<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<dc xmlns="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/ http://dublincore.org/schemas/xmls/simpledc20021212.xsd">
  <dc:identifier>http://dx.doi.org/10.59704/4f232f13b9148552</dc:identifier>
  <dc:identifier>https://verfassungsblog.de/judicial-convergence-on-climate-change/</dc:identifier>
  <dc:title>Judicial Convergence on Climate Change - The Advisory Opinions of the ICJ, the IACtHR, and the ITLOS </dc:title>
  <dc:creator>Bañuelos, Jorge Alejandro Carrillo</dc:creator>
  <dc:creator>Samuel, Susan Ann</dc:creator>
  <dc:language>eng</dc:language>
  <dc:date>2025-09-16</dc:date>
  <dc:type>electronic resource</dc:type>
  <dc:format>text/html</dc:format>
  <dc:subject>ddc:342</dc:subject>
  <dc:publisher>Verfassungsblog</dc:publisher>
  <dc:relation>Verfassungsblog--2366-7044</dc:relation>
  <dc:rights>CC BY-SA 4.0</dc:rights>
  <dc:description>In just over a year, three of the world’s most prominent courts have addressed States’ legal obligations in the context of climate change. Although each court examined various questions from its own unique institutional and legal standpoint, their conclusions showed a significant convergence on several key issues, including the role of science, the standard of due diligence, the duty to cooperate, the role of private actors, the importance of human rights, and the need for reparations. This blog post explores each court’s consideration of these issues.</dc:description>
</dc>
