{"id":75812,"date":"2024-11-18T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2024-11-18T00:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.lse.ac.uk\/granthaminstitute\/?post_type=news&p=75812"},"modified":"2024-11-19T09:35:28","modified_gmt":"2024-11-19T09:35:28","slug":"what-can-we-learn-from-just-transition-litigation","status":"publish","type":"news","link":"https:\/\/www.lse.ac.uk\/granthaminstitute\/news\/what-can-we-learn-from-just-transition-litigation\/","title":{"rendered":"What can we learn from just transition litigation?"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Tiffanie Chan and Juliana Vélez Echeverri explore the multilateral climate negotiation rooms and national courts to examine how justice is considered in the transition to low-carbon and resilient societies. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The concept of justice is inherently complex and subject to multiple interpretations, and how it is interpreted shapes societal structures. ‘Just transition’ as an agenda at the international climate negotiations is often subject to politically contested moral judgements, as recently evidenced by the diverse Party submissions<\/path><\/svg><\/a> to the UAE Just Transition Work Programme dialogues. In contrast, courts are fora where those suffering injustices are required to clearly articulate their grievances and realities.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The growing global trend of just transition litigation<\/path><\/svg><\/a> offers a unique window into how the operationalisation of just transition varies across countries. Understanding these crucial differences provides valuable insights for building consensus among Parties at the international level. These cases also shed light on how domestic policymakers can better design and implement climate policy pathways that address the needs and rights of affected communities and individuals. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Justice as an interstate matter<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Although ‘just transition’ as a policy term has been referred to in multiple UNFCCC documents, most prominently the 2015 Paris Agreement, the rapid proliferation of its use has not centred on a single common definition. Under the Paris Agreement<\/path><\/svg><\/a>, its scope was limited to a just transition of the workforce, and the “creation of decent work and quality jobs in accordance with nationally defined development priorities”. This primarily focuses on distributive<\/em> justice, as it concerns the allocation of benefits and burdens among workers. However, in subsequent COP decisions, the interpretation<\/path><\/svg><\/a> of just transition has arguably moved beyond a labour-focused concept to one akin to the principle of sustainable development in the context of the climate transition. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

This broader interpretation is reflected in Paragraph 52 of the 2021 Glasgow Climate Pact<\/path><\/svg><\/a> agreed at COP26, which emphasises “the need to ensure just transitions that promote sustainable development and eradication of poverty<\/em>, and the creation of decent work and quality jobs, including through making financial flows consistent with a pathway towards low greenhouse gas emission and climate-resilient development<\/em>, including through deployment and transfer of technology, and provision of support to developing country Parties<\/em>” [emphasis added]. This language expands just transition into the domains of climate justice<\/a>, and paints just transition as both an interstate<\/em>and intrastate issue. While Paragraph 52 does not expressly discuss the moral or legal implications of historical inequalities in greenhouse gas emissions, it acknowledges the responsibility of developed countries to deliver financial support to developing countries. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The operationalisation of the UAE Just Transition Work Programme<\/path><\/svg><\/a> (JTWP) at COP28 in 2023 reinforces this expanded scope, referencing Article 2 of the Paris Agreement, which provides that the actions to meet temperature goals will be implemented to reflect equity and the principle of ‘common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities’ (CBDR-RC). The establishment of the Loss and Damage Fund in 2022 under the COP umbrella also brings in restorative justice<\/path><\/svg><\/a> dimensions, i.e. repairing the harm that has been done. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

However, outside of agreed COP decisions, the interpretation of justice in just transition is diverse and often contested. Developed countries’ negotiating stance<\/path><\/svg><\/a> is generally in favour of the JTWP being limited to workforce and employment impacts, whereas developing countries are pushing for a broader scope that considers whole-of-society impacts and the need to include those often excluded in today’s global economy (e.g. young people and women). For developing countries, just transition at the multilateral negotiations thus quickly becomes intertwined with contentious discussions on climate finance, specifically the New Collective Quantified Goal on Climate Finance<\/a>, and the operationalisation of the Loss and Damage<\/a> Fund. These fundamental differences on how justice is applied and perceived and the lack of detailed implementation strategies agreed upon so far have resulted in the JTWP being criticised for being a “talk shop<\/path><\/svg><\/a>”.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Meanwhile, on the ground in domestic courtrooms and through grassroots advocacy movements, just (or unjust) transitions are materialising in people’s daily lives. Courts are grappling with just transition as an intrastate<\/em> and community-level issue. We turn to these cases below and explore how this interacts with, and could influence, the international discussions. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Place-based and transboundary injustices <\/h2>\n\n\n\n

The failure to reach consensus on just transition at the international level in combination with poorly-designed domestic policies could create harmful localised impacts<\/path><\/svg><\/a> for those who have contributed the least to the climate crisis. Just transition litigation articulates justice dimensions that resonate with growing discussions around which legal principles<\/path><\/svg><\/a> should be included in international just transition frameworks. For instance, there is increasing discussion over whether, in light of the climate crisis, the imperatives of wellbeing should be prioritised over economic growth in law and policymaking. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Integrating principles of justice in international climate negotiations and domestic policy pathways to achieve a just transition requires an understanding of the justice claims of those affected by climate action. While the term ‘just transition litigation’ has been referred to in climate litigation studies<\/path><\/svg><\/a>, its theoretical understanding is yet to be developed. Using the first conceptualisation of just transition litigation<\/path><\/svg><\/a>, we analysed 21 cases and examined the geographical spread and nature of such cases. This analysis revealed place-based injustices emerging from the implementation of just transition at the local and national levels. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

More than half of the cases (13) allege harmful impacts from projects aiming to deliver climate action at the local level. All local cases build on either recognition justice claims (failure to recognise the interests and experiences of specific groups in the implementation of climate projects) or procedural justice claims (exclusion in decision-making processes in the form of failure to consult or the inadequate application of environmental permission procedures). Seven cases challenge domestic climate policies or laws mainly using distributive justice frames, in which marginalised communities and workers allege grievances about the existential threats that the burdens of climate action entail. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Just transition litigation also brings forward discussions about transboundary justice: one place’s net zero transition can affect another place’s just transition. For example, in FOCSIV and others v. FCA Ital<\/em>y, the applicants allege that an Italian car manufacturer failed to provide information about potential human rights violations related to cobalt sourcing from the Democratic Republic of Congo. Although this case adopts a primarily procedural justice framing, it shows the complex, cross-border justice implications of clean energy transition policies in an increasingly interconnected world. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

While the tripartite model (international, national and local) discussed above is conceptually relevant for understanding justice claims at different levels, it is important to examine how these dimensions of justice speak differently, and interact, under the overarching just transition framework. These distributive, procedural and recognition dimensions are not new forms of injustice<\/path><\/svg><\/a>: they are commonly articulated and are used to assess harm and justice claims in the current fossil-fuel-dependent economy. The challenge lies in adapting these principles to ensure a just transition in a way that respects these multiple layers of justice.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Connecting place-based litigation with developing international legal principles<\/h2>\n\n\n\n

What needs to be done differently, then? A geography approach<\/path><\/svg><\/a> or ‘place-based’ approach to just transition can reveal how impacts and harm resulting from climate action are located. Learning from past and emerging just transition litigation that focuses on place-based issues can help prevent further harm. This approach shows how climate action interacts with socio-cultural and political legal spaces. In addition, it sheds light on how multi-scalar solutions might address pre-existing structural drivers of injustice. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

However, it is crucial to link this place-based analysis to international level discussions on articulating legal principles for a just transition. These principles, when articulated well, can be interpreted<\/path><\/svg><\/a> coherently by governments, courts and other decision-makers globally. The law has the potential to transform<\/path><\/svg><\/a> pre-existing structural drivers of injustice, as this is a space in which the framework for processes to transition are possible and established. Activities harmful to the climate are all created, regulated and limited in some form by law. Using climate justice as a framework<\/path><\/svg><\/a> for changes to laws and how the law is interpreted could help address structural inequalities to promote more inclusive and fair transition pathways. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Just transition litigation demonstrates that a transformative form of thinking is needed – one that is not limited to shifting from a ‘dirty’ to a ‘clean’ energy source. Instead, a framework is needed that addresses justice across different places, levels and dimensions, to inform the design of policies and social transformations that dismantle the unjust socioeconomic structures and practices that caused the climate crisis in the first place. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The authors thank Joana Setzer for her review of this commentary. The analysis of cases for justice frames is based on the approach set out in Savaresi A, Setzer J, Bookman S et al. (2024) Conceptualizing just transition litigation. Nature Sustainability. <\/em>https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1038\/s41893-024-01439-y<\/em><\/a>.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"\n

Tiffanie Chan and Juliana Vélez Echeverri explore the multilateral climate negotiation rooms and national courts to examine how justice is considered in the transition to low-carbon and resilient societies. <\/p>\n\n","protected":false},"author":23,"featured_media":75814,"template":"","tags":[971,1292,1787,1160,581],"news-category":[16],"topic_area":[],"class_list":["post-75812","news","type-news","status-publish","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","tag-climate-justice","tag-climate-law","tag-court-cases","tag-just-transition","tag-litigation","news-category-20-commentary"],"acf":{"exclude_from_sync":{"ref_value":"field_560538b0e7350","value":"1","type":false,"post_type":""},"show_translations_widget":{"ref_value":"field_6203d588c41e8","value":"0","type":false,"post_type":""},"downloads":{"ref_value":"field_52f16cc1a80f2","value":false,"type":"repeater","post_type":""},"rss_newsletter":{"ref_value":"field_54f5c2c1544d8","value":"","type":false,"post_type":""},"profile_link":{"ref_value":"field_52f164b5189e9","value":["tiffanie-chan","juliana-velez-echeverri"],"type":"relationship","post_type":"profile"},"article_link":{"ref_value":"field_52eee3c7f0586","value":"","type":false,"post_type":""},"article_link_title":{"ref_value":"field_5322399d89d42","value":"","type":false,"post_type":""},"spotlight":{"ref_value":"field_52f80896506d3","value":"","type":false,"post_type":""}},"yoast_head":"\nWhat can we learn from just transition litigation? - Grantham Research Institute on climate change and the environment<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Tiffanie Chan and Juliana V\u00e9lez Echeverri explore the multilateral climate negotiation rooms and national courts to examine how justice is contemplated in the transition to low-carbon and resilient societies.\u00a0\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.lse.ac.uk\/granthaminstitute\/news\/what-can-we-learn-from-just-transition-litigation\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_GB\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"What can we learn from just transition litigation? - Grantham Research Institute on climate change and the environment\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Tiffanie Chan and Juliana V\u00e9lez Echeverri explore the multilateral climate negotiation rooms and national courts to examine how justice is contemplated in the transition to low-carbon and resilient societies.\u00a0\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.lse.ac.uk\/granthaminstitute\/news\/what-can-we-learn-from-just-transition-litigation\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Grantham Research Institute on climate change and the environment\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2024-11-19T09:35:28+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.lse.ac.uk\/granthaminstitute\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/getty-images-0tGhdC_5X3E-unsplash.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"640\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"427\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Estimated reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"7 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.lse.ac.uk\\\/granthaminstitute\\\/news\\\/what-can-we-learn-from-just-transition-litigation\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.lse.ac.uk\\\/granthaminstitute\\\/news\\\/what-can-we-learn-from-just-transition-litigation\\\/\",\"name\":\"What can we learn from just transition litigation? - Grantham Research Institute on climate change and the environment\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.lse.ac.uk\\\/granthaminstitute\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.lse.ac.uk\\\/granthaminstitute\\\/news\\\/what-can-we-learn-from-just-transition-litigation\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.lse.ac.uk\\\/granthaminstitute\\\/news\\\/what-can-we-learn-from-just-transition-litigation\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.lse.ac.uk\\\/granthaminstitute\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2024\\\/11\\\/getty-images-0tGhdC_5X3E-unsplash.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2024-11-18T00:00:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2024-11-19T09:35:28+00:00\",\"description\":\"Tiffanie Chan and Juliana V\u00e9lez Echeverri explore the multilateral climate negotiation rooms and national courts to examine how justice is contemplated in the transition to low-carbon and resilient societies.\u00a0\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.lse.ac.uk\\\/granthaminstitute\\\/news\\\/what-can-we-learn-from-just-transition-litigation\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-GB\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.lse.ac.uk\\\/granthaminstitute\\\/news\\\/what-can-we-learn-from-just-transition-litigation\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-GB\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.lse.ac.uk\\\/granthaminstitute\\\/news\\\/what-can-we-learn-from-just-transition-litigation\\\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.lse.ac.uk\\\/granthaminstitute\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2024\\\/11\\\/getty-images-0tGhdC_5X3E-unsplash.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.lse.ac.uk\\\/granthaminstitute\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2024\\\/11\\\/getty-images-0tGhdC_5X3E-unsplash.jpg\",\"width\":640,\"height\":427,\"caption\":\"Photo: Getty Images\\\/Unsplash+\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.lse.ac.uk\\\/granthaminstitute\\\/news\\\/what-can-we-learn-from-just-transition-litigation\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.lse.ac.uk\\\/granthaminstitute\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"News & commentaries\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.lse.ac.uk\\\/granthaminstitute\\\/news-and-commentary\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":3,\"name\":\"Commentary\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.lse.ac.uk\\\/granthaminstitute\\\/news-category\\\/20-commentary\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":4,\"name\":\"What can we learn from just transition litigation?\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.lse.ac.uk\\\/granthaminstitute\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.lse.ac.uk\\\/granthaminstitute\\\/\",\"name\":\"Grantham Research Institute on climate change and the environment\",\"description\":\"The Grantham Research Institute at LSE carries out world-class research on climate change and the environment.\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.lse.ac.uk\\\/granthaminstitute\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-GB\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"What can we learn from just transition litigation? - Grantham Research Institute on climate change and the environment","description":"Tiffanie Chan and Juliana V\u00e9lez Echeverri explore the multilateral climate negotiation rooms and national courts to examine how justice is contemplated in the transition to low-carbon and resilient societies.\u00a0","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.lse.ac.uk\/granthaminstitute\/news\/what-can-we-learn-from-just-transition-litigation\/","og_locale":"en_GB","og_type":"article","og_title":"What can we learn from just transition litigation? - Grantham Research Institute on climate change and the environment","og_description":"Tiffanie Chan and Juliana V\u00e9lez Echeverri explore the multilateral climate negotiation rooms and national courts to examine how justice is contemplated in the transition to low-carbon and resilient societies.\u00a0","og_url":"https:\/\/www.lse.ac.uk\/granthaminstitute\/news\/what-can-we-learn-from-just-transition-litigation\/","og_site_name":"Grantham Research Institute on climate change and the environment","article_modified_time":"2024-11-19T09:35:28+00:00","og_image":[{"width":640,"height":427,"url":"https:\/\/www.lse.ac.uk\/granthaminstitute\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/getty-images-0tGhdC_5X3E-unsplash.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Estimated reading time":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.lse.ac.uk\/granthaminstitute\/news\/what-can-we-learn-from-just-transition-litigation\/","url":"https:\/\/www.lse.ac.uk\/granthaminstitute\/news\/what-can-we-learn-from-just-transition-litigation\/","name":"What can we learn from just transition litigation? - Grantham Research Institute on climate change and the environment","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.lse.ac.uk\/granthaminstitute\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.lse.ac.uk\/granthaminstitute\/news\/what-can-we-learn-from-just-transition-litigation\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.lse.ac.uk\/granthaminstitute\/news\/what-can-we-learn-from-just-transition-litigation\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.lse.ac.uk\/granthaminstitute\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/getty-images-0tGhdC_5X3E-unsplash.jpg","datePublished":"2024-11-18T00:00:00+00:00","dateModified":"2024-11-19T09:35:28+00:00","description":"Tiffanie Chan and Juliana V\u00e9lez Echeverri explore the multilateral climate negotiation rooms and national courts to examine how justice is contemplated in the transition to low-carbon and resilient societies.\u00a0","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.lse.ac.uk\/granthaminstitute\/news\/what-can-we-learn-from-just-transition-litigation\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-GB","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.lse.ac.uk\/granthaminstitute\/news\/what-can-we-learn-from-just-transition-litigation\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-GB","@id":"https:\/\/www.lse.ac.uk\/granthaminstitute\/news\/what-can-we-learn-from-just-transition-litigation\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.lse.ac.uk\/granthaminstitute\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/getty-images-0tGhdC_5X3E-unsplash.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.lse.ac.uk\/granthaminstitute\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/getty-images-0tGhdC_5X3E-unsplash.jpg","width":640,"height":427,"caption":"Photo: Getty Images\/Unsplash+"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.lse.ac.uk\/granthaminstitute\/news\/what-can-we-learn-from-just-transition-litigation\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.lse.ac.uk\/granthaminstitute\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"News & commentaries","item":"https:\/\/www.lse.ac.uk\/granthaminstitute\/news-and-commentary\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":3,"name":"Commentary","item":"https:\/\/www.lse.ac.uk\/granthaminstitute\/news-category\/20-commentary\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":4,"name":"What can we learn from just transition litigation?"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.lse.ac.uk\/granthaminstitute\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.lse.ac.uk\/granthaminstitute\/","name":"Grantham Research Institute on climate change and the environment","description":"The Grantham Research Institute at LSE carries out world-class research on climate change and the environment.","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.lse.ac.uk\/granthaminstitute\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-GB"}]}},"taxonomies":{"post_tag":["climate justice","climate law","court cases","just transition","litigation"],"news-category":["Commentary"]},"featured_image_src":"https:\/\/www.lse.ac.uk\/granthaminstitute\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/11\/getty-images-0tGhdC_5X3E-unsplash.jpg","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lse.ac.uk\/granthaminstitute\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/news\/75812","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lse.ac.uk\/granthaminstitute\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/news"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lse.ac.uk\/granthaminstitute\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/news"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lse.ac.uk\/granthaminstitute\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/23"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/www.lse.ac.uk\/granthaminstitute\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/news\/75812\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":75815,"href":"https:\/\/www.lse.ac.uk\/granthaminstitute\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/news\/75812\/revisions\/75815"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lse.ac.uk\/granthaminstitute\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/75814"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.lse.ac.uk\/granthaminstitute\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=75812"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lse.ac.uk\/granthaminstitute\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=75812"},{"taxonomy":"news-category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lse.ac.uk\/granthaminstitute\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/news-category?post=75812"},{"taxonomy":"topic_area","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.lse.ac.uk\/granthaminstitute\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/topic_area?post=75812"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}