Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

U.S. policy in the UN environmental arena: powerful laggard or constructive leader?

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

As the world’s one remaining superpower, the United States stands forth as a hegemon in international politics. Within the traditional realist perspective, this means that the U.S. is decisive for the ambition and scope of international cooperation. However, research has shown that there is limited empirical support for this assumption when it comes to environmental cooperation. After a brief look at the U.S. general attitude and perception of the UN, this paper will then review general trends in U.S. foreign environmental policy within the United Nations context, including several key domestic factors that have influenced the U.S. in this area. I will then look more specifically at three UN institutions that are responsible for different aspects of environmental governance: United Nations global conferences (Stockholm in 1972, Rio de Janeiro in 1992 and Johannesburg in 2002), the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and the Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD). The main focus will be how U.S. policies and influence in these arenas, and their relationship to UN reform, have evolved over time. Finally, the paper will attempt to analyze the American policies and answer the question posed in the title: is the U.S. a powerful laggard or a constructive leader?

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. For additional approaches to the concept of leadership in multilateral negotiations in general or multilateral environmental negotiations in particular, see also Young 1991 and Underdal 1994.

  2. To gain domestic acceptance for this proposal, a memo from Secretary of State William Rogers to President Richard Nixon argued that “Providing a large share of U.S. support in equipment and services would assist in employing greater numbers of U.S. scientists and technicians and providing increased opportunities for U.S. manufacturers to capture markets for monitoring, research, and eventually control equipment.” (Rogers 1972).

  3. For a unique historical record, see the papers of the second U.S. deputy, on file at the Harvard University Library’s Environmental Science and Public Policy Archives, Environmental Collection of Peter S. Thacher, 1960–1999.

  4. These papers, “Discussion papers on the future of the United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development,” can be found online at http://www.state.gov/g/oes/sus/csd/2003/

Abbreviations

CSD:

Commission on Sustainable Development

GEF:

Global Environment Facility

G-77:

Group of 77

JPOI:

Johannesburg Plan of Implementation

MEA:

Multilateral environmental agreement

NGO:

Non-governmental organization

UNCED:

United Nations Conference on Environment and Development

UNCHE:

United Nations Conference on the Human Environment

UNEP:

United Nations Environment Programme

WSSD:

World Summit on Sustainable Development

References

  • Albright, M. (1995). Statement by Ambassador Madeleine K. Albright, U.S. Permanent Representative to the United Nations, at the Foreign Press Center on the Opening of the 50th UNGA, September 22, 1995. Retrieved March 9, 2007, from http://dosfan.lib.uic.edu/ERC/intlorg/UN50th/950922.html

  • Benedick, R. E. (1987). The environmental agenda and foreign policy—John D. Negroponte’s address and Richard E. Benedick’s address before the State Department Symposium on April 16, 1987. U.S. Department of State Bulletin (July).

  • Bigg T., & Dodds, F. (1997). The UN Commission on Sustainable Development. In F. Dodds (Ed.), The way forward: Beyond Agenda 21 (pp. 15–36). London: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Blumenauer, E. (2002). United States should participate in the United Nations World Summit for Sustainable Development. Congressional Record—House (9 September 2002), H6111.

  • Bolton, J. R. (1999). Reject and oppose the International Criminal Court. In R. Wedgwood, et al. (Eds.), Towards an International Criminal Court? (pp. 26–36). New York: Council on Foreign Relations. Retrieved March 11, 2007, from http://www.cfr.org/content/publications/attachments/International_Criminal_Court.pdf

  • Bramble, B. J., & Porter, G. (1992). Non-governmental organizations and the making of U.S. international environmental policy. In A. Hurrell & B. Kingsbury (Eds.), The international politics of the environment (pp. 313–353). New York: Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brunnée, J. (2004). The United States and international environmental law: Living with an elephant. European Journal of International Law, 15(4), 617–649.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bush, G. H. W. (1992). Annual report of the Council on Environmental Quality–Message from the President–PM 188 (Senate—March 24, 1992). Congressional Record (24 March 1992), S4094–S4096.

  • Chasek, P. S., Downie, D. L., & Brown, J. W. (2006). Global environmental politics (4th ed.). Boulder: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dobriansky, P. (2002a). Vision statement for the World Summit on Sustainable Development. U.S. Department of State press release (23 May 2002). Retrieved March 8, 2007, from http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2002/10442.htm

  • Dobriansky, P. (2002b). The World Summit on Sustainable Development: Beginning a new chapter in sustainable development history. Global Issues: Achieving Sustainable Development 7(1), 8–9. Retrieved March 8, 2007, from http://usinfo.state.gov/journals/itgic/0402/ijge/gj02.htm

  • Falkner, R. (2005). American hegemony and the global environment. International Studies Review 4(7), 585–599.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foot, R., MacFarlane, S. N., & Mastanduno, M. (Eds.). (2003). U.S. hegemony and international organizations. New York: Oxford.

  • Harris, P. G. (Ed.) (2001). The environment, international relations and U.S. foreign policy. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.

  • Heimer, M. (1998). The UN Environment Programme: Thinking globally, retreating locally. Yale Human Rights and Development Law Journal, 1. Retrieved March 11, 2007, from http://islandia.law.yale.edu/yhrdlj/pdf/Vol%201/Matthew_Heimer_YHRDLJ.pdf

  • Heritage Foundation. (1991). Guidelines for the U.N. environmental conference: A United Nations assessment project study. (Washington, DC: Heritage Foundation), as cited in P. Shabecoff (1996). A new name for peace. (Hanover, NH: University Press of New England).

  • Hierlmeier, J. (2002). UNEP: Retrospect and prospect—options for reforming the global environmental governance regime. Georgetown International Environmental Law Review 14(4), 767–807.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoffmann, S. (2002). The United States and international organizations. In R. J. Lieber (Ed.), Eagle rules: Foreign policy and American primacy in the twenty-first century (pp. 342–352). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hopgood, S. (1998). American foreign environmental policy and the power of the state. New York: Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hopgood, S. (2003). Looking beyond the ‘K-Word’: Embedded multilateralism in American foreign environmental policy. In R. Foot, S. N. MacFarlane, & M. Mastanduno (Eds.), U.S. hegemony and international organizations (pp. 139–164). New York: Oxford.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • IISD-RS (International Institute for Sustainable Development—Reporting Services). (1993). Summary of the first session of the Commission on Sustainable Development: 14–25 June 1993. Earth Negotiations Bulletin 5(12). Retrieved March 11, 2007, from http://www.iisd.ca/vol05/0512000e.html

  • Ivanova, M. (2005). Assessing UNEP as anchor institution for the global environment: Lessons for the UNEO debate. Yale Center for Environmental Law and Policy Working Paper 05/01. Retrieved March 11, 2007, from http://www.yale.edu/envirocenter/UNEO-wp.pdf

  • Kimble, M. (1998). Statement by Melinda Kimble, Assistant Secretary of State for Oceans, Environment and Science, in the Sixth Session of the United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development. USUN Press Release 82 (98). Retrieved March 11, 2007, from http://www.un.int/usa/98_82.htm

  • Kotis, S. (2005). Explanation of position by Samuel Kotis, Adviser, on draft resolution A/C.2/60/L.60: Report of the Governing Council of the UN Environment Programme, in the Second Committee. USUN Press Release #244 (05). Retrieved March 11, 2007, from http://www.un.int/usa/05_244.htm

  • Mally, A. (2005). Explanation of position by Alec Mally, Counselor, on draft resolution: Toward global partnerships, in the Second Committee, December 15, 2005. USUN Press Release #261 (5). Retrieved March 11, 2007, from http://www.un.int/usa/05_261.htm

  • Margolis, J. (2005). Opening remarks at the thirteenth session of the Commission on Sustainable Development. Retrieved March 11, 2007, from http://www.state.gov/g/oes/rls/rm/44557.htm

  • Nye, J. S. Jr. (1990). Soft power. Foreign Policy 80(Autumn), 153–171.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nye, J. S. Jr. (2002). The paradox of American power: Why the world’s only superpower can’t go it alone. New York: Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paarlberg, R. (2002). The eagle and the global environment: The burden of being essential. In R. J. Lieber (Ed.), Eagle rules: Foreign policy and American primacy in the twenty-first century (pp. 324–341). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Patrick, S. (2002). Multilateralism and U.S. foreign policy: Ambivalent engagement. (Remarks at the Carnegie Council on Ethics and International Affairs, New York, New York). Retrieved on March 11, 2007, from http://www.cceia.org/resources/transcripts/127.html

  • Pearce, F. (1997) Environment body goes to pieces. New Scientist (15 February) 1111.

  • Powell, C. L. (2002). Making sustainable development work: Governance, finance, and public–private cooperation. (State Department Conference, Meridian International Center, Washington, DC). Retrieved on March 9, 1997 from http://www.state.gov/secretary/former/powell/remarks/2002/11822.htm

  • Puchala, D. J. (2005). World hegemony and the United Nations. International Studies Review 4(7), 571–584.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, W. P. (1972). United States international environmental initiative. Memo to President Richard M. Nixon, as cited in S. Hopgood (1998). American foreign environmental policy and the power of the state. New York: Oxford.

  • Shabecoff, P. (1996). A new name for peace. Hanover, NH: University Press of New England.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sherman, R., Peer, J., Dodds, F., & Figueroa Küpcü, M. (2006). Strengthening the Johannesburg implementation track (London: Stakeholder Forum). Retrieved on March 11, 2007, from http://www.stakeholderforum.org/CSDAprilReport.pdf

  • Siv, S. (2005). Statement by Ambassador Sichan Siv, Alternate U.S. Representative to the General Assembly, on Agenda Item 52: Sustainable Development, in the Second Committee, USUN Press Release #206 (05). Retrieved March 22, 2007, from http://www.un.int/usa/05_206.htm

  • Skodvin, T., & Andresen, S. (2006). Leadership revisited. Global Environmental Politics 6(3), 13–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Speth, J. G. (2003). Perspectives on the Johannesburg Summit. Environment 45(1), 24–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Train, R. E. (1972). Memorandum for the President on the UN Conference on the Human Environment.

  • Underdal, A. (1994). Leadership theory: Rediscovering the arts of management. In I. W. Zartman (Ed.), International multilateral negotiation: Approaches to the management of complexity (pp. 178–197). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Upton, S. (2000). Roadblocks to Agenda 21: A government perspective. In F. Dodds (Ed.), Earth Summit 2002: A new deal (pp. 3–20). London: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • U.S. State Department (1972). United Nations Conference on the Human Environment, Stockholm, June 5–16, 1972: Scope Paper. Congressional Record (25 May 1972) Daily ed. pp. S18954–S18956.

  • U.S. State Department (2005). State department daily briefing. Transcript. Retrieved March 11, 2007, from http://usinfo.state.gov/xarchives/display.html?p = washfile-english&y = 2005&m = February&x = 20050225185412ESnamfuaK0.2265436.

  • U.S.UN (United States Mission to the United Nations) (2003). Discussion papers on the future of the United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development. Retrieved on March 11, 2007 from http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/16952.pdf

  • Wagner, L. (2005). A Commission will lead them?: The UN Commission on Sustainable Development and UNCED follow-up. In G. Sjöstedt, E. Corell & A. Churie Kallhauge (Eds.), Global challenges: Furthering the multilateral policy process (pp. 103–122). Sheffield, UK: Greenleaf Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wapner, P. (2003). World Summit on Sustainable Development: Toward a post-Jo’burg environmentalism. Global Environmental Politics, 3(1), 1–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winnick, S. (1998). Statement by Seth Winnick, Deputy United States Representative on the United Nations Economic and Social Council, on Agenda Item 13: Sustainable development and environment, in the 1998 substantive session of the Economic and Social Council. Press Release #135 (98). Retrieved on March 11, 2007, from http://www.un.int/usa/98_135.htm

  • Young, O. (1991). Political leadership and regime formation: On the development of institutions in international society. International Organization 45(3), 281–309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The author would like to thank three current and former State Department officials and one current official with the U.S. Agency for International Development for their assistance. In addition, delegates from Nigeria, South Africa, Norway, the Russian Federation, Germany and the NGO community also agreed to be interviewed for this project. The information collected from these interviews appears throughout the text, but the author is respecting their wishes to remain anonymous. The author would also like to thank Steinar Andresen, Marc Levy and two anonymous reviewers for their comments on previous drafts and the Fridtjof Nansen Institute for its support of this research.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Manhattan College, Manhattan College Parkway, Bronx, NY, 10471, USA

    Pamela S. Chasek

Authors
  1. Pamela S. Chasek
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Pamela S. Chasek.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Chasek, P.S. U.S. policy in the UN environmental arena: powerful laggard or constructive leader?. Int Environ Agreements 7, 363–387 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10784-007-9054-2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10784-007-9054-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation