| Abstract: | The EU, Japan, and the US now share many environmental norms, laws, and institutions and cooperate on international environmental matters through numerous bilateral and multilateral channels. They disagree, however, on how to deal with some of the most serious issues facing the global environment and the quality of human life including wide-scale biodiversity loss, climate change, the use of genetically modified (GM) organisms; the trans-boundary movement of hazardous wastes, and chemical safety. As these are all issues that require the involvement of developing countries if global environmental protection efforts are to be effective, the discord that exists among the Northern states is of tremendous significance. The US has pulled out of the Kyoto Protocol arguing that the treaty is poorly designed and would be detrimental to the US economy. Japan and the EU have had to try to find a way to bring the treaty into force without the participation of the world’s largest emitter of greenhouse gases and to convince participating countries to meet their targets even though this may put them at a competitive disadvantage. In the case of biodiversity loss, although the US initiated international negotiations on biodiversity preservation, it has refused to join the EU and Japan in ratifying the Convention on Biological Diversity. There are also differences between the US, on the one side, and Japan and the EU on the other, regarding the use of GM organisms. This article analyses the reasons for the differences that have emerged among northern states in their international environmental policy positions and what the implications of this northern policy divide are for the effectiveness and legitimacy of international environmental protection efforts. |
