Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-v5vhk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-06T14:53:21.384Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Hazardous Substances in Electronics: The Effects of European Union Risk Regulation on China

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 January 2017

Katja Biedenkopf
Katja Biedenkopf*
Affiliation:
University of Amsterdam
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article argues that European Union (EU) risk regulation of hazardous substances in electrical and electronic equipment (EEE) was both a trigger and formative factor in the development of similar Chinese regulation. The attractiveness and global interdependence of the EU market in EEE impelled a response from Chinese policy-makers. Fostering the domestic industry's global competitiveness was one of the driving factors behind Chinese substance restriction regulation. Additionally, symbolic emulation and growing domestic environmental problems related to waste EEE infl uenced the Chinese policy agenda. Chinese substance restriction rules are not, however, a mere copy of EU regulation. The limited domestic capacity of the Chinese economy, administration, and legal structure to adopt policies similar to those of the EU explains, to a large extent, the emergence and partial persistence of differences between EU and Chinese risk regulation. In the course of the implementation and evaluation of Chinese substance restriction regulation, lessons learned from the EU’s experience increasingly contributed to shaping the policy, leading to growing convergence.

Type
Symposium on Comparing Risk Regulation in China and the Eu
Information
European Journal of Risk Regulation , Volume 3 , Issue 4 , December 2012 , pp. 477 - 487
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2012

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.)

References

1 The research presented in this article was funded by the Kolleg Forschergruppe (KFG) ‘The Transformative Power of Europe’ hosted at the Freie Universität Berlin. The KFG is funded by the German Research Foundation (DFG). The author would like to thank all interviewees that contributed to this research for sharing their valuable insights.

2 This law will be replaced by a revised version on 3 January 2013, namely by Directive 2011/65/EU.

3 A number of variants of the title are used in English translations such as Management Methods and Management Measures. Their divergence however is marginal and does not change the meaning.

4 In 2008, the Ministry of Information Industry (MII) gained additional competences for industry, trade, science and technology and was renamed the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology (MIIT).

5 Ferris, Richard J., “China's Increasing Focus on Europe: Trends and Implications for the Development of Chinese Environmental Law”, 7 International Environmental Law Committee Newsletter (2005), pp. 1 et sqq., at p. 6.Google Scholar

6 Damro, Chad, “Market Power Europe”, 19 Journal of European Public Policy (2012), pp. 682 et sqq., at pp. 686–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Vogel, David, “Trading Up and Governing Across: Transnational Governance and Environmental Protection”, 4 Journal of European Public Policy (1997), pp. 556 et sqq., at pp. 561–4CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Drezner, Daniel W., “Globalization, Harmonization, and Competition: The Different Pathways to Policy Convergence”, 12 Journal of European Public Policy (2005), pp. 841 et sqq., at pp. 844–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

7 Checkel, Jeffrey T., “Why Comply? Social Learning and European Identity Change”, 55 International Organization (2001), pp. 553 et sqq., at pp. 560–2CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Levy, Jack S., “Learning and Foreign Policy: Sweeping a Conceptual Minefield”, 48 International Organization (1994), pp. 279 et sqq CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Meseguer, Covadonga, “Policy Learning, Policy Diffusion, and the Making of a New Order”, 598 The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science (2005), pp. 67 et sqq., at pp. 72–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

8 Finnemore, Martha and Sikkink, Kathryn, “International Norm Dynamics and Political Change”, 52 International Organization (1998), pp. 887 et sqq., at p. 896–905CrossRefGoogle Scholar; March, James G. and Olsen, Johan P., Rediscovering Institutions. The Organizational Basis of Politics, (New York: The Free Press 1989), at pp. 160–2.Google Scholar

9 Meseguer, Covadonga, “Learning and Economic Policy Choices”, 22 European Journal of Political Economy (2006), pp. 156 et sqq., at p. 172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

10 Article 3.1, Administrative Measures, 28 February 2006.

11 SJ/T 11363–2006 Marking for Control of Pollution caused by Electronic Information Products, 6 November 2006.

12 Article 5, Directive 2011/65/EU.

13 Article 3, Directive 2011/65/EU.

14 SJ/T 11363–2006 Requirements for Concentration Limits for Certain Hazardous Substances in Electronic Information Products, 6 November 2006.

15 Decision No 768/2008/EC.

16 Article 1, Administrative Measures, 28 February 2006.

17 Gilardi, Fabrizio, “Transnational Diffusion: Norms, Ideas, and Policies”, in Carlsnaes, Walter, Risse, Thomas, and Simmons, Beth (eds.), Handbook of international relations, (London, Thousand Oaks, CA and New Delhi: Sage Publications 2012), pp. 453 et sqq., at p. 460–1.Google Scholar

18 Lavenex, Sandra and Wichmann, Nicole, “The External Governance of EU Internal Security”, 31 European Integration (2009), pp. 83 et sqq., at p. 98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

19 Braun, Dietmar and Gilardi, Fabrizio, “Taking ‘Galton's Problem’ Seriously. Towards a Theory of Policy Diffusion”, 18 Journal of Theoretical Politics (2006), pp. 298 et sqq., at pp. 308–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Elkins, Zachary and Simmons, Beth A., “On Waves, Clusters, and Diffusion: A Conceptual Framework”, 598 The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science (2005), pp. 33 et sqq., at p. 39CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Lavenex, Sandra and Uçarer, Emek M., “The External Dimension of Europeanization. The Case of Immigration Policies”, 39 Cooperation and Conflict: Journal of the Nordic International Studies Association (2004), pp. 417 et sqq., at p. 421.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

20 Vogel, D., “Trading Up and Governing Across ”, at pp. 561–3, supra note 6.

21 Finnemore, M. and Sikkink, K., “International Norm Dynamics”, at pp. 895–904, supra note 8; March, J. G. and Olsen, J. P., “Rediscovering Institutions”, at pp. 160–2, supra note 8.

22 Gilardi, F., “Transnational Diffusion”, at p. 463–6, supra note 17.

23 A list of all interviews can be found in the annex.

24 DG Trade, Sector Fiche: EU Trade in Electronics, (17 June 2011).

25 Selin, Henrik and VanDeveer, Stacey D., “Raising Global Standards. Hazardous Substances and E-Waste Managment in the Euroepan Union”, 48 Environment (2006), pp. 6 et sqq., at pp. 8–9; interviews 17 & 18.Google Scholar

26 Ferris, R. J., “China's Increasing Focus on Europe”, at p. 6, supra note 5; interviews 4, 5, 11 & 12.

27 Zeng, Ka and Eastin, Josh, “International Economic Integration and Environmental Protection: The Case of China”, 51 International Studies Quarterly (2007), pp. 971 et sqq., at p. 976.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

28 Interviews 4, 5 & 7.

29 New York Times, Lead Paint Prompts Mattel to Recall 967,000 Toys, (2 August 2007).

30 European Commission, Keeping European Consumers Safe. 2011 Annual Report of the Operation of the Rapid Alert System for Nonfood Dangerous Products RAPEX, (Luxembourg 2012).

31 Ferris, R. J., “China's Increasing Focus on Europe”, at p. 6, supra note 5; interviews 5 & 6.

32 Interviews 4, 5, 7, 9 & 10.

33 Interview 2.

34 Interviews 5, 7 & 10.

35 Presentation by Chinese offi cial, Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) meeting, 24 June 2007.

36 Ramesh Babu, Balakrishnan, Parande, Anand Kuber, and Basha, Chiya Ahmed, “Electrical and Electronic Waste: A Global Environmental Problem”, 25 Waste Management & Research (2007), pp. 307 et sqq., at pp. 308–9CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed; Chi, Xinwen et al., “Informal Electronic Waste Recycling: A Sector Review with Special Focus on China”, 31 Waste Management (2011), pp. 731 et sqq.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed; Tsydenova, Oyuna and Bengtsson, Magnus, “Chemical Hazards Associated with Treatment of Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment”, 31 Waste Management (2011), pp. 45 et sqq., interviews 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 & 11.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

37 See, for example, Greenpeace website: http://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/campaigns/toxics/problems/e-waste/ (accessed 1 September 2012).

38 Wu, Fengshi, “Environmental Politics in China: An Issue Area in Review”, 14 Journal of Chinese Political Science (2009), pp. 383 et sqq.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

39 Interviews 5, 7 & 10.

40 Interview 5.

41 Interview 12.

42 Interview 4.

43 Interviews 5, 7 & 10.

44 Edmonds, Richard Louis, “The Evolution of Environmental Policy in the People's Republic of China”, 40 Journal of Current Chinese Affairs (2011), pp. 13 et sqq., at p. 22Google Scholar; Zhu, Qinghua, Sarkis, Joseph, and Lai, Kee-hung, “Internationalization and Environmentallyrelated Organizational Learning Among Chinese Manufacturers”, 79 Technological Forecasting & Social Change (2012), pp. 142 et sqq., at p. 143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

45 Interviews 4 & 7.

46 Sarah Bogaert et al., Study on RoHS and WEEE Directives. No. 30-CE-0095296/00–09. Final Report, (2008), at p. 154; Cécile des Abbayes et al., Study to Support the Impact Assessment of the RoHS Directive Review. G.4/FRA/2007/0067. Final Report, (2008), at pp. 20–21.

47 Article 4.2, Directive 2011/65/EU.