Transition to a clean energy future: the role of climate litigation

Background

    Climate change is an urgent environmental problem requiring a rapid transition to sources of clean energy. Yet governments - both nationally and internationally - have moved only slowly and timidly to put in place the necessary long-term regulatory steps to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. In this setting environmental advocates have looked increasingly to courts, mounting ambitious climate litigation in an effort to block fossil fuel use and force consideration of climate change impacts in planning decisions. This innovative project analyses the capacity of climate litigation in key fossil-fuel producing countries, Australia and the US, to influence regulation so contributing to putting these nations on the path to a clean energy future. This project is funded by the Australian Research Council Discovery Project (DP 130100500) for 2013-2017.

Researchers

Program

Workshop Report

Publications

  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016

    Jacqueline Peel and Hari Osofsky, “Energy Partisanship” (2016) 65 (3) Emory Law Journal 695

    Hari M Osofsky and Jacqueline Peel, “The Grass is not Always Greener: Congressional Dysfunction, Executive Action and Climate Change in Comparative Perspective” (2016) 91(1) Chicago Kent Law Review 139

    Hari Osofsky, Lisa Benjamin, Michael Gerrard, Jacqueline Peel, “The 2015 Paris Agreement on Climate Change: Significance and Implications for the Future” (2016) 46(4) Environmental Law Reporter 10267

  • 2015

    Jacqueline Peel and Hari Osofsky, Climate Change Litigation: Regulatory Pathways to Cleaner Energy (Cambridge University Press, 2015)

    Jacqueline Peel and Hari Osofsky, “Sue to Adapt?” (2015) 99(6) Minnesota Law Review 2177

  • 2014

    Jacqueline Peel, “The Australian carbon pricing mechanism: Promise and pitfalls on the pathway to a clean energy future” (2014 15(1) Minnesota Journal of Law, Science & Technology 429

  • 2013

    Jacqueline Peel and Hari Osofsky, “Climate change litigation’s regulatory pathways: A comparative analysis of the United States and Australia” (2013) 35(3) Law and Policy 150

    Hari Osofsky and Jacqueline Peel, “Litigation’s regulatory pathways and the administrative state: Lessons from U.S. and Australian climate change governance” (2013) 25 Georgetown International Environmental Law Review 207

    Hari Osofsky and Jacqueline Peel, “The role of litigation in multilevel climate change governance: Possibilities for a lower carbon future?” (2013) 30(4) Environmental and Planning Law Journal 303