An evaluation of the impact of the European Parliament on

environmental legislation

Please do not quote from these slides without permission from authors

University of Bath, 6 October 2009

Dr Charlotte Burns (University of Leeds)Professor Neil Carter (University of York)

Dr Nick Worsfold (University of York)

http://www.polis.leeds.ac.uk/research/projects/eu-environmental-champion.php

Championing Europe’s Environment?

• The European Parliament often sees itself, and is seen by others, as the defender of environmental interests (Weale et al. 2000: 91)

• Sets the political agenda, forms coalitions and exploits political powers to full through amending and strengthening legislation.

• But portrayal based upon: (1) partial evidence and (2) historical record.

Research Questions

• Is EP REALLY an environmental champion?

• How environmentally stringent are its amendments?

• How successful are they?

• Is there a relationship between the strength of an amendment and its chance of adoption?

• Has the EP’s behaviour changed over time? If so, how?

Methodology

• Analysed 5,234 amendments made to 94 proposals

• Legislation classified according to the stage at which it was concluded and the policy area that it addressed.

• Each amendment was classified according to

– the reading at which it was proposed;– its environmental ambition; – its importance; – and the degree to which it was adopted by the

Commission and Council of Ministers.

Environmental Ambition Typology

• Fivefold typology

• Based on ecological modernisation.

• Policy paradigm informing EU environmental policy

Environmental Ambition Typology

• Strong EM (3) – stronger, binding, sanctions, costs

• Weak EM (2) – tightens, some costs and new policy instruments

• Marginal (1) – rhetorical, vague, limited impacts and costs

• Neutral (0) – no environmental impact

• Negative (-1) – overall negative impact

Importance and Adoption Typologies

Importance 1-5 from insignificant to highly important

Multiplied with EA to give a score for overall environmental importance

Adoption• 0 = not adopted• 1 = <50% adopted• 2 = >50% adopted• 3 = fully adopted• M = text changed so amendment no longer

relevant

Co-Decision

• Commission proposes

• EP 3 readings, conciliation and veto

• EP and Council = co-legislators

• Increasing pressure to agree at first reading or second reading

• Informal meetings used to reach agreement

Is the EP adopting environmentally important amendments ?

0

10

20

30

40

50

%

-1 0 1 2 3

Environmental Importance

Importance of EP amendments

Strong Amendments

Distribution of Strong Amendments

WFD

LCPDETS

WEEE

0

5

10

15

20

Proposals attracting strong amendments 1996-2006

Num

ber

of am

endm

ents

Is the EP adopting environmentally important amendments?

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

%

-1 0 1 2 3

Importance of EP amendments by Session

EP5

EP6

Is the EP Successful?

OVERALL• 40% rejected• 11% partially adopted

BUT

• 36% fully adopted• 11% largely adopted

Success by Session

0

10

20

30

40

50

%

0 1 2 3

Adoption

Is the EP Successful?

EP5

EP6

Evolving procedures

Stage at which legislation was concluded

• EP5 (1999-2004) – 47% cases concluded after conciliation

• EP6 (2004-2009) – 23% cases concluded after conciliation, – 46% concluded via fast track 1st reading

What is fast track 1st reading?

• Commission proposes legislation• Legislative proposal goes to

Environment Committee• Committee adopts its opinion, which

becomes the mandate for rapporteur to open informal negotiations with Council

• If agreement is reached the plenary endorses the joint text

Summary

• EP is trying to strengthen legislation

• Stronger amendments concentrated

• Success depends on strength of amendment, reading and session

• Differences between EP5 and EP6 – latter less ambitious but more successful

Explaining distribution of strong EP amendments

• Nature of policy – air and water attract stronger amendments

• New/updating legislation?

• New approaches to policy-making – framework directives

Why change over time? (1) Institutional

• EP has got its extra powers• Commission – doing less, but doing

it better• Informal norms under codecision

are evolving • Personnel Changes

Why change over time? (2) Enlargement

• New states less developed. Focus on economic prosperity.

• Weak environmental movement. No green MEPs 2004-09.

• EU saw political centre of gravity shift ‘to the Right and to the east’

Why would enlargement make a difference? (cont.)• EPP position consolidated and EPP

regards environment as less salient

• Increasingly heterogeneous political groups affect distribution of positions of power.

• EP Groups still cohesive but some evidence of national blocks amongst new states.

Evolving Norms

• Why is the EP now prepared to engage in these practices?

• Pre 2004 - Preparation for enlargement.

• Post 2004 – established practice. New MEPs – care less about empowering the Parliament

Environmental behaviour

• Appointment of Ouzký

• On Climate Change legislation clear that there was pressure from new states

• Aviation – over half of those who voted against resolution were Poles/Czechs

• But RCV data ltd by new voting behaviour

Summary

• Enlargement has clearly led to the evolution and consolidation of norms within the EP.

• Perception in EP that balance of power has shifted – making EP less environmentally radical.

• Expect this trend to continue with current economic climate.

New parliament

• Buzek President of EP – committed to using fast-track procedure less.

• Changed dynamics on the Right. EPP did well but ECR split away. However, EPP no longer has to appoint R-W Czechs/Poles to key positions.

• Left weaker, but Jo Leinen (German SPD) new Chair of Env. Ctte.

Conclusions

• EP is an ‘environmental tweaker’ rather than an ‘environmental champion’

• Economic context and political make-up of EP means that will continue.

Further reading……

• See Burns and Carter ‘Is Codecision Good for the Environment?’ Political Studies (published online)

• http://www.polis.leeds.ac.uk/research/projects/eu-environmental-champion.php