KlimaSeniorinnen case: Climate change legal scholarship needs empiricism, not hype KlimaSeniorinnen case: Climate change legal scholarship needs empiricism, not hype

Julien Bétaille and Guillaume Chapron

PLOS Climate, 2025, vol. 4, issue 3, 1-4

Abstract: In April 2024, the European Court of Human Rights ruled in the KlimaSeniorinnen case that Switzerland had not implemented a legal framework capable of addressing climate change and that this constituted a violation of the right to private and family life. Despite being celebrated as “historic,” this ruling reflects established case law rather than a legal breakthrough. Hyperbolic reactions reveal a lack of empirical rigor in legal commentary, which undermines evidence-based climate policymaking. We caution against exaggerating the impact of individual rulings, given limited evidence of their influence on climate policies and emissions reductions, and encourage legal scholars to instead adopt methodological rigor akin to practices in other scientific disciplines. Specifically, we advocate for empirical approaches in law, through comprehensive data collection, robust statistical methods, and systematic analysis to better understand the role of courts in climate change mitigation.

Date: 2025
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.plos.org/plosclimate/article?id=10.1371/journal.pclm.0000589 (text/html)
https://journals.plos.org/climate/article?id=10.13 ... 00589&type=printable (application/pdf)

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:plo:pclm00:0000589

DOI: 10.1371/journal.pclm.0000589

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in PLOS Climate from Public Library of Science
Bibliographic data for series maintained by climate ().