On the Role of Courts in Climate Policy: Comment on Lando

Hylton Keith N. ()
Additional contact information
Hylton Keith N.: Boston University, Boston, MA, USA

Review of Law & Economics, 2024, vol. 20, issue 2, 197-202

Abstract: This is a response to Henrik Lando’s article on courts and climate policies. Lando’s argument can be summarized in two propositions. The first is that EU courts have adopted a suboptimal legal standard for evaluating climate policies. Lando’s second proposition is that courts are not a good forum for the evaluation of climate policies because of the need to focus on the narrow interests of the litigants before the courts. I agree with Lando’s first proposition, but I disagree somewhat with his second proposition. It is pitched too broadly in my view.

Keywords: climate litigation; cost-benefit analysis; precautionary principle; decision-making; mechanism; sustainability (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: K13 K3 K32 K4 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2024
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://doi.org/10.1515/rle-2023-0113 (text/html)
For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:bpj:rlecon:v:20:y:2024:i:2:p:197-202:n:1005

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
https://www.degruyter.com/journal/key/rle/html

DOI: 10.1515/rle-2023-0113

Access Statistics for this article

Review of Law & Economics is currently edited by Francesco Parisi

More articles in Review of Law & Economics from De Gruyter
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Peter Golla ().