Climate Protection – in the Name of the Law

17 July 2020, by Prof. Dr. Martin Wickel

Photo: Pixabay/succo

In 1997, Hamburg was the first German federal state to introduce a climate protection law – and was considered highly progressive at the time. But the act had since become outdated, and had been surpassed by the policies of various other states, as well as the federal government. Since February, Hamburg has had a new law. What changes will it entail?

I am interested in how federal and state climate legislation works. As a lawyer specializing in administrative law, I’ve carefully examined Hamburg’s new climate law and discussed it at Universität Hamburg’s Cluster of Excellence for climate research. What will change? What does the government want to achieve – and is it clearly stated in the text? How strongly are the goals worded? And will they be effective?

The most important changes are the concrete goals for reducing greenhouse gases. The aim is to cut emissions of carbon dioxide, CO₂ for short, step by step: by 55 percent by 2030, and by 95 percent by 2050 – compared to the emissions levels in 1990. Until recently, the figures were only defined in Hamburg’s climate plan, which meant the next government could have opted to repeal them.

But now the goals are law, making them more permanent and binding for the senate, the administration and the courts. But that doesn’t mean that in 2031 citizens or associations will be able to take Hamburg to court should the city fail to achieve its set objectives. That would require a right to sue being introduced – but if that happens at all, then most likely at a European level.

Nevertheless, the stipulations will have concrete effects. The entire administration will have to make its operations climate-neutral by 2030. Various departments, such as urban development and traffic planning, will be required to focus more on climate protection in the future. And the court will also place more emphasis on this aspect. For example: If it were decided that buildings in a particular area can no longer use fossil fuels like oil or gas for heating, it would represent a serious infringement on property rights, and property owners could sue. However, in the future, judges will attach more importance to climate protection, since it will also be laid down in law.

Further, the senate will have to release official figures on the current state of CO₂ reductions every two years. And every four years, the climate plan will be adjusted if insufficient progress has been made. Furthermore, climate protection has now been added to the preamble of the Constitution of Hamburg, which states: “In particular, the Free and Hanseatic City of Hamburg recognizes its responsibility to limit global warming” – making climate protection an official objective for the government.

However, there are a few loopholes. I have reviewed the documents thoroughly, and CO₂ is the only climate-relevant gas that Hamburg mentions. Most other legislation includes further greenhouse gases like methane. At the moment, CO₂ emissions predominate, but in the long term other greenhouse gases will need to be reduced as well.

Overall, the legislation aims to minimize climate change, but climate change adaptation measures are somewhat lacking in detail. That’s unfortunate, since Hamburg can expect to see flooding, rising temperatures, heavy rainfall and droughts – and needs to be prepared. Accordingly, it’s just as important for climate change adaptation to be anchored in the law.

On the whole, the law is a major step forward. But it doesn’t grant unlimited powers; Hamburg can’t dictate the type of fuel cars run on, or change electricity production for the entire city. Whether the planned 55 or 95 percent reductions are actually achieved will largely depend on federal law and European guidelines. But if the right decisions concerning climate protection are made at those levels, too, I remain optimistic.