The ruling described in this Washington Post article is based on the idea that the climate is a natural commons which needs to be protected for public use – an approach that ties in with the arguments made in Feasta’s book Sharing for Survival. The lawsuit which brought about this ruling was part of a campaign by the Oregon-based non-profit Our Children’s Trust. It’s carrying out similar lawsuits in a number of other US states. Perhaps a similar approach could be effective in other countries?
Note: Feasta is a forum for exchanging ideas. By posting on its site Feasta agrees that the ideas expressed by authors are worthy of consideration. However, there is no one ‘Feasta line’. The views of the article do not necessarily represent the views of all Feasta members.