According to Richard Lord, an expert in insurance claims who observed Oxfam's mock climate tribunal, insurance companies have the potential to encourage more environmentally friendly behavior. Lord, who has specialized in insurance claims for over two decades, noted that industries are often more proactive in addressing climate change compared to governments. He emphasized that industries are more aware of the issue and have taken more responsible actions, driven in part by pressure from their shareholders. Activists and regulators are exerting pressure on insurance companies, according to Lord, a lawyer at Brick Court Chambers in London. He stated that insurance companies are taking this matter seriously due to the potential risks involved, particularly in light of his recent work settling claims for victims of Hurricane Katrina. Lord stated that insurance companies are actively interested in comprehending the risks associated with climate change and litigation so that they can fully grasp the consequences. For example, if a homeowner has to pay higher insurance premiums for a house located in a flood-prone area, they are more likely to question the rationale behind it. Lord explained that insurance companies gather detailed information to better understand the risks, which can impact people's behavior. He also highlighted that the insurance industry, being larger than oil, gas, or other typically large sectors, could have a significant influence globally. In fact, he emphasized that the economic power of insurers plays a crucial role in a wide range of commercial activities. The commercial litigator, who was observing a tribunal, hesitated to comment on the issue because he was not familiar with Bangladesh laws. He emphasized that he was not an environmental or human rights lawyer and mentioned that litigation was a blunt tool to address climate change. However, he noted that as the problem worsens and awareness of its consequences grows, people will find new ways to tackle climate change. He found it intriguing that atmospheric trust litigation, which is still in its early stages, draws on ancient principles that have been traditionally used to protect natural assets like water. Lord stated that he was not aware of any instances of climate litigation. He noted that many countries include the right to a clean environment in their constitutions either directly or indirectly through human rights. Lord pointed out that while the issues in Bangladesh are emotionally moving, they lack compelling evidence based on scientific research to establish cause and effect. Therefore, he explained that turning a mock tribunal into a real one raises complex issues. He mentioned that the hypothetical defendant, such as the Bangladesh government, could argue that they are already taking sufficient measures to combat climate change, pointing to their low carbon footprint of 200 kilograms per person compared to 8600 kilograms for each British citizen. Conversely, in a legal dispute between nations, the defendant, likely a developed country, could deflect any historical blame by claiming they have developed in a similar way to Bangladesh. He expressed doubt about Bangladesh being able to directly sue a country like the United States. As a result, people have been taking indirect approaches to address climate change, such as blocking permits, filing injunctions, or requesting environmental impact assessments for certain entities, which are also leading to positive changes.