Backlogs bad for environmental enforcement
George Pring 10, Professor of Law, Sturm College of Law, University of Denver; JD University of Michigan; BA Harvard University; Principal, Global Environmental Outcomes LLC (GEO), Golden, Colo., USA, consultants, and Catherine Pring, a professional mediator and Director of ReSolution Resources LLC, Golden, Colo. USA; MPA University of Michigan; BA Vassar College; Principal, Global Environmental Outcomes LLC (GEO), "Increase in Environmental Courts and Tribunals Prompts New Global Institute", Journal of Court Innovation 3, no. 1, HeinOnline, Winter 2010
Then the fourth factor can occur. In response to the lack of environmental enforcement and protection, civil society in the form of environmental NGOs, advocacy lawyers, as well as public entities begin bringing their complaints to the available general courts. At this point, the all-important fifth factor can occur - the traditional courts disappoint expectations, failing to deliver environmental justice. They often do not provide an ideal adjudication, one that is, in the succinct words of Australian court procedural law, "just, quick, and cheap."6 Barriers to existing court effectiveness in resolving environmental conflicts are many and various - the most significant being long delays, huge case backlogs, poor case management, decision-makers lacking in environmental expertise, narrow definitions of plaintiff standing, the high cost and economic risks of litigation, lack of consistent decisions, intimidation, and corruption.7