all energy and climate targets. This package included a review of all existing EU climate and energy acts.

Article 194 TFEU brings certain areas of energy policy under shared competence, signaling the transition to a common energy policy. Nevertheless, each member state retains the right “to determine the conditions for the use of its energy resources, the choice between different energy sources and the general structure of its energy supply” (Article 194(2) TFEU).

In summary, the European Union’s energy policy, while addressing significant global challenges such as pollution, supply disruptions, the depletion of natural resources, the cost-intensiveness of new technologies, and biodiversity loss [64,65,66], is driving changes in the EU’s socio-economic model through the aforementioned legislation [20]. Many economies, previously reliant on the brown economy model, are transitioning toward a green economy model [67,68]. In this new model, the primary objective of economic growth and development is to minimize the utilization of natural resources while enhancing the quality of life for the population [68]. These divergent approaches, with a specific focus on the energy sector, are illustrated in

Table 1. Characteristics of the brown and green economy.

Category	Brown Economy	Green Economy
P:	Economy of energy supply	Self-sufficiency, energy security
P:	Relying on the cheapest energy sources	Diversification of energy sources
P:	Relying on traditional economic sectors	Change in economic structure
P:	Destruction of biodiversity	Protection of biodiversity
E:	Unlimited economic growth	Decoupling economic growth from natural resource consumption
E:	Infinity of resources	Limited resources
E:	Reliance on fossil fuels	Renewable energy sources
E:	Intensive consumption of natural resources	Energy efficiency
E:	Consolidation of the sector	Sector dispersion
S:	Global social inequality	Intergenerational and interregional justice
S:	Unlimited consumption (overconsumption)	Sustainable consumption
S:	Lack of accountability	Corporate social responsibility and ESG
S:	Weakening public confidence	Growing public confidence
T:	Greenhouse gas emissions	Clean production
T:	Modification of existing technologies	Advances in clean technology

Categories: political, economic, social, technological. Source: own study based on [20,69,70,71,72].

, organized according to the PEST method [69].

Expression of the implementation of each country’s energy policy and their compliance with EU law is the submission of documents to the European Commission. These national plans outline how EU countries intend to address the five dimensions of the energy union: decarbonization; energy efficiency; energy security; the internal energy market; and research, innovation, and competitiveness.

2.3. Rule of Law and Energy Policy—Selected Relationships and Relations

The theme of the impact of the rule of law on economic initiatives, innovation, investment, and economic cohesion is closely related to issues concerning the implementation of energy policy across all EU countries. The energy sector differs fundamentally from other economic sectors.

First, it is a sector of paramount strategic importance. Without a stable energy supply, no country, economy, or society can function. This underscores the sector’s pivotal role in each member country and in the EU.

Second, the energy sector is predominantly nationalized and monopolized. This characteristic inherently follows from its strategic nature and provides a pertinent context for examining the rule of law. The dominant role of the state and the existence of natural monopolies create an environment conducive to state intervention in this sector. Such intervention takes various forms, encompassing different aspects and implications:

In EU countries with a high regard for the rule of law, state intervention generally yields positive effects. Whether aimed at strengthening or reducing a country’s dominant position in the energy sector, energy policy in such countries either fosters development or helps avert crises.

In EU countries with a lower regard for the rule of law, state intervention is more mixed. The energy sector may benefit from certain legal safeguards in some areas while facing challenges in others. The restriction, violation, or disregard of various aspects of the rule of law tends to be selective rather than systemic. In such cases, the state, whether due to negligence or deliberate non-compliance with elements of the rule of law in specific areas, deliberately influences certain aspects while reaping certain advantages.

In EU countries with a very low regard for the rule of law, state intervention tends to be systemic and has negative consequences. Systematic limitations; violations; disregard for legality and legal certainty; arbitrary decision-making in executive actions; impediments to effective judicial review; and the absence of equality before the law practically steer the energy sector toward underdevelopment. This keeps the sector entrenched in the brown economy, diminishing the standing and influence of a given EU member state within Europe and on the global stage.

Third, the energy sector is capital- and investment-intensive. The absence of guarantees regarding legal certainty, arbitrary decision-making by those in power, a lack of effective judicial review, and inequality before the law form a discouraging recipe for investors with capital. This practical effect results in a shortage of investment or a decrease in investment levels. Even when investments are made using domestic funds (the country’s own), there remains a high likelihood of asymmetric economic situations that do not bode well for the energy sector.

Fourth, the energy sector is highly dependent on the environment and is a significant source of emissions. The failure to respect the rule of law leads to environmental harm, such as excessive emissions resulting from inadequate judicial oversight, the destruction of valuable resources due to arbitrary administrative decisions, and the elimination of individuals and entities engaged in environmental and resource protection caused by a lack of equality before the law.

The degree of respect for the rule of law within the energy sector in EU countries can be gauged using the WJP Rule of Law Index (more on this topic: https://worldjusticeproject.org/rule-of-law-index/about#howwemeasure (accessed on 23 June 2023)). developed by World Justice Project researchers, experts, practitioners and public opinion leaders. The WJP Rule of Law Index measures the state of implementation of selected elements of the rule of law.

The dimensions of the WJP Rule of Law Index, as described in

Table 2. Rule of Law Factors.

Lp.	Rule of Law Factors	Label	Definition
0	Overall Score	T	Average obtained from indicators 1–4, 6–9
1	Constraints on Government Powers	CGP	Measures the extent to which those who govern are bound by law. It comprises the means, both constitutional and institutional, by which the powers of the government and its officials and agents are limited and held accountable under the law. It also includes non-governmental checks on the government’s power, such as a free and independent press.
2	Open Government	OG	Measures the openness of the government, defined by the extent to which a government shares information, empowers people with tools to hold it accountable, and fosters citizen participation in public policy deliberations. This factor measures whether basic laws and information on legal rights are publicized and evaluates the quality of information published by the government.
3	Fundamental Rights	FR	Recognizes that a system of positive law that fails to respect the core human rights established under international law is at best “rule by law” and does not deserve to be called a rule of law system. Since there are many other indices that address human rights, and because it would be impossible for the index to assess adherence to the full range of rights, this factor focuses on a relatively modest menu of rights that are firmly established under the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights and are most closely related to rule of law concerns.
4	Regulatory Enforcement	RE	Measures the extent to which regulations are fairly and effectively implemented and enforced. Regulations, both legal and administrative, structure behaviors within and outside of the government. This factor does not assess which activities a government chooses to regulate nor does it consider how much regulation of a particular activity is appropriate. Rather, it examines how regulations are implemented and enforced.
5	Regulatory Quality Index	RG	The index of regulatory quality captures perceptions of the ability of the government to formulate and implement sound policies and regulations that permit and promote private sector development.
6	Absence of Corruption	AC	Measures the absence of corruption in government. The factor considers three forms of corruption: bribery, improper influence by public or private interests, and misappropriation of public funds or other resources. These three forms of corruption are examined with respect to government officers in the executive branch, the judiciary, the military, police, and the legislature.
7	Order and Security	OS	Measures how well a society ensures the security of persons and property. Security is one of the defining aspects of any rule of law society and is a fundamental function of the state. It is also a precondition for the realization of the rights and freedoms that the rule of law seeks to advance.
8	Civil Justice	CJ	It measures whether ordinary people can resolve their grievances peacefully and effectively through the civil justice system. It measures whether civil justice systems are accessible and affordable as well as free of discrimination, corruption, and improper influence by public officials. It examines whether court proceedings are conducted without unreasonable delays and whether decisions are enforced effectively. It also measures the accessibility, impartiality, and effectiveness of alternative dispute resolution mechanisms.
9	Criminal Justice	CJ	Evaluates a country’s criminal justice system. An effective criminal justice system is a key aspect of the rule of law, as it constitutes the conventional mechanism to redress grievances and bring action against individuals for offenses against society. An assessment of the delivery of criminal justice should take into consideration the entire system, including the police, lawyers, prosecutors, judges, and prison officers.

Source: own study based on [73,74].

, enable an analysis of the situation related to the implementation of the rule of law in individual EU countries. The areas of analysis, described by the indicators, include the Rule of Law Factors Constraints on Government Powers, Open Government, Fundamental Rights, Regulatory Enforcement, Regulatory Quality Index, Absence of Corruption, Order and Security, Civil Justice, and Criminal Justice and form an overall score. The indicators representing the situation in the energy sector (Table 2) are referred to as energy policy factors, which include Contribution to Renewable Energy, Total Gross Available Energy, Eco-Innovation Scoreboard, Primary Energy Consumption, Final Energy Consumption, Effort Sharing Regulation, Level of Electricity Interconnectivity, and Energy Market Indicator. Both sets of indicators were selected based on expert knowledge, data availability, and the results of analyses carried out by the author’s team in seminars and brainstorming sessions.

This article assumes that the selected WJP Rule of Law Index indicators, which assess the level of rule of law, enable the demonstration of the rule of law’s impact on the energy policy of EU countries. Each indicator within the two groups characterizes a different aspect within the domains of the rule of law and energy policy. A thorough comparison of these indicators allows us to illustrate the interrelationships between these issues. Since these indicators are applicable to all EU countries, the analysis provides insights into the relationship between the rule of law and energy policy throughout the EU.

2.4. Data Sources and Transformation

To test the hypothesis, factors (variables) related to the rule of law (Table 2) were selected for analysis and compared with factors (variables) that influence energy policy (Table 3). Data on the rule of law were sourced from the World Justice Project^® (WJP)’s databases [73]. The WJP Rule of Law Index^® computes scores and rankings for 8 factors and 44 sub-factors, organized into eight categories. An additional ninth indicator, the Regulatory Quality Index, was included. Data for these factors were collected for all European Union countries in 2020. In cases where data for 2020 were unavailable, as for Cyprus, Ireland, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, and Slovakia, data from 2021 were used. This approach is justified by the observed long-term trends characteristic of these countries.

This article outlines the correlations for five factors (variables) and one aggregate linked to the rule of law, considering them the most influential factors affecting the implementation of energy policy (Table 2—lines 0–5). A comprehensive set of calculations for all variables, including those not discussed in detail in the article, can be found in the Data Repository “Correlation of the Rule of Law with Energy Policy” [75].

Data pertaining to the energy policy factors were sourced from various references: National Energy and Climate Plans—NECPs [76]—EUROSTAT (the nrg_bal_c database) [77], and “Eco-Innovation at the heart of European policies” [78]. European Commission documents were used as a reflection of European energy policy. NECPs were introduced as part of the Regulation on the Governance of the Energy Union and Climate Action (EU)2018/1999, which was adopted in 2019. Data were collected from multiple sources, and all the data used in the article are accessible in a publicly available database.

Table 3. Energy policy factors.

Lp	Energy Policy Factors	Label	Definition
1	Contribution to renewable energy	RE	Share of energy from renewable sources in gross final consumption of energy (FEC)
2	Total gross available energy	GAE	Means the overall supply of energy for all activities in the territory of the country. This also includes energy transformation (including generating electricity from combustible fuels), distribution losses, and the use of fossil fuel products for non-energy purposes.
3	Eco-Innovation Scoreboard	EcoIS	Measures the environmental innovation performance of EU member states on the basis of the 12 indicators included in the measurement framework.
4	Pimary energy consumption	PEC	Measures the total energy demand of a country. It covers the consumption of the energy sector itself, losses during the transformation (for example, from oil or gas into electricity) and distribution of energy, and the final consumption by end users. It excludes energy carriers used for non-energy purposes.
5	Final energy consumption	FEC	Is the total energy consumed by end users, such as households, industry, and agriculture. It is the energy which reaches the final consumer’s door and excludes that which is used by the energy sector itself.
6	Effort Sharing Regulation	ESR	Binding target for greenhouse gas emission reductions compared to 2005 under the Effort Sharing Regulation.
7	Level of electricity interconnectivity	EI	Electricity interconnectivity refers to high-voltage cables connecting the electricity systems of neighboring countries. They enable excess power, such as that generated from wind and solar farms, to be traded and shared between countries. This ensures that renewable energy is not wasted and makes for a greener, more efficient power system.
8	Energy market indicator	EM	An energy market is a type of commodity market that deals with electricity, heat, and fuel products. It shows the concentration of energy production by major companies.

Source: own study based on [78,79,80,81].

Table 3. Energy policy factors.

Lp	Energy Policy Factors	Label	Definition
1	Contribution to renewable energy	RE	Share of energy from renewable sources in gross final consumption of energy (FEC)
2	Total gross available energy	GAE	Means the overall supply of energy for all activities in the territory of the country. This also includes energy transformation (including generating electricity from combustible fuels), distribution losses, and the use of fossil fuel products for non-energy purposes.
3	Eco-Innovation Scoreboard	EcoIS	Measures the environmental innovation performance of EU member states on the basis of the 12 indicators included in the measurement framework.
4	Pimary energy consumption	PEC	Measures the total energy demand of a country. It covers the consumption of the energy sector itself, losses during the transformation (for example, from oil or gas into electricity) and distribution of energy, and the final consumption by end users. It excludes energy carriers used for non-energy purposes.
5	Final energy consumption	FEC	Is the total energy consumed by end users, such as households, industry, and agriculture. It is the energy which reaches the final consumer’s door and excludes that which is used by the energy sector itself.
6	Effort Sharing Regulation	ESR	Binding target for greenhouse gas emission reductions compared to 2005 under the Effort Sharing Regulation.
7	Level of electricity interconnectivity	EI	Electricity interconnectivity refers to high-voltage cables connecting the electricity systems of neighboring countries. They enable excess power, such as that generated from wind and solar farms, to be traded and shared between countries. This ensures that renewable energy is not wasted and makes for a greener, more efficient power system.
8	Energy market indicator	EM	An energy market is a type of commodity market that deals with electricity, heat, and fuel products. It shows the concentration of energy production by major companies.

Source: own study based on [78,79,80,81].

Since the data were collected from various sources, they were normalized to ensure their values fell within the range of 0.01 to 0.99. The normalization process was carried out as follows:

• Data expressed as percentages remained unaltered and were recorded as a value after the decimal point.
• Data not expressed in percentages were normalized using the following formula:

$$X^{\prime }=\frac{X-Xmin}{Xmax-Xmin}\times \left(Vmax-Vmin\right)+Vmin$$

(1)

where:

• X′—variable after normalization,
• X—variable before normalization,
• Xmin—the minimum value of the variable X before the transformation,
• Xmax—the maximum value of the variable X before the transformation,
• Vmin—the minimum value of the variable X′ after the transformation (0.01),
• Vmax—the maximum value of the variable X′ after the transformation (0.99).

Thanks to normalization, the variables accepted for analysis were normalized within a homogeneous range. In this way, the performance of the analysis will be of a comparative nature, and the graphs prepared will show relationships within the same area of variation of 0.01–0.99.

2.5. Methodological Assumptions

The research introduces a classification of individual EU countries by considering indicators related to the rule of law, the energy sector, and green and brown economy solutions.

Table 4. Areas O1, O2, O3, and O4—definitions. For easier analysis, the different areas are color-coded.

O1	law-abiding above average and showing an indicator that realizes the green economy above average	O2	law-abiding above average and showing an indicator that realizes the brown economy below average
O3	law-abiding below average and showing an indicator that realizes the green economy above average	O4	law-abiding below average and exhibiting an indicator realizing the brown economy below average

Source: own study.

outlines the four areas (O1, O2, O3, and O4) determined based on the arithmetic mean values of individual indicators (variables) associated with the rule of law and those related to the energy sector and green and brown economy solutions. These areas were defined systematically, aiming to address how a particular indicator contributes to upholding the rule of law or advancing the objectives of transitioning the energy sector with green economy solutions.

In the case of the rule of law, the division into areas O1, O2, O3, and O4 is based on the established development directions within the framework of European Union policy. The rule of law stands as one of the core values of the EU. Furthermore, it plays a critical role in the proper execution of energy policy within the EU and individual member states [79,82].

Areas O1, O2, O3, and O4 are applicable to both areas of analysis: the rule of law and energy. This means that within each of the four parts of Table 4, individual EU countries are categorized based on their alignment with the respective content area in accordance with the methodological proposal. Each EU country is placed in only one of the four areas: O1, O2, O3, or O4. According to the assumptions made, EU countries were categorized as having either a medium to high level of rule of law or a low to very low level of rule of law.

For each rule-of-law-related indicator, the arithmetic average was calculated, creating two analytical areas for each indicator:

• O1 and O2 for indicators with values above the arithmetic average
• O3 and O4 for indicators with values below the arithmetic average

EU countries with above-average indicator values (O1 and O2) were classified as those with medium and high levels of the rule of law, while EU countries with below-average indicator values (O3 and O4) were considered to have low and very low levels of the rule of law.

In the case of energy policy, the division into areas O1, O2, O3, and O4 is influenced by the adopted development direction within the framework of European Union policy, particularly the preference for the green economy. Deviating from the green direction (adopting the brown economy) effectively equates to practicing conventional economic policy within the energy sector.

Similarly, for energy-related indicators, the arithmetic average was calculated, forming two analytical areas for each indicator:

• O1 and O3 for indicators with values above the arithmetic average
• O2 and O4 for indicators with values below the arithmetic average

EU countries with above-average indicator values (O1 and O3) were categorized as those that moderately modernize the energy sector and favor green economy solutions. Meanwhile, EU countries with below-average indicator values (O2 and O4) were classified as those that moderately modernize the energy sector and lean toward brown economy solutions.

Following the methodology adopted, these extracted areas were overlaid onto each other to create a summary table in which each analyzed EU country falls into one of the areas: O1, O2, O3, or O4. The data used to derive areas O1, O2, O3, and O4 are documented in the Data Repository titled “Correlation of the Rule of Law with Energy Policy,” which includes Tables 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, and 20 (Data Repository: A. Nowakowska-Krystman, R. Wisniewski: Correlation of the Rule of Law with Energy Policy [75]):

• Col. 1 describes variables related to the energy sector (green economy, brown economy),
• Col. 2 shows the range of values above and below average for “energy” variables,
• Col. 3 shows the EU countries classified into areas O1 and O2 and col. 5 areas O3 and O4,
• The designations of each area are included in cols. 4 and 6 on the corresponding lines,
• The headlines of cols. 3–6 record the calculated arithmetic averages for each rule-of-law-related variable.

The outcome of the research procedure outlined above is a classification of EU countries, which are categorized, as per Table 4, into four distinct areas (O1, O2, O3, O4). Each EU country is placed into only one of these areas based on its assigned classification. Given that there are eight variables related to energy policy, a single EU state may appear up to eight times across all the analyzed areas. Drawing conclusions about the impact of the rule of law on the energy sector necessitates the identification of groups of countries with similar characteristics.

The authors of this article suggest that the grouping of countries with similar relationships between the rule of law and energy policy should be carried out using the criterion of how often a given EU state appears in a particular area (O1, O2, O3, O4). Such an analysis will illustrate the frequency with which a particular EU country appears in a given area, such as O1. Frequent appearances of an EU country in area O1, indicating an above-average performance (e.g., Denmark or Finland, as shown in the Data Repository in Table 3a,b), can provide valuable insights (Data Repository [75])—this means that the country simultaneously respects the rule of law and observes and applies in practice elements of energy policy including green economy solutions. In contrast, if an EU country frequently appears in the O4 area—above average (see Bulgaria or Cyprus in the Data Repository in Table 3a,b) (Data Repository [75])—this means that the country has a low level of respect for the rule of law while lacking commitment to energy policies incorporating green economy solutions.

Tables 3a, 5a, 7a, 9a, 11a, 13a, 15a, 17a, 19a, and 21a in the Data Repository “Correlation of the Rule of Law with Energy Policy” (Data Repository [75]) show prepared summaries of the incidence counts of each EU country in a given area, either O1, O2, O3, or O4. The tables in the Data Repository were prepared as follows:

• In Phase I, EU countries were ranked, in absolute terms, according to the number of occurrences within the O1 area (col. 2 in Tables 3a, 5a, 7a, 9a, 11a, 13a, 15a, 17a, 19a, 21a in the Data Repository [75]),
• In Stage II, EU countries were ranked according to the number of occurrences within the O2 area, but taking into account the results of the ranking from Stage I (col. 3 in Tables 3a, 5a, 7a, 9a, 11a, 13a, 15a, 17a, 19a, and 21a in the Data Repository [75]),
• In Stage III, EU countries were ranked according to the number of occurrences within the O3 area, but taking into account the results of the ranking from Stages I and II (col. 4 in Tables 3a, 5a, 7a, 9a, 11a, 13a, 15a, 17a, 19a, and 21a in the Data Repository [75]),
• In Stage IV, EU countries were ranked according to the number of occurrences within the O4 area, but taking into account the results of the ranking from Stages I, I, and III (col. 5 in Tables 3a, 5a, 7a, 9a, 11a, 13a, 15a, 17a, 19a, and 21a in the Data Repository [75]).

The results in Tables 3a, 5a, 7a, 9a, 11a, 13a, 15a, 17a, 19a, and 21a in the Data Repository “Correlation of the Rule of Law with Energy Policy—Position of EU countries” (Data Repository [75]) are shown graphically in Figures 1–6.

Tables 3b, 5b, 7b, 9b, 11b, 13b, 15b, 17b, 19b, and 21b in the Data Repository “Correlation of the rule of law with Energy policy—Position of EU countries” (Data Repository [75]) show prepared summaries of the incidence counts of each EU country in a given area, O1, O2, O3, and O4. The tables in the Data Repository were prepared as follows:

• In Phase I, EU countries were ranked by incidence within the O1 area for incidences greater than or equal to 4 (col. 2 in Tables 3b, 5b, 7b, 9b, 11b, 13b, 15b, 17b, 19b, 21b in the Data Repository [75]),
• In Stage II, the remaining EU countries were ranked by incidence within the O2 area for counts greater than or equal to 4 (col. 3 in Tables 3b, 5b, 7b, 9b, 11b, 13b, 15b, 17b, 19b, 21b in the Data Repository [75]),
• In Stage III, the remaining EU countries were ranked by incidence within the O3 area for incidences greater than or equal to 4 (col. 4 in Tables 3b, 5b, 7b, 9b, 11b, 13b, 15b, 17b, 19b, 21b in the Data Repository [75])
• In Stage IV, the remaining EU countries were ranked by incidence within the O4 area for incidences greater than or equal to 4 (col. 5 in Tables 3b, 5b, 7b, 9b, 11b, 13b, 15b, 17b, 19b, 21b in the Data Repository [75]).

The factors were compiled based on the strategic management method—the strategic group map. In constructing these maps, key factors are used [31,83]. On the X-axis, energy policy factors are depicted, while on the Y-axis, rule of law factors are depicted. This is an application not yet used, until now, in this type of analysis. Indeed, analysis of a strategic group map is commonly used in the analysis of the competitiveness of businesses [84,85], and public organizations [86].

3. Research Results

3.1. Introduction

The authors of the article assume that the implementation of EU’s energy policy, based on the principles of solidarity and cooperation among member states, leads to improved results in terms of energy security, environmental protection, and the prevention of dominance by any single country or entity in the energy market. Consequently, the effective implementation of EU energy policy relies on a strong commitment to the rule of law and the enhancement of democracy within member states. The rule of law plays a pivotal role in EU’s energy policy, influencing how member states make decisions and achieve their energy-related objectives.

In countries with a robust rule of law, decisions regarding energy infrastructure investments, environmental protection, and electricity distribution are made transparently, following legal procedures and considering the interests of society. In contrast, in countries where the rule of law is weak, energy policy decisions can be susceptible to political influence or private interests, potentially leading to inefficient and inequitable allocation of resources and unsustainable development within the energy sector. This interpretation of the rule of law connects the business world, including market regulations, with values (axiology). Consequently, effectiveness, including participation in the EU budget, depends not only on mere adherence to legal norms but also on the (conditional) respect for human rights and ecological standards.

3.2. Analysis Results

The implementation of the methodological assumptions described in Section 2.5 facilitated the classification of the analyzed EU countries into the defined four areas, O1, O2, O3, and O4, utilizing the criterion of the number of EU countries in each area. This section will examine the relationships among selected rule of law indicators and all energy policy indicators.

As per the predefined assumptions, the following variables were analyzed in the context of the rule of law: (I) Rule of Law Index—overall score, (II) Constraints on Government Powers, (III) Open Government, (IV) Fundamental Rights, (V) Regulatory Enforcement, and (VI) Regulatory Quality Index. Tables and figures containing data on the Absence of Corruption, Order and Security, Civil Justice, and Criminal Justice factors have been included in the Data Repository titled “Correlation of the Rule of Law with Energy Policy.” (Tables 14–21b and Figures 1–4 in the Data Repository [75]).

In the context of energy policy, the variables analyzed encompass contribution to renewable energy, total gross available energy, the Eco-Innovation Scoreboard, primary energy consumption, final energy consumption, the Effort Sharing Regulation, the level of electricity interconnectivity, and the energy market indicator.

3.2.1. Rule of Law Index—Overall Score (Data from Table 3a,b in the Data Repository [75])

As an overall summary of EU countries, encompassing all energy policy indicators and the overall scores in the Rule of Law Index, the data analysis presented in Figure 1 reveals that EU countries can be categorized as follows:

• Excelling in both the rule of law and the responsible implementation of energy policies including green economy elements are Denmark, Finland, Luxembourg, Spain, Austria, Estonia, Germany, Lithuania, and the Netherlands.
• Performing well in the rule of law and demonstrating a responsible approach to energy policies, including green economy elements, are Sweden, France, Czechia, Belgium, and Ireland.
• Struggling in terms of the rule of law and showing limited progress in energy policy, including green economy elements are Portugal, Romania, Slovenia, Malta, and Italy.
• Experiencing significant challenges in the rule of law and displaying limited advancement in energy policy including green economy elements are Latvia, Greece, Poland, Croatia, Hungary, Slovakia, Bulgaria, and Cyprus.

In Figure 1, the curves schematically delineate the separated areas, with O1 represented by the green line and O4 by the brown line for the rule-of-law-related variable Rule of Law Index—overall score.

A more detailed summary (Data Repository [75]-data from Table 3b) ranks countries based on the number of occurrences (count) within the O1 area as the primary criterion, followed by O2, O3, and O4. This ranking reveals the following:

• The countries excelling in both the rule of law and green economy policies are Denmark, Finland, Luxembourg, and Spain.
• The countries demonstrating a strong commitment to the rule of law but with some ambiguity in their approach to green economy policies include Austria, Estonia, Germany, Lithuania, and the Netherlands. France is ambiguously implementing brown economy policies.
• The countries with a strong adherence to the rule of law but pursuing brown economy policies are Ireland, Belgium, Czechia, and Sweden.
• Italy exhibits an issue with the rule of law (below average) while actively implementing green economy policies.
• Latvia faces challenges with the rule of law and lacks a clearly defined energy policy.
• Bulgaria, Cyprus, Croatia, Hungary, Slovakia, Malta, Greece, Poland, Romania, and Slovenia experience significant difficulties with the rule of law and are actively pursuing brown economy policies.

3.2.2. Factor: Constraints on Government Powers (Data from Table 5a,b in the Data Repository [75])

As an overall summary of EU countries, encompassing all energy policy indicators and Factor 1: Constraints on Government Powers, the analysis of the data depicted in Figure 2 reveals:

• Excelling in the rule of law and responsible implementation of energy policies, including elements of the green economy, are Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Luxembourg, Portugal, Spain, France, Austria, and the Netherlands.
• Demonstrating average adherence to the rule of law and average implementation of energy policies, including elements of the green economy, are Czechia, Germany, Sweden, Slovenia, Latvia, Croatia, Hungary, Slovakia, and Belgium.
• Struggling significantly with the rule of law and displaying limited implementation of energy policy, including green economy elements, are Bulgaria, Cyprus, Italy, Romania, Lithuania, Greece, Malta, Poland, and Ireland.

In Figure 2, the curves schematically delineate the distinct areas O1 (green line) and O4 (brown line) for the rule of law variable Factor 1: Constraints on Government Powers.

Analysis of the detailed data, considering Factor 1: Constraints on Government Powers (Data Repository [75]-data from Table 5b), reveals the following trends:

• The most law-abiding countries that also implement green economy policies are Denmark, followed by Estonia, Finland, Luxembourg, Portugal, and Spain.
• The countries that exhibit law-abiding tendencies but lean toward brown economy policies are Slovenia, Latvia, Italy, and Romania.
• The countries with a below-average score in the rule of law dimension of Constraints on Government Powers but still implementing green economy policies include Ireland, Belgium, Czechia, Germany, Sweden, France, Austria, and the Netherlands.
• The countries facing the most significant rule of law challenges and also implementing brown economy policies are Bulgaria, Cyprus, Greece, Malta, Croatia, Hungary, Slovakia, Poland, and Lithuania.

3.2.3. Factor: Open Government (Data from Table 7a,b in the Data Repository [75])

Analysis of the detailed data, taking into consideration Factor 3: Open Government (Data Repository [75]-data from Table 6b), reveals the following trends:

• The countries that perform exceptionally well in terms of the rule of law and the responsible implementation of energy policies, including elements of the green economy, are Denmark, Estonia, Latvia, Finland, Luxembourg, France, Lithuania, and the Netherlands.
• The countries that exhibit an average performance in terms of the rule of law and the implementation of energy policies, including green economy elements, are Slovakia, Germany, Malta, Sweden, Slovenia, Croatia, Czechia, Hungary, Belgium, and Cyprus.
• The countries with significant rule of law challenges and limited implementation of energy policy, including green economy elements, include Bulgaria, Italy, Portugal, Romania, Spain, Austria, Greece, Poland, and Ireland.

In Figure 3, the curves schematically indicate the separate areas, O1 (green line), and O4 (brown line), for the rule-of-law-related variable Factor 3: Open Government.

Analysis of the detailed data considering the factor “Open Government” (Data Repository [75]-data from Table 7b) reveals the following observations:

• Denmark, Estonia, Latvia, and Finland exhibit the highest level of adherence to the rule of law and actively pursue green economy policies.
• Luxembourg and France are actively involved in green economy policies but have undefined rule of law standings.
• Countries like Ireland, Belgium, Cyprus, Slovakia, Germany, Malta, Sweden, Lithuania, and the Netherlands face rule of law challenges in the context of “Open Government,” yet they are actively implementing green economy policies.
• Slovenia demonstrates compliance with the rule of law while pursuing brown economy policies.
• Italy, Portugal, Romania, and Spain are focused on brown economy policies and have undefined rule of law standings.
• Bulgaria, Poland, and Greece, as well as Croatia, Czechia, Hungary, and Austria, confront significant rule of law issues and are simultaneously pursuing brown economy policies.

3.2.4. Factor: Fundamental Rights (Data from Table 9a,b in the Data Repository [75])

Using the overall summary of EU countries, which includes all energy policy indicators and Factor 4: Fundamental Rights, analysis of the data illustrated in Figure 4 shows that EU countries that:

• Achieve a high level of compliance with the rule of law and responsibly implement energy policies, including elements of the green economy—Denmark, Estonia, Latvia, Finland, Luxembourg, Austria, Lithuania, and the Netherlands.
• Demonstrate average adherence to the rule of law and moderately implement energy policies, including elements of the green economy—Slovakia, Germany, Malta, Sweden, Slovenia, France, Croatia, Czechia, Hungary, Belgium, and Cyprus.
• Experience significant rule of law challenges and exhibit limited implementation of energy policies, including green economy elements—Bulgaria, Italy, Portugal, Romania, Spain, Greece, Poland, and Ireland.

In Figure 4, the curves schematically indicate the separate areas, O1 (green line), and O4 (brown line), for the rule-of-law-related variable Factor 4: Fundamental Rights.

Analysis of the detailed data concerning Factor 4: Fundamental Rights (Data Repository [75]-data from Table 9b) reveals the following:

• The countries that demonstrate the highest adherence to the rule of law and actively implement green economy policies are Denmark, Estonia, Latvia, and Finland.
• Luxembourg and France are pursuing green economy policies but have an undefined status in terms of the rule of law.
• The countries with rule of law challenges in the Fundamental Rights dimension (below average) but actively implementing green economy policies include Ireland, Belgium, Cyprus, Slovakia, Germany, Malta, Sweden, Austria, Lithuania, and the Netherlands.
• Slovenia adheres to the rule of law and implements brown economy policies.
• Italy, Portugal, Romania, and Spain are pursuing brown economy policies but have an undefined status in terms of the rule of law.
• The countries facing the most significant rule of law challenges and actively implementing brown economy policies are Bulgaria, Poland, and Greece, followed by Croatia, Czechia, and Hungary.

3.2.5. Factor: Regulatory Enforcement (Data from Table 11a,b in the Data Repository [75])

In an overall summary of EU countries, which includes all energy policy indicators and Factor 6: Regulatory Enforcement, analysis of the data presented in Figure 5 reveals that EU countries can be categorized as follows:

• The countries that excel in both the rule of law and the responsible implementation of energy policies, including elements of the green economy, are Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Luxembourg, Spain, France, Austria, Lithuania, and the Netherlands.
• The countries that maintain an average level of rule of law and implement energy policies including elements of a green economy to an average extent include Czechia, Germany, Sweden, Slovenia, Latvia, Croatia, Hungary, Slovakia, and Belgium.
• The countries that face significant rule of law challenges and have limited implementation of energy policies including green economy elements are Bulgaria, Cyprus, Italy, Portugal, Romania, Greece, Malta, Poland, and Ireland.

Figure 5 provides a visual representation of these categories, with the curves schematically indicating the separated areas of O1 (green line) and O4 (brown line) for the rule-of-law-related variable Factor 6: Regulatory Enforcement.

From analysis of the detailed data considering Factor 6: Regulatory Enforcement (Data Repository [75]-data from Table 11b), the following insights can be drawn:

• The countries that are most law-abiding and actively implement green economy policies are Denmark and Estonia.
• Finland, Luxembourg, and Spain are pursuing green economy policies, but their status regarding the rule of law is undefined.
• There is a rule of law problem in the Regulatory Enforcement dimension (below average) but the implementation of green economy policies is visible in countries like Ireland, Belgium, Czechia, Germany, Sweden, France, Austria, Lithuania, and the Netherlands.
• Slovenia and Latvia maintain a law-abiding status but implement brown economy policies.
• Italy, Portugal, and Romania are actively pursuing brown economy policies but also face rule of law challenges.
• The countries with the most significant rule of law issues and simultaneous implementation of brown economy policies are Bulgaria, Cyprus, Croatia, Hungary, Slovakia, Poland, Greece, and Malta.

3.2.6. Regulatory Quality Index (Data from Table 13a,b in the Data Repository [75])

Using an overall summary of EU countries, including all energy policy indicators and the Regulatory Quality Index, the analysis presented in Figure 6 reveals that EU countries can be categorized as follows:

• Those who excel in both the rule of law and the responsible implementation of energy policies, encompassing green economy elements, are Denmark, Estonia, Latvia, Finland, Luxembourg, France, Austria, and the Netherlands.
• The countries that maintain an average level of rule of law and implement energy policies including green economy aspects are Czechia, Germany, Malta, Slovenia, Bulgaria, Croatia, Hungary, Slovakia, Belgium, and Cyprus.
• The countries with significant rule of law challenges and limited progress in energy policy, particularly in green economy areas, include Italy, Portugal, Romania, Spain, Lithuania, Sweden, Greece, Poland, and Ireland.

In Figure 6, the curves schematically delineate the distinct areas O1 (green line) and O4 (brown line) for the variable related to the rule of law the Regulatory Quality Index.

From analysis of the detailed data considering the factor Regulatory Quality Index (Data Repository [75]-data from Table 13b), the following observations can be made:

• The countries most committed to the rule of law and the implementation of green economy policies are Denmark, Estonia, and Latvia.
• Finland, Luxembourg, and France are pursuing green economy policies but have undefined rule of law standings.
• There is a rule of law deficiency in the dimension of the Regulatory Quality Index (below average) but the implementation of green economy policies is evident in Ireland, Belgium, Czechia, Germany, Malta, Sweden, Austria, and the Netherlands.
• The countries that adhere to the rule of law but implement brown economy policies include Slovenia.
• Italy, Portugal, Romania, and Spain have undefined rule of law standings and are pursuing brown economy policies.
• The most substantial rule of law challenges combined with the implementation of brown economy policies are experienced by Bulgaria, Cyprus, Poland, Greece, as well as Croatia, Hungary, Slovakia, and Lithuania.

4. Discussion

The reasons why energy policies in line with EU guidelines are being overlooked and/or sluggishly implemented in Poland and other EU countries at the tail end of the energy modernization process should be sought at several levels and linked to policies on compliance with the rule of law.

The research results presented in Section 3 and the positioning of EU countries in the matrix in Table 4 provide the basis for the following discussion. The groups of countries obtained in this way allow us to notice that Denmark, Estonia, and Finland can be considered countries that clearly meet the high requirements of the rule of law and at the same time implement a fully green energy policy. This follows directly from the conclusions presented in Figure 1, Figure 2, Figure 3, Figure 4, Figure 5 and Figure 6. At the general level of the analysis, it can be noted that these countries have in common not only their location in the north of Europe (Nordic countries) but also on the Baltic Sea. These countries therefore represent a specific cultural identity—Nordic culture. Another equally important argument explaining the high level of rule of law and energy policy is the fact that these are small state entities in terms of population—Finland, 5.5 million; Denmark—5.8 million; and the smallest being Estonia—1.3 million. Smaller state entities are probably more effective in terms of state management, which translates into the quality of their energy policy and rule of law. This arguably allows for greater control in smaller societies. Unfortunately, this argument is not very convincing if we take into account countries from a completely opposite group with the lowest level of rule of law and brown energy policy, such as Croatia and Greece. These are also small countries in terms of population.

The research team proposes taking as the main argument explaining the obtained research results the type of religion dominant in a given country, and more broadly, the attitude of the citizens of this country to religion as a fundamental relationship characterizing the leaders of the rule of law and green economy (Figure 7).

This is, in a way, the result of the culture professed and propagated—whether it is the culture of Nordic countries, of Central European post-socialist countries, or of Balkan countries. The analysis was based on two datasets. The first was analyzed by the Pew Research Center [87,88], which, although it is not the most recent (2011–2012), allows for a comparison of all the countries discussed here in the same period. Analysis of the latest data available for only some of these countries confirms the general structure and the trend shown in the Pew Research Center’s research. The second group of data comes from the Association of Religion Data Archives [89]. The presented Pew Research Center and ARDA data will be separated by slashes.

The author’s team proposes making the following comparison, which is the basis for the main discussion in the article. Denmark being the most visible leader in the rule of law and green economy is characterized by the fact that it is one of the most secularized nations in the world. Religious indifference, agnosticism, and, to a lesser extent, atheism are common. According to the Pew Research Center and ARDA, Protestantism constitutes 81.9%/77.7%, no religion 11.8%/12.81%, Islam 4.1%/5.26%, and Catholicism 0.7%/0.78%. The Lutheran Church dominates among Protestants. Belonging to the state Lutheran Church is a sign not so much of religiosity but of national identity [87,88,89].

A similar relationship can be noticed when analyzing the religious structure of Estonia. It is a highly secularized country, but the traditional religion is Lutheranism. The religious structure of the country in 2010 according to the Pew Research Center was Protestantism—21.2%/14.47% (mainly Estonians, as well as Finnish and Latvian national minorities), Orthodox Christianity—18.9%/12% (mostly Russian-speaking national minorities), Catholicism—0.7%/0.44% (mainly Poles and Lithuanians), other branches of Christianity—0.5%/1.01%, Islam—0.2%/0.28%, and Judaism—0.1%/0.11%. A total of 58.4% of citizens were undeclared religiously. Therefore, next to the Czech Republic (72%), it is the most secularized country in Europe [87,88,89].

The dominant religion in Finland is Protestantism. The Finnish Evangelical Lutheran Church and the Finnish Orthodox Church have the status of national churches. Thanks to this, they have special privileges, and the faithful pay taxes on their behalf. The percentage of people who believe in God and recognize the basic truths of the Christian religion is higher than in other Nordic countries. In the case of Finland, the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Finland has the largest share at 80.2%/72.57%, and the Orthodox Church has 1.1%/1.19%, while 17.6%/19% have no denomination. The decline in this share of the main church in Finland since 1950 is over 30% (in 1950, 95.7%, when only 2.7% of citizens had no religion) [87,88,89].

Based on the above conclusions, it can be concluded that in countries where Protestantism dominates and there is a significant proportion of non-believing citizens, there is a connection between a high level of rule of law and advanced modernization energy policy implemented in accordance with the adopted obligations. The countries with this type of dependency include: Denmark, Finland, Estonia, and Lithuania.

The research results presented in Section 3 allowed us to notice that the countries that are clearly not law-abiding and implementing a brown economy can be considered mainly Bulgaria, followed by Croatia and Greece. So, these are Balkan countries. They are immediately followed by Poland and Hungary, i.e., Central European countries. What connects these groups of Balkan countries and Central Europe? These are countries that differ from the group of law-abiding countries committed to implementing a green economy by their strong attachment to religion (a small number of non-believers) and where the Catholic religion dominates.

Bulgaria as a leader in its lack of rule of law and in its brown economy is characterized by the following religious structure: Orthodox Christianity 83%/80.88%, Islam 13.7%/13.62%, Protestantism 0.6%/2.01%, Catholicism 0.5%/1.05%, and non-believers 4.2%/4.19%. It is therefore the most Orthodox country analyzed here [87,88,89]. Next, close to each other—and far behind Bulgaria—are Croatia and Greece. In Croatia, Catholics are the largest group at 88.5%/83.58%. The next groups of believers are Orthodox at 4.4%/5.6%, Muslim at 1.4%/1.89%, and Protestants at 0.3%/0.84%. Non-believers constitute 5.1%/4.32% [87,88,89].

The religious structure of Greece is as follows: Orthodox Christianity 88.3%/87.98%, Islam 5.3%/5.83%, Catholicism 0.7%/1.32%, Protestantism 0.3%/0.23%, and non-believers 6%/6.1% [87,88,89].

The next two countries in this infamous ranking were Poland and Hungary. Let us look at the religious structure in these countries. Poland stands out in Europe due to the very high share of the Catholic religion there—92.2%/90.1%, compared to Orthodox Christianity at 1.3%/1.53% (mainly residents of the eastern and south-eastern parts of the country—Ukrainian and Belarusian minorities) and Protestantism at 0.4%/0.35%. The rate of non-believers was 5.6%/4.24 [87,88,90]. Hungary is distinguished from Poland by a much larger shares of non-believers in this structure—18.6%/11.85%—and of the Protestant religion—21.6%/26.09%. Also, like in Poland, the Catholic religion is dominant 60.6%/60.04%. There is a negligible share of the Orthodox religion—0.1%/1.54%—and Islam—0.3%/0.32% [87,88,90].

Based on the above conclusions, it can be concluded that in countries where the Catholic or Orthodox religion dominates, there is a relationship between a low level of rule of law and a very conservative energy policy implemented as a brown economy. The countries with this type of strong dependency include Bulgaria, Greece (with dominant Orthodox religion), Croatia, Hungary, and Poland (with dominant Catholic religion). The common religious roots of these two subgroups of countries have important determinants, which was also indicated in the analysis carried out by the Pew Research Center in 2017 [90]. Therefore, the approach to ecology in the form of the proposed and implemented energy policy has much deeper foundations than it initially seemed. The sense of need for and compliance with the rule of law, correlated with a responsible and sustainable approach to the environment, nature, and energy, has ontological foundations. It is an expression of an approach to life and the world and its practical implementation. Either this approach is very responsible toward the environment and people or it is less responsible.

In countries where Protestantism predominates, this correlation falls positively and is at a high level, which translates to a high level of rule of law and advanced modernizing energy policies implemented in accordance with the commitments made. The countries with this type of correlation include Denmark, Finland, Sweden, the Netherlands, and Estonia. The opposite is true for countries where Catholic or Orthodox religions predominate, e.g., Bulgaria, Greece, Romania, Cyprus, Hungary, Croatia, Malta, Poland, Italy. This dependence may be related, of course, to the level of wealth of these countries, but its causes can also be linked to their approach to the phenomenon of communitarianism, the way it is realized, and the related understanding of the importance of civil society and public participation in the creation and implementation of and accountability in politics. In the official documents of the European Union, churches are treated as institutions of civil society and are credited with the role of involving citizens, especially in local affairs. As explained by Wioletta Szymczak, people involved in these organizations of religious provenance can be seen, on the one hand, as implementers and carriers of the norm of commitment to the common good and social solidarity and religious or church organizations as schools of civic virtues or, on the opposite pole, as sources of alienation, ghettoization, and opposition to democratic values such as freedom, autonomy, and tolerance [91].

Given the close ties between the Catholic Church in Poland and the ruling conservative coalition, this relationship may translate into support for the policies of a government that is tarnished in terms of its rule of law and passive in terms of its energy policy commitments. In contrast to the above, with regard to Protestantism, by contrast, it is worth pointing to the results of R. Inglehart’s research in the World Value Survey, on which is written that “When the propensity to cooperate was taken into account as measured by attitude toward the law (trust in the legal system, acquiescence in breaking the law, such as tax fraud, giving bribes, among others), the overall conclusion was that Protestants trusted other people and the legal system more, and were less likely to accept tax fraud and bribes than Catholics. Catholics, on the other hand, supported private property twice as strongly as Protestants and were characterized by the highest support for the principle of competition among representatives of all denominations. Protestantism had a strong influence on the formation of attitudes conducive to civil society because it gave trust and knowledge not only a metaphorical, but a measurable character. It formed a specific type of culture, which for its duration and intergenerational reproduction no longer needed religion for the permanence and strength of civil society [92].”

Taking into account the results of the survey conducted, there is a clear polarization between the countries of the poorer European south and those of the richer north. In the former, the factors related to economic costs entailing social costs seem to take precedence over issues related to the rule of law in these countries and the implementation of commitments made at the supranational level of the EU political system. This may be due to the too-short period of functioning in the European Union and the “breathlessness” of the societies of these countries associated with the constant need to “catch up” with richer countries in the sphere of economic development (Figure 8). This pursuit is carried out on the basis of multi-generational sacrifices, in which some social groups no longer want to be active or do not keep up with the pace of change. Their attitudes and views on too much change and misunderstood progress provide fodder for a growing number of populist or national-conservative parties proposing simple prescriptions to stop it, including denying or disregarding the rule of law in countries where they have taken the helm of power. This trend is noticeable in a number of EU member states but is particularly accentuated in those countries of the south that joined the EU after 2004 (Figure 8).

Also to be considered is the observation of the influence of the dominant religion/religion on the correlation between the level of rule of law and the energy policies of member states (Figure 8). And at this level, there seem to be determinants of the correlations between the rule of law and the dynamics of change in the energy sector in EU countries.

5. Conclusions

5.1. Recommendations on the Rule of Law and Energy Policy

Examining the correlation between the level of rule of law in EU member states and the implementation of the European Union’s energy policy has not attracted attention from researchers so far. The originality of such research lies in rejecting the separateness of the problem of adherence to the rule of law principles in EU member countries from the problem of implementing energy policy resulting from the normative acts adopted at this level. This article’s authors believe that this less noticeable dependency deserves examination and the verification of previous convictions.

The content of this article allows for the identification of the correlations between the level of rule of law in European Union countries and the fulfillment of obligations arising from EU policies, in this case, energy policy. Analyses enable the identification of countries and governments that demonstrate loyalty to EU commitments, pursuing their national interest in line with European interests, as well as those prioritizing other interests over European ones.

The main conclusions of the study are as follows:

• The EU’s energy policy is determined by a number of factors, one of which is the level of rule of law in various member countries.
• The rule of law (and its level) in a given country influences the implementation of energy policy resulting from the need to implement EU law and implement solutions that fulfill it.
• A low level of rule of law in an EU member state can contribute to delays in or the deformation of the energy policy objectives implemented by that state within the framework of the whole that is the EU.
• The most significant influence on the effectiveness of the implementation of EU laws and obligations to other member states—linked to the rule of law—in the area of energy policy is related to “Fundamental Rights” and “Order and Security” (see FR and OS in Table 2).
• In the EU, the best performers in terms of the rule of law and responsible implementation of energy policy are Denmark, Finland, Luxembourg, and Spain. In the EU, performing very badly with the rule of law and implementing energy policy in a limited way are Latvia, Greece, Poland, Croatia, Hungary, Slovakia, Bulgaria, and Cyprus.

The conclusions from the analysis presented in the article have utilitarian value, providing scientific foundations for EU institutions to introduce disciplinary solutions for member states that violate or fail to adhere to the rule of law, harming the dynamics of its implementation in the Union as a whole.

EU activities should be differentiated and depend on the classification used in Table 4. Group O1 can serve as a benchmark for other EU countries—Benchmark Strategy Group Countries (BSGCs). Group O2 requires an EU policy directed at strengthening its activities related to improving the rule of law—“Money” for the “Rule of Law” (MRoL). In contrast, the O3 group requires thorough economic support to develop a modern energy sector—"Money” for “Green Activities” (MfGA).

The most problematic and challenging for the EU is the O4 group, which has been widely described in academic discussion (see Section 4). The most restrictive policies should be pursued against the countries in this group (O4)—that is, among other things, the application, by analogy, of the rule of law or the introduction of the new “Money” “Green Energy” (MfGE) principle. This indicates the priority of EU action on energy policy and the rule of law.

This research and its conclusions also allow for the identification of specific characteristics of the rule of law with a significant or insignificant impact on the implementation of energy policies adopted by EU member states. The results of these analyses can serve as benchmarks for disciplinary actions by EU institutions toward member states to maintain coherence and the expected dynamics of the organization’s development.

5.2. Limitations of Research

In the course of collecting the research material, preparing the methodological assumptions, conducting the research, and preparing the text, several limitations of research were identified. The most important ones are indicated below.

5.2.1. Theoretical Limitations

One limitation of the article, identified in this area, is the lack of scientific articles examining the relationship and correlation between the rule of law and energy policy, assuming that we use quantitative variables. Analyzing the correlations for these two different, and often so distant in content, areas of science can cause scientific cognitive dissonance. However, the research conducted shows that the problems identified are apparent.

The research attempt undertaken is one of the first in this area of science. As such, references to the literature are indirect, and the research method adopted is pioneering in nature. On the one hand, this may attest to the originality of the study, thereby filling a scientific gap in this area, while on the other hand, its uniqueness may attest to an unusual approach and raise cognitive objections.

5.2.2. Methodology Limitations

The variables adopted in the article were collected from various commercial and non-commercial sources. Energy policy data are scattered, and variables are often difficult to compare substantively and numerically.

Another limitation stems from the difficulty of obtaining data caused by the problem of the availability of energy policy data. These data are collected in heterogeneous databases by many different institutions. As a result, the data are of limited analytical quality. At the same time, there is a large variety of data, which forced the authors of the article to select only some variables describing energy policy.

Not all data on the rule of law were available for 2020. This gave rise to the need to supplement the data. For this purpose, data from 2021 were used, assuming that they better showed the research trends. This information is described in the Data Sources and Transformation section.

The limitation also extends to the geographic aspect—the survey covered only European Union member states.

The discussion carried out in this article focused on the most clear-cut countries for analysis, which represent the benchmark (O1 countries) and those that cause the most problems, representing a priority for EU action (O4 countries).