Ivano Alogna
British Institute of International and Comparative Law, Public International Law, Senior Research Fellow in Environmental and Climate Change Law
Dr Ivano Alogna is Senior Research Fellow in Environmental and Climate Change Law at the British Institute of International and Comparative Law (BIICL), where he spearheads the Institute’s program in this field.
He's an Associate Member of the Sorbonne Research Institute in International and European Law (IREDIES), Sorbonne Law School and contributes to global environmental discussions as a member of the World Commission on Environmental Law (WCEL) of the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN), serving on its Climate Change Expert Group and Taskforce on the Rights of Nature. He's also an Expert on the "Environmental Law and Policy" Commission, IUCN French Committee. Ivano played a pivotal role as the General Rapporteur of the "Global Pact for the Environment" project, led by the French Constitutional Council, and participated in the European Law Institute (ELI) project on “Ecocide”. Moreover, Ivano is a licensed Attorney-at-Law at the Bar of Milan.
He lectures at several universities on various aspects of law, including International and Comparative Environmental Law, Climate Change Law and Litigation, Environmental Liability, Private Law, Sustainable Consumer Law, and Comparative Law.
He co-edited influential books like 'Climate Change Litigation: Global Perspectives' (Brill, 2021) and 'Climate Change Litigation in Europe: Regional, Comparative and Sectoral Perspectives' (Intersentia, 2023). His PhD thesis, "The Circulation of Legal Models in the Environmental Field: Toward a Global Environmental Law" – Special Jury Prize by the French Society of Environmental Law (SFDE) – is forthcoming in French with LGDJ, Paris.
Ivano holds a PhD in Comparative and International Environmental Law from the Sorbonne Law School, University of Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne. He also earned an LLM in Environmental Law from the Universities of Paris 1 and Paris 2 and several diplomas in Law, Comparative Law, and Environmental Law from prestigious universities in France, Italy, and Spain.
Throughout his career, Ivano undertook numerous international research stays, enriching his perspectives at institutions like the University of Glasgow (Scotland), Louisiana State University (USA), SOAS University of London (England), Indian Law Institute (India), and University of Wuhan (China).
His research interests include Private Law, Legal Theory, Comparative Law, and Legal History.
Ivano leads the BIICL Global Toolbox on Corporate Climate Litigation (https://www.biicl.org/global-toolbox-corporate-climate-litigation).
Address: British Institute of International and Comparative Law
Charles Clore House
17 Russell Square
London WC1B 5JP
United Kingdom
He's an Associate Member of the Sorbonne Research Institute in International and European Law (IREDIES), Sorbonne Law School and contributes to global environmental discussions as a member of the World Commission on Environmental Law (WCEL) of the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN), serving on its Climate Change Expert Group and Taskforce on the Rights of Nature. He's also an Expert on the "Environmental Law and Policy" Commission, IUCN French Committee. Ivano played a pivotal role as the General Rapporteur of the "Global Pact for the Environment" project, led by the French Constitutional Council, and participated in the European Law Institute (ELI) project on “Ecocide”. Moreover, Ivano is a licensed Attorney-at-Law at the Bar of Milan.
He lectures at several universities on various aspects of law, including International and Comparative Environmental Law, Climate Change Law and Litigation, Environmental Liability, Private Law, Sustainable Consumer Law, and Comparative Law.
He co-edited influential books like 'Climate Change Litigation: Global Perspectives' (Brill, 2021) and 'Climate Change Litigation in Europe: Regional, Comparative and Sectoral Perspectives' (Intersentia, 2023). His PhD thesis, "The Circulation of Legal Models in the Environmental Field: Toward a Global Environmental Law" – Special Jury Prize by the French Society of Environmental Law (SFDE) – is forthcoming in French with LGDJ, Paris.
Ivano holds a PhD in Comparative and International Environmental Law from the Sorbonne Law School, University of Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne. He also earned an LLM in Environmental Law from the Universities of Paris 1 and Paris 2 and several diplomas in Law, Comparative Law, and Environmental Law from prestigious universities in France, Italy, and Spain.
Throughout his career, Ivano undertook numerous international research stays, enriching his perspectives at institutions like the University of Glasgow (Scotland), Louisiana State University (USA), SOAS University of London (England), Indian Law Institute (India), and University of Wuhan (China).
His research interests include Private Law, Legal Theory, Comparative Law, and Legal History.
Ivano leads the BIICL Global Toolbox on Corporate Climate Litigation (https://www.biicl.org/global-toolbox-corporate-climate-litigation).
Address: British Institute of International and Comparative Law
Charles Clore House
17 Russell Square
London WC1B 5JP
United Kingdom
less
Related Authors
Dylan Trigg
Central European University
Remo Caponi
University of Cologne
Jana Javornik
University of East London
David Morris
Concordia University (Canada)
Armando Marques-Guedes
UNL - New University of Lisbon
Kevin Arbuckle
Swansea University
ARCHIE B CARROLL
The University of Georgia
Mauro Grondona
University of Genova
Nicola Lupo
LUISS Guido Carli
Rafael Domingo Osle
University of Navarra
InterestsView All (14)
Uploads
Papers by Ivano Alogna
This research project examines how the proposal to adapt the burden of proof for compensation claims under the Industrial Emissions Directive could be implemented into the domestic law of EU Member States.
Under the present framework, victims of violations of the EU Industrial Emissions Directive (IED) are, in the majority of cases, without an effective means of claiming compensation as they are unable to satisfy the procedural rules on the burden of proof that are generally applicable in Member States. More specifically, they struggle to provide sufficient evidence that the emissions in question have caused their damage.
Consequently, in April 2022, the EU Commission published its proposal for a revised IED, which contains a novel provision (Article 79a(4)) that aims to adapt the burden of proof to benefit the victims of pollution by large-scale industrial activities. Under the proposed amendments, where a claimant is able to provide 'sufficiently robust evidence' that a violation of the IED has caused, or significantly contributed to, damage to their health, there will be a rebuttable presumption that the defendant is liable.
While provisions that adapt the burden of proof are not entirely novel in EU legislation, this would be a first under the EU environmental law framework.
En affirmant le caractère exécutoire de la loi sur le changement climatique, le jugement rendu reconnaît que le gouvernement britannique est tenu responsable de ses engagements climatiques. Plus précisément, la Cour a estimé que la stratégie Net Zéro n’incluait pas les questions qui étaient importantes pour savoir si les objectifs du CCA 2008 pouvaient être atteints, et sur lesquelles le secrétaire d’État était tenu de faire un rapport au Parlement. Le secrétaire d’État n’avait donc pas respecté les obligations prévues aux articles 13 et 14 du CCA 2008 en ce qui concerne la stratégie Net Zéro. Le secrétaire d’État avait considéré que les propositions et les politiques de la stratégie permettaient de respecter les budgets carbones sans avoir été informé d’informations cruciales sur la contribution des politiques individuelles à la réduction des émissions de GES. Dans les rapports au Parlement en vertu de l’article 14, il n’avait pas non plus expliqué comment les politiques élaborées visaient à atteindre les objectifs d’émissions. Le tribunal ayant jugé que la stratégie Net Zéro était inadéquate, le gouvernement a dû la mettre à jour pour fournir plus d’informations, notamment sur la manière dont les politiques permettront d’atteindre les objectifs du CCA 2008, dans un délai de huit mois. Le gouvernement a confirmé en octobre 2022 qu’il ne ferait pas appel de cette décision. Le résultat de l’affaire est également significatif à l’échelle mondiale, car il renforce l’efficacité d’une loi nationale, à un moment où plusieurs autres pays ont emboîté le pas et adopté une législation nationale dans le but de réduire leurs émissions de GES.
Cette contribution analyse le jugement de la Haute Cour à la lumière du contexte juridique existant au Royaume-Uni (I) et montre ses implications dans le système juridique britannique (II). Les conclusions prendront en considération les perspectives comparées d’un tel jugement, en considération de l’écart souvent existant entre les objectifs de réduction fixés et les plans visant à concrétiser ces réductions d’émissions.
La « circulation des modèles juridiques » est la théorie décrivant le phénomène d’échange et de diffusion d’idées, de bonnes pratiques et de normes juridiques entre les différents ordres et systèmes juridiques mondiaux. Le modèle d’évaluation environnementale, capable de saisir la complexité du réel, en acclimatant le risque dans le droit et en faisant entrer l’écologie dans le domaine juridique, a été sans doute l’instrument juridique le plus largement adopté à travers le monde en droit de l’environnement. L’étude de sa circulation met en exergue une grande variété de formulations et de formes diverses dudit modèle, ainsi que les dynamiques à la base de ses développements mondiaux.
Mots clés : Circulation, modèle juridique, évaluation environnementale, transplantation juridique, droit comparé, complexité, mondialisation du droit.
Summary
The "circulation of legal models" is the theory describing the phenomenon of exchange and diffusion of ideas, good practices and legal rules between different global legal orders and legal systems. The environmental impact assessment model, capable of grasping the complexity of reality by integrating risk into law and bringing ecology into the legal domain, has undoubtedly been the most widely adopted legal instrument worldwide in the environmental field. The study of its circulation highlights various formulations and diverse forms of this model and the dynamics underlying
its global developments.
Keywords: Circulation, Legal Model, Environmental impact assessment, Legal transplant, Comparative Law, Complexity, Globalisation of law.
to an increasing number of legal actions against governments and cor-
porations worldwide. These cases, stemming from the failure of na-
tional and international policymakers to address climate change ad-
equately, are expanding in scale and ambition. This article explores
climate litigation as a response to the urgent climate change crisis. It
provides a global overview of climate-related litigation by examining
prominent domestic cases, underscoring the collective nature of cli-
mate governance and the crucial role of the judicial system in address-
ing this global challenge.
La circolazione dei modelli giuridici, resa celebre dallo scozzese Alan Watson con la metafora dei “trapianti giuridici” (legal transplant), fornisce un approccio dinamico dello studio del diritto comparato. Secondo questa teoria, il trasferimento di norme da un sistema giuridico a un altro non costituisce un’eccezione, ma è un fenomeno diffuso sin dai tempi antichi.
Lo Sviluppo Sostenibile, quale “nuovo” paradigma adottato a livello internazionale può mostrare la sua dinamicità attraverso la circolazione verticale e orizzontale dei suoi modelli. Inoltre, questo contributo sarà l’occasione per proporre una terza tipologia di circolazione dei modelli giuridici: quella “obliqua”. Così, il modello di Sviluppo Sostenibile si rivela all’origine
dello sviluppo di normative basate sui suoi principi, le quali tuttavia assumono caratteristiche diverse a seconda del contesto in cui vengono applicate.
Quindi, questo contributo costituisce un tentativo di delineare il percorso compiuto dallo Sviluppo Sostenibile attraverso diversi sistemi giuridici, cercando di mettere in evidenza la dinamica di tale percorso senza perdere di vista gli obiettivi tipici dello Sviluppo Sostenibile.
Book Reviews by Ivano Alogna
Drafts by Ivano Alogna
Reports by Ivano Alogna
This report provides an overview of the discussions and synthesises some of the conclusions.
This document was commissioned by Policy Department A at the request of the European Parliament’s Committee on Internal Market and Consumer Protection (IMCO).
Developments around mandatory human rights due diligence laws are multiplying across Europe, and increasingly include climate change impacts within their scope. As a result, companies, regulators, judges, legal advisors, civil society and the public are asking what the legal implications of these due diligence laws will be for companies relating to their climate change impacts.
In this webinar series, the discussion turned on the nature of due diligence as a legal standard of care, how this can be applied in relation to climate change, and what the practical implications for companies are likely to be.
This report provides an overview of the discussions and is divided into four parts according to the episodes’ topics. It contains the written versions of each speaker’s presentation, in the order that they took place.
The event discussed legal developments in the field of climate change from a comparative and international perspective. It was comprised of two panels, the first on 'Climate Change Litigation before Domestic Courts', and the second on 'Climate Change Litigation at the International Level'. The panelists included academics and legal practitioners, many of whom were, or are currently, involved in strategic climate change lawsuits, in a range of jurisdictions. The event was opened by Lord Carnwath of the United Kingdom Supreme Court.
This report provides an overview of the discussions and synthesises some of the conclusions. It is divided into two parts according to the panel topics, and its content is presented thematically, with each sub-heading incorporating relevant comments that were made throughout the event.
Books by Ivano Alogna
Climate change litigation is particularly pertinent in Europe. Since the landmark decision in Urgenda v. The Kingdom of The Netherlands in 2015, climate cases have been filed across European jurisdictions and reaching European regional courts, such as the Court of Justice of the European Union and the European Court of Human Rights. Consequently, climate change litigation is also emerging as a consolidated body of knowledge and practices, with the common objective of enhancing climate change mitigation and adaptation action. It is a multi-faceted phenomenon, engaging with a wide array of substantive and procedural legal challenges and issues. Legal architectures and strategies for climate cases include, among others, environmental law, tort law, constitutional law, consumer law, administrative law and human rights law.
Against such a backdrop, Climate Change Litigation in Europe provides, for the first time, a comprehensive account of the most relevant developments around climate change litigation, with a specific focus on Europe. To this end, the book aims to address the phenomenon of climate change litigation from a threefold perspective. First, it unpacks the supranational dimension of climate change litigation within Europe, with a particular focus on European regional courts. Second, it provides a comparative analysis of climate change litigation from different European jurisdictions, in order to understand points of convergence and departures among the different approaches to the common problem of tackling global warming. Finally, it analyses relevant substantive and procedural issues underpinning both existing and future climate change litigation, ranging from human rights to state and corporate responsibilities, international trade and investment and procedural rights.
The book comprises contributions from highly experienced law practitioners and academics, as well as emerging and established experts in the field of climate law and environmental law. It contributes meaningfully to the burgeoning body of literature on climate change litigation by providing a fully-fledged picture of this global phenomenon within Europe.
This research project examines how the proposal to adapt the burden of proof for compensation claims under the Industrial Emissions Directive could be implemented into the domestic law of EU Member States.
Under the present framework, victims of violations of the EU Industrial Emissions Directive (IED) are, in the majority of cases, without an effective means of claiming compensation as they are unable to satisfy the procedural rules on the burden of proof that are generally applicable in Member States. More specifically, they struggle to provide sufficient evidence that the emissions in question have caused their damage.
Consequently, in April 2022, the EU Commission published its proposal for a revised IED, which contains a novel provision (Article 79a(4)) that aims to adapt the burden of proof to benefit the victims of pollution by large-scale industrial activities. Under the proposed amendments, where a claimant is able to provide 'sufficiently robust evidence' that a violation of the IED has caused, or significantly contributed to, damage to their health, there will be a rebuttable presumption that the defendant is liable.
While provisions that adapt the burden of proof are not entirely novel in EU legislation, this would be a first under the EU environmental law framework.
En affirmant le caractère exécutoire de la loi sur le changement climatique, le jugement rendu reconnaît que le gouvernement britannique est tenu responsable de ses engagements climatiques. Plus précisément, la Cour a estimé que la stratégie Net Zéro n’incluait pas les questions qui étaient importantes pour savoir si les objectifs du CCA 2008 pouvaient être atteints, et sur lesquelles le secrétaire d’État était tenu de faire un rapport au Parlement. Le secrétaire d’État n’avait donc pas respecté les obligations prévues aux articles 13 et 14 du CCA 2008 en ce qui concerne la stratégie Net Zéro. Le secrétaire d’État avait considéré que les propositions et les politiques de la stratégie permettaient de respecter les budgets carbones sans avoir été informé d’informations cruciales sur la contribution des politiques individuelles à la réduction des émissions de GES. Dans les rapports au Parlement en vertu de l’article 14, il n’avait pas non plus expliqué comment les politiques élaborées visaient à atteindre les objectifs d’émissions. Le tribunal ayant jugé que la stratégie Net Zéro était inadéquate, le gouvernement a dû la mettre à jour pour fournir plus d’informations, notamment sur la manière dont les politiques permettront d’atteindre les objectifs du CCA 2008, dans un délai de huit mois. Le gouvernement a confirmé en octobre 2022 qu’il ne ferait pas appel de cette décision. Le résultat de l’affaire est également significatif à l’échelle mondiale, car il renforce l’efficacité d’une loi nationale, à un moment où plusieurs autres pays ont emboîté le pas et adopté une législation nationale dans le but de réduire leurs émissions de GES.
Cette contribution analyse le jugement de la Haute Cour à la lumière du contexte juridique existant au Royaume-Uni (I) et montre ses implications dans le système juridique britannique (II). Les conclusions prendront en considération les perspectives comparées d’un tel jugement, en considération de l’écart souvent existant entre les objectifs de réduction fixés et les plans visant à concrétiser ces réductions d’émissions.
La « circulation des modèles juridiques » est la théorie décrivant le phénomène d’échange et de diffusion d’idées, de bonnes pratiques et de normes juridiques entre les différents ordres et systèmes juridiques mondiaux. Le modèle d’évaluation environnementale, capable de saisir la complexité du réel, en acclimatant le risque dans le droit et en faisant entrer l’écologie dans le domaine juridique, a été sans doute l’instrument juridique le plus largement adopté à travers le monde en droit de l’environnement. L’étude de sa circulation met en exergue une grande variété de formulations et de formes diverses dudit modèle, ainsi que les dynamiques à la base de ses développements mondiaux.
Mots clés : Circulation, modèle juridique, évaluation environnementale, transplantation juridique, droit comparé, complexité, mondialisation du droit.
Summary
The "circulation of legal models" is the theory describing the phenomenon of exchange and diffusion of ideas, good practices and legal rules between different global legal orders and legal systems. The environmental impact assessment model, capable of grasping the complexity of reality by integrating risk into law and bringing ecology into the legal domain, has undoubtedly been the most widely adopted legal instrument worldwide in the environmental field. The study of its circulation highlights various formulations and diverse forms of this model and the dynamics underlying
its global developments.
Keywords: Circulation, Legal Model, Environmental impact assessment, Legal transplant, Comparative Law, Complexity, Globalisation of law.
to an increasing number of legal actions against governments and cor-
porations worldwide. These cases, stemming from the failure of na-
tional and international policymakers to address climate change ad-
equately, are expanding in scale and ambition. This article explores
climate litigation as a response to the urgent climate change crisis. It
provides a global overview of climate-related litigation by examining
prominent domestic cases, underscoring the collective nature of cli-
mate governance and the crucial role of the judicial system in address-
ing this global challenge.
La circolazione dei modelli giuridici, resa celebre dallo scozzese Alan Watson con la metafora dei “trapianti giuridici” (legal transplant), fornisce un approccio dinamico dello studio del diritto comparato. Secondo questa teoria, il trasferimento di norme da un sistema giuridico a un altro non costituisce un’eccezione, ma è un fenomeno diffuso sin dai tempi antichi.
Lo Sviluppo Sostenibile, quale “nuovo” paradigma adottato a livello internazionale può mostrare la sua dinamicità attraverso la circolazione verticale e orizzontale dei suoi modelli. Inoltre, questo contributo sarà l’occasione per proporre una terza tipologia di circolazione dei modelli giuridici: quella “obliqua”. Così, il modello di Sviluppo Sostenibile si rivela all’origine
dello sviluppo di normative basate sui suoi principi, le quali tuttavia assumono caratteristiche diverse a seconda del contesto in cui vengono applicate.
Quindi, questo contributo costituisce un tentativo di delineare il percorso compiuto dallo Sviluppo Sostenibile attraverso diversi sistemi giuridici, cercando di mettere in evidenza la dinamica di tale percorso senza perdere di vista gli obiettivi tipici dello Sviluppo Sostenibile.
This report provides an overview of the discussions and synthesises some of the conclusions.
This document was commissioned by Policy Department A at the request of the European Parliament’s Committee on Internal Market and Consumer Protection (IMCO).
Developments around mandatory human rights due diligence laws are multiplying across Europe, and increasingly include climate change impacts within their scope. As a result, companies, regulators, judges, legal advisors, civil society and the public are asking what the legal implications of these due diligence laws will be for companies relating to their climate change impacts.
In this webinar series, the discussion turned on the nature of due diligence as a legal standard of care, how this can be applied in relation to climate change, and what the practical implications for companies are likely to be.
This report provides an overview of the discussions and is divided into four parts according to the episodes’ topics. It contains the written versions of each speaker’s presentation, in the order that they took place.
The event discussed legal developments in the field of climate change from a comparative and international perspective. It was comprised of two panels, the first on 'Climate Change Litigation before Domestic Courts', and the second on 'Climate Change Litigation at the International Level'. The panelists included academics and legal practitioners, many of whom were, or are currently, involved in strategic climate change lawsuits, in a range of jurisdictions. The event was opened by Lord Carnwath of the United Kingdom Supreme Court.
This report provides an overview of the discussions and synthesises some of the conclusions. It is divided into two parts according to the panel topics, and its content is presented thematically, with each sub-heading incorporating relevant comments that were made throughout the event.
Climate change litigation is particularly pertinent in Europe. Since the landmark decision in Urgenda v. The Kingdom of The Netherlands in 2015, climate cases have been filed across European jurisdictions and reaching European regional courts, such as the Court of Justice of the European Union and the European Court of Human Rights. Consequently, climate change litigation is also emerging as a consolidated body of knowledge and practices, with the common objective of enhancing climate change mitigation and adaptation action. It is a multi-faceted phenomenon, engaging with a wide array of substantive and procedural legal challenges and issues. Legal architectures and strategies for climate cases include, among others, environmental law, tort law, constitutional law, consumer law, administrative law and human rights law.
Against such a backdrop, Climate Change Litigation in Europe provides, for the first time, a comprehensive account of the most relevant developments around climate change litigation, with a specific focus on Europe. To this end, the book aims to address the phenomenon of climate change litigation from a threefold perspective. First, it unpacks the supranational dimension of climate change litigation within Europe, with a particular focus on European regional courts. Second, it provides a comparative analysis of climate change litigation from different European jurisdictions, in order to understand points of convergence and departures among the different approaches to the common problem of tackling global warming. Finally, it analyses relevant substantive and procedural issues underpinning both existing and future climate change litigation, ranging from human rights to state and corporate responsibilities, international trade and investment and procedural rights.
The book comprises contributions from highly experienced law practitioners and academics, as well as emerging and established experts in the field of climate law and environmental law. It contributes meaningfully to the burgeoning body of literature on climate change litigation by providing a fully-fledged picture of this global phenomenon within Europe.