@article {1975001,
	title = {The Trouble with Boycotts: Are Fossil Fuel Divest Campaigns Unlawful Concerted Activity?},
	journal = {American Business Law Journal},
	volume = {57},
	year = {2020},
	month = {2020},
	pages = {5377591},
	abstract = {Organizations like 350.org, Insure Our Future, and DivestInvest are leading campaigns to urge boycott and divestment from fossil fuels as a means to address climate change. Increasingly, they are finding success, from individual consumers to massive pension and sovereign wealth funds. However, as organized group boycotts, divest campaigns may be vulnerable to prosecution under antitrust law. This article explores the likelihood of success in such a case, considering the history of the legal treatment of organized boycotts, the scope and purpose of antitrust law, and the possible application of the First Amendment to the divestment context. The article finds that fossil fuel boycotts straddle a number of contradictory characteristics, making application of existing theories inadequate. In particular, existing precedent protects political boycotts, but not those with primarily economic objectives, and fails to definitively address whether a noncompetitive actor may undertake concerted action under antitrust law. In the context of climate change, where the political is economic, and political goals may seek significant economic changes (such as undermining an entire industry), existing theories may lead to a result that threatens both free expression and the health of the planet. The essential flexibility of the Sherman Act, however, provides room for protection of political activity, even where the ultimate objective is economic in nature.},
	keywords = {Business Law},
	author = {Scott,Inara}
}
@article {1983091,
	title = {Toward a Taxonomy of Sharing: Categorizing, Assessing, and Regulating Distinct Aspects of the Sharing Economy},
	year = {2016},
	month = {2016},
	address = {San Francisco, CA},
	keywords = {Business Law},
	author = {Scott,Inara}
}
@article {1975101,
	title = {Teaching an Old Dog New Tricks: Adapting Public Utility Commissions to Meet Twenty-First Century Climate Challenges},
	journal = {Harvard Environmental Law Review},
	volume = {38},
	year = {2014},
	month = {2014},
	address = {Boston, MA},
	abstract = {Climate change and efforts to address it have put the electric utility system under increasing pressure to adapt and evolve. Key to the success of these efforts will be the support of public utility commissions, the state agencies that oversee retail electric utilities. In an effort to determine how these commissions will make decisions, this article explores the history, enabling legislation, and jurisdiction of commissions. It concludes that the authority and purpose of commissions has been narrowly defined to focus almost exclusively on short-term rate impacts to current utility customers, and as a result, efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, modernize or transform the electric grid, or expand the path for new technologies such as electric vehicles, will not come from commissions, and in fact may be blocked by the same. Accordingly, the article offers options for modernization, ultimately recommending a melding of economic and environmental goals through a long-term planning process that balances cost and risk, yet remains squarely within the jurisdiction and historical purpose of the regulatory commission.},
	keywords = {Business Law},
	author = {Scott,Inara}
}
@article {1983131,
	title = {Teaching an Old Dog New Tricks: Creating a Twenty-First Century Public Utility Commission},
	year = {2013},
	month = {2013},
	address = {Boston},
	keywords = {Business Law},
	author = {Scott,Inara}
}
