Climate-related vulnerabilities and the European Court of Human Rights: Reimagining victim status through intersectional thinking

Abstract Who is particularly vulnerable to climate change, how do these vulnerabilities intersect, and what do they mean for climate litigation? For the European Convention on Human Rights, these questions have not yet been conclusively answered. Although recent climate rulings recognized the interdependence of human rights and climate change, the European Court of Human Rights has proven reluctant to engage with the fundamental inequity of climate change and the intersecting vulnerabilities that shape how groups and individuals experience its effects. The present article argues that the Court’s staunch refusal to think intersectionally led to its current, untenably high bar for individual victim status in climate cases. It engages critically with this refusal, arguing that the difficulty of issuing model judgments to face large-scale structural problems like climate change should not come at the cost of engaging with the intersecting vulnerabilities and inequalities at the core of such a case. In doing so, it invites a rethinking of vulnerability in the Court’s parlance.