Share
What legal frameworks and practices do we need to protect all life on Earth?
Experts from academia, policy, and the NGO community gathered at Christ’s College, Cambridge, for a roundtable discussion on Nature and Rights. The conversation preceded a public panel which asked: What legal frameworks and practices do we need to protect all life on Earth?
You can view the public panel discussion on the CSaP YouTube channel
Professor Melissa Leach, Director of the Cambridge Conservation Initiative, has written a thought piece based on the panel discussion which you can read here: Exploring Nature and Rights: Personal Reflections from a Mini-Festival of Ideas | Cambridge Conservation Initiative
Over the course of the roundtable event, participants examined moral versus legal frameworks, international versus devolved approaches, and the relationship between Human Rights and the Rights of Nature.
Human Rights and Nature’s Rights
A key theme was whether the recognition of Nature’s Rights might conflict or converge with Human Rights. Participants noted that some cultures and nations treat humans as part of Nature and have even enshrined legal rights for ecosystems—examples raised included legislation in Ecuador and provisions for rivers in New Zealand and India. Elsewhere, however, there are concerns that granting rights to Nature could unintentionally restrict the rights of marginalised communities. In Europe, where the European Court of Human Rights has sometimes been politicised, there is also the possibility that legislating Nature’s Rights would further polarise environmental issues. Many around the table stressed the risk of entrenching a “nature versus people” mentality, instead advocating for a collective ambition of rights for all.
Moral and Legal Frameworks
The use of law as a driver of social and cultural change was a central theme. Participants distinguished between moral frameworks—which can shift organically over time—and legal frameworks, which can sometimes spur or cement these shifts. One view was that legislation, such as laws restricting tobacco use, can lead public opinion, while in other cases, such as legalising homosexuality, the law follows changing social norms. Speaker Professor Emma Lees suggested that although the law can reinforce prevailing views, it is rarely the most powerful tool for transforming deeply held moral perspectives.
Devolved Rights of Nature
Questions also arose about the contemporary moral framework for Nature’s Rights in the UK. Much environmental governance here is devolved to the four nations, raising the question: how do we gauge public views on this topic across different regions? In 2014, a Senedd citizens’ assembly in Wales led to the Well-being of Future Generations Act (2015). Several participants highlighted how citizens’ assemblies can illuminate public attitudes toward both the Rights to Nature and the Rights of Nature. Meanwhile, UK Earth Law Judgments, coedited by speaker Dr Helen Dancer, explores how existing legislation might be reinterpreted under a Nature-focussed legal lens across the devolved nations.
International Rights
Several roundtable participants also represented international NGOs, including ClientEarth, led by speaker Laura Clarke. The work of these NGOs spans multiple jurisdictions and operates within broader frameworks such as the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, agreed upon in 2022 at the Fifteenth Conference of the Parties (COP15) of the Convention on Biological Diversity. Another important milestone is the recent addition of the right to a healthy and clean environment to the UN’s list of universal human rights—an expansion that could shape future legal and policy approaches worldwide.
A Rights-Based Approach
Liberia’s 2018 Land Rights Act (LRA) featured as an example of a rights-based framework emerging in a context where community rights are pivotal. By recognising local communities’ rights to continue owning a Protected Area, the Act fosters a more inclusive approach to environmental stewardship. While challenges remain, many around the table saw hope in the possibility that rights-based legal frameworks could offer more equitable outcomes for all, human and non-human alike.
Power and Rights
Throughout the roundtable, participants stressed that rights-based approaches are inseparable from questions of power. Where power is unequally distributed—whether among communities, corporate actors, or governmental bodies—laws alone may fail to protect those with less influence or fewer resources. Participants emphasised the need for robust enforcement mechanisms and for local communities to have a genuine voice in decision-making processes. Without these safeguards, the Rights of Nature could risk being co-opted by more powerful interests, undermining the very communities and ecosystems such measures aim to protect.
Generations and Rights
Another recurring theme was the importance of viewing environmental protection as a multi-generational responsibility. By highlighting the Well-being of Future Generations Act in Wales, attendees noted how legislation can formalise long-term stewardship in law. Yet the group also acknowledged that political and economic cycles often hinder such efforts. There was broad agreement that truly effective legal frameworks must extend beyond short-term horizons, and be supported by a wholehearted willingness to ensure the rights of current and future generations—human and non-human—to a thriving planet.