Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorEngland, Philippa
dc.date.accessioned2020-05-08T01:00:33Z
dc.date.available2020-05-08T01:00:33Z
dc.date.issued2017
dc.identifier.doi10.2139/ssrn.3079142
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10072/393683
dc.description.abstractIn Australia, risk analysis, risk assessment and risk management are buzz words for decision-makers who must deal with the prospective - but relatively uncertain - impacts of climate change and other environmental risks. But what do these terms mean in practice and how do they play out in the courts? This short paper identifies some divergent approaches to these issues with particular regard to cases involving a risk of flooding.
dc.publisherGriffith University Law School
dc.subject.fieldofresearchLaw
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode1801
dc.subject.keywordsRisk Assessment
dc.subject.keywordsCourts
dc.subject.keywordsFlooding
dc.titleRisk Managing in the Courts: Seeds of a Divergent Jurisprudence
dc.typeJournal article
dc.type.descriptionC2 - Articles (Other)
dcterms.bibliographicCitationEngland, P, Risk Managing in the Courts: Seeds of a Divergent Jurisprudence, 2017
dc.date.updated2020-05-07T21:40:38Z
dc.description.versionAccepted Manuscript (AM)
gro.rights.copyright© 2017 Griffith University Law School and the Author(s). The attached file is reproduced here in accordance with the copyright policy of the publisher. Please refer to the publisher’s website for further information.
gro.hasfulltextFull Text
gro.griffith.authorEngland, Philippa C.


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

  • Reports
    Contains reports by Griffith authors published for government agencies, industry and other organisations.

Show simple item record