The dying days of 2022 saw a historic global agreement reached to try to protect the plants and animals of this world from further demise.
In the last 50 years, the variety of life on Earth has diminished faster than at any time before. Environmental organisation, WWF estimates a 69 percent decline in wildlife populations around the world between 1970 and 2018. The United Nations suggests that one million species face extinction.
At the United Nations conference on biodiversity held in Kunming, China and Montreal, Canada, nations agreed to protect 30 percent of land and sea from degradation by 2030, and further to restore 30 percent of degraded areas, amongst other plans.
The agreement was a significant step forward for environment protection, and enshrined into international law the idea that we should “live well in harmony with Mother Earth”.
“For far too long humanity has paved over, fragmented, over-extracted and destroyed the natural world on which we all depend. Now is our chance to shore up and strengthen the web of life, so it can carry the full weight of generations to come,” said Inger Andersen Under-Secretary-General of the United Nations and Executive Director of the UN Environment Programme
The agreement, with its emphasis on Indigenous knowledge and treatment of Earth as a living thing echoes the rights of nature movement, which has been gathering steam since it was conceived in the 1970s.
Through various legal avenues, this pushes the idea that nature — whether whole forests or single trees — could have rights, in the same way that human rights, or corporate rights exist.
While it seems fanciful, numerous places around the world are actively investigating, or have already implemented at least portions of the concept. The latest is Ireland, where a citizens' assembly is tackling the question of how the country can maintain its wildlife.
The details of ‘rights of nature’ are of course nuanced and cloaked in legal complexity, and at its core are big philosophical questions about humans’ relationship with our planet. But with humanity's woeful track record of living sustainably with other species, it's a movement that ultimately hopes to reset our path to one of “harmony with Mother Earth”.
REALITY CHECK:
Indigenous people represent 5 percent of the world’s people but manage of 80 percent of Earth’s biodiversity.
The current rate of species going extinct is tens to hundreds of times higher the past 10 million years.
321 rights of nature initiatives, plus many other legal ventures have been launched around the world
BIG IDEAS:
Quote attributable to Craig Kauffman, University of Oregon
"Western legal systems are only just beginning to bring a biological understanding of the world to the law."
Quote attributable to Alex Putzer, Sant'Anna School of Advanced studies
"In a city the boundary between what’s artificial and what’s nature becomes blurry, posing the question of which ‘nature’ in the ‘rights of nature’ should be protected."
Quote attributable to Peter Burdon, University of Adelaide
"Rights of nature represent a minimalist alternative and seek to mitigate environmental damage from firmly within the coordinates of the current system."
PERSPECTIVES:
The law of the river Mihnea Tănăsescu, University of Mons, Belgium Granting ‘rights’ to rivers and forests has been embraced by environmentalists. But to understand its effectiveness, we must first look closely at the law.
What does rights of nature mean for development? Craig Kauffman, University of Oregon If a river has rights, does that mean farmers can no longer use the water to grow their crops?
What is the ‘nature’ in the rights of nature? Alex Putzer, Sant’Anna School of Advanced Studies Some experts are proposing that nature has rights, like human rights. But to do that, we first have to define what ‘nature’ really is.
Could we sue Mother Earth for storm damage? Govind Singh, O.P. Jindal Global University The recognition of natural entities as living persons has generated awareness but its contribution to their legal protection remains uncertain.
The need for better protection of Malaysia’s forests Adzidah Yaakob, Universiti Sains Islam Malaysia Learning from past experience, the government moves to fortify existing legislation to prevent exploitation and destruction of rainforests.
Time is now for the next rights of nature phase Erin O’Donnell, University of Melbourne and Alessandro Pelizzon, Southern Cross University Half a century since it was conceived, rights of nature is a movement with momentum. The next test? Making its impact felt the world over.
Giving rights to nature will not stop environmental damage Peter Burdon, University of Adelaide Giving legal rights to rivers and trees is touted as a potential solution to environmental damage. But history suggests its effect will be minor.
Australia’s rights of nature push flows from the Yarra River Katie O’Bryan, Monash University Although it lacks the teeth of legislation overseas, Victoria’s Yarra River (Birrarung) laws provide a foundation for rights of nature to build on in Australia.
Rivers are still people in South Asia despite court showdown Erin O’Donnell and Ishrat Jahan, University of Melbourne Rivers are the lifeblood for millions of Indians and Bangladeshis. But a radical legal idea to save them from pollution is being met with opposition.
Reframing the law to recognise nature's value Tarini Mehta, O.P. Jindal Global University in New Delhi Viewing nature as a commodity has long been the norm but giving it legal rights may force a change of outlook across the world.
