Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chapter 10 on International Atmospheric Trust cases investigates the application of the public trust doctrine in climate litigation. Historically, under this doctrine courts have maintained that certain natural and cultural resources should be held in trust for the public, with the government acting as a trustee. The authors explain the practical application and interpretation of this doctrine in climate litigation, examining key cases (through 2022) across various jurisdictions, including the United States, Canada, India, Pakistan, and Uganda. The effect is to produce a Restatement of best practices in climate litigation revealing the successes and challenges encountered when invoking the public trust doctrine in climate litigation. This review of the case law reveals an emerging distinction between the U.S., which has seen the erection of procedural barriers in federal and state courts to avoid deciding cases on the merits, and international courts, who have reached the merits of several cases, ordering remedial actions. The chapter underscores the potential of this doctrine to induce more robust climate action among the political branches of government, reflecting a growing recognition among courts outside the U.S. of their own role in safeguarding the atmosphere.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".