Search for a command to run...
Climate litigation continues to grow and evolve as climate action lags and impacts grow increasingly severe. Although climate-focused cases employ a variety of legal strategies, they all require rigorous research to support their arguments, requiring the engagement of scientists capable of conducting and interpreting litigation-relevant research. To advance that work, we interviewed legal practitioners and scholars to identify research needs for climate litigation. This paper presents the third installment in a longitudinal research series designed to track how scientific research needs in climate litigation are changing over time and to translate evolving legal theories into empirically tractable scientific questions. Building on prior phases of this research, the study examines how new case types, evidentiary strategies, and theories of liability are shaping demand for specific kinds of scientific evidence. Earlier phases of this work highlighted three research priorities: attribution science, climate change and health, and economic modeling, which reflect the evolution and advancement of the field. Additionally, we identified strategic research areas including legal and financial accountability, disinformation and greenwashing, policy and governance, environmental and social impacts, and emissions accounting and reductions. Research to inform losses and damages emerged as a cross-cutting theme, integrating these priorities and strategic areas to address comprehensive litigation needs. This third wave updates and extends that framework by providing new empirical insights into how litigation strategies are evolving and what this means for the scientific research agenda. This work underscores the important role that scientists play in climate litigation and provides an updated research agenda for those looking to engage.