278 “Achieving relatively easy terms under the Kyoto Protocol did not necessarily inspire post-socialist states to engage enthusiastically in international climate talks. . . .” Climate Change Policies in the Post-Socialist World LAURA A. HENRY AND LISA MCINTOSH SUNDSTROM T he states of the former socialist bloc bear a share of historical responsibility for cli- mate change. During their industrializa- tion in the twentieth century, they contributed significantly to the atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases that threaten to raise tempera- tures and destabilize global weather patterns. As participants in the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and ratifiers of the Kyoto Protocol, these states also are engaged in addressing climate change to vary- ing degrees. However, the post-socialist region’s most effec- tive response to soaring greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions was to undergo a painful econom- ic recession in 1990s. The collapse of socialist regimes and the transition to a market economy shuttered many inefficient industrial enterprises— GHG-emitting behemoths that had been the crown- ing achievement of socialist economic planning. In many cases, these state-owned manufacturers’ products were not competitive when faced with the technologically advanced production lines and consumer tastes of the global market. Without state subsidies, many industrial enterprises closed their doors. Yet in spite of the shared experience of state planning and deep recession, these states’ respons- es to climate change—both globally and domesti- cally—vary dramatically, and there has been little region-wide cooperation to address climate issues. Overall, the post-socialist region can be divided into three groups: Russia and, to a lesser degree, Ukraine, which account for a significant percent- age of global emissions under the Kyoto Protocol and have played an important (albeit not always constructive) role at the UN climate negotiations; states that became part of the European Union and are governed by EU climate policy; and post- socialist states outside the EU that account for a relatively small share of emissions, generally are focused on economic development, and have neither prioritized climate issues nor developed robust climate policies. Ultimately, many of these governments remain ambivalent about climate policy, domestically and globally. Internal impetuses for climate mitiga- tion—public opinion, social movements, and scientific consensus—are weak. Thus far, global climate agreements have not required much action by post-socialist states. Even so, many (including the Czech, Polish, and Russian governments) express disquiet that future climate agreements could constrain their economic development. KYOTO CATEGORIES Exported from the USSR to the rest of the Warsaw Pact, the Soviet industrial model was highly inefficient. Inputs such as natural resources and energy were assigned artificially low prices by state planning bureaucracies, and the costs of externalities (including air pollution) were largely ignored. As a result, socialist economies were much more energy intensive than their Western counterparts. For example, in 1990 the energy intensity of Czechoslovakia was double that of France and Germany, at purchasing power parity. While energy intensity has declined in the region overall, and the Czech Republic now is only about 20 percent more energy intensive than Germany, Russia’s use of energy per unit of GDP at purchas- LAURA A. HENRY is an associate professor of government at Bowdoin College. LISA MCINTOSH SUNDSTROM is an associ- ate professor of political science at the University of British Columbia.