Australia's climate policy has been spearheaded by the Emissions Reduction Fund (ERF), but its effectiveness in delivering emissions reduction has been disappointing. While the ERF provides a useful framework for potential climate policy, it lacks the strictness and severity necessary to achieve the goal of net zero emissions by 2050.

Recent analysis of the European Union Emissions Trading Scheme reveals that implementing a more comprehensive policy with mandatory and stricter emission targets will significantly improve the current trajectory of emissions production in Australia. This new climate policy will utilize the framework provided by the ERF, but with stricter targets that will encourage firms to invest in more efficient and environmentally friendly technologies.

Australia's current climate policy does not reflect the urgency of the environmental and security challenges posed by climate change. In late October, after substantial criticism from the international community, Australia finally agreed to achieving net zero emissions by 2050. However, a long-term emission reduction plan was released alongside this declaration that contained no new policies to reflect this changing goal. Carbon emissions in Australia have plateaued, and many experts question the legitimacy of Australia's current policies in reaching its emission reduction targets.

Australia's emissions per capita are the highest in the developed world, and Climate Transparency designated Australia the worst possible rating for its performance on emissions trends, carbon intensity, share of renewables in its energy supply, and overall climate policy. Australia's climate policy is not compatible with the Paris Agreement, and the country risks falling behind other nations that are moving towards more extreme reduction measures.

To combat these issues, it is recommended that Australia replaces the Emissions Reduction Fund with a more effective emissions trading scheme, similar to that conducted by the European Union. This policy change would also help the Australian economy to decouple from fossil fuel consumption and economically diversify.

The Emissions Reduction Fund's voluntary scheme is the flagship climate policy of Australia, but it has proven underwhelming in reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Unlike the carbon market of other countries, Australia's carbon market is largely voluntary. While the ERF's safeguard mechanism places a limit on the greenhouse emissions from large polluting businesses, preventing companies from polluting more than an agreed-upon emissions baseline, calculated based on their existing operations, it is not enough to deliver significant emissions reduction.

There are two key flaws in Australia's current approach: it is voluntary, and the 'safeguard mechanism' baseline has already been increased for many businesses, minimising the benefits of the ERF. The voluntary aspect of the ERF relies on incentivisation for emitting industries to reduce emissions, but many industries may simply elect not to join the fund, rendering it ineffective. Furthermore, those who do join may already be implementing efficiency measures, creating an overrepresentation of the actual benefit of the policy.

Looking to the European Union's successes, implementing a more comprehensive policy with mandatory and stricter emission targets similar to that of the European Union Emissions Trading Scheme will be necessary for Australia to address its emission reduction targets and the challenges posed by climate change.

The EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) is the world's first major carbon market and continues to be the largest cap-and-trade system in operation. The European Commission oversees and governs the EU ETS, setting a cap on the total amount of certain greenhouse gasses that companies can emit, with a steady reduction over time to ensure a decrease in total emissions. Participation in the EU ETS is compulsory for all firms emitting CO2, nitrous oxide, and perfluorocarbons.

Research indicates that emissions trading schemes can be effective when made mandatory, as evident through analysis of the EU ETS. A comprehensive review study shows a significant decline in CO2 emissions from sectors covered by the EU ETS, compared to estimated business-as-usual emissions.

The progress made in energy efficiency by sector is measured through the ODYSSEE Energy Efficiency Index (ODEX), which is a weighted average of subsector physical output-based energy efficiency indices. The EU industry sector's energy efficiency has improved, on average, annually at a rate of 1.8% between 1990 and 2014 and 1.3% between 2005 and 2014, compared to a typical average rate of about 1% per year for autonomous energy efficiency improvement. Historical trends suggest that the policies in place constituted an additional energy efficiency improvement.

The adoption of a more stringent cap-and-trade system will impact high polluting firms in the short-term, experiencing some cost for their emissions, but will benefit from improved production and reduced emissions in the long run. In the short-term, consumers will bear some of the increased cost due to climate policy measures. For instance, in the carbon pricing system, the cost of production is passed onto consumers, resulting in an increase in the average family's electricity cost by 10%. The introduction of the carbon tax is estimated to increase the cost of living for households by around $9.90 per week on average. Still, the impact of costs will shift over time, as companies transition towards more sustainable and efficient production.

One of the theoretical frameworks dictating emission trading is negative incentivisation, imposing a financial cost for making specific choices or taking certain actions. Recent behavioural economics research found that negative incentives are more motivating than positive incentives, i.e. motivating individuals through a gain. In a voluntary trading scheme, firms are more likely to join when they feel they can benefit, whereas an involuntary scheme means that all firms must join and face a loss if they fail to cooperate.

Politically, Australia's economy relies heavily on fossil fuel exports, making it challenging to push for strong climate action, especially among big businesses in the mining sector. The mining industry accounts for 10.4% of Australian GDP, making Australia the world's largest exporter of coal and liquified natural gas. The emissions from the fossil fuels extracted by major gas, coal, and oil producing companies in Australia are larger than all domestic emissions combined. However, relying on natural resource exports hinders Australia's economic diversity and makes it more vulnerable to market shocks while demand for fossil fuels is likely to diminish as the global community shifts to renewables.

Australia urgently requires a fresh climate policy to demonstrate its comprehension of the highly significant repercussions of climate change to the worldwide community. It also needs to mitigate the potentially devastating consequences resulting from inadequate action. Though the Emissions Reduction Fund (ERF) isn't suitable to achieve current emissions objectives, it could be used to structure a more effective emissions trading scheme. The EU Emissions Trading Scheme highlights the feasibility of a roadmap for improved environmental measures in Australia. This initiative successfully accomplished a drastic decrease in CO2 emissions in the European Union.

Several reputable sources, including Climate Change Authority, Climate Action Tracker, and Science Direct, have discussed successful climate change mitigation policies. They emphasize that delaying climate action will lead to destructive outcomes. Australia is currently one of the world's top carbon dioxide emitters based on its extensive fossil fuel utilization. Several reports, including ABC News and Climate Justice, suggest that Australia's lack of climate change response policies is alarming.

Australia's past efforts to regulate carbon emissions effectively, including the controversial carbon tax from 2012, which led to increased business failures, have yet to produce the desired results. To achieve success, Australia must embrace policies that have proven successful in other continents. By doing so, the nation would demonstrate leadership and the understanding of the urgency of climate change.

Your task is to rephrase and revamp the following list of references in original and natural English:

1) Mariotti, Caterina. "Theory and Practice of Emissions Trading in the European Union: Some Reflections on Allowance Allocation in Light of the DK Recycling Case." European Papers, 2016.

2) EEA. "Progress on Energy Efficiency in Europe." European Environment Agency, 2016.

3) Science Direct. "A Review of Successful Climate Change Mitigation Policies in Major Emitting Economies and the Potential of Global Replication." Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2021.

4) Tennant, Michael. "Australia's Carbon Tax Contributing to Record Business Failures." The New American, 2013.

5) Goldsmith, Kelly and Ravi Dhar. "Negativity Bias and Task Motivation: Testing the Effectiveness of Positively versus Negatively Framed Incentives." Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 2013.

6) Kilvert, Nick. "Australia is the World's Third-Largest Exporter of CO2 in Fossil Fuels, Report Finds." ABC News Science, 2019.

7) Moss, Jeremy. "Carbon Majors: Overview." Climate Justice, 2019.

1) Caterina Mariotti's study explores the theory and application of emissions trading in the EU with a particular focus on allowance allocation in light of the DK Recycling case.

2) The European Environment Agency reports on Europe's progress towards energy efficiency within the region.

3) Science Direct's review examines climate change mitigation policies in significant emitting economies and the potential of replicating them globally.

4) Michael Tennant's article in The New American argues that Australia's carbon tax has contributed to business failures in the country.

5) The study by Kelly Goldsmith and Ravi Dhar investigates the effectiveness of positively framing incentives compared to negatively framing them concerning negativity bias and task motivation.

6) Nick Kilvert's report in ABC News Science reveals that Australia is the third-largest exporter of CO2 in fossil fuels globally.

7) Jeremy Moss' Carbon Majors overview highlights the major companies that have contributed the most to global carbon emissions.