This site is no longer actively updated; if you have a current subscription to Earthscan journals please go to https://www.ingentaconnect.com/register/institutional to register on the new site and gain access to your journal; if you are not a current subscriber go to sales@portland-services.com to subscribe, or to www.earthscan.co.uk/journals for more information.
Climate Policy
Climate Policy 5 (2005) 273–290
|
|
|
|
|
|
Between the USA and the South: strategic choices for European climate policy
|
|
|
Frank Biermann
|
|
|
Received 14 January 2005
; received in revised form 8 March 2005
; accepted 8 March 2005
|
|
Abstract
This article discusses Europe’s strategic choices in current climate policy. It argues that the future climate governance architecture must pass four tests: credibility, stability, flexibility, and inclusiveness. Drawing on this, I review the strategic choices for Europe, structured around three levels of analysis in political science: climate polity, that is, the larger institutional and legal context of policy making; climate policy, the instruments and targets that governments agree to implement; and climate politics, the actual negotiation process. At each level of analysis, I look at the interests and expectations of two non-European actors or actor groups: the USA, which accounts for over a third of all Northern greenhouse gas emissions, and the group of developing countries, which accounts for the vast majority of humankind. I argue that Europe must take clear principled positions on a number of key issues, in particular the need to have a strong multilateral framework as the sole and core institutional setting for climate policy and to accept the principle of equal per-capita emissions entitlements as the long-term normative bedrock of global climate governance. Both positions, however, will alienate the USA, and both will make it more difficult for the USA to rejoin the international community on the climate issue.
Keywords: European climate policy; US climate policy; Developing country climate policy; Post-2012 climate governance architecture; Kyoto Protocol
 download full article
|
