Literature Review

We provide a descriptive comparative analysis of features related to emergence and design among 14 Rights of Nature (RoN) case studies worldwide. For analysis, we develop a schematic roadmap in which we categorise RoN into case studies with public guardianship and ones with appointed guardians (termed Environmental Legal Personhoods (ELPs) with further sub-categories of indirect, direct and living ELPs). Our findings suggest that RoN case studies emerged under similar circumstances where existing governance structures had been unable to protect natural environments from continued economic (urban, agricultural and industrial) activity by multiple economic actors. The strong role of local community and Indigenous Peoples in advocacy for RoN point to a divide between in situ communities and external economic agents, allowing for eco-centric value systems to emerge in juxtaposition to existing governance structures. We find that the design of RoN, however, varies in geographical entity, legal framework, legal status and guardianship. Poorly defined liability of guardians and economic agents have led to the overturning of two case studies, which stands in contrast to well-defined rights and liabilities in other case studies, suggesting that attention to liability may be an important building block for the effectiveness of RoN to protect biodiversity.

This chapter addresses how eco-social work that includes Nature-based intervention, therapy, or healing and is rooted in eco-centric worldviews can play a central role in shifting our current human-centred paradigms towards eco-centric paradigms, where humans live in more reciprocal and respectful relationships with Nature and each other—and where the rights of Nature are recognised. In May 2022, the International Federation of Social Workers adopted a new policy for social workers, ‘The Role of Social Workers in Advancing a New Eco-Social World’, recognising that the interconnectedness of all life in our ecosystem is integral in the guiding ethics of social workers and affirming the rights of Nature. To be part of co-creating truly sustainable ways of living, social work must be rooted in eco-centric cosmologies and worldviews that affirm the interdependence and interconnectedness of all life. We explore what social work can look like from eco-centric perspectives and approaches when the principles of Earth Jurisprudence are applied and placed in dialogue with the new policy. Through a case study of a Nature programme offered to women at Danish shelters for victims of partner violence, based a.o. on Shinrin-yoku, we show the healing and transformative powers of Nature and the possibilities for including Nature-based intervention, therapy, or healing in eco-social work.

The industrial modern fossil fueled societies are founded in, and structured by, a worldview in which we humans have considered us to stand above nature with a boundless right to dominate, control and exploit it. What if we instead acknowledge that human survival is intimately linked to nature’s right to flourish? Recognizing Rights of Nature (RoN) in legislation is a system innovation that has been tried around the world in constitutions (Ecuador, Bolivian and Peru), environmental law (Australia, New Zealand), and ordinances of the USA and Spain as well as the international scene, where it is found in the UN Universal Declaration of the Rights of Mother Earth with unexpectedly good results in dealing with complex environmental issues. However, there is still much research to be done when it comes to how understand RoN, how to justify it morally, and how to implement RoN locally if it will have local to global impact.

This research project utilizes the Narrative Policy Analysis framework to analyze print news media coverage of the Rights of Nature (RoN) movement in the United States. This burgeoning movement draws upon Indigenous principles of animism and interconnectedness to recognize the existence rights and legal personhood of non-human animals, plants, and ecosystems. This project highlights the legal and legislative challenges the RoN movement has faced. Including the complexities of attempting to incorporate Indigenous epistemologies into a colonialist legal system and highlighting the narrative strategies and emerging coalitions present in the U.S.-based movement.

n/a

The transnational movement to recognise the rights of Nature continues to fuel experimentation by a growing number of jurisdictions in legal form, content, powers, and governance arrangements. In this paper, we focus on the mechanisms through which Nature is represented in various ways. There is enormous diversity in representational arrangements, but there is no clarity on precisely who should be representing Nature, or how Nature can be represented in human spaces, or even what the intent of this representation is (or should be). We describe a spectrum of representation that ranges from speaking about, to speaking for, to speaking with the ... more

Several sectors of Irish society have put forward rights of nature as a way to further enhance environmental protection in the country and help curb environmental degradation. In light of rights of nature developments in other jurisdictions, this piece presents rights of nature in their social, economic, and legal context, and summarises their reception by legal scholars. This portrayal will provide a basis for analysing the two main Irish rights of nature legal propositions and assess, albeit in preliminary fashion, whether these initiatives – if enacted – would further enhance environmental protection in Ireland.

Rights and legal personhood have been granted to natural entities, like rivers, mountains, forests, or the nature as a whole, in recent years. Various legal and conceptual strategies underlie this movement for the rights of nature. We explore some main legal-theoretical divides inside it. First, legal personality can be granted to nature on essentially pragmatic grounds, for purposes sometimes distinct from environmental protection. This is in contrast with metaphysical implications most often associated with those rights. Can natural objects be subjects of rights and in what sense? Are they similar or in opposition to human rights? Are rights of nature reinstating a form of natural law? We also discuss and refute the hypothesis that rights of nature are already protected through particular dispositions and interpretations of extant non-ecocentric legal frameworks. We conclude that a paradigmatic change in the relation between law and nature is inevitable due to current environmental pressures.

This article argues that the Rights of Nature (RoN) framework is compatible with various ideological outlooks and political options. As a result, those initiatives may translate into extremely diverse institutional implementations with contrasted outcomes in terms of power distribution. The institutional design of RoN has deep political implications for various social groups who hold conflicting claims over certain territories. Hence, rather than transforming human-nature relations, RoN primarily transform the power relations between human communities. I delve into three conceptual frameworks that could shape the recognition of RoN and explore their respective distributive implications: green colonialism, environmental justice, and the focus on Indigeneity. Through this critical engagement, I wish to warn against the illusion of a post-political ecology where an ecocentric legal declaration would deliver human-nature harmony without deep political battles, social tensions, and economic confrontations. RoN as an abstract notion does not offer a ready-made toolkit to dismantle the legal architecture of fossil capitalism; nor does it provide clear guidance on the distribution of costs and benefits of the green transition.

The transnational movement to recognise the rights of Nature continues to fuel experimentation by a growing number of jurisdictions in legal form, content, powers, and governance arrangements. In this paper, we focus on the mechanisms through which Nature is represented in various ways. There is enormous diversity in representational arrangements, but there is no clarity on precisely who should be representing Nature, or how Nature can be represented in human spaces, or even what the intent of this representation is (or should be). We describe a spectrum of representation that ranges from speaking about, to speaking for, to speaking with the natural entity. We develop a model of relational representation that shows the power of speaking with Nature to not only develop relations between the representatives and the natural entity, but also to enable a broader dialogue of knowledges with a wider pool of participants. By examining four case studies (the Mar Menor in Spain, the Rio Atrato in Colombia, the Birrarung/Yarra River in Australia and Te Awa Tupua/Whanganui River in Aotearoa New Zealand), we show how these diverse representational models are moving towards the relational end of the spectrum, and identify the challenges and opportunities of relational representation of Nature.

The EU legal order has produced some of the most stringent protection schemes for the environment and human health of the world. However, as of today, the rights of ecosystems are not explicitly recognized in the EU Treaties, and neither do progressive pieces of legislation, such as the EU Habitats Directive and the Water Framework Directive, explicitly grant legal rights to nature. In light of the emergence of more rights-based approaches to environmental and nature protection elsewhere in the world and, more recently, also in Spain, the question arises as to how the EU legal order would interact with these novel templates. This chapter outlines the possible alignment between the rights of nature and the existing environmental law in the EU, as well as the possible obstacles and legal hurdles that exist in this regard. It puts forward the thesis that it is possible that certain ecosystems and habitats that are protected by the EU Habitats Directive have indirectly been granted basic legal rights, such as the right to exist and to be restored when damaged. These rights can be enforced through court action by environmental organizations, which can act as their custodian.

The evolution of mankind, driven by developments in society, science, and technology, has had a significant impact on Mother Earth or nature, resulting in serious effects on the environment, ecosystems, and biodiversity. This research critically analyses illicit acts that violate the rights of nature and assesses their environmental impact. To achieve this, we employed an approach that incorporates inductive, dogmatic, historical-logical, and descriptive legal methods through a non-experimental design. The research results show a concerning lack of respect for the rights of nature in Ecuador. Furthermore, the inadequate control of illegal acts, including the endorsement of deforestation and the illegal and irresponsible extraction of natural resources, are causing a substantial negative impact on the environment, ecosystems, flora, and fauna.