Can the law protect us from climate change? Do we have a legal right to a stable climate? Are governments responsible for preventing dangerous climate change within their borders? One month ago I would have answered these questions with "most likely not", but one extraordinary court case changed that to "hopefully, yes!". By Erik-Jan Van Oosten.
David Knight considers four possible reasons for divestment from fossil fuels. He concludes that divestment can help to bring about changes needed to tackle the negative impacts of fossil fuel production and use, but it cannot substitute for concerted and rigorous action at international and national governmental levels to keep fossil fuels in the ground.
We find the latest IPCC report's emphasis on climate as a "global commons problem" helpful and constructive. However, the economy must break its dependency on GDP growth in order to achieve emissions reduction without economic collapse. Fortunately the potential exists for significant co-benefits from climate mitigation, including poverty alleviation and reduced inequality. Grassroots legal action could help give teeth to the international institutions needed for cooperation.
This letter to the Guardian was written by a group of activists including several Feasta members. It advocates legal action by low-lying communities in order to require governments to achieve greenhouse gas emission targets. A new group, the Climate Litigation Network, has been formed to provide support to these vulnerable communities.