Literature Review

Rights of Nature, the idea of extending legal personhood to nature, is today’s most prominent alternative to mainstream environmental governance. Proponents describe Rights of Nature as a grassroots movement of diverse actors opposing commodification of life and anthropocentric dualism of western thought. In Rights of Nature, indigenous cosmologies validate holistic models of life to overcome dualities of nature and humans. We argue this move enacts a paradoxical dichotomy between the West and the rest and, in so doing, treats rights as existing outside western history. In this article, we push against the image of Rights of Nature as a global consensus converging on the inevitability of rights. Applying decolonial, black feminist perspectives on historical mobilizations of rights, we ask how rights for nature becomes rights as natural. We trace individuals, institutions, and ideas associated with Rights of Nature, conceptualized as a Transnational Policy Network. We find tight linkages among a small number of actors, mostly from the global North, who draw on western holism and jurisprudence to present nature’s rights as an indigenous and natural alternative to western development. Rights of Nature is not just connected to the same ideas of nature and law it rejects, but through these connections Rights of Nature universalizes colonial modes of existence as natural.

Strong scientific evidence affirms that climate change is now a public health emergency. Increasingly, climate litigation brought against governments and corporations utilizes international human rights, environmental and climate laws and policies to seek accountability for climate-destructive and health-harming actions. The health impacts of climate change make litigation an important means of pursuing justice and strategically challenging legal systems. Yet there is scant documentation in the literature of the role that public health has played in climate litigation and the legal weight public health narratives are given in such contexts. Therefore, we assessed to what extent courts of law have used public health harm in legal adjudication and sought to provide practical recommendations to address barriers to positioning legal arguments in public health-centric frames.

Tropical forests in South America play a key role in the provision of ecosystem services such as carbon sinks, biodiversity conservation, and global climate regulation. In previous decades, Bolivian forests have mainly been deforested by the expansion of agricultural frontier development, driven by the growing demands for beef and other productions. In the mid-2000s the Movimiento al Socialismo (MAS) party rose to power in Bolivia with the promise of promoting an alternative development model that would respect the environment. The party passed the world’s first laws granting rights to the environment, which they termed Mother Earth (Law No. 300 of 2012), and proposed an innovative framework that was expected to develop radical new conservation policies. The MAS conservationist discourse, policies, and productive practices, however, have since been in permanent tension. The government continues to guarantee food production through neo-extractivist methods by promoting the notion to expand agriculture from 3 to 13 million ha, risking the tropical forests and their ecosystem services. These actions raise major environmental and social concerns, as the potential impacts of such interventions are still unknown. The objective of this study is to explore an innovative land use modeling approach to simulate how the growing demand for land could affect future deforestation trends in Bolivia. We use the LuccME framework to create a spatially-explicit land cover change model and run it under three different deforestation scenarios, spanning from the present–2050. In the Sustainability scenario, deforestation reaches 17,703,786 ha, notably in previously deforested or degraded areas, while leaving forest extensions intact. In the Middle of the road scenario, deforestation and degradation move toward new or paved roads spreading across 25,698,327 ha in 2050, while intact forests are located in Protected Areas (PAs). In the Fragmentation scenario, deforestation expands to almost all Bolivian lowlands reaching 37,944,434 ha and leaves small forest patches in a few PAs. These deforestation scenarios are not meant to predict the future but to show how current and future decisions carried out by the neo-extractivist practices of MAS government could affect deforestation and carbon emission trends. In this perspective, recognizing land use systems as open and dynamic systems is a central challenge in designing efficient land use policies and managing a transition towards sustainable land use.

This chapter recommends extending the ecological jurisprudence movement to outer space. The US Space Act of 2015 permits national companies to claim property in material extracted from celestial bodies, perpetuating flawed ideas of exclusive ownership, ignoring treaty commitments and expanding an ethic of human dominance. This belies needed ecological virtues of gratitude, humility and benevolence. A space ethic must value the non-living and living. The space domain requires a “stranger ethic” because we lack the attachments that foster place-based ethics on Earth. A space ethic should connect the universe with personal experience as some Indigenous stories depict the stars as kin. A space ethic can foster an improved ethic on Earth.

Earth jurisprudence represents an alternative approach to the law based on the belief that nature has rights. In this view, a river has the right to flow, species have the right to continue to exist in the wild, and ecosystems have the right to adapt and evolve over time. Proponents of Earth jurisprudence argue that, by treating nature as exploitable resources, contemporary legal systems actively promote environmental harms. Recognising rights of nature, they argue, will transform core values and inspire social changes that promote economic development which respects nature’s limits. Since 2006, rights of nature have been recognised by some sub-federal public bodies in the United States and by the governments of Ecuador and Bolivia. This paper sets out to answer two questions. First, what explains the legal recognition of rights of nature in Ecuador and Bolivia? Second, what factors impede a wider adoption and implementation of Earth jurisprudence? Amongst the constraints, it will be argued, is that Ecuador and Bolivia continue to pursue an extractivist economic development model, with assertions of national sovereignty over natural resources tending to prevail over Earth jurisprudence and environmental conservation.

This article introduces the concept of Rights of Nature and explores its potential to help address climate change. First, it provides a brief summary of emerging climate change threats. Second, it highlights the failure of international law to adequately address climate change. Third, the article argues that the Rights of Nature movement can serve as a useful tool to address climate change, such as by giving nature a voice at climate change negotiations. Finally, the article highlights island nations as possible flag-bearers for one subset of the Rights of Nature movement: nature’s fundamental right to a stable climate system (or “right to a stable climate” for short).

Bolivia became one of the front figures for environmental rights when they in 2012 implemented the Mother Earth law. The ideas were a more empowered indigenous community and development happening with respect for the rights of nature. There has however since then been an increase in the deforestation in Bolivia, culminating in the 2019 forest fires. To get a deeper understanding of why this is happening, and what the implications of it has been for the indigenous communities living in the areas, this project discusses the role of deforestation in the Bolivian development model and the empowerment process and challenges of the indigenous communities. This will be done from the perspectives of scale and power, which are central concepts to both Political Ecology and Empowerment Theory. Political Ecology and Empowerment theory both claim that any research of environmental degradation at a local scale should always be analyzed in the national and global context in order to gain an in-depth understanding of the power relations. Based on this framework, this thesis has discussed What has been the role of deforestation in the Bolivian development model – and what has been the implications of this on indigenous communities and movements? Deforestation has been found to play a major role in the Bolivian development model, but mostly due to a high level of dependency of exports, which lays the foundation for funding social reforms and initiatives. This, however, breaks with the Buen Vivir model, which was implemented as a development strategy based on the indigenous epistemology of Pachamama; the respect for mother earth. Deforestation has been found to have quite severe implications for those indigenous communities that live in the area; the threat of forced migration, forest fires and the interest from transnational corporations have been the most prominent findings. In this clash between policies and promises, there has however also been found to be a strong indigenous resistance, which has manifested itself in different ways; in the communities that have acquired autonomy over their territories, some communities have managed to decrease deforestation rates through careful forest management strategies. Other communities have tried to get ahead of state-managed extractive strategies by making agreements with the transnational companies interested in their lands. Common for them is the empowerment through collective power, which has clearly shown that many of these communities partake in at least a process of empowerment. This has led to the conclusion that deforestation in Bolivia is increasing due to a high degree of market dependency, giving it a central role in the social reforms planned in the 2016-2020 development model. The increased deforestation does bring a set of challenges to the indigenous communities, however, there has been a strong collective in the face of these challenges, from where some empowerment processes have started.

This chapter focuses on environmental grief: the grief reaction stemming from the environmental loss of ecosystems caused by natural or human-made events. Specific focus is given to the decline of one ecosystem, the Southern Resident Orcas in the Salish Sea, and how people are coping with their decline. Themes emerging from this particular form of grief include anger, frustration, depression, sadness, hopelessness, and helplessness—all consistent with reactions of environmental grief. For many, naming their reactions validated the feelings they had experienced for some time. Tips are provided for social scientists to help support first responders and others who are reacting to environmental grief whether counseling lay people or scientific professionals. Action tips are offered for those who want to use this form of grief to motivate them to change their lifestyles, policies, and/or laws such as getting legal rights of nature for the Southern Resident Orcas. The information within this chapter does not only apply to the decline of the Southern Resident Orcas, but to all ecosystems as we continue to deny climate change and the destruction of our planet.

Thomas Berry’s powerful appeal for a mutually enhancing humanEarth relationship faces many challenges due to the ecological crisis that is co-identified with dominant growth-insistent economic, political, and legal systems across the world. The domains of environmental history, ecological restoration, and eco-cultural restoration, as well as studies by Elinor Ostrom and others of sustainable use of common pool resources, provide insights on the necessary conditions for a mutually enhancing human-Earth relationship. A theme common to these domains is the need for intimate knowledge of and connection to place that requires a long-standing commitment of people to the ecosystems that sustain them. Remote private ownership—often by large and politically powerful multinational corporations financed by investors seeking the highest possible returns and lacking knowledge or interest in the places and people they harm—is deeply engrained in the global economic system. The historical roots of remote ownership and control go back to territorial extensification associated with the sharp rise of colonialism and long-distance trade in the early modern era. Yet remote owners’ and investors’ detachment from place poses an enormous challenge in the quest for a mutually enhancing human-Earth relationship. This Essay presents an analysis of how contemporary environmental law undergirds the remote ownership problem and of how limits-insistent ecological law could provide solutions.

A healthy environment is not only key to the achievement of human rights such as the most fundamental of all, the right to life, but also increasingly recognised as a human right in itself. This healthy environment, in fact the entire earth ecosystem, is threatened by the increasing depletion of resources, biodiversity loss and climate change. Dangerous industrial activity is responsible for a large proportion of this - but the corporations and individuals causing wide-spread damage and destruction often remain unpunished. For over 40 years, different formulations of an international environmental crime, called 'ecocide', have been discussed to halt this destruction through criminal liability of decision-makers. This article presents the proposed crime of ecocide, explores its history, and links it with recent developments in law recognising the human right to a healthy environment, but also the rights of nature, future generations, and indigenous peoples. It concludes that the law of ecocide prevention as well as a supranational court to enforce it are necessary to ensure these rights.

Book Summary: Provides a summary of all major environmental theories, based on case studies from all over the world Demonstrates the link between social theories and environmental policies and advocates Argues that an integrated approach to social and ecological justice is key to successful environmental management and provides tools to improve current conservation practices

This paper discusses the question: How does one lead a good life in the law? and the teaching of Richard Brooks, Professor Emeritus at Vermont Law School.