Between the USA and the South: Strategic choices for European climate policy

Climate Policy

Volumn 5, Issue 3, 2005, Pages 273-290

  Biermann, Frank ^a  

^a INSTITUTE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Developing country climate policy; European climate policy; Kyoto Protocol; Post 2012 climate governance architecture; US climate policy

Indexed keywords

CLIMATE CHANGE; ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY; INTERNATIONAL COMPARISON; KYOTO PROTOCOL; STRATEGIC APPROACH;

EURASIA; EUROPE; NORTH AMERICA; UNITED STATES;

EID: 27744441265     PISSN: 14693062     EISSN: 17527457     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/14693062.2005.9685558     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Aldy, J. E., Orszag, P. R., and Stiglitz, J. E., 2001. Climate change:an agenda for global collective action. Prepared for the conference on The Timing of Climate Change Policies Washington DC:Pew Center on Global Climate Change.
2. Aldy, J., Barrett, S., and Stavins, R., 2003. Thirteen plus one:a comparison of global climate policy architectures. Regulatory Policy Program Working Paper RPP-2003–04.
3. Andresen, S., and Agrawala, S., 2001. US climate policy:evolution and future prospects. Energy and Environment, 12 (2–3):117–139.
4. Barnett, M. N., and Finnemore, M., 1999. The politics, power and pathologies of international organizations. 53–4. International Organization. 699–732
5. Barrett, S., 2001. Towards a better climate treaty. World Economics, 3 (2):519–541.
6. Barrett, S., 2002. Towards a Better Climate Treaty. Opinion Pieces, AEI-Brookings Joint Center for Regulatory Studies.
7. Benedick, R., 2001. Striking a new deal on climate change Issues in Science and Technology (online), Fall[available at http://www.issues.org/issues/18.1/benedick.html]
8. Biermann, F., 1996. Common concern of humankind:the emergence of a new concept of international environmental law. Archiv des Völkerrechts, 34 (4):426–481.
9. Biermann, F., 1999. “ Justice in the greenhouse:perspectives from international law. ”. In Fair Weather? Equity Concerns in Climate Change., London:Earthscan Publications Edited by:Tóth, F. L., 160–172.
10. Biermann, F., 2002. Common concerns of humankind and national sovereignty. In:Globalism:People, Profits and Progress:Proceedings of the 30th Annual Conference of the Canadian Council on International Law, Ottawa, 18–20 October 2001. 158–212. Dordrecht, The Netherlands:Kluwer.
11. Biermann, F., and Bauer, S., 2005. Managers of global governance:assessing and explaining the influence of international bureaucracies Global Governance Working Paper. The Global Governance Project, Amsterdam, Potsdam, Berlin, Oldenburg[available at http://www.glogov.org]
12. Biermann, F., and Brohm, R., 2003. Implementing the Kyoto Protocol without the United States:the strategic role of energy tax adjustments at the border Global Governance Working Paper No. 5. The Global Governance Project, Amsterdam, Potsdam, Berlin, Oldenburg[available at http://www.glogov.org]
13. Biermann, F., and Brohm, R., 2005. Implementing the Kyoto Protocol without the USA:the strategic role of energy tax adjustments at the border. Climate Policy, 4:289–302.
14. Biermann, F., and Sohn, H.-D., 2004. Europe and multipolar global governance:India and East Asia as new partners? Global Governance Working Paper No 10 The Global Governance Project, Amsterdam, Potsdam, Berlin, Oldenburg[available at http://www.glogov.org]
15. Bodansky, D., 2002a. U.S. climate policy after Kyoto:elements for success. Policy Brief, 15 (April) Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Washington DC
16. Bodansky, D., 2002b. Linking U.S. and International Climate Change Strategies. Washington DC:Pew Center.
17. Bradford, D. F., 2002. Improving on Kyoto:greenhouse gas control as the purchase of a global public good. Princeton University Working Paper, Draft of 30 April 2002. Princeton, NJ Princeton University
18. Cooper, R., 1998. Toward a real treaty on global warming. Foreign Affairs, 77 (2):66–79.
19. Cooper, R., 2001. The Kyoto Protocol:a flawed concept. Environmental Law Reporter, 31:11484–11492.
20. Danish, K. W., 2004. “ Linking a U.S. federal climate program with international and sub-federal climate programs. ”. In A Climate Policy Framework:Balancing Policy and Politics. Report of an Aspen Institute Climate Change Policy Dialogue, 14–17 November 2003. Edited by:Riggs, J. A., 73–82. Washington, DC:Pew Center.
21. Egenhofer, C., and Fujiwara, N., 2003. The Emerging Climate Change Regime:The UNFCCC, the Kyoto Protocol Forever, Kyoto Modified…Or Yet Something Else? Final Report of a Study Prepared for Environmental Studies Group Economic and Social Research Institute, Cabinet Office, Government of Japan
22. Finnemore, M., 1996. Norms, culture, and world politics:insights from sociology's institutionalism. International Organization, 50 (2):325–347.
23. Finnemore, M., and Sikkink, K., 1998. International norm dynamics and political change. International Organization, 52 (4):887–917.
24. German Government. 2005. Press release:US—German joint actions on cleaner and more efficient energy, development and climate change [available at www.bundesregierung.de/Anlage792411/Deutsch-amerikanisches+Aktions-programm+%28engl.+Version%29.doc (last accessed 3 March 2005)]
25. Gupta, J., 1997. The Climate Change Convention and Developing Countries:From Conflict to Consensus? Kluwer Academic The Netherlands:Dordrecht.
26. Hale, T. N., and Mauzerall, D. L., 2004. Thinking globally and acting locally:can the Johannesburg partnerships coordinate action on sustainable development?. Journal of Environment and Development, 13 (3):220–239.
27. Hall, P. A., and Taylor, R. C.R., 1996. Political science and the three new institutionalisms. Political Studies, 44 (5):936–957.
28. Informal Working Group of Experts on Financial Mechanisms for the Implementation of the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer. 1989. Report of the Meeting in Geneva, 3–7 July 1989. UN Doc. UNEP/OzL.Pro.Mech.1/Inf.1 of 16 August 1989.
29. Kant, I., 1795/1983. “ Zum ewigen Frieden:Ein philosophischer Entwurf. ”. In Immanuel Kant:Werke in 6 Bänden. Edited by:von Weischedel, W., 191–251. Darmstadt, Germany:Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.
30. Kohler, D. F., Haaga, J., and Camm, F., 1987. Projections of Consumption of Products Using Chlorofluorocarbons in Developing Countries. Santa Monica, CA:Rand Corporation.
31. March, J. G., and Olsen, J. P., 1998. The institutional dynamics of international political orders. International Organization, 52 (4):943–969.
32. Müller, B., Drexhage, J., Grubb, M., Michaelowa, A., and Sharma, A., 2003. “ Framing Future Commitments:A Pilot Study on the Evolution of the UNFCCC Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Regime ”. In Oxford Institute for Energy Studies EV Vol. 32, Oxford (June)
33. Najam, A., Huq, S., and Sokona, Y., 2003. Climate negotiations beyond Kyoto:developing country concerns and interests. Climate Policy, 3:221–231.
34. Nilsson, M., and Nilsson, L. J., 2005. Towards climate policy integration in the EU:evolving dilemmas and opportunities. Climate Policy, 5:363–376.
35. Philibert, C., and Pershing, J., 2001. Considering the options:climate targets for all countries. Climate Policy, 1:211–227.
36. Risse, T., Ropp, S. C., and Sikking, K., eds. 1999. The Power of Human Rights:International Norms, and Domestic Change. New York:Cambridge University Press.
37. Schelling, T. C., 2002. “ What makes greenhouse sense? Time to rethink the Kyoto Protocol. ”. Foreign Affairs8(May/June)[available at http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20020501facomment8138/thomas-c-schelling/what-makes-greenhouse-sense.html]
38. Simpson, B., 2002. Participation of developing countries in a climate change convention protocol. Asia Pacific Journal of Environmental Law, 7 (1):39–74.
39. Smith, K. R., Swisher, J., and Ahuja, D. R., 1993. “ Who pays (to solve the problem and how much)? ”. In The Global Greenhouse Regime:Who Pays? Science, Economics and North—South Politics in the Climate Change Convention. Edited by:Hayes, P., and Smith, K., 70–98. London:United Nations University Press. Earthscan Publications/
40. Stewart, R. B., and Wiener, J. B., 2003. Reconstructing Climate Policy. Washington, DC:AEI Press.
41. Sugiyama, T., 2003. ‘Orchestra of treaties’ scenario for after 2012 Presentation for the workshop ‘Developing Post-Kyoto Architecture’, 5 September 2003, Hamburg[available at:http://www.hwwa.de/Projekte/Forsch_Schwerpunkte/FS/Klimapolitik/PDFDokumente/Taishi.pdf]
42. Tangen, K., and Hasselknippe, H., 2003. Linking treaties to expand the market. Presentation for the side-event ‘Developing a post-Kyoto policy framework’ at the eighteenth, Bonn, June, 12:2003
43. Tol, R. J., 2002. Technology Protocols for Climate Change. An Application of FUND. Working Paper FNU-14.
44. Torvanger, A., Twena, M., and Vevatne, J., 2004. Climate Policy Beyond 2012:A Survey of Long-term targets and Future Frameworks. CICERO Report 2004:02. Oslo:Centre for International Climate and Environmental Research.
45. Vajpayee, A. B., 2002. Speech by Prime Minister Shri Atal Bihari Vajpayee at the Eighth Session of Conference of the Parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, 30 October 2002[available at http://meaindia.nic.in/speech/2002/10/30spc02.htm]
46. van Asselt, H., Biermann, F., and Gupta, J., 2004. “ Interlinkages of global climate governance. ”. In Beyond Climate:Options for Broadening Climate Policy. RIVM Report 500019001/2004 and NRP-CC Report 50003/01. Edited by:Kok, M. T.J., and de Coninck, H. C., 221–246. Bilthoven, The Netherlands:RIVM.
47. Victor, David G., 2001. The Collapse of the Kyoto Protocol and the Struggle to Slow Global Warming. Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press.
48. Young, O., 2002. The Institutional Dimensions of Environmental Change:Fit, Interplay, and Scale. Cambridge, MA:MIT Press.