Abstract
In a context in which national and international policy-making have been inadequate and insufficient for dealing with climate change, more recently courts have become a critical forum in which the climate crisis and the consequences of inaction are under debate. Climate change litigation (CCL) is emerging as a valuable strategy to hold governments and private entities accountable for their lack of action and to advance policy and regulation in both, mitigation and adaptation. In addition, CCL also appears to be a powerful tool for communicating the urgency of climate change. Win or lose, climate-related cases can help to promote a better understanding of climate change, raise awareness and enhance dialogue and public engagement in the debate over the actions needed to confront the challenges linked to it. Against the backdrop of the climate change communication discourse, this paper explores how CCL assists in communicating climate change issues. By looking at the experience of some of the most significant climate-related cases that have set important precedents in recent years, this paper highlights that CCL contributes to the public understanding of the causes, risks and consequences of climate change, as well as the adaptation needs, by bringing its realities closer to people—within and outside courtrooms—and by presenting complex related issues in a clear and easy-to-understand manner. Thus, as climate-related cases are reported in a variety of sources gaining national and international attention, they help to increase the public’s understanding of climate issues, raise public and politic awareness and inspire action.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
For information about the case, see http://www.urgenda.nl/en/climate-case/.
- 2.
For information about the case, see http://www.lse.ac.uk/GranthamInstitute/litigation/ashgar-leghari-v-federation-of-pakistan-lahore-high-court-green-bench-2015/.
- 3.
For information about the case, see http://germanwatch.org/de/der-fall-huaraz/.
- 4.
See a summary of the media cover, specially of the Urgenda and Leghari cases, in http://www.urgenda.nl/en/climate-case/ and http://germanwatch.org/de/der-fall-huaraz). See also https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/may/23/climate-change-government-court-cases-study.
- 5.
See a summary of Cox’s presentations in http://www.revolutionjustified.org/rj-media.
- 6.
- 7.
Cox (2012).
- 8.
De Graaf and Jans (2015).
- 9.
Lin (2015).
- 10.
- 11.
- 12.
Schiermeier (2015).
- 13.
- 14.
Just to mention some: Verschuuren (2015) and Warnock (2015). See also information about the three cases in Climate Law Blog http://blogs.law.columbia.edu/climatechange/.
- 15.
For example, in the 14th Annual Colloquium of the IUCN Academy of Environmental Law (http://iucnael2016.no/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Final-Programme-23.06.pdf) and the 2nd International Forum on Environmental Justice (II Foro Internacional de Justicia Ambiental) (http://www.tribunalambiental.cl/ii-foro-internacional-de-justicia-ambiental/#programa).
References
Abate R (ed) (2016) Climate justice: case studies in global and regional governance challenges. Environmental Law Institute, Washington, DC, USA
Averill M (2007) Climate litigation: Shaping public policy and stimulating debate. In: Moser S, Dilling L (eds) Creating a climate for change: communicating climate change and facilitating social change. Cambridge University Press, New York, USA, pp 462–474
Averill M (2008) Climate litigation: ethical implications and societal impacts. Denver Univ Law Rev 85:899–918
Averill M (2009) Linking climate litigation and human rights. Rev Eur Comp Int Environ Law 18(2):139–147
Banda M, Fulton S (2017) Litigating climate change in national courts: recent trends and developments in global climate law. Environ Law Rep 47(2):10121–10434
Burns W, Osofsky H (eds) (2009) Adjudicating climate change: state, national, and international approaches. Cambridge University Press, New York, USA
Capstick S, Whitmarsh L, Poortinga W, Pidgeon N, Upham P (2015) International trends in public perceptions of climate change over the past quarter century. WIREs Clim Change 6(1):35–61
Corner A (2013) The ‘art’ of climate change communication. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/art-climate-change-communication. Accessed 25 Sept 2017
Cox R (2012) Revolution justified. Planet Prosperity Foundation, The Netherlands
Cox R (2015) A climate change litigation precedent: Urgenda Foundation v The State of the Netherlands. J Energy Nat Resour Law 34(2):143–163
Dahlstrom M (2014) Using narratives and storytelling to communicate science with nonexpert audiences. PNAS J 111:13614–13620
De Graaf K, Jans J (2015) The Urgenda decision: Netherlands Liable for role in causing dangerous global climate change. J Environ Law 27(3):517–527
Enserink M (2015) In surprise, Dutch court orders government to do more to fight climate change. Science, June 24. http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2015/06/surprise-dutch-court-orders-government-do-more-fight-climate-change. Accessed 25 Oct 2017
Faure M, Peeters M (eds) (2011) Climate change liability. Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham, UK
Galvão Ferreira P (2016) Common But Differentiated Responsibilities’ in the National Courts: lessons from Urgenda v. The Netherlands. Trans Environ Law 5(2):329–351
Germanwatch (2017) First Climate Lawsuit Against Energy Company Before German Courts. http://germanwatch.org/en/14191. Accessed 25 Sept 2017
Green M (2004) Storytelling in Teaching. The Association for Psychological Science 17(4). https://www.psychologicalscience.org/observer/storytelling-in-teaching. Accessed 28 Sept 2017
Hunter D (2007) The implications of climate change litigation for international environmental law-making. Washington College of Law Research Paper 14:1–19. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1005345. Accessed 20 Sept 2017
Jones MD (2014) Communicating climate change: are stories better than “just the facts”? The Policy Stud J 42(4):644–673
Kaminakaité-Salters G (2011) Climate change litigation in the UK: its feasibility and prospects. In: Faure M, Peeters M (eds) Climate change liability. Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham, UK
Kanner A, Nagy T (2006) Legal strategy, storytelling and complex litigation. Am J Trial Advocacy 30(1):1–26
Kearney A (1994) Understanding global change: a cognitive perspective on communicating through stories. Clim Change 27:419–441
Leal Filho W (2009) Communicating climate change: challenges ahead and action needed. Int J Clim Change Strateg Manag 1(1):6–18
Lin J (2012) Climate change and the courts. Legal Stud 32(1):35–57
Lin J (2015) The first successful climate change negligence case: a Comment on Urgenda Foundation v. The State of the Netherlands (Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environment). Clim Law 5(1):65–81
Loth M (2016) Climate change liability after all: a Dutch Landmark case. Tilburg Law Rev 21:5–30
Mehra M (2015) Pakistan ordered to enforce climate law by Lahore court. Climate Home News. http://www.climatechangenews.com/2015/09/20/pakistan-ordered-to-enforce-climate-law-by-lahore-court/. Accessed 15 Oct 2017
Moser S (2010) Communicating climate change: history, challenges, process and future directions. Wiley Interdiscip Rev: Clim Change 1(1):31–53
Moser S, Dilling L (2004) Making climate HOT: communicating the urgency and challenge of global climate change. Environ: Sci Policy Sustain Dev 46(10):32–46
Moser S, Dilling L (2011) Communicating climate change: closing the science-action gap. In: Dryzek JS, Norgaard RV, Schlosberg D (eds) The Oxford Handbook of climate change and society. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK
Osofsky H (2010) The continuing importance of climate change litigation. Clim Law 1(1):3–29
Peel J, Osofsky H (2015) Climate change litigation: regulatory pathways to cleaner energy. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK
Roy S, Woerdman E (2016) Situating Urgenda v the Netherlands within comparative climate change litigation. J Energy Nat Resour Law 34(2):165–189
Science (2015) Dutch court orders government to cut more CO2. Science 349(6243):10
Schiermeier Q (2015) Landmark court ruling tells Dutch government to do more on climate change. Nat News. June 24, http://www.nature.com/news/landmark-court-ruling-tells-dutch-government-to-do-more-on-climate-change-1.17841. Accessed 25 Oct 2017
Shaw C (2014) Reframing climate risk to build public support for radical emission reductions: the role of deliberative democracy. Carbon Manag 5(4):349–360
Smith J, Sherman D (2006) Climate change litigation: analysing the law, scientific evidence and impacts on the environment, health and property. Presidian Legal Publications, Adelaide, South Australia
Somerville R, Joy Hassol S (2011) Communicating the science of climate change. Phys Today 64(10):48–53
Sprinz D, Hefele P (2017) Compensating for climate change impacts? Priorities for research and public policy. German Konrad Adenauer Foundation (KAS) and the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research (PIK) http://www.kas.de/recap/en/publications/50024/. Accessed 15 Sept 2017
UNEP (2017) The status of climate change litigation—A global review. UNEP. http://columbiaclimatelaw.com/files/2017/05/Burger-Gundlach-2017-05-UN-Envt-CC-Litigation.pdf. Accessed 10 Oct 2017
Van Zeben J (2015) Establishing a governmental duty of care for climate change mitigation: will Urgenda Turn the Tide? Trans Environ Law 4(2):339–357
Verschuuren J (2015) Spectacular Judgment by Dutch Court in Climate Change Case. Tilburg University Blog, June 25 https://blog.uvt.nl/environmentallaw/?p=109. Accessed 25 Oct 2017
Warnock C (2015) The Urgenda Decision: Balanced Constitutionalism in the Face of Climate Change?’ Oxford University Press Blog, July 22. http://blog.oup.com/2015/07/urgenda-netherlands-climate-change. Accessed 25 Oct 2017
Wibeck V (2014) Enhancing learning, communication and public engagement about climate change—Some lessons from recent literature. Environ Educ Res 20(3):387–411
Wolf J, Moser S (2011) Individual understandings, perceptions, and engagement with climate change: insights from in-depth studies across the world. Wiley Interdiscip Rev: Clim Change 2:547–569
Court Decisions
Court of The Hague (2015) Urgenda v. Government of the Netherlands, 24 June, ECLI:NL:RBDHA:2015:7196, Rechtbank Den Haag, C/09/456689/HA ZA 13-1396 (English version). http://www.urgenda.nl/documents/VerdictDistrictCourt-UrgendavStaat-24.06.2015.pdf. Accessed 10 Sept 2017
Lahore High Court (2015) Leghari v. Federation of Pakistan, WP No. 25501/2015. http://edigest.elaw.org/sites/default/files/pk.leghari.090415.pdf. Accessed 3 Oct 2017
Funding Acknowledgement
The generous financial support of the South Africa National Research Foundation (NRF) in the form of a ‘travel grant for individual researcher’ is acknowledged with appreciation.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Villavicencio Calzadilla, P. (2019). Climate Change Litigation: A Powerful Strategy for Enhancing Climate Change Communication. In: Leal Filho, W., Lackner, B., McGhie, H. (eds) Addressing the Challenges in Communicating Climate Change Across Various Audiences. Climate Change Management. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-98294-6_15
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-98294-6_15
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-98293-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-98294-6
eBook Packages: Earth and Environmental ScienceEarth and Environmental Science (R0)