Kyoto Protocol and the European Union's Climate Leadership

Background: From Rio de Janeiro to the Kyoto Protocol

The Kyoto Protocol and the European Union share a long and important connection. The Protocol was designed to reduce carbon emissions and grew out of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) — a treaty that resulted from a gathering of nations held in Rio de Janeiro in June 1992. Under the terms of the UNFCCC, all nations signing the treaty were obligated to establish national programs intended to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. As part of the treaty, the signatory developed nations were also required to submit annual reports detailing their progress. The hope of the Convention was that all nations would begin to stabilize their greenhouse emissions toward 1990 levels and, ideally, fully do so by the year 2000.

It is important to note that the Convention made a distinction between developed, industrialized nations and still-developing nations. The reasoning behind this distinction was the recognition that developed nations were not only largely responsible for the greenhouse emissions that existed at the time of the Rio de Janeiro meeting, but also possessed the institutional and financial capacity to develop the technology necessary to remedy those emissions' effects.

Although the concepts advanced by the conference were admirable, the treaty failed to provide strong enforcement procedures and failed to establish universal standards on greenhouse gas emissions. These weaknesses were immediately recognized by participating nations, and the members of the European Union were aggressive in their efforts to close the treaty's loopholes. The EU's goal was to set legally binding limits on greenhouse emissions for industrialized nations. It was also hoped that discussions between participating nations would generate market-based ideas leading to technological innovations that would reduce the considerable costs of emissions control. The Kyoto Protocol was the direct result of the European Union's efforts.

When the final treaty documenting the agreement reached at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development was signed, it was understood that additional work would be necessary. The inherent problems in the initial treaty were recognized, and a process was established to address its deficiencies. The attending nations were more concerned with commencing the process of environmental protection than with the specific details of how that protection would be accomplished. They left Rio de Janeiro planning to meet at a future date to set forth specific goals and enforcement procedures through annual Conferences of the Parties (COP).

The first COP meeting subsequent to the Rio de Janeiro gathering was held in Berlin in 1995 (Moltke). EU members pushed strongly for an agreement establishing carbon emission standards and enforcement procedures, but consensus on these points proved elusive. A follow-up conference was held in Geneva the next year, and it was only in the subsequent year in Kyoto, Japan, that significant achievements were finally made toward an international agreement.

Unfortunately, the agreement was not met with universal acceptance. The United States, which had been actively involved in the process leading up to the Kyoto Protocol, failed to ratify the agreement. This failure cost the Kyoto Protocol some credibility and created friction between the European Union and the United States on environmental protection. Although the United States participated in the Protocol negotiations, it never formally ratified the document. Facing pressure from oil companies and the auto industry, former President Bill Clinton never submitted the agreement to the Senate as required by the United States Constitution. The United States has still not ratified the Protocol.

The European Union as Environmental Leader

The passage of the Kyoto Protocol marked a significant achievement for the European Union. The EU had been in the forefront of establishing high environmental standards for several decades and, although the Kyoto Protocol did not reach the level of environmental controls the Union was advocating, the Protocol was considered a step in the right direction.

The standards set by the Kyoto Protocol do not approach the environmental protections required by the European Union. The Union has made combating climate change, preserving biodiversity, reducing water and air pollution, and the responsible use of natural resources a priority for its members. Additionally, the Union has worked diligently to encourage the growth of industries related to environmental protection, including solar energy, nuclear power, and alternative fuels.

Long before the Kyoto Protocol, the European Union had attempted to enact measures to reduce greenhouse emissions. Beginning in 1972, the Union began addressing issues such as acid rain, the thinning of the ozone layer, land, water and air quality, and solid waste disposal. The Union had already required its members to reduce emissions to the levels later demanded by the Kyoto Protocol before the Protocol was ever signed, and since the Protocol's ratification the Union has, on its own, enacted standards considerably stricter than those required by the Protocol.

The European Union's evolution into a trendsetter in environmental policy began almost immediately after its formation in 1993. Earlier, while still known as the European Economic Community, member states began expressing concerns about adopting measures that addressed environmental issues both within the European community and internationally. As an organization, the Union attended the original Rio de Janeiro meeting, and at the subsequent meetings in Berlin, Geneva, and Kyoto it was afforded status equal to all other participating nations. Consistent with its aggressive history of environmental advocacy, the Union took a leadership role at all of these international meetings.

EU Governance and Environmental Policy Challenges

A persistent challenge for the Union in regard to its environmental policy has been the fact that the strength of its advocacy has been heavily dependent on the Union's leadership at any given time. Under the terms of the Union's organizational treaties, the EU presidency rotates among its member states. As can be expected, there is often a difference of opinion among member states regarding the importance of environmental issues, and it has been a pattern for the Union to adjust its positions in accordance with the views of the member state then holding the presidency. This shifting policy has caused confusion in the international community as to the Union's environmental position at any given time. On the whole, the Union's environmental policies are generally more stringent than those of most other nations, but in an area where disagreement is ever present, even a subtle shift in policy can have a significant impact.

Confusion is also caused by a structural anomaly within the Union. The EU has separate directorates controlling different aspects of its operations. Two of these govern trade and the environment, respectively. The trade directorate and the environmental directorate sometimes hold differing views on a given environmental issue, and because the primary purpose of the Union remains its trade function, the trade directorate tends to carry more influence. Thus, on environmental issues that affect trade, the Union's position will likely favor the trade perspective.

In all, however, the European Union has been successful in being a strong advocate for environmental protection. The Union's member states, individually and collectively, have enacted environmental controls far more stringent than those of most other nations participating in the Kyoto Protocol.

Conclusion: The EU's Ongoing Role in Climate Protection

The European Union has been a leader in environmental protection for several decades and it remains so. Even in light of recent developments, the Union remains strongly committed to environmental controls. Its member states, individually and collectively, have enacted standards far more stringent than those of most other nations participating in the Kyoto Protocol, and the Union continues to push for international agreements that are both ambitious and enforceable.

Yet the Union cannot be expected to carry this burden alone. The broader success of international climate cooperation depends on the active participation of the world's largest economies. Until nations such as the United States and China commit to binding emissions reductions, the European Union's leadership, however admirable, will remain insufficient to achieve the scale of change that scientists and policymakers agree is necessary to address global climate change.