scholarly journals The EU and Climate Change Policy: Law, Politics and Prominence at Different Levels

2008 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 179-192
Author(s):  
Chad David Damro ◽  
Iain Hardie ◽  
Donald MacKenzie
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
Preliminary Investigation ◽  
Climate Change Policy ◽  
Individual Member ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Change Policy ◽  
Multiple Pressures ◽  
Different Levels ◽  
The Eu

The European Union (EU) is a prominent player in the politics of climate change, operating as an authoritative regional actor that influences policy-making at the national and international levels. The EU’s climate change policies are thus subjected to multiple pressures that arise from the domestic politics of its twenty-seven individual member states and the international politics of non-EU states with which it negotiates. Facing these multiple pressures, how and why could such a non-traditional actor develop into a prominent player at different levels of climate change policy-making? This article argues that the EU’s rise to prominence can be understood by tracking a number of historical-legal institutional developments at the domestic and international levels. The article also provides a preliminary investigation of the EU emissions trading scheme, a new institutional mechanism that illustrates the policy pressures arising from different levels.

scholarly journals European Union as a Leader in Climate Change Policy: Assessing Europe’s Roles in the World∗

2016 ◽  
Vol 12 (5) ◽  
pp. 285
Author(s):  
Omer Ugur ◽  
Kadir Caner Dogan ◽  
Metin Aksoy
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
European Union ◽  
International Politics ◽  
Climate Change Policy ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Change Policy ◽  
The Usa ◽  
The Moment ◽  
Climate Change Politics ◽  
The Eu

The European Union has grown up in terms of influence and size in international politics. The size of its economy and the ever-increasing membership, have seen its ambitions grow meaning that the EU now has an international presence it did not have at its formation. It is easy to say that with the EU being an ambitious actor in international politics, the rise into prominence of climate change naturally came in handy for the EU as it provided an opportunity for the EU to assert itself and prove both its capacity and presence. The 1992 Rio Earth Summit and the withdrawal of the USA from the obligations of the Kyoto came as a blessing in disguise for the Union as it seized the moment to assert itself. Thus, in trying to understand what role the EU has or is playing in international climate change politics, there is need to assess its leadership claims and what it has done to prove these claims. To get there, the paper will navigate through a part of the discipline of International Relations (IR) to understand how it provides for a basis to explain or understand the EU’s limitations and strengths on actorness.

scholarly journals Understanding the Paradoxes of Multilevel Governing: Climate Change Policy in the European Union

2012 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 43-66 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Jordan ◽  
Harro van Asselt ◽  
Frans Berkhout ◽  
Dave Huitema ◽  
Tim Rayner
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
European Union ◽  
Climate Change Policy ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Climate Governance ◽  
Paradoxical Situation ◽  
Change Policy ◽  
Leading Position ◽  
Multi Level ◽  
The Eu

The European Union (EU) has sought to lead the world in the adoption of ambitious climate change mitigation targets and policies. In an attempt to characterize and broadly explain the resulting pattern of EU climate governance, scholars have employed the term “multi-level reinforcement.” This term does help to account for the paradoxical situation whereby the EU seeks to lead by example but is itself a relatively leaderless system of governance. Drawing on a much fuller empirical account of the evolution of EU climate governance, this article finds that the term captures some but not all aspects of the EU's approach. It identifies four other paradoxical features of the EU's approach and assesses the extent to which they exhibit “multi-level reinforcement.” It concludes by looking forward and examining the extent to which all five features are expected to enable and/or constrain the EU's ability to maintain a leading position in climate governance.

scholarly journals Climate Change Policy of Turkey: An Analysis of Regular Progress Reports

2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 189-201 ◽  
Author(s):  
Onur Kulaç ◽  
Evinç Torlak
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Climate Change Policy ◽  
Global Perspective ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Analysis Method ◽  
International Organisations ◽  
Change Policy ◽  
Content Analysis Method ◽  
Almost All ◽  
The Eu

Abstract When assessed from a global perspective; environmental problems, especially in the last five decades, have been a threat to almost all countries. International organisations and institutions struggle to develop effective solutions for arising issues. Climate change is also evaluated as one of the most crucial risks for the environment. European Commission regular progress reports hold a guiding role for the candidate countries and in light of that numerous policies of the relevant countries have aligned with the European Union (EU) acquis. The main purpose of the study is to analyze the climate change policy of Turkey within the context of regular progress reports in an effort to mend the gap fill the void in literature regarding climate change policy of Turkey. Therefore, 7 regular progress reports between the years 2010-2016, when climate change was considered as a title, will be scrutinised in terms of legislation, institutional structure and emission gas through content analysis method with the aim of having a functional assessment about the determinations and the expectations of the EU. The study reveals that although Turkey has made fundamental progress over the years regarding climate change, there are still some crucial issues that need to be reconsidered to have an effective climate change policy.

The Climate Change Policy: The Position of the European Union

1998 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 449-461
Author(s):  
Peter Palinkas
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Greenhouse Gases ◽  
Climate Change Policy ◽  
Emission Trading ◽  
Active Role ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Change Policy ◽  
The Eu

The EU has always tried to play a major role in coordinating the activities of its now 15 Member States in the broad area of climate change policy. This active role of the EU was demonstrated in the first climate protection negotiations (Rio de Janeiro, 1992), the follow-up conferences (Berlin 1995 and Geneva 1996) and finally at the Kyoto-Conference in December 1997. At the Kyoto-Conference the EU negotiators had to abandon their original negotiating position of 15% reduction based on three greenhouse gases. The final Protocol requires a collective EU reduction by 8% based on 6 gases. This modification is, however, closer to the initial EU position than it indicates, since the final commitment based on six gases is roughly equivalent to a 13% reduction based on 3 gases only. Further compromise made by the EU was on the issue of differentiation. Keeping the “EU-bubble” approach, the EU had to accept country-specific reduction targets as initially proposed by the Japanese delegation. The EU also had to agree on including emissions-trading and joint implementation in the Protocol. During the negotiations EU representatives expressed their concern that trading must not become a substitute for any domestic actions. Consequently, in the Protocol any emission trading is declared as supplementary to domestic actions. Despite the number of unavoidable concessions made by the EU negotiators, the European Commission recognized that the Kyoto protocol is an important first step toward reversing the upward trend in the emissions of greenhouse gases. However, the EU Commissioner Ritt Bjerregaard expressed a certain disappointment in not reaching agreement on even more ambitious commitments.

scholarly journals Swiss Climate Change Law

2021 ◽  
pp. 17-47
Author(s):  
Julia Hänni ◽  
Tienmu Ma
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Climate Change Policy ◽  
The European Union ◽  
European Climate ◽  
Change Policy ◽  
European Court ◽  
Recent Innovation ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Reduce Emissions

AbstractThis chapter explores the relationship between Swiss climate change law and the international and European climate change regimes. At the international level, the chapter reviews the three major international agreements regulating the field: the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), the Kyoto Protocol to the UNFCCC, and the Paris Agreement. And at the national and regional levels, the chapter briefly describes the CO2 Act—often considered the heart of Swiss climate change policy—and questions whether it will prove effective in achieving its explicitly stated emissions reduction targets. The chapter then reviews the most significant recent innovation in the evolution of Swiss climate change policy: joining the Emissions Trading System (ETS) established by the European Union. Due to long-standing problems afflicting the ETS, the authors raise doubts about whether Switzerland’s joining the scheme will lead to meaningful reductions in the country’s greenhouse gas emissions. As an alternative to an ETS-centric approach, the authors refer to an approach centered on human rights. Drawing on the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), the major international climate change agreements, other sources of international law, and the recent Urgenda decision of the Supreme Court of the Netherlands, the authors argue that under the human rights approach, Switzerland would be obligated to take stronger measures to reduce emissions than it could hope to achieve through the ETS and the CO2 Act alone.

Declarations: Root and Branch Unthinking

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-16
Author(s):  
Peter J. Taylor ◽  
Geoff O’Brien ◽  
Phil O’Keefe
Keyword(s):  
Climate Change ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Social Science ◽  
International Relations ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
Climate Change Policy ◽  
Complex Problem ◽  
Jane Jacobs ◽  
Change Policy ◽  
Fit For Purpose

This chapter takes the failure of current climate change policy as a given and seeks explanations and ways forward. Policy-making should be firmly grounded in the essential nature of anthropogenic climate change – a complex problem and an existential threat. It is found wanting in three fundamental aspects. International relations with its competitive preposition is found to be not fit for purpose as decision-making arena. The scientific input for decision-making underplays the ‘anthropo’ bit of climate change and therefore is found unfit for purpose. And social science contributions are found not fit for purpose because of their innate state-centric bias. To overcome the resulting impasse requires critical unthinking. The work of Jane Jacobs is chosen as guide to unthinking thereby foregrounding cities. An invitation is issued for others to provide alternate unthinking.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document