Climate change litigation and public interest litigation (PIL) are two important areas of legal action that can impact environmental policy and governance. In China, climate change litigation has seen some support but is currently lacking in its impact on policy and is more effective in terms of placating those affected by climate change
1
. The potential impact of climate change litigation on government policy can be significant, as it can frame issues in terms of institutional failure and the need for institutional reform, generate policy-relevant information, place issues on the agendas of policy-making institutions, fill gaps in statutory or administrative regulatory schemes, encourage self-regulation, and allow for diverse regulatory approaches in different jurisdictions.
In India, PIL is designed to serve a broader public interest and can be brought by third parties, including NGOs, on behalf of a large group of affected persons or on behalf of the general public
2
. PIL has played a crucial role in the development of environmental law in India, with the Supreme Court using PILs to shine a harsh light on neglected environmental problems and improve environmental governance, enhance the quality of the environment and protect forests and wildlife, and nudge in place regulation where legislative gaps persist
3
. PILs differ from traditional cases in that they are brought on behalf of a large group of affected persons or the general public, rather than by individual parties with a direct stake in the outcome of the case.
In Europe, climate litigation has been unleashed as a means of catalysing action against states and corporations
4
. Climate change actions can be strategic in nature, seeking to call decision-makers to account for their climate change action or resolve a range of legal disputes in light of the disruption created by climate change and climate laws. The label ‘strategic’ can narrow the field of view and discourage cross-fertilisation between different areas of litigation, giving the impression that legal actions in relation to climate change have very little to do with law.
In the Asia-Pacific region, tort-based PIL on air pollution in China has been a novel judicial phenomenon since 2016, with the modification of the Civil Procedure Law in 2012 and the Environmental Protection Law in 2014 conferring standing on environmental NGOs and public prosecutors to bring environmental public interest litigation cases
5
. This has led to a rapid increase in the number of environmental public interest litigation cases and presents a potential avenue for the emergence of climate change litigation in China.
