Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-84b7d79bbc-x5cpj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-29T21:13:28.144Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

6 - Domestic institutions and international environmental agendas in Japan and Germany

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 March 2010

Miranda A. Schreurs
Affiliation:
University of Maryland, College Park
Elizabeth Economy
Affiliation:
Council on Foreign Relations, New York
Get access

Summary

As regional leaders and economic heavyweights, Japan and Germany are important actors in global environmental politics. Yet Japan and Germany responded quite differently to the emergence of global environmental risks in the 1980s. Whereas Germany was relatively proactive in response to the emergence of global atmospheric pollution problems, Japan was relatively reactive. New ideas about international environmental problems reached the German policy agenda more quickly than they did the Japanese. Acid rain, for example, was an issue on the German policy agenda in the early 1980s, yet it did not surface as a political concern in Japan until the end of the 1980s, even though it was a scientific concern before this time. In the mid-1980s, Germany emerged as a leader within the European Community (EC) pushing for the establishment of international regulations on ozone-depleting substances. In contrast, there was almost no mention of stratospheric ozone depletion in Japan prior to the fall of 1987, just months before states met to draw up the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer. Similarly, in the case of global warming, Germany was one of the first countries to propose the establishment of international targets for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions and announced an ambitious domestic target as a starting point. The pillar of Germany's climate change policy was its target to reduce CO2 emissions by 25 percent of 1987 levels by 2005. Japan, on the other hand, initially joined the United States, Russia, and China in objecting to an international target, and instead called for more research into climate change. Domestically, there was very little public, scientific, or political pressure for action.

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 1997

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×