What are the legal and economic issues that arise when trying to enforce a duty of care to future generations?

Cameron and Jonathan discuss the legal and economic questions arising from the Private Senators Bill by David Pocock intending to “legislate a positive duty of care, creating a requirement for politicians and policy makers to consider the impact of climate harm on young people and future generations.”

This comes on the back of a 2022 Federal Court of Australia ruling in the appealed case of Minister for the Environment v Sharma, which found against such a duty.

This case was brought by “eight brave children led by Anj Sharma (with the assistance of 86 year-old litigation guardian Sister Brigid Arthur), against the Federal Minister for the Environment to protect young people from the future harm caused by the climate change impacts of a proposed coal mine extension project in NSW known as the Vickery Extension Project.”

Read about that court case here.

Follow Cameron and Jonathan on Twitter

Theme music: Happy Swing by Serge Quadrado Music under Creative Commons Licence CC BY-NC 4.0

Fresh Economic Thinking is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.fresheconomicthinking.com/subscribe