Global Governance and Transatlantic Relations in the Issue Area of Climate Change

 academic article/report  Comments Off on Global Governance and Transatlantic Relations in the Issue Area of Climate Change
Apr 082008
 

A transatlantic policy divide has occurred during the last one and a half decades since the Berlin wall came down, the Cold War ended, and there was hope for the pay-off of what was has been called a peace dividend. This hope included widespread optimism that the global society would now be able to focus on new, pressing, non-security challenges which were increasingly global and badly needed worldwide solutions. Seen from today, this hope has not been satisfied. The topic of my presentation here today is “global governance and transatlantic relations in the issue area of climate change”. It is divided in four major blocks: First I will talk about what makes climate change a global governance issue and an issue with great importance for the transatlantic relationship. Then I will briefly explore on where the Atlantic partners lost their joint path and around what the transatlantic differences in the field of climate policy revolve. Thirdly, I will come up with a few theses about why that might have happened, i.e. why the US and Europe have taken different approaches and still hold different views. Finally, I will come up with a few suggestions for how we might be able to renew the Atlantic partnership in this important field.

BOOK CHAPTER in: René Gradwohl & Christoph Pohlmann, Renaissance of Transatlantic Relations – Perspectives of a New Partnership, Berlin 2004: p. 13-21 (PDF)

A Century of Climate Protection: How Global Warming Will Change Politics and Economics

 presentation  Comments Off on A Century of Climate Protection: How Global Warming Will Change Politics and Economics
Mar 202008
 

I delivered this presentation on 12 March 2008 at the German Embassy, Washington DC, on invitation of Egon Kochanke, Minister and Head of the Economic Department. The talkcovered a wide array of issues. I started with outlining the twin challenges of climate change and energy security. To compare the costs of non-action versus those of action, I then outlined and compared two scenarios, a three degree Celsius warmer world and one that has seen a third industrial revolution to prevent scenario one. I decline these scenarios along key dimensions of the challenge: the ecological problem and consequences for humanity; ethical and security dimensions; the political problem; as well as the economic dimension and the technological challenge.

I.a., my discussion included a climate policy snap shot, a focus on transatlantic disunity, a focus on power shifts in international (climate) relations, the question whether there is a new transatlantic climate looming, and an outlook of the challenges for future climate and energy policy in the search of a post-Kyoto framework.  Please find the presentation here.

Nach Nairobi: Wie weiter in der internationalen Klimapolitik?

 academic article/report  Comments Off on Nach Nairobi: Wie weiter in der internationalen Klimapolitik?
Mar 082008
 

Europa ist auf der Suche nach einem klimapolitischen Kompass für die nächsten Jahre.

Vom 6. bis 17. November 2006 fanden in der kenianischen Hauptstadt parallel die zwölfte Konferenz der 189 Vertragsstaaten der Klimarahmenkonvention und das zweite Treffen der 168 Mitgliedsländer des Kyoto-Protokolls statt. Die Verhandlungen wurden mit dem erneuten Hinweis eröffnet, dass es sich beim Klimawandel um die wohl größte globale Herausforderung in der Geschichte der Menschheit handelt. Die Konferenzergebnisse nehmen sich demgegenüber eher mager aus. Deutschland und Europa wollen die internationale Klimapolitik weiter anführen. Was sind die großen Herausforderungen?

SWP Diskussionspapier, Januar 2007

The Climate Changes: Europe Learns to Lead

 Uncategorized  Comments Off on The Climate Changes: Europe Learns to Lead
Mar 012008
 

At their summit last week, the twenty-seven member countries of the European Union agreed on an impressive package of climate policy targets. The union committed to an overall goal of a 20 percent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2020. Bio-fuels in transport must then account for at least 10 percent, and no less than one fifth of EU energy will have to be generated from renewable sources such as wind, solar, biomass and hydro power. The agreement was quickly praised as “groundbreaking” and “bold” by UK Prime Minister Tony Blair, “the most ambitious package ever agreed by any commission or any group of countries on energy security and climate protection” by EU Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso, and as constituting a “new quality of climate policy” and the basis for a “third technological revolution” by German Chancellor Angela Merkel. Politicians’ eulogizing of their own efforts is nothing new in politics, not even in the EU which has not exactly been crowned with success in recent years. Still, for a number of reasons the accord might indeed stand as a remarkable milestone in European diplomatic history.

BLOG, March 2007 (PDF)

 

The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly? Europe, the United States, and China at the World Climate Conference

 essay  Comments Off on The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly? Europe, the United States, and China at the World Climate Conference
Feb 012008
 

The picture drawn by the media of the main protagonists at the UN conference on climate change in Bali was reminiscent of Sergio Leone’s famous spaghetti western. In one corner of the stand-off, a tenacious and uppity Europe, convinced that she will succeed. Then there was America, with her presumptuous plan to either get her own say or obstruct everyone else’s. And finally, China. Recently declared the world’s number one greenhouse gas emitter, she insisted on her right to pollute even more in the future. It was a boring picture, one we have seen all too often in the past. Until the very last day, the Bali summit was only the newest episode in a showdown habitually played out at yearly climate conferences: The European Union tries to provide leadership but cannot do it on its own, while the United States and China remain stuck in their regular gridlock ritual, both unwilling to take responsibility for their share of the problem. This year’s climate conference, however, took a dramatic turn: the script was changed so that, at least this season, the perennial tragedy ended on a positive note. FACET Commentary No. 6

AICGS Event – The Third Industrial Revolution: Energy Security, Transatlantic Relations, and the Economic Case for Climate Policy

 Uncategorized  Comments Off on AICGS Event – The Third Industrial Revolution: Energy Security, Transatlantic Relations, and the Economic Case for Climate Policy
Dec 032007
 

On December 3, 2007, AICGS was pleased to host AICGS Senior Fellow Alexander Ochs for a lecture titled “The Third Industrial Revolution: Energy Security, Transatlantic Relations, and the Economic Case for Climate Policy.” This lecture was made possible by the generous support of the German Academic Exchange Service (DAAD).

Mr. Ochs began his presentation with an overview of American and European climate policy, including the differing international, national, and sub-national approaches taken by the U.S. and the EU; the difficulties facing the Kyoto Protocol (namely the gridlock between the U.S. and major developing countries); and the main sticking points of transatlantic disunity (including disagreements over the necessity of binding emissions reduction targets and time frames, mechanisms for their implementation, and the inclusiveness of the international regime). He then offered his perspective on the next crucial steps for successfully implementing effective international climate policy. These included the importance of U.S. domestic legislation, the design of a sustainable post-Kyoto framework, a leadership role for the U.S., and the EU’s willingness to continue leadership both at home and in the international sphere.

The challenges of climate change and energy security, Mr. Ochs argued, are intrinsically tied to each other. The climate problem cannot be solved without reforming the energy sector and, likewise, energy security is not possible or affordable with our current energy mismanagement. Thus, we are faced with an ecological problem (increased global temperatures lead to more frequent and intense weather extremes, sea-level rise, and risks to plant, animal and human life); a political problem (overcoming the horizontal and vertical complexities of the world’s “most global” problem); an ethical problem (the poor countries are the most adversely impacted but the rich countries are most responsible for the problem); and an economic-technological challenge (reforming an economy that has been thriving based on fossil fuels for most of the last one and a half centuries since the second industrial revolution).

[Please find a full summary here and the presentation slides here]

 Newer Entries