Transnational Environmental Impact Lawsuits

Tuvalu is one of the world’s smallest sovereign states, second only to the Vatican by population, and fourth on earth by physical size. Comprised of a chain of small islands, Tuvalu has recently gained some visibility, in light of the fate it is likely to suffer at the hands of global climate change; Tuvalu is only 4.5 meters above sea level at its greatest height and stands to be destroyed, either by flooding or the salination of its farmlands. This year, at the COP15 conference in Copenhagen, a representative from Tuvalu pled with the other nations of the world to enact strong climate legislation. Ultimately, COP failed to create binding policy as developed nations like the US shied away from proposed policy that put greater pressure upon them to solve the crisis and developing powers fought for their right to grow. Tuvalu rejected what agreements were reached as a grand betrayal.

Many islands stand to be lost entirely.

Until now, small and/or politically weak nations, such as Tuvalu, have had little recourse when it came to addressing environmental concerns. The Prunéřov coal power plant in the Czech Republic is one of the most potent GHG emitting plants in Europe, releasing 11.1 million tons of carbon dioxide on an annual basis. As the plant has aged, the state-administered utility CEZ group declared its intentions to revamp the facility and continue use for decades more. Enter the government of the Federated States of Micronesia (another country of islands that stands to suffer from rising tides and spoilt land), which has filed a call for an environmental impact assessment, made possible by the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe convention known, rather literally, as the Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context. The policy calls for notification and cooperation in policy making/enforcement between parties and was initially intended for application in relatively localized events, such as chemical dumping into waterways that feed into one country from another. By arguing that the greenhouse gases produced by a Czech coal power plant thousands of miles away pose a real and dire threat to the people of the FSM, a new precedent may be set for expanding the role of international pressure in creating environmental policy. Unfortunately, the CEIATC treaty only applies to its signatories, among which the US does not number. Foreign parties can, however, sue US companies here with basic nuisance claims (and the elimination of whole nations’ livelihood certainly ought to qualify as at least a nuisance).

In the United States, climate change policy has been slow to form. After months of conflict in Congress over health care, the much vaunted Kerry-Graham-Lieberman climate bill that was set to be introduced in the Senate last week has been tabled due to disputes over immigration reform. If we can no longer rely on our government to set policy at a Federal level, increased foreign pressure may eventually provide a needed additional kick. Given the current age of globalization and shared risks, the US has a responsibility to respond to the effects of its actions abroad, and such dialogues should be entered into with respect and integrity.