Reducing Phosphorus Input into the Baltic Sea—An Assessment of the Updated Baltic Sea Action Plan and Its Implementation through the Common Agricultural Policy in Germany

The eutrophication of the Baltic Sea is a longstanding environmental issue which is caused by excessive nutrient input including phosphorus. In response, neighbouring states of the Baltic Sea adopted the Helsinki Convention and the updated Baltic Sea Action Plan. The Helsinki Convention aims at the ecological restoration of the Baltic Sea. The updated Baltic Sea Action Plan summarises actions to achieve a good environmental status of the Baltic Sea. It lists the Common Agricultural Policy of the EU as supporting legislation. Against this backdrop, this article aims to assess the extent to which the measures of the Common Agricultural Policy in Germany (Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania) implement the agriculture actions of the updated Baltic Sea Action Plan and thereby contribute to the objective of the Helsinki Convention. To this end, a qualitative governance analysis is applied. Results show that the Common Agricultural Policy addresses most agriculture actions of the updated Baltic Sea Action Plan. Agri-environment climate commitments in particular have the potential to reduce phosphorus input into the Baltic Sea. However, their potential will likely be offset by (1) unclear uptake due to voluntariness, (2) limited funding and (3) continuation instead of real reform of the Common Agricultural Policy. These shortcomings are supplemented by weak actions of the updated Baltic Sea Action Plan. Therefore, other effective policy instruments at the EU level are needed

The Paris Target, Human Rights, and IPCC Weaknesses: Legal Arguments in Favour of Smaller Carbon Budgets

The Paris Climate Agreement (PA) provides an overall target which limits global warming to “well below 2 °C above pre-industrial levels” and “pursuing efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5 °C above pre-industrial levels” (Art. 2 para. 1 PA). This article assesses the extent to which new insights can be derived from recent IPCC reports for the interpretation of Art. 2 para. 1 PA from a legal perspective. To this end, the article analyses the contributions of Working Groups I and III of the sixth assessment report. Methodologically, we compare the findings with previously published IPCC reports, namely the 1.5 °C report and the fifth assessment report. A legal interpretation of the Paris Agreement and of core concepts of human rights follows. Several empirical indications show that current global greenhouse gas budget calculations are quite generous. We provide five empirical arguments that clearly point in that direction. These empirical arguments, combined with legal arguments, demonstrate that the budgets must be smaller than those estimated by the IPCC. The legal arguments are based on Art. 2 of the Paris Agreement, as well as on human rights and the precautionary principle. These norms contain an obligation to minimise the risk of significant damage, i.e., to take rapid and drastic climate protection measures. This implies: 1.5 °C is the legally binding temperature target; adherence requires a very high probability of achieving the target; temperature overshoot and geoengineering tend to be prohibited, and budget calculations must be based on sceptical factual assumptions. These findings have also been confirmed by recent rulings of supreme courts, such as the ground-breaking climate decision of the German Federal Constitutional Court. The Paris Agreement and human rights underline a legally binding obligation for smaller global greenhouse gas budgets as those estimated in the greenhouse gas budgets of the IPCC—even compared to the 83 percent scenario in the latest assessment. Thus, climate policy will have to raise its ambitions towards zero fossil fuels and a drastic reduction of livestock farming in times of the Ukraine war

Using bone char as phosphate recycling fertiliser: an analysis of the new EU Fertilising Products Regulation

Abstract Background Phosphorus recycling is an important cornerstone of sustainable phosphorus management and required to establish a circular economy in line with the EU Green Deal. Animal bones contain phosphate which can be recovered and processed into bone char. Animal bone char has a fertiliser potential. In the past, the EU lacked measures to market these fertilisers on the internal market. With the adoption of the Fertilising Products Regulation in 2019, the EU sought to incentivise recycling fertiliser production. Against this backdrop, the aim of this paper is to first provide the key elements of the new regulation and to second assess the extent to which it enables marketing bone chars as fertilisers. To this end, a qualitative governance analysis is applied. Results Results show that the Fertilising Products Regulation closes an important regulatory gap by establishing the legal framework for diverse recycling fertilisers, including bone char fertilisers. However, a lengthy adoption process hinders the marketing of bone char fertilisers and contaminant limits require improvement. Conclusions Ultimately, the promotion and use of recycling fertilisers is a necessary but complementary approach for the circular economy. A comprehensive transformation of the sector is needed to align it with global environmental goals

Potentials and Limitations of Subsidies in Sustainability Governance: The Example of Agriculture

The goals of the Paris Agreement and the Convention on Biological Diversity call for a global transition to sustainability. To achieve these goals, subsidies can be implemented. Subsidies are pervasive especially (but not only) in the agricultural sector. The agricultural sector plays an important role in the transition to sustainability as agriculture can both benefit and harm climate and biodiversity. Some agricultural subsidies seem environmentally beneficial, but the majority appear environmentally destructive. Against this background, this article applies a qualitative governance analysis—including aspects of legal analysis—to provide a comprehensive review of agricultural subsidies in the EU and to discuss the role of subsidies in transitioning towards sustainability. Results show that agricultural subsidies need to be substantially downscaled and implemented as complementary instruments only because other policy instruments such as quantity control instruments are more effective in addressing the drivers of non-sustainability, i.e., fossil fuels and livestock farming. However, subsidies remain a useful complementary instrument to remunerate the provision of public goods (e.g., in nature conservation) as long as they are constructed in a way that they do not suffer from typical governance problems. In addition, data and transparency need to be improved, subsidies for research and development increased, and environmental objectives streamlined through EU law to ensure all agricultural subsidies are in line with global environmental goals

Potentials and Limitations of Subsidies in Sustainability Governance: The Example of Agriculture

The goals of the Paris Agreement and the Convention on Biological Diversity call for a global transition to sustainability. To achieve these goals, subsidies can be implemented. Subsidies are pervasive especially (but not only) in the agricultural sector. The agricultural sector plays an important role in the transition to sustainability as agriculture can both benefit and harm climate and biodiversity. Some agricultural subsidies seem environmentally beneficial, but the majority appear environmentally destructive. Against this background, this article applies a qualitative governance analysis-including aspects of legal analysis-to provide a comprehensive review of agricultural subsidies in the EU and to discuss the role of subsidies in transitioning towards sustainability. Results show that agricultural subsidies need to be substantially downscaled and implemented as complementary instruments only because other policy instruments such as quantity control instruments are more effective in addressing the drivers of non-sustainability, i.e., fossil fuels and livestock farming. However, subsidies remain a useful complementary instrument to remunerate the provision of public goods (e.g., in nature conservation) as long as they are constructed in a way that they do not suffer from typical governance problems. In addition, data and transparency need to be improved, subsidies for research and development increased, and environmental objectives streamlined through EU law to ensure all agricultural subsidies are in line with global environmental goals

Free Trade, Environment, Agriculture, and Plurilateral Treaties: The Ambivalent Example of Mercosur, CETA, and the EU–Vietnam Free Trade Agreement

Transnational trade holds opportunities for prosperity and development if accompanied by a robust political and legal framework. Yet, where such a framework is missing, transnational trade is frequently associated with, among others, negative impacts on the environment. Applying a legal comparison, this article assesses if recent free trade agreements, i.e., the Mercosur Agreement, CETA and the EU–Vietnam Free Trade Agreement, negotiated by the European Union, have been underpinned with effective environmental standards so that they are in line with global environmental goals and avoid detrimental effects on climate and biodiversity. Besides that, we evaluate the extent to which these agreements at least enable and incentivise environmental pioneering policies in the trading Parties. In particular, we discuss the likely impacts of the agreements on the agricultural sector. The analysis finds that, while a few mandatory standards concerning, e.g., deforestation have been established, overall, the agreements lack a comprehensive legal framework to uphold/enhance environmental protection. Moreover, weak dispute settlement mechanisms to ensure compliance with sustainability measures limits their effectiveness. In addition, the provisions on regulatory cooperation and investor-state dispute settlement are likely to negatively affect the decision-making processes and (thus) discourage ecological pioneering policies in the trading Parties. Hence, there is a long way to go so that transnational trade is compatible with global environmental goals

Salon for a speculative future

The Salon for a Speculative Future was inaugurated in March 2019 in celebration of Women’s History Month, as a platform for cross-generational and cross-disciplinary exchange. Reflecting on the current political and economic global situation, in particular the exponential acceleration of a technology-driven platform capitalism, many women advocate positive change for an ecologically sustainable and humane future. In The Left Hand of Darkness, Ursula K. Le Guin argues that science fiction does not simply extrapolate from the present to predict the future—instead, the fiction writer engages in thought-experiments where ideas and intuition move within the confines set by the experiment. This book hosts imaginative thinking by seventy-five women artists, sharing their influences, inspired by women’s contributions to diverse fields, from art, education, and science to political activism. Salon for a Speculative Future honours and shares insights and experimental thinking towards a positive future