The European Union and the United States have significantly different approaches when addressing climate change. It is reasonable to think that the actions of the EU and the US, as powerful entities in global politics, influence the contours and effectiveness of the international climate change regime. The EU has for a long time strived to play the strongest role possible in international climate negotiations and to maximise its climate change targets, which is reflected through its climate policies and legal implementation of the international climate change regime. The situation in the US is more polarised, with the Republican Party almost uniformly denying the existence of climate change and any human impact on rising global temperatures. Instead of taking scientific reports on impacts, risks and adaptation to climate change seriously, the Trump administration is focused on increasing US production of oil, natural gas and coal. Meanwhile, Democrats are pushing to combat climate change, build a clean energy economy and secure environmental justice. This article explores and explains the legal differences in the EU and the US responses to climate change and climate change targets, and considers the possible contributing factors. The assessment takes account of policies at the highest governing level, thus not taking account of what is happening among some US states.

中文翻译：

---

欧盟和美国不同的气候变化方法：影响因素分析

欧盟和美国在解决气候变化问题上有着截然不同的方法。可以合理地认为，作为全球政治中强大的实体的欧盟和美国的行动会影响国际气候变化制度的轮廓和有效性。欧盟长期以来一直努力在国际气候谈判中发挥最强有力的作用，并最大程度地实现其气候变化目标，这通过其气候政策和国际气候变化制度的合法实施得以体现。美国的情况更加两极分化，共和党几乎一致否认气候变化的存在以及对全球气温上升的任何人类影响。与其认真对待有关气候变化的影响，风险和适应的科学报告，特朗普政府的重点是增加美国的石油，天然气和煤炭产量。同时，民主党人正在努力应对气候变化，建立清洁能源经济并确保环境正义。本文探讨并解释了欧盟和美国在应对气候变化和气候变化目标方面的法律差异，并考虑了可能的影响因素。该评估考虑了最高管理级别的政策，因此没有考虑美国某些州的情况。本文探讨并解释了欧盟和美国在应对气候变化和气候变化目标方面的法律差异，并考虑了可能的影响因素。该评估考虑了最高管理级别的政策，因此没有考虑美国某些州的情况。本文探讨并解释了欧盟和美国在应对气候变化和气候变化目标方面的法律差异，并考虑了可能的影响因素。该评估考虑了最高治理级别的政策，因此没有考虑美国某些州的情况。