ARBITRATING CLIMATE CHANGE DISPUTES
While global climate change frameworks have existed for decades, the climate change litigation landscape has shifted dramatically in the past few years. Climate change-related disputes are no longer reserved for academic debate. Governments and companies are exposed to litigation with significant implications.
The first legally binding climate change treaty, the Kyoto Protocol, committed its signatories to limiting and reducing greenhouse gas emissions in accordance with agreed targets. The Kyoto Protocol had limited effects because some countries (including the US) did not ratify the Protocol, some parties did not meet their commitments, and these commitments applied to only a portion of the global economy.
Given the limitations of the Kyoto Protocol, plaintiffs turned to litigation to tackle climate change. As of 2020, plaintiffs have filed 1550 climate change cases across 38 countries. More than 90 percent of those disputes have been filed in US courts, where plaintiffs have brought a range of climate change litigation. These disputes cover a broad reach of climate change issues, from requiring federal agencies to consider climate change in reviewing federal projects pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act, to public nuisance cases in California against oil companies for their contributions to rising sea levels. Despite the significant number of cases filed in US courts, plaintiffs thus far have faced significant jurisdictional hurdles in the courts.
Oct-Dec 2021 issue
King & Spalding LLP