CIG - The IGS Center on Institutions and Governance - University of California, Berkeley

The world's financial crisis has, according to press accounts, already led the European Union to propose less stringent carbon emissions standards for automobiles than proposed just a year ago. European carmakers are likely to be granted three year extensions from the EU's original proposal to limit carbon dioxide from passenger cars by 2012. Even prior to the financial turmoil auto manufacturers strongly opposed the EU proposal and its passage was uncertain at best. European passenger automobiles are already more fuel efficient, on average, than the U.S. fleet (roughly 40 miles per gallon v. 27.5 MPG) and hence produce less carbon dioxide than their American counterparts. But as in the U.S., passenger car emissions have been growing more rapidly than other carbon emitting sectors and a voluntary agreement to limit carbon dioxide emissions, agreed to by the European Commission and the Association des Constructeurs Europeens d'Atomobiles (ACEA) in 1998, has failed to achieve agreed upon levels by 2008. Moreover the EU needs to meet more stringent emissions standards if it is to meet ambitious goals to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 2020 to 20 percent below 1990 levels.

>> Back to Top

Alberto Alemanno
How to get out of the Transatlantic Regulatory deadlock over GMOs? This is Time for Regulatory Cooperation

The aim of this paper is to identify some possible ways out of the current transatlantic deadlock over GMOs, by focusing in particular on the regulatory cooperation option. After providing an account of the most important initiatives undertaken to reconcile the EU and US regulatory divergence in the past, it explores whether there is a case for transatlantic regulatory cooperation in the GMO sector. It argues that the current inability of the WTO/SPS framework to govern genetic engineering combined with the rise of emerging economies as new actors of the global GMO industry as well as the increasing unsustainability of the EU GM framework provide both the US and the EU valuable incentives to engage into an effective regulatory cooperation exercise. Unlike previous experiences of transatlantic cooperation, the two sides should not aim at harmonisation or mutual recognition of standards, but rather promote mutual understanding of their existing regimes and different regulatory approaches. Although the final aim of the cooperation exercise should be the identification of a basic set of common transatlantic risk analysis principles, the focus of cooperation should be on risk assessment, by far the most suitable procedural stage for engaging into a comparative scrutiny. Several recommendations are formulated on how to conduct an effective dialogue aimed at identifying divergence before trying to overcome them.

>> Back to Top

Chris Ansell and Jörg Balsiger
Transatlantic Perspectives on Persistent Organic Pollutants and Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals

This paper focuses on two classes of chemical pollutants that raise thorny regulatory issues for regulators on both sides of the Atlantic: persistent organic pollutants (POPs) and endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs). POPs are chemical pollutants with at least four key characteristics: they are toxic; they are persistent; they bioaccumulate; and they can be transported long distances (Adeola 2004). EDCs are chemical pollutants that disrupt the normal functioning of hormone systems. The dose response effects of EDCs are poorly understood, but they may have consequential effects at low doses as well as interactive effects with other environmental pollutants. What is therefore of special concern is that POPs may be EDCs and vice versa (Yoder 2003). When the persistent, bioaccumulating quality of POPs intersect with the potentially low dose effects of EDCs, the biosafety and biodiversity consequences may be grave.

>> Back to Top

Christina G. Hioureas and Bruce E. Cain
Transatlantic Environmental Regulation-Making: Strengthening Cooperation between California and the European Union

Global warming and other environmental threats pose serious collective action challenges to an international system that since the Treaty of Westphalia has been predicated on national sovereignty. International cooperation normally requires national government consent. In a pure Westphalian system, the right and power to make international agreements to curb the causes of global warming rests exclusively with national governments, and thus, cooperation can be stymied if one or more powerful national leaders opposes the effort. But the reality of the contemporary international system is less pure and more complex than the abstract Westphalian model, and hence, the possibilities for forms of environmental cooperation other than formal national treaties are greater than they might initially seem.

>> Back to Top

Jacopo Torriti, and Ragnar Lofstedt
To compete or to cooperate? This is an Impact Assessment question

There is a fine line between regulatory competition and cooperation across the Atlantic. Whilst U.S. and European Union (EU) increasingly collaborate on a range of specific regulatory areas in an effort to remove tariff barriers and thus facilitate trade flows of about 620 billion Euros per year, they also compete in order to improve their internal markets, attract a higher number of investors, increase safety for their citizens and maintaining acceptable environmental standards (Vogel, 2001). When measuring the temperature of regulatory competition and cooperation between U.S. and the EU, a valid reading key is Impact Assessment (IA) (L?fstedt, et al, 2008). IAs are the main evidence-based policy-making instrument in place in both U.S. and EU and can help understand the rationales and justifications for policy and regulatory interventions.

>> Back to Top

November 2008
Larry Karp and Jinhua Zhao
Regional and International Environmental Agreements: Emissions trade, safety valves and escape clauses

We explain how the structure of multi-national or multi-regional environmental agreements affect their chance of success of those agreements. Trade in emissions permits has ambiguous and in some cases surprising effects on both the equilibrium level of abatement, and on the ability to persuade nations or regions to participate in environmental agreements. An escape clause policy and a safety valve policy have essentially the same properties when membership in environmental agreement is pre-determined, but they have markedly different effects on the incentives to join such an agreement. The two policies lead to a qualitative difference in the leverage that a potential member of the agreement exercises on other members.

>> Back to Top

November 2008
David E. Winickoff & Kendra Klein
Food Labels and the Environment: Organic Reguation and Its Problems in the US and EU

An increasing number of consumers make purchasing choices informed by ethical and political values, which has expanded the market for so-called "eco-labeled" goods (Micheletti, 2003; Bryant and Goodman, 2004; Bureau and Marette 2000). The rise of supply and demand for eco-labels is indicative of a more general shift away from traditional command and control forms of regulation toward market-based strategies (USAID, 2005). However, labeling systems are far from simple, and raise important concerns for international regulatory harmonization: behind a state-ratified label lies a complex regime of governmental regulation, consumer and producer, cultural values, authoritative knowledge, and trade politics. Perhaps for this reason, they have been controversial both within and across regulatory jurisdictions. Process-based labeling of food has received increasing attention in recent years in light of controversies over genetically modified foods, concerns about animal cruelty, the use of chemicals in food production, and the social impacts of labor practices (Henneberry and Armbruster, 2003). Heated cross-Atlantic battles over gentically modified organisms (GMOs), recombinant bovine growth hormone (rBGH) and geographic indicators reveal persistent differences in the regulatory domains of environment, food, agriculture, and sustainability. The story of organic has been lurking in the shadow of these more contentious battles, and the United States (US) and European Union (EU), along with other key actors, have been working to achieve harmonization.

>> Back to Top

October 2008
Gal Hochman, Gordon Rausser, and David Zilberman
U.S. versus E.U. Biotechnology Regulations and Comparative Advantage: Implications for Future Conflicts and Trade

In the 1990s, a new and important industry emerged; namely, the plant biotechnology industry.
As the industry matured, US based firms became more dominant and their market shares
increased. Although many former chemical companies in the US moved away from development
of new chemicals into development of new biotechnology traits (e.g., Monsanto, followed by
Pioneer/DuPont and Dow Chemical/Mycogen), European companies continued to heavily invest
in chemicals well into the 21st century (e.g., Syngenta, BASF, Bayers). The different patterns of
investment in R&D caused the US firms to dominate the industry, and affected the two countries' comparative advantage. Whereas the Europeans became more competitive in
agricultural chemicals, the US became more competitive in biotechnology.

>> Back to Top

Hanemann, Michael; Busch, Chris
Climate Change Policy in California: Balancing Markets Versus Regulation

>> Back to Top

Megan R. Schwarzman and Michael P. Wilson
Reshaping Chemicals Policy on Two Sides of the Atlantic: Ecosystem Impacts of Current Approaches and the Promise of Improved Sustainability through Regulatory Cooperation

The chemical industry is linked to some of the largest causes of biodiversity loss, including (1) pollution of soil, air, fresh water and oceans, (2) global climate change (3) urbanization and changing consumption patterns, (4) technological development, construction and mining, and (5) resource-intensive agricultural practices. Over the next 25 years, as global chemical production doubles, the extent of externalized damage generated by the industry and incurred by society and ecosystems will broaden and deepen. Current U.S. chemical regulations, notably the Toxics Substances Control Act, are grossly outdated and have failed to provide sufficient environmental protections or motivate meaningful investment in cleaner chemical technologies and safer alternatives, known collectively as green chemistry. Given the pace and scale of chemical production-and its increasing evidence of its impact on ecosystems-a fully transformed, multi-pronged approach to chemicals policy is needed that enables: (1) immediate action to limit use and exposure to known hazardous substances, (2) further investigation of priority substances suspected of having ecotoxic effects, and most importantly, (3) a precautionary approaches that facilitate action to reduce potential risk, even where definitive evidence of cause and effect relationships is not yet established. The new EU REACH regulation has the potential to accomplish all of these aims, and as such is the most comprehensive chemicals management regulation in the world. Its basis in the precautionary principle also makes it the most protective for health and ecosystems. Transatlantic regulatory cooperation between California and the European Union (EU) in the area of chemicals policy could speed the development and implementation of such an approach in the U.S., beginning in California. Forging links with the EU will help California pursue substantive chemicals policy changes and could also give EU policymakers a footing for strengthening REACH in subsequent negotiations. Specifically, California and the EU should pursue regulatory cooperation in three key areas: sharing information, sharing best practices, and contributing to international sustainability efforts.

>> Back to Top

Jan Wouters, Axel Marx, Nicolas Hachez
Private Standards, Global Governance and Transatlantic Cooperation

>> Back to Top

Daniel Farber
Legal Guidelines for Cooperation Between the European Union and American State Governments

>> Back to Top

Katja Biedenkopf
Environmental Pioneership: the Diffusion of EU and Californian Environmental Policy

>> Back to Top

Anne Meuwese
EU-US Horizontal Regulatory Cooperation: Two global regulatory powers converging on how to assess regulatory impacts?

>> Back to Top

Sabine Reinecke,Till Pistorius, Christine Schmitt, Jürgen Hauber and Georg Winkel
The Environmental Leader entangled in institutional chains? An Analysis of the European Union role in international forest biodiversity policy using the case of genetically modified trees.

>> Back to Top

Heike Nitsch , Andrew Manale and Bernhard Osterburg
Agriculture and the conservation of wildlife biodiversity - Comparative analysis of policies in the USA and the EU.

>> Back to Top

Adam B. Smith
International biodiversity governance and complex problems: How can biodiversity conservation regimes address global warming?

>> Back to Top

Michael V. McGinnis
Biodiversity loss in a changing climate: The importance of coastal marine ecosystem-based regulatory policy in the Euro-Mediterranean, US and California.

This paper describes the importance of coastal marine ecosystem-based regulatory policy development to address biodiversity loss in two Mediterranean-type ecosystem or MTES - the coastal marine areas of California and the Mediterranean Basin. The paper first provides an introduction to the importance of cultural adaptation to a dynamic Mediterranean climate, and characterizes the major pressures and threats to coastal marine biodiversity, including anthropogenic climate change, associated with MTEs. Evidence of coastal marine ecosystem-disturbance is provided for the California MTE and Mediterranean Basin. Scientists have documented a decline in primary and secondary levels of ecological productivity in these regions. Second, the paper includes a review and analysis of recent policy development in the U.S., California and the Euro-Mediterranean Basin that focus on biodiversity protection in accordance to a coastal marine ecosystem-based approach to planning and management. Two national marine sanctuaries off California are compared - the Channel Islands National Marine Sanctuary and the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary - with respect to the designation of marine protected areas as an important regulatory tool that can curb the over-use of resources and mitigate the expected impacts from climate disturbance. With respect to the Euro-Mediterranean Basin, the paper includes a review of recent EU programs that support "integrated marine policy", marine protected area designation, and Integrated Coastal Zone Management. The final section of the paper offers a number of recommendations to strengthen coastal marine ecosystem-based regulatory policy across MTEs, and focuses on the need to develop bioregional zoning strategies that include the designation of a large network of marine reserves, and new social alliances and partnerships between the U.S., California and the EU.

>> Back to Top

Gabrielle Bouleau & Matt Kondolf
Rivers of Diveristy: Evolving Water Regulation in California and the European Union.

>> Back to Top

Upcoming Events

December 1st 2009: panel on Business and Ethics, Boalt Law school

December 10th-12th 2009: Workshop launching the Religious Norms in the Public Sphere network, European University Institute, Florence (IT)

About CIG

Director:
Heddy Riss hriss@berkeley.edu

Faculty Director:
Robert Powell rpowell@berkeley.edu

Address:
Institute of Internationall Studies
iGov-Institutions and Governance program
214 Moses Hall
Berkeley, CA

Website designed and maintained by Jason Anastasopoulos:
janastas@berkeley.edu

International Headlines