We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To send content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about sending content to .
To send content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about sending to your Kindle.
Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Climate change poses serious adaptation challenges for countries in Southeast Asia, including how climate change impacts will be managed under environmental and planning law frameworks. At the same time. in Southeast Asia, climate change litigation involving questions of adaptation planning is at a nascent stage. There is also little research and scholarship on climate change legal developments in this part of the world. This chapter aims to evaluate prospects for adaptation-focused climate change litigation in Southeast Asia. It considers three key Southeast Asian jurisdictions – the Philippines, Malaysia and Singapore – which illustrate differing levels of receptivity to such cases given their existing legal frameworks and litigation cultures. With climate litigation in general at an early stage in these jurisdictions, this chapter attempts to draw lessons for further development of this body of case law from the more developed climate adaptation jurisprudence in neighbouring Australia. The chapter concludes with an assessment of the necessary preconditions for growth of climate adaptation litigation in the Southeast Asian region.
Any plausible solution to the world’s growing climate crisis will need to take root in the Asia Pacific region. With Asia holding 54 per cent of the world’s projected 2050 population and 41 per cent of its projected 2040 energy use, a policy response to climate change that does not include a major role for Asia and does not give voice to the region’s governments and citizens would be wholly incapable of achieving the kind of decarbonization that scientists agree is necessary to avert climate catastrophe.
This is the first scholarly examination of climate change litigation in the Asia Pacific region. Bringing legal academics and lawyers from the Global South and Global North together, this book provides rich insights into how litigation can galvanize climate action in countries including Pakistan, Indonesia, Malaysia and China. Written in clear and accessible language, the fourteen chapters in this book shed light on the important question of how litigation may unfold as a potential regulatory pathway towards decarbonization in the world's most populous region.
Climate litigation in the Global South tends to be couched in rights-based clams including the right to life and a clean and healthy environment. Jolene Lin explained that this is in part due to the fact that many jurisdictions in the Global South have embedded environmental rights in their constitutions and, in some cases, courts have interpreted the right to life to include the right to a clean and healthy environment.
Since the conclusion of the Paris Agreement, climate litigation has become a global phenomenon, casting courts as important players in multilevel climate governance. However, most climate litigation scholarship focuses on court actions in the Global North. This Article is the first to shine a light on the Global South's contribution to transnational climate litigation. Analysis of this experience is essential if transnational climate jurisprudence is to contribute meaningfully to global climate governance, and to ensuring just outcomes for the most climate-vulnerable.