35
Carbon Tracker Initiative (2018) Mind the gap: the 1.6 trillion energy transition risk
Collins M et al (2013) Long-term climate change: projections, commitments and irreversibility.
In: Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to
the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, pp 1029–1136
De Sadeleer N (2016) The precautionary principle and climate change. In: Farber D, Peeters M
(eds) Climate change law. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, pp 21–31
Duffy M (2009) Climate change causation: harmonizing tort law and scientific probability. Temple
J Sci Technol Environ Law 28(2):185–240
French D, Pontin B (2016) The science of climate change: a legal perspective on the IPCC. In:
Farber D, Peeters M (eds) Climate change law. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, pp 9–20
Ghaleigh NS (2016) Science and climate change law – the role of IPCC in international decision
making. In: Carlarne CP, Gray KR, Tarasofsky R (eds) The Oxford handbook of international
climate change law. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 56–71
Hanekamp JC, Bergkamp L (2016) The “Best Available Science” and the Paris agreement on climate change. Eur J Risk Regul 7(1):42–48
Heede R (2013) Tracing anthropogenic carbon dioxide and methane emissions to fossil fuel and
cement producers, 1854–2010. Clim Change 122(1–2):229–241
Heede R et al (2014) Carbon Majors: Accounting for carbon and methane emissions 1854–2010 –
Methods and Results Report
Hoegh-Guldberg O et al (2018) Impacts of 1.5°C global warming on natural and human systems.
In: IPCC global warming of 1.5°C. World Meteorological Organization, Geneva
Hughes L (2019) The Rocky Hill decision: a watershed for climate change action? J Energy Nat
Resour Law 37(3):341–351
Kahl W, Daebel MC (2019) Climate change litigation in Germany: an overview of politics, legislation and especially jurisdiction regarding climate protection and climate damages. Eur Energy
Environ Law Rev 28(2):67–76
Koch HJ, Lührs M, Verheyen R (2011) Germany. In: Lord R et al (eds) Climate change liability:
transnational law and practice. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 376–416
Le Queré C et al (2018) Global carbon budget 2018. Earth Syst Sci Data 10:2141–2194. https://
doi.org/10.5194/essd-10-2141-2018
Markell D, Ruhl JB (2012) An empirical assessment of climate change in the courts: a new jurisprudence or business as usual? Florida Law Rev 64(1):17–86
Mastrandrea M, Schneider SH (2014) Climate change science overview. In Schneider SH et al
(eds) Climate change science and policy. Island Press, pp 14–27
McAllister LK (2008) Litigating climate change at the coal mine. In: Burns W, Osofsky HM
(eds) Adjudicating climate change: sub-national, national, and supra-national approaches.
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 48–71
McGlade C, Ekins P (2015) The geographical distribution of fossil fuels unused when limiting
global warming to 2°C. Nature 517:187–190
McKormick S et al (2018) Strategies in and outcomes of climate change litigation in the United
States. Nat Clim Change 8:829–833
Nachmany M, Setzer J (2018) Global trends in climate change legislation and litigation: 2018
snapshot, Grantham Research Institute Policy brief – May 2018.
Peel J, Osofsky HM (2015) Climate change litigation: regulatory pathways to cleaner energy.
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Peel J, Osofsky HM (2018) A rights turn in climate change litigation? Transnl Environ Law
7(1):37–67
Rogelj J et al (2018) Mitigation pathways compatible with 1.5°C in the context of sustainable
development. In: IPCC global warming of 1.5°C. World Meteorological Organization, Geneva
Setzer J, Vanhala L (2019) Climate change litigation: a review of research on courts and litigants
in climate governance. WIREs Clim Change 10:1–19
UNEP (2017) The status of climate change litigation – a global review
Climate Science Before the Courts: Turning the Tide in Climate Change Litigation
Carbon Tracker Initiative (2018) Mind the gap: the 1.6 trillion energy transition risk
Collins M et al (2013) Long-term climate change: projections, commitments and irreversibility.
In: Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to
the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, pp 1029–1136
De Sadeleer N (2016) The precautionary principle and climate change. In: Farber D, Peeters M
(eds) Climate change law. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, pp 21–31
Duffy M (2009) Climate change causation: harmonizing tort law and scientific probability. Temple
J Sci Technol Environ Law 28(2):185–240
French D, Pontin B (2016) The science of climate change: a legal perspective on the IPCC. In:
Farber D, Peeters M (eds) Climate change law. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, pp 9–20
Ghaleigh NS (2016) Science and climate change law – the role of IPCC in international decision
making. In: Carlarne CP, Gray KR, Tarasofsky R (eds) The Oxford handbook of international
climate change law. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 56–71
Hanekamp JC, Bergkamp L (2016) The “Best Available Science” and the Paris agreement on climate change. Eur J Risk Regul 7(1):42–48
Heede R (2013) Tracing anthropogenic carbon dioxide and methane emissions to fossil fuel and
cement producers, 1854–2010. Clim Change 122(1–2):229–241
Heede R et al (2014) Carbon Majors: Accounting for carbon and methane emissions 1854–2010 –
Methods and Results Report
Hoegh-Guldberg O et al (2018) Impacts of 1.5°C global warming on natural and human systems.
In: IPCC global warming of 1.5°C. World Meteorological Organization, Geneva
Hughes L (2019) The Rocky Hill decision: a watershed for climate change action? J Energy Nat
Resour Law 37(3):341–351
Kahl W, Daebel MC (2019) Climate change litigation in Germany: an overview of politics, legislation and especially jurisdiction regarding climate protection and climate damages. Eur Energy
Environ Law Rev 28(2):67–76
Koch HJ, Lührs M, Verheyen R (2011) Germany. In: Lord R et al (eds) Climate change liability:
transnational law and practice. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 376–416
Le Queré C et al (2018) Global carbon budget 2018. Earth Syst Sci Data 10:2141–2194. https://
doi.org/10.5194/essd-10-2141-2018
Markell D, Ruhl JB (2012) An empirical assessment of climate change in the courts: a new jurisprudence or business as usual? Florida Law Rev 64(1):17–86
Mastrandrea M, Schneider SH (2014) Climate change science overview. In Schneider SH et al
(eds) Climate change science and policy. Island Press, pp 14–27
McAllister LK (2008) Litigating climate change at the coal mine. In: Burns W, Osofsky HM
(eds) Adjudicating climate change: sub-national, national, and supra-national approaches.
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 48–71
McGlade C, Ekins P (2015) The geographical distribution of fossil fuels unused when limiting
global warming to 2°C. Nature 517:187–190
McKormick S et al (2018) Strategies in and outcomes of climate change litigation in the United
States. Nat Clim Change 8:829–833
Nachmany M, Setzer J (2018) Global trends in climate change legislation and litigation: 2018
snapshot, Grantham Research Institute Policy brief – May 2018.
Peel J, Osofsky HM (2015) Climate change litigation: regulatory pathways to cleaner energy.
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Peel J, Osofsky HM (2018) A rights turn in climate change litigation? Transnl Environ Law
7(1):37–67
Rogelj J et al (2018) Mitigation pathways compatible with 1.5°C in the context of sustainable
development. In: IPCC global warming of 1.5°C. World Meteorological Organization, Geneva
Setzer J, Vanhala L (2019) Climate change litigation: a review of research on courts and litigants
in climate governance. WIREs Clim Change 10:1–19
UNEP (2017) The status of climate change litigation – a global review
Climate Science Before the Courts: Turning the Tide in Climate Change Litigation