Following the landmark Urgenda case, European social movements and legal networks have increasingly turned to courts to compel governments to more ambitious mitigation policies. The rapid proliferation of Urgenda‐like cases in the most diverse European jurisdictions, makes a compelling case to investigate the motivations and goals animating European climate litigators, especially when facing high legal barriers. While timely legal analyses of high‐profile climate litigation abound in the literature, an emerging body of research has focused on the genesis of climate cases , their strategies, and societal impacts. To contribute to this latter thread, the article investigates how legal barriers and considerations, and social movements' motivations and goals,have shaped a diverse range of legal strategies in high‐profile climate lawsuits inspired by Urgenda in Europe. The article shows that courts might turn into very different arenas to pursue social change, in which actors elect cautious or daring strategies, depending on the legal system and tradition they refer to, but also their vision and objectives.

中文翻译：

---

“脚踩门”还是“门迎面”？欧洲结构与机构之间气候诉讼法律策略的发展

沿着地标乌尔根达在这种情况下，欧洲社会运动和法律网络越来越多地诉诸法院，迫使政府采取更雄心勃勃的缓解政策。的迅速扩散乌尔根达‐类似欧洲最多元化司法管辖区的案件，为调查欧洲气候诉讼者的动机和目标提供了令人信服的案例，特别是在面临高法律障碍时。虽然文献中对备受瞩目的气候诉讼的及时法律分析比比皆是，但新兴的研究机构主要关注气候案件的起源、其策略和社会影响。为了对后一条线索做出贡献，本文研究了法律障碍和考虑因素以及社会运动的动机和目标如何在备受瞩目的气候诉讼中形成了各种法律策略乌尔根达在欧洲。文章表明，法院可能会成为追求社会变革的截然不同的舞台，参与者根据他们所引用的法律制度和传统以及他们的愿景和目标来选择谨慎或大胆的策略。