The Politics of the Environment: Ideas, Activism, Policy, 2nd Edition

Globalisation, trade and the environment

profound criticism of the EU is that itsraison d’ˆetre–economic integration
based on creating a free internal market – has stimulated and accelerated
thefree movement of goods, capital and people, which inflicts damage on
theenvironment that far outweighs the benefits arising from its progressive
environmental policies. This debate about the overall impact of the EU on
theenvironment mirrors the wider free trade debate. Significantly, whereas
in the past many green parties and environmentalists opposed European
integration, in recent years their position has mostly shifted to one of accept-
ing integration but working for the ‘greening’ of that process (Bomberg and
Carter 2006 ).
The EU is a fascinating supranational institution that over the last thirty
years or so has tried to address the complex relationship between globali-
sation, trade and the environment by developing a body of often ambitious
and far-reaching environmental policy. Although a process of ‘Europeani-
sation’ can be clearly detected, there is little evidence that the domestic
environmental policies and processes of member states have converged to
produce a common European model of policy (Jordan and Liefferink2004a);
indeed, the precise impact of ‘Europeanisation’, as opposed to other fac-
tors, such as domestic pressure from pressure groups and public opinion,
is remarkably varied (see Box10.3). The EU policy process involves hard bar-
gaining and plentiful compromises, so the preferences of greener pioneer
nations on each particular policy initiative are rarely completely satisfied.

10.3 The Europeanisation of environmental policy?

The process of ‘Europeanisation’ refers to the

impact of the EU on the domestic politics,

policies and administrative structures of

member states. There are several different

definitions of the concept, but the most

common and simplest confines itself to the

top-down influence deriving from European

decisions on member states.

A rigorous comparative analysis of ten

countries (nine EU-15 states and Norway)

using this definition found that the EU has

‘affected the content of national policy much

more deeply than national policy structures and

policy style’ (Jordan and Liefferink2004a: 230).

Significantly, every dimension of national policy

has been Europeanised to some extent, even in

the pioneer states, but more so where the EU

promoted a preventative, source-based policy

paradigm that was fundamentally at odds with

common practice (as in Ireland and the UK) or

the use of explicit emission standards where

few existed before (Finland, France, the UK). In

short, the EU has produced a ‘trading up’ of

environmental protection regulations across the

Community rather than a ‘race to the bottom’.

Yet the degree of Europeanisation should not

be exaggerated. It has not changed policy

structures significantly, as most large changes

in the machinery of government, such as the

creation of environment ministries (see Chapter

11 ), were introduced for domestic reasons. Nor

has it altered policy styles much, and it has had

only limited impact on the selection of policy

instruments, such as regulations or eco-taxes,

at national level (see Chapter 12 ). In short,

there is little evidence of convergence on a

single European model of environmental policy.

Drawn from Jordan and Liefferink (2004a)