Legal implications of the climate-health crisis: A case study analysis of the role of public health in climate litigation

In the case of Future Generations v Ministry of the Environment (Table 1, case 2), a group of youth plaintiffs in Colombia sued the government, municipalities and several corporations based on a “right to a healthy environment, life, health, food and water”. The court determined that the “fundamental rights to life and health are linked and determined by the environment and ecosystem”. The court further recognized the Colombian Amazon as subject to rights. There are similar cases in India, Bangladesh, Colombia, Ecuador, and New Zealand. In Modh Salim v State of Uttarakhand, the court declared two rivers to be ‘juristic/legal persons/ living entities having the status of a living person with all corresponding rights, duties and lia- bilities”. In 2017 the Whanganui river in New Zealand, the Ganges and Yamuan rivers in India, and the Rio Atrato in Colombia were also granted legal rights [93]. Globally, less than 15% of the land, 21% of the freshwater and 8% of the ocean are protected areas [34]. Yet, indigenous communities, which make up 5% of the global population hold 25% of the land, with 80% of planetary biodiversity. Many of the first countries to adopt rights for nature are post-colonial nations with living indigenous cultures. In the US, which constitutes the majority of litigation cases, 70% of litigation based on fed- eral statute is brought under the National Environmental Policy Act and Clean Air Act, which are more anthropocentric in their objectives [94]. However, it is likely that the codification of

eco-laws, in the US at the local level, will bring challenging cases before the courts on the issue of personhood for nature. Reconciling social and environmental justice. The trend in the growing volume of cases brought by, or on behalf of youth, introduces the concept of intergenerational equity. The UN convention on the rights of the child holds that “state parties shall undertake all appropriate legislative, administrative and other measures for the implementation of the rights recognized in the convention” [95]. In addition, the concept of intergenerational equity, is at the core of both the UN Charter and the Stockholm declaration on the environment: “the present genera- tion has a right to use and enjoy the resources of the Earth but is under an obligation to take into account the long-term impact of its activities and to sustain the resource base and the global environment for the benefit of future generations of humankind” [96]. The right to a healthy environment is now recognized in law by more than 80 percent of United Nations Member States (156 out of 193) [97]. In the case of Saachi v Argentina [98], 16 children filed a petition through the UN conven- tion on the rights of the child. The violated rights included “the right to life, right to health, pri- oritization of the child’s best interest, and cultural rights of petitioners from indigenous countries”. In the case of Future generations v Ministry of the Environment (Table 1, case 2), a group of plaintiffs aged between 7 and 26 years claimed the rights to a healthy environment,

life, health, food and water. In the case of Youth for Climate Change v EU [99], a group of youths claimed that the impact of climate change upon them would go as far as harming their mental health. Considering that the environmental impact will disproportionately affect certain communi- ties, there are cases of climate litigation that have been brought by groups that include: women, climate refugees, elderly women, organic farmers, indigenous people, and civil society. In most rulings, the courts have declined to give such groups unique standing to bring a case, for example by stating that all people will be impacted by climate change. Therefore, the strategy of framing the issue as one of disproportionate impact has not yet proven to be highly effective. However, the impact of climate litigation in generating media coverage, creating publicity, and changing public perception is evidently growing and can be expected to escalate further. PLOS ONE Public health as a legal tool in climate litigation PLOS ONE | https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0268633 June 15, 2022 18 / 31