Melbourne Law School - Research Publications
Permanent URI for this collection
Search Results
1 - 10 of 11
-
ItemNo Preview AvailablePreparing for a post-net-zero world (Comment)(NATURE PORTFOLIO, 2022-08-11)
-
ItemNo Preview AvailableReview of literature on impacts of climate litigation(Children’s Investment Fund Foundation, 2022-05-17)This report for the Children’s Investment Fund Foundation (CIFF) reviews the findings of academic and grey literature published over the period 2000-2021 on the impacts of climate change litigation. Climate change litigation is variously defined in the literature and may include interventions before courts, tribunals and complaints bodies where climate change is central or peripheral to any given complaint. Impacts are also understood differently in the literature. Broadly, the impacts of climate change litigation encompass the aftermath or follow-on events, actions or changes flowing from a case or proceeding, which can include direct legal, regulatory, policy and behavioural changes, as well as indirect effects on the conduct or actions of government, corporate, civil society and public actors.
-
ItemGuidance on Policy and Legislation for Integrated Waste Management during a Pandemic(United Nations Environment Programme, 2022)
-
ItemThe ‘Rights’ Way to Democratize the Science–Policy Interface in International Environmental Law? A Reply to Anna-Maria Hubert(Oxford University Press (OUP), 2020)Science is widely regarded as being necessary for effective international environmental decision-making and risk assessment processes. However, it is equally well recognized that uncertainties or the complexity of phenomena under study mean that science may only offer partial knowledge for environmental problems in many circumstances. ‘Democratization’ of science is often proposed as a solution to this dilemma. This may involve incorporating a wider spectrum of expert views and public inputs in risk assessments of new technologies, public participation in science through so-called ‘citizen science’ initiatives or the application of the precautionary principle. This reply reviews these approaches and contrasts them with another tantalizing possibility offered by Anna-Maria Hubert’s article; a human rights-based approach drawing on the ‘oft-neglected’ right to science. It assesses the extent to which a rights-based approach, utilizing the right to science, offers a way to bridge the gap between science and democracy in contested international environmental legal decision-making processes. While it concludes that there are important potential benefits to the application of the right to science in international environmental law, it is far from clear that it provides a panacea given the limitations on the right expressed in the international human rights instruments in which it is found, such as the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. Instead, the right to science can be seen as placing another thumb on the scales – alongside the precautionary and participatory approaches – in favour of enabling broader, more democratically accountable decision-making in cases of uncertain science and contested environmental risks.
-
ItemCorporate Energy Transition: Legal Tools for Shifting Companies Towards Clean Energy Practices(University of Melbourne, Melbourne Law School, 2020)This report presents the findings of an ARC funded Discovery Project, DP160100225, Devising a Legal Blueprint for Corporate Energy Transition (Peel, Osofsky & McDonnell, 2016-2020).
-
ItemNo Preview Available'A Wake-up Call': Why this Student is Suing the Government over the Financial Risks of Climate Change( 2020)As the world warms, the value of “safe” investments might be at risk from inadequate climate change policies. This prospect is raised by a world-first climate change case, filed in the federal court last week.
-
ItemClimate Change Litigation(Annual Reviews, 2020)Climate change litigation has grown exponentially in the last decade, paralleled by the emergence of a rich legal and social sciences literature assessing these cases. Building on a recent review in WIRES Climate Change, this article evaluates the growth of this literature and the key themes it highlights. In 2019, climate litigation literature experienced substantial growth, with a focus on multiple novel dimensions: new high-profile judgments; emerging legal avenues, types of actors, litigation objectives, and jurisdictions, especially those in the Global South; and additional interdisciplinary analyses. Just as in the underlying case law, climate litigation scholarship shows evidence of distinct but overlapping waves that build together in a manner similar to a harmonic chord. Even so, this literature has not yet engaged deeply with questions about the effectiveness of climate litigation as a governance tool, particularly in the context of the decentralized system formalized with the 2015 Paris Agreement.
-
ItemNo Preview AvailableEnergy Partisanship(Emory Law Journal, 2016)Whether the topic is the Paris Agreement on climate change, greenhouse gas emissions from power plants, the Keystone XL pipeline, hydraulic fracturing, offshore drilling, or renewable energy, much of the U.S. policy dialogue about energy and climate change is deeply partisan. Republicans and Democrats debate individual issues in vitriolic sound bites that indicate minimal common ground. For example, officials favoring robust action on climate change are charged with engaging in a “War on Coal.” Those opposed are labeled “members of the Flat Earth Society.” Set against these dysfunctional climate and energy politics, how can progress be made? For people who accept the science of climate change, this has become a critical question. An emerging body of psychological research indicates that strategies attempting to persuade those with opposing views with additional scientific evidence have limited effectiveness. Providing more information does not change minds because (1) it does not take moral and cultural worldview differences into account, or (2) it is presented in ways that do not adequately acknowledge how people’s perceptions of the relatability and trustworthiness of communicators shape their acceptance of that information.This Article provides a novel analysis of how to make progress on energy and climate change issues by translating this emerging psychological research into a framework for action. It proposes two interconnected strategies— substantive and structural—for moving past imbedded partisanship and political dysfunction. Substantively, the Article argues for refocusing regulatory efforts on areas where a greater degree of consensus may be possible, such as economic development and disaster resilience. Structurally, it proposes a shift to arenas that are less gridlocked by energy partisanship than the legislative branch of the federal government, such as other branches of the federal government, state and local levels, and corporate and private sector actors. By drawing on case studies and empirical data, including interviews with key stakeholders, the Article illustrates possibilities for progress under this framework.
-
ItemReducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation in Developing Countries (REDD): Implementation Issues(Monash University, Faculty of Law, 2010)
-
ItemScience and risk regulation in international law(Cambridge University Press, 2010-01-01)The regulation of risk is a preoccupation of contemporary global society and an increasingly important part of international law in areas ranging from environmental protection to international trade. This book examines a key aspect of international risk regulation - the way in which science and technical expertise are used in reaching decisions about how to assess and manage global risks. An interdisciplinary analysis is employed to illuminate how science has been used in international legal processes and global institutions such as the World Trade Organization. Case studies of risk regulation in international law are drawn from diverse fields including environmental treaty law, international trade law, food safety regulation and standard-setting, biosafety and chemicals regulation. The book also addresses the important question of the most appropriate balance between science and non-scientific inputs in different areas of international risk regulation.