Democracy in Climate Litigation : Exploring Democracy Conceptions in Indigenous and Non-Indigenous Cases

In recent years, climate litigation has emerged as a key arena for contesting climate inaction. While existing research has mainly focused on the legal effectiveness and policy impacts of such cases, far less attention has been devoted to their democratic implications. This thesis offers a modest contribution to this gap by examining how democracy is envisioned and articulated within climate litigation, with particular attention to differences between Indigenous and non-Indigenous cases. Drawing on the Ecological versus Environmental Democracy framework, the study applies a qualitative content analysis to plaintiff statements from six climate litigation cases. The results indicate that Indigenous-led litigations tend to align more closely with ecological-democratic ideals, emphasizing intergenerational responsibility and challenges to anthropocentric boundaries of the democratic community. In contrast, non-Indigenous cases more commonly reflect environmental-democratic orientations by framing environmental harm in terms of human well-being and seeking remedies within existing legal and institutional frameworks. The findings of this thesis suggest that climate litigation may function not only as a legal tool, but also as a site for democratic innovation.