Harmonizing Regulatory and Litigation Approaches to Climate Change Mitigation: Incorporating Tradable Emissions Offsets into Common Law Remedies
Arizona Legal Studies Discussion Paper No. 07-10
- 2,051Usage
- 6Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Paper Description
This article argues that courts should allow defendants, held liable for contributing to the state common law public nuisance of global warming, to comply with a judicial abatement order with the use of emissions offset credits purchased or otherwise obtained from third parties. Such an option would be in contrast to the usual remedy in a public nuisance suit: changes, by the defendant, to its own operations in order to abate its contribution to the public nuisance. In addition to the benefit of cost-effectiveness, I argue that this option could trigger a greenhouse gas emissions trading market. Such a market could function until such time as a federal regulatory program is enacted. Given that the federal program is likely to allow emissions trading, the market would enhance the success of the subsequent regulatory program.
Bibliographic Details
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know