This workshop was dedicated to better understanding the historical development, but also the ramifications and contradictions of Germany’s purported role as a “Green Superpower.” Taking a historical approach, and drawing on developments and case studies from both Cold War Germanys as well as the Berlin Republic, the workshop explored the realities of German environmental engagement after 1945, and also analyzed the ways in which this engagement has been perceived abroad. Presentations and discussions focused on how Germany’s green reputation has evolved since the postwar era and looked into how and why it has deteriorated over the past decade.

STEPHEN GROSS (New York) introduced the topic of the workshop by highlighting the emergence of Germany’s green reputation in the era of climate change awareness. He noted how some observers see Germany's green image as a political construct, particularly as that reputation faces external threats.

The first panel considered the place of the environment in German international engagement during the Cold War. THOMAS LEKAN (Columbia, SC) discussed the connection between German urban planning and development aid in East Africa. He showed the different ways that West and East Germany influenced the built environment in Tanzania in the 1960s, and reflected on how these contributions related to Cold War competition. JENNIFER ALLEN (New Haven, CT) described the development of seed banks in both Cold War Germanys. She contrasted East Germany’s successful Institut für Pflanzengenetik und Kulturpflanzenforschung with West Germany’s focus on seed bank development in places like Ethiopia and Costa Rica. These initiatives reflected colonialist practices with potentially dangerous consequences, as West German expertise eclipsed indigenous knowledge.

The second panel looked at perceptions and materialities of German environmental policymaking. PER HÖGSELIUS (Stockholm) analyzed how Swedish newspapers report on the German Energiewende. He found that although the Swedish media often portrays Germany as a larger and more mature version of Sweden, Germany is described as falling behind Scandinavian countries where the environment and green energy is concerned. DENNIS DUENNWALD (New York) discussed the role played by the Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau (KfW) in financing environmental protection initiatives between 1970 and 2000. In its investments, the KfW sought to improve Germany’s redevelopment but also to expand its own influence. Duennwald argued that the KfW’s role as a financeer of environmental protection has caused the FRG to adopt regulatory measures more frequently than market-driven mechanisms, like cap and trade schemes.

In the keynote lecture, KLAUS TÖPFER looked back on his career in environmental politics in order to think about the challenges of the present. His introspective talk focused particularly on his ideas about how government agencies and other decision-makers ought to address environmental problems, emphasizing the importance of the social aspect of “soziale Marktwirtschaft” and the role of circular economies.1

The third panel looked at the extent to which reunified Germany was seen as a green leader after the Cold War. Focusing on the contiguous national parks of the Bavarian Forest (Germany) and Šumava (Czechia), PAVLA ŠIMKOVÁ (Munich) analyzed the circulation of governance practices, especially of German conservationism. She showed that while the euphoria of the 1990s fostered cross-boundary collaboration, perceptions and stereotypes continued to play a crucial role in the transfer of environmental ideas. Thinking with the “political myth” concept, STEPHEN MILDER addressed the differences between the Berlin Republic’s domestic and international Green reputations. While German environmental policymaking has been celebrated abroad, it is seen quite critically at home, a circumstance that raises questions about the intended audience and the uses of the “Green Germany” myth. ASTRID M. ECKERT (Atlanta / Greifswald) showed that climate diplomacy was considered a safe field for the development of German leadership after 1990. This strategy caused German officials to advocate for Bonn as the seat of the newly created UN Climate Secretariat in the 1990s, meaning that climate diplomacy was not only driven by a sense of environmental emergency.

The workshop’s final panel focused on Germany’s role as an environmental actor within the EU. Looking at the cases of automobile emissions standards and the carbon Emissions Trading System (ETS), GRACE BALLOR (Milan) showed how business interests influenced the German government’s role in European discussions about environmental protection. Hence, Germany supported stronger automobile emissions standards because this was in the interest of German carmakers, but dragged its feet on carbon emissions since this was perceived as a threat to German industry. Despite aiming at solidifying its green reputation in Europe in the 1990s, STEPHEN GROSS (New York) argued that Germany appeared as a self-interested actor in European debates. He proposed that Germany’s rather lukewarm support for an energy tax was due to the strong opposition of its energy-intensive industries. Conversely, Germany was openly in favor of the liberalization of the energy market as it would ultimately benefit from sinking prices, leading to a consequential rise in production and consumption.

During the concluding discussion, participants reflected on the particularities of “Green Germany.” While some emphasized the importance of the 1990s context for Germany’s green reputation, others noted Germany’s particular approach to the management of ecology and economy. At the same time, participants asked how unique Germany’s approach to environmental policymaking is, and whether similar observations could be made about other parts of the world. Moreover, participants discussed the role played by the “Green Germany” myth in the 1990s, wondering for instance if this could be considered as a way to fill in the absence of political alternatives, especially regarding the myths about national greatness that existed before and Germany’s need to reinvent itself after reunification. This raised the question of the instrumentalization of environmental leadership by the German government, also pointing to the need to include domestic perspectives in the study of “Green Germany.” Scholars also suggested investigating the links between the end of the Cold War, the economization of the environment, and the “ecologization” of businesses. Participants agreed on the need to “broaden” the meaning of “Green,” and to incorporate different visions, solutions, and problems into future research. They proposed increased interdisciplinary work and a conceptual history of the adjective “green” as first steps in this direction.

Workshop Overview:

Welcome and Introduction

Sonja Dümpelmann (Munich) / Stephen Milder (Munich) / Stephen Gross (New York)

Panel I: Local and Transnational Green Germanys
Chair: Sonja Dümpelmann

Tom Lekan (Columbia, SC): Camp Hessen in Dar es Salaam: On the Local Materials of Global (Green) Connection

Jennifer Allen (New Haven): A Burdensome Mandate?: Concepts of Salvation and Sustainability in German Plant Genetics

Panel II: Green Energy
Chair: Elke Seefried (Aachen)

Per Högselius (Stockholm): The ‘Energiewende’ in Swedish Media

Dennis Duennwald (New York): The Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau and the Financing of Green Germany from 1970-2000

Keynote Lecture
Klaus Töpfer (former German Minister of the Environment and former Director of the United Nations Environment Program): Der blaue Himmel über der Ruhr und die ökologischen Herausforderungen der Wiedervereinigung: Zentrale Antriebskräfte einer engagierten Umweltpolitik

Panel III: The Green 1990s
Chair: Susanne Unger

Pavla Šimková (Munich): Europe’s Green Roof: German and Czech conservationists in the Bavarian Forest and Šumava in times of transformation

Stephen Milder (Munich): Germany, Green Superpower: On the Making of the Berlin Republic and the Making of an International Political Myth

Astrid M. Eckert (Atlanta / Greifswald): How did the UN Climate Secretariat get to Bonn?

Panel IV: Green Germany in the EU
Chair: Frieda Ottmann (Munich)

Grace Ballor (Milan): Germany in European Environmental and Climate Governance

Stephen Gross (New York): Energy Liberalization and Carbon Taxes in the 1990s: Germany and the European Union

Concluding discussion

Note:
1 In Memoriam: Klaus Töpfer, one of Germany’s most distinguished environmental policymakers and a key architect of the FRG’s green reputation on the international stage, died unexpectedly shortly after this workshop. In addition to his political achievements, Töpfer has been described as an “Umweltprofessor,” with a close eye for detail and impressive analytical skill. Those characteristics were on full display during the workshop, where he gave a compelling keynote speech and contributed thoughtfully to discussions.