This article highlights the results of the Environmental Law and Policy Annual Review (ELPAR) article selection process and reports on the environmental legal scholarship for the 2018-2019 academic year, including the number of environmental law articles published in general law reviews versus environmental law journals, and the topics covered in the articles.

This Article argues that growing private efforts to address climate change collectively take on the attributes and functions of a governance system that could be vital to societal decarbonization. Instead of evaluating specific initiatives or actions of particular businesses, it explores the entire field of private climate action and offers new ways of thinking about the path ahead.

It is now scientifically proven that climate change is causing disruptions to the world at large. These slow-motion consequences threaten most coastal areas around the world, especially the Pacific Island nations.  Scientists predict that climate change will cause the forced displacement of people; desertification; protracted destructive wildfires; sea-level rise; ocean acidification; extreme weather events; and severe drought, which then impacts the supply of food.

The livestock sector is one of the planet’s primary causes of resource consumption and environmental degradation. Approximately 99% of meat and other animal products in the United States are from factory farms, and the number of concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) continues to grow. This Article, adapted from Chapter 8 of What Can Animal Law Learn From Environmental Law?, 2d Edition (ELI Press, forthcoming 2020), examines animal agriculture in the U.S and the associated problems.

This Article highlights the role of advocates in pushing government to step up to the challenges of reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and remaining steadfast through continued policy enforcement. The authors, who participated in the development of the Massachusetts Global Warming Solutions Act, provide insights regarding climate legislation, regulation, and litigation in a state committed to addressing climate change.

The year 2015 marked a new era in climate efforts under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change when the nations of the world signed a new implementing agreement in Paris, France.

The role that cost-benefit analysis (CBA) plays in regulatory decisionmaking is at a crossroads, as is the role played by the agency that oversees its implementation, the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA). The Trump Administration has largely demonstrated agnosticism toward CBA; this has left many to question whether OIRA can still play the role of ensuring quality analysis while serving as the eyes and ears of the president in overseeing regulation.

In the first decades of the 21st century, those working to assure that earth continues to be a viable home for humanity as well as for all other life have been in a crisis regarding their purpose and direction. This is a departure from the past century and a half, when the giants of conservation and environmental protection—personalities such as John Muir, Rachel Carson, and David Brower— were certain of their cause and the actions needed to sustain it.

This Article analyzes the recent proliferation of “tag-gag” laws aimed at undermining the emerging plantbased and cell-based food industries. It examines potential constitutional challenges to these laws, including those based on the First Amendment, the dormant Commerce Clause, Supremacy Clause, and Due Process Clause, as well as the likely arguments that states will proffer in their defense. It concludes with a discussion of the consequences and implications of various outcomes of these cases, and how animal advocates can responsibly bring these types of constitutional challenges.

We must substantially reduce carbon emissions within a short time line, and this rapid decarbonization will cause negative economic and social impacts on workers and communities dependent upon fossil fuel extraction and use. “Just transition” often refers to addressing the needs of those communities, but an equitable transition into a low-carbon future should also take into account environmental justice communities that have suffered from disproportionate exposure to environmental hazards and that could and should benefit from job creation.