Divesting from Climate Change: The Road to Influence

Is fossil fuels divestment likely to achieve its aims? This article evaluates the rationales for divestment in terms of their capacity to give the campaign influence. It focuses on the direct effects of divestment on financial actors because divestment is a specific means of exerting influence outside of conventional political channels. In seeking to end fossil fuel industries in order to halt climate change, the campaign deploys a variety of arguments to win support and wield influence, namely, the legality of divestment and, indeed, the emerging duty to divest; investors’ moral responsibility to avoid complicity in the fossil fuel economy; investors’ moral responsibility to use their leverage against climate polluters; and the power of financial sanctions to create a business case for abandoning fossil fuels. Although in combination they may be effective, each of these asserted rationales has some limitations that may diminish the influence of the divestment movement. Moreover, the movement does not engage sufficiently with the systemic qualities of finance capitalism that must also be reckoned with in order to address broader patterns of environmental unsustainability. Although the divestment movement aspires to ultimately change government policies on climate change, it may achieve greater influence by also seeking better government regulation of the financial economy.     

Building Norms from the Grassroots Up: Divestment,Expressive Politics,and Climate Change

The fossil fuel divestment movement is at the forefront of civil society initiatives to raise public consciousness about the need for a “fossil‐free” future. Through the lens of the social movement literature, this article shows how the movement has harnessed grassroots activists, engaged in innovative and sometimes disruptive forms of protest, and used cognitive framing and symbolic politics to gain media interest and persuade the public of the importance and legitimacy of its claims as well as to promote a new social norm. The relative instrumental, structural, and discursive power of the movement and its adversaries is also examined, showing how, notwithstanding the fossil fuel industry's deeply embedded structural and instrumental power, the movement has managed to shift the contest onto a terrain where it holds a comparative advantage. Finally, the movement's role in nonstate climate governance is considered, taking account of its interactions with and impact on a range of other climate actors. This article's conclusion is that climate governance is not only an instrumental or pragmatic process of mandating changes in behavior but an expressive and symbolic one of nurturing a new norm and institutionalizing a new set of moral principles.     

A Contest for Legitimacy: The Divestment Movement and the Fossil Fuel Industry

The divestment movement has sought to influence attitudes to fossil fuels by framing producer companies as pariahs and as unnecessary and redundant. In response, the fossil fuel industry has engaged in a direct and aggressive attack on the divestment movement. This article considers the relationship between the movement and the industry as a contest for legitimacy for both the organizations and the norms they advocate. Through a case study of the coal discourse in Australia from 2013 to 2016, it explores how each party has attempted to undermine the other's legitimacy and to build or defend its own. It concludes that the contest for legitimacy is complex, being conducted at multiple levels (pragmatic, moral, legal, and cognitive) and before multiple audiences. For the movement to “win” the contest, it will require more than a simple rebalancing of the legitimacy scales.     

The Morality of Divestment

Divestment from companies that produce or heavily utilize fossil fuels has become one of the biggest issues in the contemporary moral debate surrounding climate change. Universities and other institutions are being asked to divest themselves of their fossil fuel–related investments. In this article I argue that, while the case for divestment is morally strong, not all of the arguments used to support divestment are equally strong. Moreover, which of these arguments is employed matters a great deal for the strength of the conclusions regarding divestment. There are two major groups of arguments: what I call positive arguments for divestment, which stem from the claim that divestment is a response to general duties to take action to prevent dangerous climate change, and what I call negative arguments, which stem from a duty not to cause harm. In this article I will briefly characterize what divestment means and to whom it applies. I will then look at negative and positive duty accounts of the duty to divest before looking at the standard objections to both. Objections have tended to cohere around the claims that divesting is inconsistent, useless and/or harmful, or should be abandoned for better options to avoid dangerous climate change.     

Explaining energy disputes at the World Trade Organization

The international trade regime has seen an explosion of challenges to government support for renewable energy in recent years, yet fossil fuel subsidies, which dwarf renewable energy subsidies, have remained unchallenged. Existing explanations for this puzzling discrepancy have focused on four rationales: major fossil fuel exporters have not historically been members of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade/World Trade Organization (WTO); WTO subsidies rules are inadequate to deal with the specifics of the fossil fuel trade; nations have developed separate institutions to govern energy; and all states have fossil fuel subsidies, so a challenge to one country’s subsidies will prompt a reciprocal challenge. This article makes two contributions. First, it uses a survey of existing renewable energy trade disputes to critique the existing explanations. Most importantly, the article shows that the threat of reciprocal litigation exists in the renewable energy sector, and that WTO subsidies rules are rarely used to challenge renewable energy subsidies. Hence, neither the threat of reciprocal litigation nor the relative ease of applying WTO subsidies rules explains the discrepancy in the number of disputes. Second, the article hypothesizes that the economic diversification of energy-producing countries is correlated with and may drive whether energy-producing countries face WTO challenges to their energy support policies. Most major fossil fuel producers lack significant non-fossil fuel exports that could be restricted in order to induce them to reform their fossil fuel policies, the usual mechanism for enforcing a WTO judgment. States may also be more likely to challenge new, rather than long-standing, trade restrictions. This suggests that trade challenges will arise more frequently where innovation leads to competition and a demand for new trade restrictions (as in renewable energy), as opposed to in mature sectors of the economy (i.e., the fossil fuel industry). Economic diversification, in turn, is a good predictor of innovation.     

“What He Did Was Lawful”: Divorce Litigation and Gender Inequality in China

Sociolegal research has shed considerable light on gender inequality in the civil justice system. Existing research, however, rarely looks beyond court proceedings to examine gender inequality stemming from the prior stages in civil litigation. This article fills the gap by addressing the question of whether and how the early moments in disputing produce inequality between women and men. Based on a mixed‐methods study of divorce litigation in China, I identify two critical moments in the early stages in disputing: the initiation stage and the suit‐filing stage. Findings from the two stages indicate that, early on in disputing, the legal profession routinely dismisses and violates women's rights in marriage and family. Moreover, due to the legal profession's failure to convert important rights on the books into formal claims, women's marital grievances and rights claims fall through cracks long before they can enter court proceedings. These findings suggest that gender inequality can result not only from judicial decision making, but also from dispute processing conducted prior to—and outside of—court proceedings.     

The Trouble with Boycotts: Can Fossil Fuel Divest Campaigns Be Prohibited?

Organizations like 350.org, Insure Our Future, and DivestInvest are leading campaigns to urge boycott and divestment from fossil fuels as a means to address climate change. Increasingly, they are finding success, from individual consumers to massive pension and sovereign wealth funds. However, as organized group boycotts, divest campaigns may be vulnerable to prosecution under antitrust law. This article explores the likelihood of success in such a case, considering the history of the legal treatment of organized boycotts, the scope and purpose of antitrust law, and the possible application of the First Amendment to the divestment context. The article finds that fossil fuel boycotts straddle a number of contradictory characteristics, making application of existing theories inadequate. In particular, existing precedent protects political boycotts, but not those with primarily economic objectives, and fails to definitively address whether a noncompetitive actor may undertake concerted action under antitrust law. In the context of climate change, where the political is economic, and political goals may seek significant economic changes (such as undermining an entire industry), existing theories may lead to a result that threatens both free expression and the health of the planet. The essential flexibility of the Sherman Act, however, provides room for protection of political activity, even where the ultimate objective is economic in nature.     

MIDDLE MANAGEMENT AND POLICE DEMOCRATIZATION: A Reply to John E. Angell

This article responds to John Angell's (1971) proposal to abolish police middle management. With use of the data from a seven-city study of team policing (Sherman et al., 1973) and Tannenbaum's (1968) framework of control in organizations, the past obstructions and potential uses of middle management to police change are discussed. Rather than abolish or neutralize mid-management, I propose to expand their support functions as a positive aid to change.     

Fraud,Free Speech and Fossil Fuel: Lessons from Big Tobacco for Big Oil

Recent journalistic investigations revealed that ExxonMobil carried out research beginning in the 1970s indicating fossil fuel's dangerous role in global warming. Rather than heed the warnings of its research, for the next few decades, ExxonMobil instead chose to become a leader in climate change denial; stressing uncertainty, propagating misinformation, funding denial, and politicizing and undermining the expert scientific consensus. Exxon's behavior invoked the tactics used by the tobacco industry years earlier, tactics which wound up the subject of a successful federal government lawsuit under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act. The parallels with the tobacco industry prompted legislators and environmentalists to call on the Department of Justice to use RICO again to hold the fossil fuel industry to account. This article will consider the legal issues associated with bringing such an action, and whether useful lessons can be drawn from the tobacco litigation.     

Collective Litigation and the Constitutional Challenges to Decriminalizing Homosexuality in Singapore

This article examines collective legal mobilization through the courts, or collective litigation, in a non‐liberal regime. It analyses the emergence and development of collective litigation to challenge the constitutionality of section 377A of the Penal Code, the law that criminalizes same‐sex sexual conduct in Singapore. The analysis focuses on the relational dynamics of collective litigation and legal subjectivities of the social actors involved, highlighting how social positions and strategic interests shaped their interactions and decisions on litigation. While gay rights activists emphasized their movement's collective interests when choosing the appropriate case and lawyers, a movement outsider pursued individual interests on behalf of a client. Due to their divergent social positions and strategic interests, the two teams competed with each other as they initiated two separate constitutional challenges. Tension between the teams led to conflict with constituents of the gay rights movement and influenced their relational dynamics with other parties.     

Reluctant Radicals: How Moderates Shape Movements for Social Change

This essay reviews three books within the southern history literature on the white moderate's response to the civil rights movement; Kevin Kruse's White Flight: Atlanta and the Making of Modern Conservatism (2005), Matthew Lassiter's The Silent Majority: Suburban Politics in the Sunbelt South (2006), and Jason Sokol's There Goes My Everything: White Southerners in the Age of Civil Rights, 1945–1975 (2006). I examine how white moderates impacted the struggle for African American civil rights, and explore how this dynamic can help us understand the trajectory of the current debate over gay rights in the United States. I argue that while the US public ultimately came to support equal rights for African Americans, and has grown more tolerant of gay rights recently, they have been willing to do so only when these rights claims are framed as benefiting “deserving” segments of these populations. This shows that rights are, to some extent, contingent resources, available primarily to those citizens who fit certain ideal types, and suggests that those individuals who are unwilling (or unable) to live up to this ideal may ultimately fail to benefit from these movements.     

民事公益诉讼的基本模式研究——以中、美、德三国为中心的比较法考察

民事公益诉讼模式取决于一国的法律传统和司法政策,新模式的导入为民事诉讼形式的创新提供了契机。在目前代表人诉讼被搁置、集团诉讼短期无引入可能的背景下,我国民事公益诉讼应采取民事公诉为主导,实验性诉讼、团体诉讼和公民诉讼为补充的模式选择路径。具体建言是:确立实验性诉讼、拓展民事公诉和团体诉讼的适用范围、引进公民诉讼。     

Review Essay: Divestment,Nonstate Governance,and Climate Change

This review essay examines the divestment movement's evolution, aims, and strategies as well as why it is both distinctive and important. It then locates the movement within the broader literature on nonstate climate change governance, suggesting how studying the movement may contribute to this literature. Finally, seeking to take stock some five years on from its inception, it assesses the movement's impact and effectiveness over that period.     

Rolling the Dice: How Many Occurrences Have Occurred?

The insurance litigation that followed from the World Trade Center tragedy has produced two decisions. The two decisions are diametrically opposed. First, the court found that for those insurance policies that contained a definition of the policy term “occurrence,” the collapse of the two buildings constituted a single occurrence. SR International Business Insurance Co., Ltd. v. World Trade Center Properties LLC, et al., 222 F. Supp. 2d 385 (S.D.N.Y. 2002), aff'd, World Trade Center Properties, LLC, et al. v. Hartford Fire Insurance Co., et al., 345 F.3d 154 (2d Cir. 2003). Then, after a trial involving those policies that did not define the term “occurrence,” the jury held that the collapse of the two buildings constituted two occurrences. This incongruous result demonstrates two truths. First, when the insurance industry wants to, it can define the term ‘occurrence’ in a totally unambiguous manner:

Occurrence shall mean all losses or damages that are attributable directly or indirectly to one cause or to one series of similar causes. All such losses will be added together and the total amount of such losses will be treated as one occurrence irrespective of the period of time or area over which such losses occur.

See WilProp form insurance policy for the World Trade Center, cited at 345 F.3d at 160.     

Climate Change Public Nuisance Litigation: Contextualizing AEP v. Connecticut

This article follows up on B. A. Bender, “Greenhouse Gas Politics and Climate Change Public Nuisance Litigation,” Environmental Claims Journal, 22(2): 78–90, 2010. It discusses developments in climate change public nuisance litigation since May 2010, with an emphasis on how actions taken by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency may affect the outcome of American Elec. Power Co. Inc. et al. v. State of Connecticut et al., which was argued before the United States Supreme Court on April 19, 2011. A decision in that case is expected this summer.     

Media libel litigation

The libel litigation system does not efficiently or effectively resolve media libel disputes. Protracted and expensive litigation neither restores plaintiffs' reputations nor protects media defendants from intrusive discovery and potentially large damage awards. This article demonstrates how research on the characteristics of the libel litigation process and the interests and concerns of the disputants was synthesized with research on dispute resolution processes to develop an alternative process for resolving libel disputes outside the courts. The article discusses the potential feasibility of the voluntary, nonlitigation alternative program, informed by research on dispute processing and libel litigation. An evaluation of the program is being conducted to examine attorneys' and parties' reactions to the program and to assess the extent to which the program provides effective solutions to the problems of the libel litigation system.     

论建立公益诉讼制度的必要性和可行性

随着我国民主和法制的发展,在我国现行民事诉讼和行政诉讼制度的基础上,建立公益诉讼制度作为必要的补充,不仅具有客观必要性,而且具有现实可行性。一方面,在我国建立公益诉讼制度,是维护国家利益和社会公共利益的客观需要,是完善我国诉讼制度和法律监督制度的必然要求,也是与国际交流的客观需要。另一方面,在我国建立公益诉讼制度,有我国检察机关多年来的民、行案件抗诉经验可供借鉴,检察机关近年来的公益诉讼实践经验可供总结,国外的立法和司法实践可供参考。     

法国行政诉讼纲要：历史、构造、特色及挑战——区域行政立法模式前瞻

法国行政诉讼系欧陆行政诉讼的一大范本,在大陆法系甚至在英美法系都具有广泛的影响力。仅就学术研究而言,其已成为比较行政诉讼领城必不可少的研判素材。其中,历史、制度、特色与挑战构成法国行政诉讼研究的基本框架,系比较行政诉讼的基本逻辑起点。     

Movement Litigation and Unilateral Disarmament: Abortion and the Right to Die

Detractors have long criticized the use of courts to achieve social change because judicial victories tend to provoke counterproductive political backlashes. Backlash arguments typically assert or imply that if movement litigators had relied on democratic rather than judicial politics, their policy victories would have been better insulated from opposition. We argue that these accounts wrongly assume that the unilateral decision by a group of movement advocates to eschew litigation will lead to a reduced role for courts in resolving the relevant policy and political conflicts. To the contrary, such decisions will often result in a policy field with judges every bit as active, but with the legal challenges initiated and framed by the advocates' opponents. We document this claim and explore its implications for constitutional politics via a counterfactual thought experiment rooted in historical case studies of litigation involving abortion and the right to die.     

行政诉讼司法建议制度的功能衍化

行政诉讼司法建议原本是一项裁判执行措施,但随着最高人民法院司法政策的变化,其发挥的事实功能被大大扩展。实践中,行政诉讼司法建议在规范性文件修改中发挥着功能性审查的作用。从社会变迁的视角观察不难发现,维稳压力、协调和解政策与地方发展型政府的模式变迁,诱发了对于行政诉讼司法建议的制度性需求,从而迫使司法建议成为行政诉讼工具箱中的重要工具。行政诉讼司法建议制度的功能衍化,为法社会学研究提供了一个极具价值的制度样本,亦为行政诉讼法的未来发展提供了背景材料。