Carbon-polluting corporations and their investors face a rising tide of climate litigation, according to a report released Friday, two days after a Dutch court ordered oil giant Shell to slash its greenhouse gas emissions.
Companies operating in rich economies — Britain, the EU, Australia and especially the US, which accounts for the vast majority of cases to date — are most vulnerable to future legal action, business risk analysts Verisk Maplecroft found.
But the report also highlights a growing number of cases in developing countries despite more limited civil rights and a weaker rule of law.
“Our data points to a shift in major emerging economies, which might not bode well for the carbon-intensive companies operating there,” said Liz Hypes, Verisk Maplecroft’s senior environment and climate change analyst. “We are seeing climate litigation expand into countries where climate activism is lower but the threat of climate change is more significant.”
So far, most cases suing for strong climate action have been filed against governments.
But the Shell ruling, which ordered the Anglo-Dutch company to cut carbon emissions 45 percent by 2030, and other recent challenges to fossil fuel companies suggest the corporate world could see a crescendo of lawsuits.
Last month, New York City sued ExxonMobil and two other oil giants for greenwashing their products and intentionally misleading consumers about the extent to which they contribute to climate change.
An earlier bid by the Big Apple to hold five major gas and oil companies liable for damages caused by global warming was rejected weeks before by a federal court, but still inflicted reputational harm, Hypes said.
Also this week, investors brushed aside resistance from the company to install two activists board members at ExxonMobil, and at another annual investor meeting directed Chevron to deepen its emissions cuts.
More than 1,800 climate change-related cases have been filed in courts around the world in the last 25 years, most of them since 2010, according to a database maintained by the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia Law School.
A “climate litigation index” in the new report assesses the likelihood of climate lawsuits in nearly 200 countries, based on prior litigation, public awareness, climate activism, and the strength of judicial systems. Not surprisingly, the US tops the risk ranking, followed by the UK, Australia, France and Germany. The next 17 countries on the list are all European, with the exception of Canada (10th) and Japan (18th).
But Mexico, Colombia, South Africa, Brazil and the Philippines are all in the top 50, with Indonesia, Pakistan and India just behind, the index showed.
As governments reacts to public pressure for faster climate action, corporations may run afoul of rapidly shifting regulatory environment.
Failure to curb emissions, and lack of transparency about business exposure to climate risk, can also damage brand reputation, even when courts rule in a company’s favour, as has happened in several US cases involving oil and gas majors.
Risk can also comes in the form of financial penalties as the scope of nature and climate litigation expands.
Companies, and their financial backers, “are facing genuine legal risks from which the repercussions may be significant,” Hypes said.
With fossil fuels generating 80 percent greenhouse gas emissions, oil and gas companies, and coal-powered electric utilities, are especially vulnerable to climate liability lawsuits.
IN 2002 Thomas Hertog received an e-mail summoning him to the office of his mentor Stephen Hawking. The young researcher rushed to Hawking’s room at Cambridge. “His eyes were radiant with excitement,” Hertog recalls. Typing on the computer-controlled voice system that allowed the cosmologist to communicate, Hawking announced: “I have changed my mind. My book, A Brief History of Time, is written from the wrong perspective.” Thus one of the biggest-selling scientific books in publishing history, with worldwide sales credited at more than 10 million, was consigned to the waste bin by its own author. Hawking and Hertog then began working on
March 27 to April 2 After placing fifth in the 1964 Miss Universe pageant in Miami, “Miss China” Yu Yi (于儀) toured the US to great fanfare. The Chinese community in San Francisco called her the “pride of the Republic of China (ROC),” and she even received the key to New York City. Taiwan’s Miss China pageant produced three winners that year who performed on the international stage. Lin Su-hsin (林素幸), the second Taiwan-born Miss China, did even better, claiming third place in London’s Miss World. She says she was elated to see
Last week, the huge news broke that the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) would not host an open primary for its presidential nominee, but instead pick a candidate through a committee process. KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) sent forth a few polite meaningless words about party unity in making the announcement. There’s great commentary on this momentous move, so I will say only that for those of you who think the KMT will “never be that dumb,” I have three words for you: Hung Hsiu-chu (洪秀柱), the unelectable candidate the party chose for the 2016 presidential race. Criticism of the Democratic Progressive
Pingtung County was home to many of Taiwan’s earliest Hakka immigrants. Jiadong Township (佳冬鄉), now little more than a small rural outpost along the road to Kenting with a slowly dwindling population and a local economy supported mainly by aquaculture, was once a thriving Hakka stronghold. Evidence of the residents’ strong family ties, self-reliance and, in some cases, keen business sense, still remains. At the time of the Japanese takeover in 1895, it was still an important enough center that the incoming colonists sent a special military mission to capture it. Nowadays, much has been done to preserve the cultural