The Environmental Revolution and the Supreme Court of Canada: Empirical Analysis of Postmaterialist Value Change Across Four Decades

Objective. This study examines Ronald Inglehart’s theory of value change in the Supreme Court of Canada. The theory has received little attention in the public law literature, yet its central tenet suggests that intergenerational value change might influence the way that Supreme Court justices decid...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Social science quarterly 2017-03, Vol.98 (1), p.107-119
Main Authors: Wetstein, Matthew E., Ostberg, C. L.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Court decisions
Decision making
Decisions
Environmental policy
Environmentalism
Law
Regression analysis
Studies of Interest on North America
Supreme Court decisions
Values
Citations: Items that this one cites
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Objective. This study examines Ronald Inglehart’s theory of value change in the Supreme Court of Canada. The theory has received little attention in the public law literature, yet its central tenet suggests that intergenerational value change might influence the way that Supreme Court justices decide cases over time. Method. Using a socio-attitudinal model of judicial behavior, the study analyzes all environmental decisions between 1973 and 2010. Case outcomes are coded as either pro-environmental (1) or anti-environmental (0). Logistic regression analysis examines whether Court tenures, case facts, and judge-level variables have a significant impact on predicting a postmaterialist outcome. Results. We find evidence of postmaterialist, pro-environmental value change, with more contemporary justices exhibiting pro-environmental positions, even in the face of rival variables. Conclusion. Our results suggest that intergenerational value change has influenced decision making in Canadian environmental cases over the last 40 years, and indicate the theory may have relevance for explaining other high court change over time in a postmaterialist direction.
ISSN:0038-4941
1540-6237
DOI:10.1111/ssqu.12272