Bluwstein (2026): The Trouble with Carbon Budgets, Offsets and Removals in Climate Litigation against States: The Case of KlimaSeniorinnen v. Switzerland at the ECtHR

Jevgeniy Bluwstein, IN: European Journal of International Law, https://doi.org/10.1093/ejil/chaf068

The European Court of Human Rights’ (ECtHR) judgment in KlimaSeniorinnen v. Switzerland represents a critical juncture in climate litigation. By endorsing a national carbon budget in combination with an extraterritorial, consumption-based approach to state responsibility, while sidestepping the contentious issues of carbon offsets and removals, the author shows how the Court has created an implementation paradox. The judgment cannot be implemented in a meaningful way in a context where Switzerland’s fair-share carbon budget is already exhausted and negative, and where it is almost exhausted if we adopt a per capita approach. A negative fair-share carbon budget would entail an ‘emergency brake’, which no state can afford. A still remaining positive per capita carbon budget would require unprecedented emission reduction rates far beyond the temporality of economic lockdowns imposed during COVID-19. The judgment thus highlights the limits of climate litigation against states at a time of exhausted carbon budgets and an over-reliance on questionable carbon offsets and highly speculative carbon removal promises.

LINK