ABSTRACT
The Single European Act (SEA) of 1987 gave the European Community (EC) its first clear legal basis for issuing and enforcing environmental legislation. Consequently, EC integration is changing the way environmental issues are addressed throughout the Community. EC-92—and wider European integration—also has implications for a wide range of U.S. businesses and, perhaps, for U.S. environmental policy as well. A unified European voice on global environmental issues, for example, might influence U.S. positions on prominent international environmental matters, such as global climate change. Moreover, as other European nations join the EC, or simply harmonize with EC standards and regulations, U.S. policymakers may be prompted to review risk assessment and other standards-setting policies in domestic environmental legislation with a view toward greater harmonization with an increasingly powerful European market.
The achievement of a unified environmental policy, and whether it would result in the adoption of a strict set of Community-wide environmental standards and regulations, is expected to be constrained by differences among north-south EC members in terms of their relative economic strengths, environmental priorities, and 324current status of national environmental programs. Other factors that could affect the pace and direction of EC environmental policy include German unification and the associated cost of bringing eastern Germany up to west German environmental standards, and the vast needs of East European nations for environmental assistance.
The implications of EC-92 for U.S. businesses are multiple, and not all consistent. There is broad consensus that Community-wide harmonization of national environmental regulations and standards could improve the overall competitiveness of U.S. suppliers to that market. Concurrently, compliance with emerging EC environmental laws will increase the costs of doing business in the EC. A proposed environmental liability directive, for example, may force businesses to engage in environmentally safer but more costly waste management practices. If unification results in a comprehensive set of EC environmental requirements (and recent developments suggest it may), then U.S. manufacturers may realize increased competitiveness as environment-related business costs in the EC increase and approach those imposed in the United States. U.S. trade could also benefit from the European market for environmental goods and services which is expected to grow markedly with the number of EC environmental directives. However, if U.S. products fail to meet EC standards or associated technical requirements, the United States may lose market access, at least until products could be adapted.
Recent statements issuing from EC leaders suggest that the European Community intends to heighten the priority given to Community environmental matters and to challenge the United States for international leadership on global issues. This view is far from unified, however, and considerable disagreement exists among EC members and industry, as well as between the Commission and the Parliament, on the proper balance between economic growth and competitiveness, free trade, and environmental protection.
The SEA is unique among multilateral trade agreements and treaties in its attempt to balance trade openness with national and international environmental protection goals. However, a growing number of environmental measures taken by the EC members (and other countries) could be affected by the outcome of the Uruguay round of negotiations of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). Thus, while EC-92 establishes authority, principles, and a policy framework for addressing environmental matters, many other factors will help shape the eventual form and practical effect of the Community’s domestic and international environmental policies.
