Litigation\u27s Role in the Path of U.S. Federal Climate Change Regulation: Implications of AEP v. Connecticut

This symposium analyzes the role of litigation in climate change regulation, with a particular focus on the U.S. Supreme Court\u27s June 2011 decision in American Electric Power Co. v. Connecticut ( AEP ). 1 This Essay adds to that conversation by exploring the significance of AEP for U.S. federal legal approaches to regulating climate change

Multidimensional Governance and the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill

This Article explores the governance challenges posed by the BP Deepwater Horizon oil spill and proposes strategies for developing more inclusive, responsive institutions to help meet them. It begins by analyzing the incident through five core dimensions-vertical, horizontal, direction of hierarchy, cooperativeness, and public- private-to demonstrate the multilevel, multiactor interactions taking place in offshore drilling and oil spill regulation. It then explains the ways in which the complex interactions in these dimensions translate into four core governance challenges: scientific and legal uncertainty, simultaneous overlap and fragmentation, the difficulties of balancing efficiency and inclusion, and inequality and resulting injustice. The Article next integrates conceptual approaches from several disciplines to propose three principles for better multidimensional governance: hybridity, multiscalar inclusion, and responsiveness. It evaluates reform proposals made in the aftermath of the spill in light of those strategies. It considers the extent to which citizens’ councils, regulatory burden-shifting, voluntary industry-based regulatory institutions, and independent scientific and technical review bodies should complement efforts to make the federal process more rigorous and adaptive. The Article concludes by discussing the broader applicability of its analysis of multidimensional governance challenges

The Geography of Climate Change Litigation: Implications for Transnational Regulatory Governance

This Article aims to forward the dialogue about transnational regulatory governance through a law and geography analysis of climate change litigation. Part II begins by considering fundamental barriers to responsible transnational energy production. Part III proposes a place-based approach to dissecting climate change litigation and a model for understanding its spatial implications. Parts IV through VI map representative examples of climate change litigation in subnational, national, and supranational fora. The Article concludes by exploring the normative implications of this descriptive geography; it engages the intersection of international law, international relations, and geography as a jumping-off point for a companion article

Scaling Local : The Implications of Greenhouse Gas Regulation in San Bernardino County

This Essay analyzes local climate regulation in San Bernardino County as a window into the complexities of defining a local scale in an interconnected world. In so doing, it aims to contribute to the Symposium\u27s broader dialogue about Territory Without Boundaries and the Panel\u27s more specific discussion of Urban Territory in a Global World. As a purely territorial matter, U.S. cities and counties differ substantially in their sizes, the quantity and physical characteristics of their land, the size and density of their populations, and the needs of their citizens. Structurally, these localities remain administrative subunits of states, but they also have significant autonomy Finally, their substantive decision-making requires them to engage with a wide range of actors at different scales as they make decisions about multiscalar problems

Rethinking the Geography of Local Climate Action: Multi-Level Network Participation in Metropolitan Regions

As the United States and the world become increasingly urbanized, cities are a key site for addressing the problem of climate change. However, urban climate change action is not simply about local officials making decisions within their cities. In major U.S. urban areas, “local” involves multiple layers of government, including county and metro-regional entities. Moreover, many of the cities taking action on climate change also participate in and shape networks of local governments based at state, regional, national, and international levels. This Article argues that multilevel climate change networks could be more effective by embracing this geography of local action and the pressing need to foster action by suburban cities. Most emissions take *174 place in the suburban areas of metro regions, but these networks generally do not focus on the particular needs of different types of suburban cities. This Article provides a novel analysis of patterns of participation in climate change networks by cities in six major U.S. metropolitan regions -- Atlanta, Chicago, Denver, New York, San Francisco, and the Twin Cities -- as a basis for proposing practical strategies and areas for future research. It considers what types of cities participate in which networks and where stronger and weaker network interlinkages occur. The Article concludes that networks inadequately (1) differentiate by city and metro-regional type and (2) coordinate resources and strategies. It suggests ways in which networks could do so to maximize the number of cities participating in them and the participation level of those cities