By Edna Odhiambo
Climate change lawsuits
are gaining momentum as citizens are increasingly turning to domestic courts to
hold governments and corporations accountable for reducing greenhouse gas
emissions. With the passing of its 2016 Climate Change Act, Kenya is among the
few countries globally to directly regulate on climate change, signaling strong
political will to pursue low-emission development.
The act allows citizens
to sue private and public entities that frustrate efforts to reduce the impacts
of climate change.
Solar carport at Garden City Shopping Mall in Nairobi, Kenya.REUTERS/Thomas Mukoya |
The law establishes the
National Climate Change Council, which has the power to impose climate change
obligations on private establishments, including regulations on the nature and
procedure for reporting on performance.
The National Environment
Management Authority (NEMA), on behalf of the council, is charged with
monitoring, investigating and reporting on compliance. An organisation that
fails to comply may incur a fine of up to a million Kenyan shillings ($9,900)
and officers risk five years imprisonment if they withhold or gives false
information to NEMA.
An interesting feature of
this law is the lenient standard required to prove liability. It is enough to
prove that a corporation is not doing enough to address climate change without
having to also demonstrate that a person has suffered loss or injury.
COMPENSATION ON THE HORIZON?
Traditionally, in public
interest environmental cases, though the law waives the requirement of
demonstrating direct harm, there is still a requirement that an applicant
establish that a section of society will suffer harm. Perhaps the indulgence
granted to climate suits demonstrates the severity and urgency that we should
all exercise when tackling a global crisis that threatens the survival of
humanity.
The consequences of
liability may be exceedingly costly for corporations as Kenya’s Environment and
Land Court has the power to order compensation for climate victims where it
deems appropriate. Once a company becomes included within a climate change
regime, the likely substantial compliance requirements will entail significant,
related ongoing costs of operation and management that could affect returns and
competitiveness.
An example of liability
arising from climate change disclosures is the Volkswagen scandal. "We've
totally screwed up," said Volkswagen’s America boss Michael Horn, when the
car-manufacturing giant ran into serious problems in 2015 for falsifying carbon
dioxide emission tests of their vehicles.
Recalling and modifying
the vehicles has resulted in massive losses of approximately $2.8 billion
and likely fines of up to $20 billion may be incurred. Additionally,
VW stated in its quarterly report that it anticipates facing criminal and civil
charges from national regulatory authorities and lawsuits from customers and
investors.
CASH TO DO THE RIGHT THING?
So how do you navigate
the pitfalls of climate change liability? In the corporate world, companies and
their shareholders are increasingly addressing climate change by conducting
research and adopting explicit policies and practices as part of sound
environmental and risk management practices.
Shareholder proposals
submitted to major corporations such as Phillips, Gillette and Reebok state
that corporate boards of directors and managers have a "fiduciary
duty" to be informed, and to inform shareholders, about potential climate
change risks and opportunities.
This involves careful
assessment and disclosure to shareholders of information on significant risks
associated with climate change, and warrants precautionary, prudent and early
actions to enhance competitiveness and protect profitability in a world moving
away from fossil fuels.
Public disclosure of
uncertainties that are likely to result in significant changes in a company's
liquidity because of climate change is essential. Furthermore, factors
affecting sales or revenues that may have a current or future effect on the
company's financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, or capital
resources are equally important to consider.
Nevertheless, it’s not
all gloom and doom, as the act creates opportunities for the private sector by
advocating for incentives to pursue low-carbon development and promotion of
research and development on clean technologies.
This indicates that there
will be significant financing channeled towards tax reliefs to promote uptake
of clean energy, energy efficiency, and to encourage sustainable architecture.
Consequently, the future promises numerous business prospects for members of
the private sector who are willing to embrace sustainable development pathways
for posterity.
Article originally
published at Building
Resilience and Adaptation to Climate Extremes and Disasters (BRACED).
No comments:
Post a Comment