Framing Time in Climate Change Litigation
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.35295/osls.iisl/0000-0000-0000-1063Palabras clave:
tiempo, temporalidad, designación temporal, litigios sobre cambio climático, movilización legalResumen
El tiempo es esencial en relación con el cambio climático. Sin embargo, se han hecho pocos estudios sobre la manera en que se designan los marcos temporales en la movilización legal contra el cambio climático. El presente artículo examina la designación de marcos temporales en una serie de casos jurídicos contra el cambio climático de gran notoriedad pública, como Urgenda, Kivalina, Kingsnorth, y los actuales procesos de Our Children's Trust en EEUU. Argumento que hay una tensión entre el marco temporal científico de cara al futuro y el marco temporal de la ciencia basada en el momento actual. Según el marco científico a largo plazo, los efectos peligrosos del cambio climático todavía no han ocurrido y quedan a cierta distancia en un futuro proyectado. Bajo el prisma de la política medioambiental, se necesita una acción inmediata, ahora, en el presente; y, de acuerdo con un marco científico actual, el daño climático ya está sucediendo o es inminente.
Descargas
Metrics
Downloads:
PDF (English) 549
Citas
Caney, S., 2014. Climate change, intergenerational equity and the social discount rate. Politics, Philosophy & Economics, 13(4), 320–342.
Carswell, C., 2016. In Washington, activists and the “necessity defense” on trial. High Country News [online], 2 February. Available from: https://www.hcn.org/issues/48.2/in-washington-the-necessity-defense-on-trial-alongside-activists [Accessed 1 June 2018].
Climate Action Tracker, n.d. Addressing Global Warming [online]. Available from: https://climateactiontracker.org/global/temperatures/ [Accessed 22 May 2018].
Crawford, A., 2015 Temporality in restorative justice: On time, timing and time-consciousness. Theoretical Criminology [online], 19(4), 470-490. Available from: http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1362480615575804?journalCode=tcra [Accessed 1 June 2018].
de Sadeleer, N., 2016. Climate change, uncertainties and the precautionary principle. Jean Monnet Working Paper Series, Environment and Internal Market [online], 2016/1. Available from: http://www.tradevenvironment.eu/uploads/2016_CC_PP.pdf [Accessed 1 June 2018].
Fisher, E., 2002. Precaution, precaution everywhere: Developing a “common understanding” of the precautionary principle in the European Community. Maastricht Journal of European & Comparative Law [online], 9(1), 7-28. Available from: http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1023263X0200900102 [Accessed 1 June 2018].
Fisher, E., Scotford, E. and Barritt, E., 2017. The legally disruptive nature of climate change. The Modern Law Review [online], 80(2), 173–201. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2230.12251 [Accessed 1 June 2018].
Greenpeace UK, 2008. Kingsnorth trial day six: the summing up. Facebook [online], 8 September. Available from: https://www.facebook.com/notes/greenpeace-uk/kingsnorth-trial-day-six-the-summing-up/25875159538/ [Accessed 22 May 2018].
Hänggli, R., and Kriesi, H., 2012. Frame construction and frame promotion (strategic framing choices). American Behavioral Scientist [online], 56(3), 260-278. Available from: http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0002764211426325 [Accessed 1 June 2018].
Hansen, J.E., 2015. Statement of witness James E. Hansen [Kingsnorth case] (online). Available from: http://www.forestecologynetwork.org/climate_change/Hansen_Kingsnorth_testimony.pdf [Accessed 22 May 2018].
Hansen, J.E., 2017. Declaration of Dr. James E. Hansen in Support of Plaintiffs [case Juliana v US] (online). New York, 11 August. Available from: http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/mailings/2015/20150812_FINAL_HANSEN_DEC_FOR_US_DISTRICT_OREGON_9pm.pdf [Accessed 22 May 2018].
Hayes, G., 2013- Negotiating proximity: Expert testimony and collective memory in the trials of environmental activists in France and the United Kingdom. Law & Policy [online], 35(3), 208-235. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/lapo.12004 [Accessed 1 June 2018].
Hilson, C., 2012. UK climate change litigation: between hard and soft framing. In: S. Farrall, T. Ahmed and D. French, eds. Criminological and legal consequences of climate change. Oxford: Hart, pp. 47-61.
Lees, E., 2017. Responsibility and liability for climate loss and damage after Paris. Climate Policy [online], 17(1), 59-70. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2016.1197095 [Accessed 1 June 2018].
Long, L.N., and Hamilton, T., 2017. Case Comment—Washington v. Brockway: One Small Step Closer to Climate Necessity. McGill Journal of Sustainable Development Law [online], 13(1), 151-179. Available from: https://www.mcgill.ca/mjsdl/files/mjsdl/hamilton_and_long_march_31.pdf [Accessed 1 June 2018].
McKinnon, C., 2012. Climate change and future justice: Precaution, compensation and triage. Abingdon: Routledge.
Nathanson, R., 2015. Climate-change activists consider the necessity defense. The New Yorker [online], 11 April. Available from: https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/climate-change-activists-consider-the-necessity-defense [Accessed 1 June 2018].
Osofsky, H.M., 2005. The geography of climate change litigation: Implications for transnational regulatory governance. Washington University Law Quarterly [online], 83(6), 1789-1855. Available from: https://wustllawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/3-40.pdf [Accessed 1 June 2018].
Our Children’s Trust, n.d. Securing the Legal Right to a Safe Climate and a Healthy Atmosphere for all Present and Future Generations [homepage] (online). Available from: https://www.ourchildrenstrust.org/ [Accessed 22 May 2018].
Page, E., 2006. Climate change, justice and future generations. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Peel, J., Godden, L., and Keenan, R.J., 2012. Climate change law in an era of multi-level governance. Transnational Environmental Law [online], 1(2), 245-280. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1017/S2047102512000052 [Accessed 1 June 2018].
Richardson, B.J., 2017a. Doing time – The temporalities of environmental law. In: L. Kotze, ed., Environmental Law and Governance for the Anthropocene. Oxford: Hart, pp. 55-74.
Richardson, B.J., 2017b. Time and Environmental Law: Telling Nature’s Time. Cambridge University Press.
Rogers, N., 2013. Climate change litigation and the awfulness of lawfulness. Alternative Law Journal [online], 38, 20-24. Available from: http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1037969X1303800105 [Accessed 1 June 2018].
Rogers, N., 2015. If you obey all of the rules you miss all the fun: Climate change litigation, climate change activism and lawfulness. New Zealand Journal of Public and International Law [online], 13(1), 179-199. Available from: https://epubs.scu.edu.au/law_pubs/417/ [Accessed 1 June 2018].
Schwarz, M., 2010. The Drax 29 and the Kingsnorth 6: Different defences, different outcomes. ELFline [online], spring-summer. Available from: https://www.bindmans.com/uploads/files/documents/elf_line_article_Spring_Summer_2010__2_.pdf [Accessed 1 June 2018].
The Constitution [of Norway], as laid down on 17 May 1814 by the Constituent Assembly at Eidsvoll and subsequently amended, most recently in May 2018 [online], Article 112. Available from: https://www.stortinget.no/globalassets/pdf/english/constitutionenglish.pdf [Accessed 5 June 2018].
Urgenda, 2014. Summons in the Case: Urgenda Foundation v Kingdom of the Netherlands (Final draft Translation) [online]. 25 June. Available from: http://www.urgenda.nl/wp-content/uploads/Translation-Summons-in-case-Urgenda-v-Dutch-State-v.25.06.10.pdf [Accessed 22 May 2018].
Vanhala, L., and Hestbaek, C., 2016. Framing climate change loss and damage in UNFCCC negotiations. Global Environmental Politics [online], 16(4), 111-129. Available from: https://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdfplus/10.1162/GLEP_a_00379 [Accessed 1 June 2018].
Vanhala, L., and Hilson, C., 2013. Climate change litigation: Symposium introduction. Law & Policy [online], 35(3), 141-149. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/lapo.12007 [Accessed 1 June 2018].
Descargas
Publicado
Cómo citar
Número
Sección
Licencia
Derechos de autor 2019 Chris Hilson
Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución-NoComercial-SinDerivadas 4.0.
Los autores conservan el copyright de sus trabajos, que se publicarán en OSLS bajo una licencia Creative Commons Reconocimiento NoComercial SinObraDerivada. Puede consultar más detalles en: http://es.creativecommons.org/licencia/. Si no está de acuerdo con esta licencia, por favor, póngase en contacto con nosotros.
El autor concede los permisos necesarios para difundir la información bibliográfica del artículo, incluyendo el resumen, y autorizar a otros, incluyendo las bases de datos bibliográficas, de índices y servicios de alerta de contenidos, a copiar y comunicar esta información.
Para más información sobre los permisos para distribuir su artículo en cada fase de la producción, por favor, lea nuestra Política de Autoarchivo y Divulgación (en inglés).
Las condiciones de copyright con el nombre de autores y co-autores, y la licencia Creative Commons se mostrarán en el artículo. Estas condiciones se deben aceptar como parte del proceso de envío de un artículo a la revista. Por favor, asegúrese de que todos los co-autores se mencionan correctamente, y que entienden y aceptan estos términos.
