The Role of Courts in Interpreting and Enforcing Environmental Laws Related to Climate Change: A Catalyst for Progress or a Barrier?
Clicks: 1
ID: 312254
2025
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
0.0
/100
1 views
0 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Ranked #327 of 395 articles by views in Social Sciences & Humanity Research Review
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 395 in total.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
The increasing urgency of climate change has placed courts across the globe at the forefront of interpreting, enforcing, and shaping environmental law. Rising global temperatures, frequent natural disasters, biodiversity loss, and widespread environmental degradation demand urgent responses from states and corporations. However, political inertia, weak enforcement mechanisms, and economic interests often hinder effective climate governance. In this context, judicial institutions have emerged as critical actors in bridging the gap between international commitments and domestic implementation. This paper examines the dual role of courts as both catalysts for progress and barriers in addressing climate change. On the one hand, courts have acted as agents of judicial activism, setting important legal precedents, holding governments accountable to emission targets, and compelling corporations to reduce their carbon footprint. Landmark cases such as Massachusetts v. EPA (2007), Urgenda Foundation v. The Netherlands (2019), and Milieudefensie v. Royal Dutch Shell (2021) illustrate how judicial intervention can significantly influence climate policy and governance. On the other hand, courts are often constrained by rigid legal frameworks, jurisdictional limits, political backlash, and difficulties in enforcing compliance. The reliance on complex scientific evidence further complicates judicial reasoning, leading to fragmented or inconsistent rulings across jurisdictions. The study employs a doctrinal and comparative legal methodology, analyzing landmark national and international cases alongside scholarly literature. It argues that while courts are not a panacea for the climate crisis, they remain indispensable actors in climate governance. Ultimately, the paper concludes that enhancing judicial capacity, strengthening legal frameworks, and promoting international cooperation can empower courts to serve as effective catalysts rather than barriers to global climate action.
| Reference Key |
imported_1776688690_69e61e32a68b9
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | Muhammad Junaid Suffi |
| Journal | Social Sciences & Humanity Research Review |
| Year | 2025 |
| DOI |
10.63468/sshrr.119
|
| URL | |
| Keywords | Keywords not found |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.