Legal Action in Honolulu to Advance Sustainable Development Goal 13: Climate Action

Case Background and Allegations

The City and County of Honolulu has initiated legal proceedings against major fossil fuel corporations, including ExxonMobil, Shell, and Chevron. The 2020 lawsuit represents a significant effort to achieve accountability for climate change impacts, directly aligning with the objectives of Sustainable Development Goal 13 (Climate Action).

• Core Allegation: The lawsuit contends that for nearly five decades, the defendant companies were aware that their fossil fuel products contribute to greenhouse gas pollution, planetary warming, and climate change.
• Deception Claim: It is further alleged that these corporations engaged in a campaign to deceive the public about the climate crisis, thereby profiting from products known to cause harm and obstructing progress toward global climate targets.

Environmental and Socio-Economic Impacts Linked to SDGs

The lawsuit details extensive damages that undermine several Sustainable Development Goals:

• SDG 14 (Life Below Water): Honolulu cites direct threats to its marine environment, including sea-level rise along the Oahu coastline, ocean warming, the degradation of coral reefs vital for marine biodiversity, and the depletion of local fish stocks.
• SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities): The city argues that the companies’ actions have increased risks to urban resilience, forecasting more frequent and intense extreme weather events such as hurricanes and heatwaves, which threaten public safety and infrastructure.
• SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth): The environmental degradation noted in the lawsuit poses a direct threat to Hawaii’s economy, particularly the tourism and fishing industries that depend on a healthy marine ecosystem.

Legal Proceedings and Key Arguments

Current Status and Procedural History

The Honolulu case is procedurally more advanced than approximately 30 similar lawsuits filed by other U.S. states and municipalities. This progress establishes a potential framework for climate litigation and corporate accountability, reinforcing the principles of SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions).

1. The case is proceeding in state court after the Hawaii Supreme Court denied the defendants’ motions to dismiss it.
2. The U.S. Supreme Court subsequently declined to take up the case, allowing the state-level proceedings to continue.
3. A hearing is scheduled to address a defense motion for summary judgment, which will provide insight into the legal strategies of both parties.

Defense Motion and Counterarguments

• Defense Argument: The defendants argue for dismissal on the grounds that the state’s two-year statute of limitations has expired, asserting that the issue of climate change has been a matter of public record for decades.
• Plaintiff’s Counterargument: Honolulu, supported by expert declarations from figures like Harvard University professor Naomi Oreskes, counters that the fossil fuel industry orchestrated a disinformation campaign to create public doubt about climate science. This campaign, likened to tactics used by the tobacco industry, is argued to have prevented meaningful action and public awareness, thereby justifying the timing of the lawsuit.

Broader Context and Implications for Sustainable Development

Related Climate Litigation in Hawaii

The Honolulu lawsuit is part of a broader movement within Hawaii to use legal channels to drive climate action.

• Maui County has filed a similar lawsuit, which is currently on hold.
• The State of Hawaii has also initiated its own legal action against fossil fuel companies.
• A separate lawsuit brought by youth activists against the Hawaii Department of Transportation was settled, resulting in a commitment to achieve zero greenhouse gas emissions in the state’s transportation sector by 2045, a landmark achievement for SDG 11 and SDG 13.

The Role of Institutions and Partnerships (SDG 16 & SDG 17)

The ongoing legal battles highlight the importance of multi-sectoral collaboration in achieving the Sustainable Development Goals.

• Strengthening Institutions (SDG 16): The case demonstrates the crucial function of the judiciary in providing a venue for seeking justice and holding powerful entities accountable for environmental harm.
• Partnerships for the Goals (SDG 17): The involvement of academic experts providing testimony and the collective action of multiple municipalities and states filing similar lawsuits exemplify a growing partnership aimed at addressing the global climate crisis through shared legal strategies.

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals in the Article

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

1. SDG 13: Climate Action
   • The entire article is centered on the issue of climate change. Honolulu’s lawsuit directly accuses fossil fuel companies of causing “greenhouse gas pollution that warms the planet and changes the climate.” It highlights specific climate-related harms such as “sea level rise,” “hurricanes, heatwaves and other extreme weather,” which are central concerns of SDG 13.
2. SDG 14: Life Below Water
   • The article explicitly mentions the negative impacts of climate change on marine ecosystems. It states that “ocean warming that will reduce fish stocks and kill coral reefs” is a major concern, directly linking the lawsuit’s premise to the conservation and sustainable use of oceans and marine resources as outlined in SDG 14.
3. SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities
   • The legal action is initiated by a city, Honolulu, to protect its community and infrastructure from climate-related disasters. The article mentions the threat of “sea level rise around the island of Oahu’s world-famous coastline” and the “massive wildfire” in Maui County. These issues relate to making cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient, and sustainable.
4. SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions
   • The article details a legal battle where a city is using the judicial system to hold powerful corporations accountable. The process described—lawsuits, court hearings, motions, and Supreme Court involvement—is an exercise in seeking justice through established legal institutions. The conflict between the state of Hawaii and the U.S. Department of Justice further highlights the role and challenges of institutions in addressing major issues.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

1. Target 13.1: Strengthen resilience and adaptive capacity to climate-related hazards and natural disasters in all countries.
   • Honolulu’s lawsuit seeks damages to cope with the consequences of climate change, such as sea-level rise and extreme weather. This is a direct attempt to build financial capacity to adapt to and strengthen resilience against these hazards.
2. Target 13.2: Integrate climate change measures into national policies, strategies and planning.
   • The settlement mentioned in the article, which requires Hawaii’s transportation department “to achieve zero greenhouse gas emissions across all transportation modes no later than 2045,” is a clear example of integrating climate change measures into state-level policy and planning.
3. Target 14.2: By 2020, sustainably manage and protect marine and coastal ecosystems to avoid significant adverse impacts…
   • The lawsuit’s aim to address “ocean warming that will reduce fish stocks and kill coral reefs” directly aligns with the goal of protecting marine and coastal ecosystems from the adverse impacts of climate change.
4. Target 11.b: By 2020, substantially increase the number of cities and human settlements adopting and implementing integrated policies and plans towards inclusion, resource efficiency, mitigation and adaptation to climate change, resilience to disasters…
   • Honolulu’s lawsuit represents a city-level plan to seek accountability and resources for climate change adaptation and resilience, fitting this target’s description of cities implementing plans to address climate impacts.
5. Target 16.3: Promote the rule of law at the national and international levels and ensure equal access to justice for all.
   • The article describes how Honolulu is using the state court system to seek justice against major corporations. The entire legal proceeding, from the initial filing to the Hawaii Supreme Court and the U.S. Supreme Court’s refusal to hear it, is an application of the rule of law to address a grievance.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

1. Total greenhouse gas emissions (Indicator 13.2.2)
   • The article explicitly mentions a settlement goal “to achieve zero greenhouse gas emissions across all transportation modes no later than 2045.” This provides a clear, measurable indicator of progress. The lawsuit itself is based on the premise of holding companies accountable for “greenhouse gas pollution.”
2. Number of deaths and directly affected persons attributed to disasters (Indicator 11.5.1)
   • The article provides a specific data point for this indicator by stating that the Maui wildfire “killed 102 people.” This is a direct measurement of the human cost of a climate-related disaster.
3. Financial damages awarded for climate harms (Implied Indicator)
   • The lawsuit “seeks an unspecified amount of damages.” The final amount awarded, if any, would serve as a quantifiable indicator of corporate accountability and the financial resources secured by the city to address climate impacts.
4. Changes in sea level (Implied Indicator)
   • The article identifies “sea level rise around the island of Oahu’s world-famous coastline” as a key harm. Monitoring the rate of sea-level rise in this area would be a direct indicator of the problem the lawsuit seeks to address.
5. Health of marine ecosystems (Implied Indicator)
   • The mention of reduced “fish stocks” and killed “coral reefs” implies that the health and coverage of coral reefs and the population size of fish stocks are relevant indicators for measuring the impacts of ocean warming.

4. Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: mynorthwest.com