Hostname: page-component-669899f699-2mbcq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-05-01T03:50:41.387Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Future Generations Litigation and Transformative Changes in Environmental Governance

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 November 2024

Ole W. Pedersen  and
Katalin Sulyok Open the ORCID record for Katalin Sulyok [Opens in a new window]
Ole W. Pedersen
Affiliation:
Department of Law, Aarhus University, Aarhus (Denmark)
Katalin Sulyok*
Affiliation:
Department of International Law, ELTE Eötvös Loránd University, Budapest (Hungary)
*
Corresponding author: Katalin Sulyok, Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Symposium Foreword
Information
Transnational Environmental Law , Volume 13 , Issue 3 , November 2024 , pp. 464 - 474
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

This Foreword introduces a collection of articles growing out of the workshop titled ‘Future Generations Litigation and Transformative Changes in Environmental Governance’ hosted jointly by ELTE Eötvös Loránd University, Faculty of Law, and Aarhus University, held in Budapest (Hungary) on 8–9 June 2023.

References

1 See, e.g., Principle 2 of the 1972 Stockholm Declaration: Declaration of the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment, adopted by the UN Conference on Environment and Development, Stockholm (Sweden), 5–16 June 1972, UN Doc. A/Conf.48/14/Rev. 1, available at: http://www.un-documents.net/aconf48-14r1.pdf. See also Weiss, E. Brown, In Fairness to Future Generations: International Law, Common Patrimony, and Intergenerational Equity (Transnational, 1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; R. Araújo & L. Koessler, ‘The Rise of the Constitutional Protection of Future Generations’, 30 Sept. 2021, LPP Working Paper No. 7-2021, available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3933683.

2 Boyle, A. & Redgwell, C., Birnie, Boyle and Redgwell's International Law and the Environment (Oxford University Press, 2021), pp. 121–2CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

3 Paris (France), 12 Dec. 2015, in force 4 Nov. 2016, available at: https://unfccc.int/sites/default/files/english_paris_agreement.pdf.

4 New York, NY (United States (US)), 9 May 1992, in force 21 Mar. 1994, Art. 3(1), available at: https://unfccc.int.

5 E.g., Tremmel, J., ‘Establishing Intergenerational Justice in National Constitutions’, in J. Tremmel (ed.), Handbook of Intergenerational Justice (Edward Elgar, 2006), pp. 187–214CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

6 Principles on the Human Rights of Future Generations, Maastricht (The Netherlands), 3 Feb. 2023, available at: https://www.rightsoffuturegenerations.org/the-principles.

7 Available at: https://www.un.org/en/summit-of-the-future.

8 Boyle & Redgwell, n. 2 above, p. 122.

9 See, e.g., Donger, E., ‘Children and Youth in Strategic Climate Litigation: Advancing Rights through Legal Argument and Legal Mobilization’ (2022) 11(2) Transnational Environmental Law, pp. 263–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

10 See, e.g., Abate, R.S., Climate Change and the Voiceless (Cambridge University Press, 2019)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Page, E., ‘Intergenerational Justice and Climate Change’ (1999) 47(1) Political Studies, pp. 53–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

11 Fisher, E., Scotford, E. & Barritt, E., ‘The Legally Disruptive Nature of Climate Change’ (2017) 80(2) The Modern Law Review, pp. 173–201CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

12 Views Adopted by the Human Rights Committee under Article 5(4) of the Optional Protocol [of the ICCPR] concerning Communication No. 3624/2019, 21 July 2022, UN Doc. CCPR/C/135/D/3624/2019 (Billy et al. v. Australia), para. 8.14.

13 New York, NY (US), 16 Dec. 1966, in force 23 Mar. 1976, available at: https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/ccpr.pdf.

14 ECtHR, Verein KlimaSeniorinnen Schweiz and Others v. Switzerland, App. No. 53600/200, Judgment, 9 Apr. 2024 (KlimaSeniorinnen); ECtHR, Carême v. France, App. No. 7189/21, Judgment, 9 Apr. 2024.

15 Rome (Italy), 4 Nov. 1950, in force 3 Sept. 1953, available at: https://www.echr.coe.int/documents/d/echr/Convention_ENG.

16 Ibid., para. 420.

17 Ibid., para. 484.

18 Ibid., para. 550. See also A. Nolan, ‘Inter-generational Equity, Future Generations and Democracy in the European Court of Human Rights’ Klimaseniorinnen Decision’, EJIL:Talk!, 15 Apr. 2024, available at: https://www.ejiltalk.org/inter-generational-equity-future-generations-and-democracy-in-the-european-court-of-human-rights-klimaseniorinnen-decision.

19 KlimaSeniorinnen, n. 14 above, para. 548, K. Sulyok, ‘What Does the European Court of Human Rights’ KlimaSeniorinnen Judgment Mean for Future Generations? Some Quick Reflections’, Guest Post hosted by University of Auckland (New Zealand), available at: https://www.auckland.ac.nz/en/law/our-research/research-centres/new-zealand-centre-for-environmental-law/opinion-and-analysis/What-does-the-european-court-of-human-rights-klimaseniorinnen-judgment-mean.html.

20 Neubauer et al., German Federal Constitutional Court, Order of the First Senate, 24 Mar. 2021, 1 BvR 2656/1.

21 Demanda Generaciones Futuras v. Minambiente, No. 11001-22-03-000-2018-00319-01, 4 Apr. 2018, and Tierra Digna y Otros v. Presidencia de la República y Otros, Colombian Constitutional Court, Ruling T-622, 10 Nov. 2016, Expediente T-5.016.242.

22 E.g., Rawls, J., A Theory of Justice (Oxford University Press, 1971)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

23 Stockholm Declaration, n. 1 above, Principle 2.

24 Weiss, E. Brown, In Fairness to Future Generations: International Law, Common Patrimony, and Intergenerational Equity (United Nations University Press, 1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

25 D. Bertram, ‘“For You Will (Still) Be Here Tomorrow”: The Many Lives of Intergenerational Equity’ (2023) 12(1) Transnational Environmental Law, pp. 121–49, at 123.

26 Maastricht Principles, n. 6 above.

27 See the Brundtland Report's definition of sustainable development: World Commission on Environment and Development, Our Common Future (Oxford University Press, 1987), p. 51.

28 Tremmel, J.C., Handbook of Intergenerational Justice (Edward Elgar, 2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

29 UN, Report of the Secretary-General, ‘Intergenerational Solidarity and the Needs of Future Generations’, 15 Aug. 2013, UN Doc. A/68/322, available at: https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/756820/files/A_68_322-EN.pdf.

30 KlimaSeniorinnen, n. 14 above, paras 410, 420.

31 Nolan, A., ‘Children and Future Generations Rights before the Courts: The Vexed Question of Definitions’ (2024) 13(3) Transnational Environmental Law, pp. XXX–XXXGoogle Scholar.

32 See the 7th generation principle adopted by the Confederation of the Six Nations of the Iroquois cited in Report of the Secretary-General, n. 29 above, para. 12.

33 See Welsh Government, ‘Shared Purpose: Shared Future – Statutory Guidance on the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015, Core Guidance’, last updated 1 July 2024, para. 68, available at: https://www.gov.wales/sites/default/files/publications/2024-07/spsf-1-core-guidance.pdf (stating that ‘public bodies and public services boards will look at least 10 years ahead, although best practice would be to look 25 years ahead’).

34 See examples analyzed by Nolan, n. 31 above.

35 See, e.g., Demanda Generaciones Futuras v. Minambiente, n. 21 above.

36 See H.-O. Pörtner et al., ‘Summary for Policymakers’, in Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) (H.-O. Pörtner et al. (eds)), Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability, Contribution of Working Group II to the Sixth Assessment Report of the IPCC (IPCC, 2022), pp. 1–33, at 13, para. B.3 (projecting ‘unavoidable increases in multiple climate hazards’ with very high confidence for the near term (2021–2040) in case the 1.5°C target is exceeded).

37 This study defines a generation as lasting for circa 20 years, as people gain voting rights typically somewhere between 16 and 21. This also squares with the definition used in generational theories in sociology; see Strauss, W. & Neil, H., Generations: The History of America's Future, 1584 to 2069 (Morrow, 1991)Google Scholar.

38 See KlimaSeniorinnen, n. 14 above (where intergenerational burden sharing was mentioned as the first principle, which underpinned the Court's own assessment: para. 410).

39 See speech of UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres, ‘Secretary-General Calls for UN 2.0 to Tackle 21st Century Challenges’, 22 Apr. 2024, available at: https://news.un.org/en/story/2024/04/1148806 (acknowledging that ‘we cannot solve 21st century problems with 20th century tools’).

40 Linnér, B.-O. & Wibeck, V., ‘Conceptualising Variations in Societal Transformations towards Sustainability’ (2020) 106 Environmental Science & Policy, pp. 221–7, at 222CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

41 S. Díaz et al., ‘Pervasive Human-driven Decline of Life on Earth Points to the Need for Transformative Change’ (2019) 366(6471) Science, p. 1327.

42 See Stokes, E. & Smyth, C., ‘Hope-Bearing Legislation? The Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015’ (2024) 13(3) Transnational Environmental Law, pp. XXX–XXGoogle Scholar.

43 Sulyok, K., ‘Transforming the Rule of Law in Environmental and Climate Litigation: Prohibiting the Arbitrary Treatment of Future Generations’ (2024) 13(3) Transnational Environmental Law, pp. XXX–XXGoogle Scholar.

44 See Foster, C., ‘Due Regard for Future Generations? The No Harm Rule and Sovereignty in the Advisory Opinions on Climate Change’ (2024) 13(3) Transnational Environmental Law, pp. XXX–XXGoogle Scholar.

45 See Wewerinke-Singh, M. & Ramsay, A.S.F., ‘Echoes Through Time: Transforming Climate Litigation Narratives on Future Generations’ (2024) 13(3) Transnational Environmental Law, pp. XXX–XXGoogle Scholar.

46 Lees, E. & Gjaldbæk-Sverdrup, E., ‘Fuzzy Universality in Climate Change Litigation’ (2024) 13(3) Transnational Environmental Law, pp. XXX–XXGoogle Scholar.

47 See Wewerinke-Singh & Ramsay, n. 45 above.

48 Conseil d’État: Commune de Grande-Synthe v. France, N° 427301, Judgment, 19 Nov 2020.

49 For examples see Wewerinke-Singh & Ramsay, n. 45 above.

50 M. Wewerinke-Singh, A. Garg & S. Agarwalla, ‘In Defence of Future Generations: A Reply to Stephen Humphreys’ (2023) 34(3) European Journal of International Law, pp. 651–67.

51 For lack of standing see Milieudefensie v. Royal Dutch Shell Plc, District Court of The Hague, C/09/571932/HA ZA 19-379, Judgment, 26 May 2021 (Milieudefensie v. Shell), para. 4.2.5 (where the Court did not allow ActionAid's claim to proceed for not representing Dutch citizens). For a judicial finding where standing was granted to extraterritorial plaintiffs, though it was found that substantive obligations were breached only vis-á-vis territorial plaintiffs, see Neubauer, n. 20 above, paras 101, 173–81.

52 For a class action lawsuit where interests were bundled on a local scale see Milieudefensie v. Shell, ibid., para. 4.2.4.

53 For more details see Nolan, n. 31 above.

54 Wewerinke-Singh, Garg & Agarwalla, n. 50 above.

55 For more details see Sulyok, n. 43 above.

56 Ibid.

57 For more details see Foster, n. 44 above.

58 Sulyok, n. 43 above.

59 Lees & Gjaldbæk-Sverdrup, n. 46 above.

60 Ibid., p. <8 of FirstView>.

61 Ibid., p. <20 of FirstView>.

62 Nolan, n. 31 above.

63 Ibid., p. <8 of FirstView>.

64 Ibid. <final para>

65 Wewerinke-Singh & Ramsay, n. 45 above.

66 E.g., Hilson, C., ‘The Role of Narrative in Environmental Law: The Nature of Tales and Tales of Nature’ (2022) 34(1) Journal of Environmental Law, pp. 1–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

67 Wewerinke-Singh & Ramsay, n. 45 above, p. <4 of proof>.

68 Rikki Held v. State of Montana, Case No. CDV-2020-307, Montana First Judicial District Court, Case No. CDV-2020-307, Complaint filed 13 Mar. 2020.

69 N. 12 above.

70 Stokes & Smyth, n. 42 above.

71 Ibid., p. <11 of FirstView>.

72 Foster, n. 44 above.