State and Environment: The Comparative Study of Environmental Governance

6 Early Bird or Copycat, Leader or Laggard? A Comparison of Cross-National Patterns of Environmental Policy Change

6 Early Bird or Copycat, Leader or Laggard? A Comparison of Cross-National Patterns of Environmental Policy Change Thomas Sommerer On the occasion of international environmental negotiations, like the UN Climate Summit held in Durban, South Africa, in 2011, media commentators regularly divide participating countries into leaders and laggards.1 In their periodic reviews, the Organisation of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) evaluates and compares differences in the environmental performance of governments in the industrialized world. These are only two of numerous illustrations of how, in times of globalization and expanding international cooperation, national governments still play a dominant role in environmental policymaking (see chapter 1, “Introduction : The Comparative Study of Environmental Governance”). Some countries implement ambitious targets and act as pioneers and innovators , while others lag (Jänicke 2005). But these roles often vary across subfields of environmental regulation, and they also might change over time (for more, see chapter 4, “The Three Worlds of Environmental Politics ,” and chapter 5, “Wind-Power Development in Germany and the United States: Structural Factors, Multiple-Stream Convergence, and Turning Points”). Former latecomers catch up with green leaders, and governments learn from each other’s experience or simply emulate policies developed elsewhere. Several studies in environmental politics have confirmed an increasing trend toward convergence and diffusion of domestic policy repertoires (Tews et al. 2003; Prakash and Potoski 2006; Holzinger et al. 2008a, b). The aim of this chapter is to map dominant patterns in the regulation of environmental protection measures of advanced industrialized nations. For this purpose, I will analyze empirically six dimensions of regulatory change of environmental standards in twenty-four countries from 1970 to 2005. Because this chapter provides a more comprehensive and systematic overview than previous studies, the analytical framework and the empirical results have the potential to contribute to a better understanding 150 Thomas Sommerer of the regulatory performance of national governments, which is one core element of a broader measure of environmental performance, as suggested in chapter 2, “Comparing Environmental Performance.” Comparing Environmental Policy Changes The analysis in this chapter will be based on the comparative study of environmental policy change. A comparative perspective reveals similarities and differences in how countries respond to environmental degradation, and a focus on change allows for the display of regulatory dynamics over time. In the following section, I will introduce a theory-informed typology of policy change that draws on a review of specifications of the expected type of change in different theories of policy change and distinguishes six dimensions: the timing, frequency, and direction of change, the level of regulation, and the sequence and the similarity of policies. It represents an attempt to develop an overarching analytical framework for the systematic distinction of different types of change, which is still missing in the research on environmental regulation and elsewhere. The data set for the statistical analysis will be introduced later in this chapter in the section “Data on Environmental Standards in Twenty-four Countries.” Similar to the analysis in chapter 3,“Explaining Environmental Policy Adoption: A Comparative Analysis of Policy Developments in Twenty-four OECD Countries,” it builds on policy output data from the ENVIPOLCON database. The data allows for a broad comparison across twenty-four industrialized countries. Time series data from 1970 to 2005 provides a historical perspective from the beginning of environmental policy until recent developments, and it indicates the exact timing of regulatory change. The focus is not on the adoption of policies as in chapter 3, but on changes in metrical standards, such as limit values or recycling targets, that indicate the strength of environmental policy and are thus important for the assessment of the regulatory performance of national governments. The next section presents the results of the empirical analysis. It reveals major trends in environmental regulation across twenty-four countries and over more than three decades. The data can be interpreted in two different ways. First, it is possible to rank the countries in the sample on six dimensions of change, which gives a highly differentiated picture on leaders and laggards. Whereas some countries rank high (or low) in all dimensions , the analysis also shows that, for example, pioneer countries do not necessarily have the most demanding standards, and that processes Early Bird or Copycat, Leader or Laggard? 151 of catching up and convergence lead to changes in the ranking. Second, the analysis provides evidence for the empirical relevance of specific types of environmental...