The judgment in State of the Netherlands v. Urgenda Foundation marks one of the first successful challenges to climate change policy based on a human rights treaty. In this case, the Dutch Supreme Court upheld the lower court's opinion that the Netherlands has a positive obligation under the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) to take reasonable and suitable measures for the prevention of climate change. Although the Supreme Court recognized that climate change is a consequence of collective human activities that cannot be solved by one state on its own, it held that the Netherlands is individually responsible for failing to do its part to counter the danger of climate change, which, as the Court affirmed, inhibits enjoyment of ECHR rights. In reaching that conclusion, the Supreme Court determined the exact level of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions reduction that the Netherlands is required to meet to comply with its ECHR obligation, specifically, a 25 percent reduction compared to its 1990 level by the end of 2020.

中文翻译：

---

荷兰国诉 Urgenda 基金会

中的判决荷兰国诉 Urgenda 基金会标志着以人权条约为基础的气候变化政策的首批成功挑战之一。在本案中，荷兰最高法院维持了下级法院的意见，即荷兰有根据《欧洲人权公约》（ECHR）采取合理和适当措施预防气候变化的积极义务。尽管最高法院承认气候变化是集体人类活动的结果，一个国家无法单独解决，但它认为荷兰应对未能尽其所能应对气候变化的危险负有个人责任，正如法院确认的那样，禁止享有 ECHR 权利。在得出这个结论时，