Literature Review

Against the backdrop of failing environmental governance, rights of nature (RoN) are lauded as the paradigm shift needed to transform law's approach to nature. RoN have been increasingly proclaimed at the domestic level but remain mostly absent from international law. As examined in this article, this is notably as a result of some profound incompatibilities between international law and RoN, including the fact that most international treaties approach nature as a resource to be owned, exploited or protected for the sake of humans. However, despite this dominant approach to nature, some areas of international law, notably under the leadership of Indigenous peoples, are starting to acknowledge a more relational approach to nature, putting forward concepts of care, kinship, and representation of nature in international law. Building on these developments, this article offers a reflection on potential synergies between RoN and international law, specifically by changing the latter's approach to nature. It argues that some of the RoN concepts concerning duty of care, institutional representation of nature's voice, and ecocentrism could serve as a platform to reinterpret some of the anthropocentric principles of international law, creating some potential synergies between RoN and international law.

In the 21st century, we are struggling with environmental pollution around the world. The global warming phase has now been changed to global boiling. The seasonal cycle has been disturbed in India and around the globe. Pollution in the environment raises the issue of pollution control. Through air pollution control, effluent treatment, solid-waste management, hazardous-waste management, and recycling, great efforts are made to limit the release of toxic substances into the environment. Unfortunately, attempts to control pollution are frequently overwhelmed by the magnitude of the problem, particularly in less-developed nations. In many large cities, particulates and gases from transportation, heating, and manufacturing accumulate and persist, causing noxious levels of air pollution. Despite the worldwide attention given to the problem, the enduring consequences of pollution continue to be experienced in the long term. The atmosphere is progressively experiencing heightened levels of pollution as a result of human activities. People are very anxious about pollution and many researchers, environmentalists, and policymakers are exploring the means to protect the environment. Along similar lines, this paper tries to analyze two concepts: rights to nature and rights of nature concerning environment protection. This paper discusses the evolution and application of both phenomena and focuses on the rights of nature in India. It also emphasizes that the 'rights of nature' phenomena can be a breakthrough in environmental protection measures. This can be a major factor in mitigating environmental pollution in which other principles like sustainable development, polluter pays principle, and carbon credit failed because it advocates for the right to life of nature and emphasize on the protection of the ecosystem.

The starting point of this research is the assumption that the rate of biodiversity loss, together with climate change, is looming on the planet. Human-induced changes to ecosystems and the extinction of species have been more rapid in the past 50 years than at any time in human history. Several scientific studies show that humanity has already exceeded some of the planetary boundaries, putting itself in danger.

The following project falls within the Rights of Nature movement as a response to the climatic crisis. It is situated in the Alps. From the moment Hannibal managed to lead his Carthagnian army, including their elephants, through the Alps until the construction of modernist glacial skiing resorts and monumental hydroelectric power plants, the Alps have been seen as an object to be overcome and exploited. This resulted in extensive infrastructural projects throughout the whole territory and at all elevations. In order to restore the agency of this living entity, the project repositions the Alps as an active subject with their own right. Moving through three phases – listening to - speaking with - negotiating on behalf of the Alps – results in the foundation for the Parliament of the Alps, composed of a group of people which will act as guardians of the Alps, and the illustration of their most urgent project.

Can the approach based on environment-related Human Rights be reconciled with the approach based on the Rights of Nature ? In this article, Phillipe Cullet studies the synergies between these methods and how they actually reinforce one another. In examining how these approaches are in reality complementary, the author highlights the necessity of framing a new category of rights that would bring them together : eco-human rights.

This guide is one in an evolving series of guides intended to provide a general introduction to RON laws in plain language. They are intended for anyone curious about the subject, from ordinary citizens to community organizers, business people, scientists, politicians, government officials and Indigenous leaders.

Ecological law aims to give coherence to law that align with ecological economics. This session will provide insights on emerging themes and recent developments in ecological law in 2023. Panelists are engaged with research linked to the Leadership for the Ecozoic (L4E) initiative (l4ecozoic.org) and the Ecological Law and Governance Association (ELGA)(elgaworld.org). They will discuss themes such as rights of nature, legal aspects of “territories of life” and placebased governance, ecological law case studies, water governance, climate governance and more, and will provide updates on developments in ecological approaches to law. The session will provide ample time for participant engagement.

My main findings revolve around the impact of granting legal personhood to El Río Monjas - a polluted river - on the residents of La Esperanza in Quito, Ecuador. Existing research in the rights of nature discourse has primarily centered around marginalized groups' resistance for nature's rights, with limited exploration of the consequences and implications of realizing these rights for daily life. This study fills this gap by examining how the realization of these rights shapes the lives of La Esperanza's residents. The relationship between the residents, the river, and the municipality has undergone significant changes. Processes of truth-production and problematization (Foucault 1980; Li 2007) have turned the river into a legal political tool, shaping the perception of the river's contamination, creating misconceptions about the residents. Different stakeholders exploit the river for their own purposes, leaving those without resources voiceless. For the residents, El Río Monjas its vibrant materiality (Bennett 2010) has changed from a source of life into a monster, a ruinous vibrancy (Wilhelm-Solomon 2017). The river symbolizing ruination (Stoler 2008) caused by the government's lack of support. The art of unnoticing (Lou 2022) and salvage rhythms allow the residents to survive amidst the ruins (Tsing 2010) of La Esperanza.

This guide is one in an evolving series of guides intended to provide a general introduction to RON laws in plain language. They are intended for anyone curious about the subject, from ordinary citizens to community organizers, business people, scientists, politicians, government officials and Indigenous leaders.

By critically exploring variations and commonalities among these definitions and conceptualizations, this protocol provides valuable insights for research and policymakers in designing and implementing effective rights-based approaches. This includes providing grounds to understand when the application of rights approaches is pursuing (or not) the same or similar goals (e.g. improved quality of life and environment).The methodological plan for this review that includes details about the review questions, scope and method for searching, screening, coding and synthesis is available in the PROCEED (an open access registry of titles and protocols for prospective evidence syntheses in the environmental sector). The protocol can be accessed here .

This work seeks to highlight two theoretical-political and cultural constructions, human rights and nature’s rights, in the face of the challenges and contradictions of modernity based on anthropocentrism and an instrumental economic rationality. Considering them as projects of society, we sought to rescue their characterizing elements, their tensions and their emancipatory potential in the face of social, cultural and socio-environmental contradictions arising from the hegemonic model of development. The authors’ hypothesis is that these two projects can be worked on in an integrated manner, seeking to aggregate and articulate their emancipatory potential, in view of a society based on the interrelationship between human rights and nature’s rights. The methodology used was bibliographical research, linked to the empirical observation of the dialectical process of social praxis around human and nature’s rights. In view of the analyses and reflections developed, it was concluded that the hypothesis was confirmed, with the affirmation of the human rights and nature project, with its guiding potential in the face of the contemporary challenges of realizing human and nature’s rights.

This paper considers how the legal articulation of “rights of nature” (RoN) advances social and environmental justice goals in Canada. Focusing on the St. Lawrence River (STL) watershed as a case study, it explores why politicians and environmental not-for-profit groups (ENGOs) have pursued a RoN legislation strategy in this case, and what they hope to achieve. The story that emerged is that the RoN movement is evidence of a hoped-for paradigm shift that is critical for the world and that is to some extent already occurring. This paradigm shift is often described as one towards ecocentrism or towards a more Indigenous-centred view. Alternately, the concept of “kincentrism” is another way of understanding the shift that the RoN movement is encouraging. Kincentrism can be seen as a reorientation for North American settler colonial society, towards greater respect for relationality between, and common ancestry of, human and non-human life. This way of understanding kinship is central to many Indigenous legal systems and worldviews. The research demonstrated that many of those actively involved in the RoN movement are planting the seeds of a shift towards (or perhaps back to) a more relational way of understanding the world and its non-human elements. This supports the suggestion that nature rights can be considered a “collective” form of right that is itself more relational than more traditional western rights concepts. While there is optimism amongst many advocates that a RoN-related paradigm shift could have profound socioecological impacts, there are numerous hurdles. First, if the RoN movement in Canada is to support or compliment Indigenous rights, it must be grounded in Indigenous laws rather than simply be “inspired” by them. To accomplish this, RoN initiatives should be led or co-led by Indigenous peoples and include grassroots Indigenous voices. Second, “anthropocentrism” as well as human failures to protect the environment are often cited as key causes of the problems RoN laws aim to address. In employing this framing, advocates and legal drafters must neither erase the fact of historical and ongoing Indigenous stewardship, nor ignore the role of other socio-economic and political forces contributing to environmental degradation such as (racial) capitalism and the ongoing effects of colonialism. Finally, a related concern is that the movement must not distract from or undermine Indigenous self-determination efforts. While the initial two bills did not advance past first reading, other RoN movement goals such as public education may be advancing. As well, the increased public involvement of Indigenous leaders in STL rights recognition efforts over the past year is a positive sign. It may indicate that the RoN movement in Canada represents and supports progress towards greater respect for, recognition of and prioritization of Indigenous knowledges, laws, and lifeways.