Fundamentos De Uma Ética Para O Século Xxi

Neubauer, Vanessa Steigleder

doi:10.24824/978854440111.8

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The Court considered the IPCC's assessments sufficiently authoritative to "present the state of scientific research on climate change in a comprehensive and objective manner, thereby providing a basis for science-based decisions." 67 It drew on the IPCC's "virtually unanimous scientific opinion", which was sufficient to convince it that "the rapid acceleration of global warming that is currently observable in comparison with historical levels is essentially due to the change in the material balance of the atmosphere caused by anthropogenic emissions." 68 Such an endorsement and conclusion show that the Court was more than willing to rely on the broader discipline of earth system science which, specifically in the IPCC and broader climate change context, is concerned with questions focused on "changes through time in systems of immense complexity, with many feedbacks and non-linear interactions, and no simple cause and effect relationships."…”

Section: Authoritative Global Climate Sciencementioning

confidence: 99%

Neubauer et al. versus Germany: Planetary Climate Litigation for the Anthropocene?

Kotzé

2021

German Law Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The recent decision by the German Constitutional Court in Neubauer et al. versus Germany has been attracting considerable attention around the globe. The Court ordered the German legislature to correct and to significantly tighten up existing climate law provisions, to increase the ambition of these provisions, and to strengthen future mitigation pathways. Several commentators have hailed it as an example of what is possible when the judiciary steps in to fill gaps in global climate governance as a result of governments failing to act or acting inadequately. In this article, I explore the extent to which the Court in Karlsruhe has innovatively managed to embrace a holistic planetary view of climate science, climate change impacts, planetary justice, planetary stewardship, earth system vulnerability, and global climate law, within the context of a human-dominated geological epoch, to guide its reasoning and findings. My proposal is that courts will have to increasingly follow a planetary perspective that is grounded in the Anthropocene context when adjudicating matters related to global disruptors such as climate change. This decision offers a first, and important, example of a promising new paradigm that I term planetary climate litigation.

show abstract

Section: Authoritative Global Climate Sciencementioning

confidence: 99%

Neubauer et al. versus Germany: Planetary Climate Litigation for the Anthropocene?

Kotzé

2021

German Law Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Fundamentos De Uma Ética Para O Século Xxi

Cited by 1 publication

References 0 publications

Neubauer et al. versus Germany: Planetary Climate Litigation for the Anthropocene?

Neubauer et al. versus Germany: Planetary Climate Litigation for the Anthropocene?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About