Climate change litigation's regulatory pathways

A comparative analysis of the United States and Australia

Jacqueline Peel, Hari M. Osofsky

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

12 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

This article provides a critical next step in scholarship on climate change litigation's regulatory role. It creates a model for understanding the direct and indirect regulatory roles of this litigation. It then applies this model to the United States and Australia, two key jurisdictions for climate change lawsuits, in order to explore the regulatory pathways that this litigation has taken, is taking, and likely will take. This analysis helps to illuminate the ways in which litigation influences regulation and forms part of climate change governance.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)150-183
Number of pages34
JournalLaw and Policy
Volume35
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 1 2013

Fingerprint

climate change
lawsuit
jurisdiction
governance
regulation

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Sociology and Political Science
  • Law

Cite this

@article{afabf855d0c64866ab64e4366585aded,
title = "Climate change litigation's regulatory pathways: A comparative analysis of the United States and Australia",
abstract = "This article provides a critical next step in scholarship on climate change litigation's regulatory role. It creates a model for understanding the direct and indirect regulatory roles of this litigation. It then applies this model to the United States and Australia, two key jurisdictions for climate change lawsuits, in order to explore the regulatory pathways that this litigation has taken, is taking, and likely will take. This analysis helps to illuminate the ways in which litigation influences regulation and forms part of climate change governance.",
author = "Jacqueline Peel and Osofsky, {Hari M.}",
year = "2013",
month = "7",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1111/lapo.12003",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "35",
pages = "150--183",
journal = "Law and Policy",
issn = "0265-8240",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "3",

}

Climate change litigation's regulatory pathways : A comparative analysis of the United States and Australia. / Peel, Jacqueline; Osofsky, Hari M.

In: Law and Policy, Vol. 35, No. 3, 01.07.2013, p. 150-183.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Climate change litigation's regulatory pathways

T2 - A comparative analysis of the United States and Australia

AU - Peel, Jacqueline

AU - Osofsky, Hari M.

PY - 2013/7/1

Y1 - 2013/7/1

N2 - This article provides a critical next step in scholarship on climate change litigation's regulatory role. It creates a model for understanding the direct and indirect regulatory roles of this litigation. It then applies this model to the United States and Australia, two key jurisdictions for climate change lawsuits, in order to explore the regulatory pathways that this litigation has taken, is taking, and likely will take. This analysis helps to illuminate the ways in which litigation influences regulation and forms part of climate change governance.

AB - This article provides a critical next step in scholarship on climate change litigation's regulatory role. It creates a model for understanding the direct and indirect regulatory roles of this litigation. It then applies this model to the United States and Australia, two key jurisdictions for climate change lawsuits, in order to explore the regulatory pathways that this litigation has taken, is taking, and likely will take. This analysis helps to illuminate the ways in which litigation influences regulation and forms part of climate change governance.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84879104341&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84879104341&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/lapo.12003

DO - 10.1111/lapo.12003

M3 - Article

VL - 35

SP - 150

EP - 183

JO - Law and Policy

JF - Law and Policy

SN - 0265-8240

IS - 3

ER -