Climate Lawsuits

Question A: If cities in Ohio sued oil and gas companies to pay damages for concealing the effects of climate change, it would increase social welfare.

Question B: If cities in Ohio sued oil and gas companies to pay damages for concealing the effects of climate change, it would reduce inequality.

Question C: Cities in Ohio should sue oil and gas companies to pay damages for concealing the effects of climate change to correct for a past market failure.

Question A: If cities in Ohio sued oil and gas companies to pay damages for concealing the effects of climate change, it would increase social welfare.

Economist	Institution	Opinion	Confidence	Comment
Jonathan Andreas	Bluffton University	Agree	4	A lot depends on how we trade off present welfare (which might decrease) versus future welfare (which would hopefully increase). However, even in the near present, there is hope for increased welfare IF the suits could bring revenues to Ohio from out of state. Although the state is a net natural gas exporter and exports a lot of refining services (see eia.gov), we are a big importer of other fossil fuels so it might primarily transfer money to Ohio from out of state a bit like optimal tariff theory predicts.
David Brasington	University of Cincinnati	Uncertain	6
Glenn Dutcher	Ohio University	Strongly Agree	9
Kenneth Fah	Ohio Dominican University	Uncertain	9
Hasan Faruq	Xavier University	Agree	9
Paul Holmes	Ashland University	Uncertain	5	I think this is really complicated. At first glance I'd say 'no' since such lawsuits wouldn't create new resources, just shift them around. But if it meant oil and gas companies changed their behavior in a pro-social way, then (almost tautologically) this would increase social welfare. Clearly this is not the BEST way to achieve behavioral change; the oil and gas companies' argument that this would be better dealt with by federal policy is correct, except for the fact that federal policies are jammed up by politics, so maybe this is second-best? I'm not sure.
Faria Huq	Lake Erie College	Uncertain	7
Michael Jones	University of Cincinnati	Disagree	5
Charles Kroncke	Mount Saint Joseph University	Uncertain	5
Trevon Logan	Ohio State University	Strongly Agree	8
Diane Monaco	Economics Professor	Strongly Agree	10	There are numerous fossil fuel industry practices and trade & consulting groups (e.g., McKinsey) claims that have intentionally deceived the public regarding the dangers of burning fossil fuels and its direct effect on climate change. Rather than acknowledge the hazards of climate change, various current lawsuits have maintained that the fossil fuel industry has pushed to undermine scientific consensus "with pseudo-science, fabricated doubt, and a well-funded, sustained public relations campaign to promote their spin." Additional types of fraud within the State of Ohio pushing in the direction of new lawsuits include the drilling & fracking on Ohio state park land that has misused citizen’s names in the public evaluation & comment process allowing the approval process to be overrun by fraud. The U.S. Supreme Court recently declined to hear proposals by Exxon Mobil Corp, Suncor Energy Inc, and Chevron Corp, to move fossil fuel state & local governments lawsuits into the federal courts where the venue is generally more favorable to plaintiffs than federal courts.
Joe Nowakowski	Muskingum University	Strongly Agree	9
Kay Strong	Independent	Agree	9
Ejindu Ume	Miami University	Uncertain	5
Kathryn Wilson	Kent State University	Agree	8

Question B: If cities in Ohio sued oil and gas companies to pay damages for concealing the effects of climate change, it would reduce inequality.

Economist	Institution	Opinion	Confidence	Comment
Jonathan Andreas	Bluffton University	Uncertain	7	It completely depend upon how the revenues are used. It would increase the cost of oil and gas which would disproportionately hurt the poor, but if the revenues were used to reduce inequality, that could more than compensate.
David Brasington	University of Cincinnati	Uncertain	5
Glenn Dutcher	Ohio University	Uncertain	10
Kenneth Fah	Ohio Dominican University	Disagree	7
Hasan Faruq	Xavier University	Agree	7
Paul Holmes	Ashland University	Uncertain	6	Suppose the oil and gas companies win: then the answer is 'no' since the only winners will be the lawyers. Suppose the states/counties win: then 'maybe', with the answer depending on what fraction of any damages go to inequality-reducing projects, mitigated by the aforementioned enrichment of lawyers.
Faria Huq	Lake Erie College	Uncertain	7	Economically disadvantaged groups tend to be disproportionately affected by the effects of climate change, and suing oil and gas companies would help pay for some of the costs of climate change. However, if the companies passed on some of these costs to consumers in the form of higher prices, in the short run, people with lower incomes may end up having to spend a larger proportion of their incomes on these essential utilities.
Michael Jones	University of Cincinnati	Disagree	5
Charles Kroncke	Mount Saint Joseph University	Disagree	8	Unlikely to reduce inequality because many of the monetary benefits will go to the lawyers.
Trevon Logan	Ohio State University	Agree	7
Diane Monaco	Economics Professor	Agree	9	There are numerous fossil fuel industry practices and trade & consulting groups (e.g., McKinsey) claims that have intentionally deceived the public regarding the dangers of burning fossil fuels and its direct effect on climate change. Rather than acknowledge the hazards of climate change, various current lawsuits have maintained that the fossil fuel industry has pushed to undermine scientific consensus "with pseudo-science, fabricated doubt, and a well-funded, sustained public relations campaign to promote their spin." Additional types of fraud within the State of Ohio pushing in the direction of new lawsuits include the drilling & fracking on Ohio state park land that has misused citizen’s names in the public evaluation & comment process allowing the approval process to be overrun by fraud. The U.S. Supreme Court recently declined to hear proposals by Exxon Mobil Corp, Suncor Energy Inc, and Chevron Corp, to move fossil fuel state & local governments lawsuits into the federal courts where the venue is generally more favorable to plaintiffs than federal courts.
Joe Nowakowski	Muskingum University	Strongly Agree	9
Kay Strong	Independent	Uncertain	6
Ejindu Ume	Miami University	Uncertain	5
Kathryn Wilson	Kent State University	Agree	8

Question C: Cities in Ohio should sue oil and gas companies to pay damages for concealing the effects of climate change to correct for a past market failure.

Economist	Institution	Opinion	Confidence	Comment
Jonathan Andreas	Bluffton University	Agree	5	In theory it is worth a try. I disagree with the logic of the statement because I think past market failures are a sunk cost and we cannot correct past mistakes, but this could help avoid future mistakes. I don't know that this is the best way, but at least it should help prevent the fossil fuel companies from continuing spending money on their disinformation campaign which has convinced millions of Americans that global warming is fake news.
David Brasington	University of Cincinnati	Disagree	8
Glenn Dutcher	Ohio University	Uncertain	6	I shy away from "should" because there may be other mechanisms that would achieve some policy goal more efficiently.
Kenneth Fah	Ohio Dominican University	Agree	7
Hasan Faruq	Xavier University	Uncertain	8
Paul Holmes	Ashland University	Uncertain	6	I guess this depends on the likelihood of such lawsuits being successful, and the likelihood that they would effect behavioral changes going forward on the oil and gas companies. I would only be guessing as to the answers to these.
Faria Huq	Lake Erie College	Agree	7	While I agree with this on a normative level, whether the financial damages will provide enough incentives to actually correct for this is uncertain.
Michael Jones	University of Cincinnati	Strongly Disagree	5
Charles Kroncke	Mount Saint Joseph University	Disagree	7
Trevon Logan	Ohio State University	Strongly Agree	9
Diane Monaco	Economics Professor	Strongly Agree	10	There are numerous fossil fuel industry practices and trade & consulting groups (e.g., McKinsey) claims that have intentionally deceived the public regarding the dangers of burning fossil fuels and its direct effect on climate change. Rather than acknowledge the hazards of climate change, various current lawsuits have maintained that the fossil fuel industry has pushed to undermine scientific consensus "with pseudo-science, fabricated doubt, and a well-funded, sustained public relations campaign to promote their spin." Additional types of fraud within the State of Ohio pushing in the direction of new lawsuits include the drilling & fracking on Ohio state park land that has misused citizen’s names in the public evaluation & comment process allowing the approval process to be overrun by fraud. The U.S. Supreme Court recently declined to hear proposals by Exxon Mobil Corp, Suncor Energy Inc, and Chevron Corp, to move fossil fuel state & local governments lawsuits into the federal courts where the venue is generally more favorable to plaintiffs than federal courts.
Joe Nowakowski	Muskingum University	Agree	9
Kay Strong	Independent	Agree	9
Ejindu Ume	Miami University	Agree	6
Kathryn Wilson	Kent State University	Uncertain	5	The primary reason I put "uncertain" is because a lawsuit at the state level, rather than many individual city lawsuits, would be a more effective avenue to pursue. I do think it is warranted for the public to seek reimbursement for the damages caused by companies that hid information or otherwise mislead the public about the potential harms to their product.