16 Jul Recognising Nature’s Rights in Environmental Governance

Why in the News?

The Scottish Association for Marine Science (SAMS), one of the world’s oldest marine research institutions, has appointed the Atlantic Ocean as a trustee of its governing board. This symbolic yet significant move seeks to ensure that institutional decisions consider the long-term interests of marine ecosystems and has reignited the global debate on the Rights of Nature and ecocentric environmental governance.

Background & Evolution

1. From Resource to Rights

For centuries, oceans, rivers, forests and mountains have largely been viewed through an anthropocentric (human-centred) lens, where nature is valued primarily for its utility to humans. Environmental laws focused on regulating exploitation rather than recognising the intrinsic value of ecosystems.

In recent decades, climate change, biodiversity loss and ecosystem degradation have led to a paradigm shift towards an ecocentric approach, recognising nature as an entity with inherent rights deserving legal protection.

2. The Scottish Association for Marine Science (SAMS)

The decision acknowledges that scientific expertise alone cannot guarantee environmentally sustainable governance and that institutional decision-making must also account for the interests of marine ecosystems.

What Does “The Ocean as a Trustee” Mean?

The Atlantic Ocean is not literally participating in board meetings. Instead, human guardians are appointed to represent the interests of the ocean during institutional decision-making.

The concept is similar to:

• Legal guardians representing children.
• Trustees acting on behalf of charitable institutions.
• Court-appointed guardians for vulnerable persons.

Here, designated representatives ensure that every institutional decision is evaluated from the perspective of marine ecosystem health.

Rights of Nature: The Emerging Global Movement

The Rights of Nature doctrine argues that ecosystems possess intrinsic rights rather than merely serving human interests.

These rights include:

• Right to exist.
• Right to regenerate.
• Right to evolve naturally.
• Right to restoration after environmental damage.
• Right to be represented before legal authorities.

This represents a shift from environmental regulation to environmental justice.

Global Examples of Nature Receiving Legal Personhood

These developments indicate the growing acceptance of ecological governance worldwide.

Relevance for India

India possesses:

• Nearly 7,500 km coastline
• 2.37 million sq km Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ)
• Rich mangrove ecosystems
• Coral reefs
• Seagrass meadows
• Blue Economy initiatives

India’s marine resources face multiple threats:

• Marine pollution
• Plastic waste
• Coastal erosion
• Coral bleaching
• Overfishing
• Sea-level rise
• Ocean warming

The concept of ecological representation could strengthen India’s marine governance.

Existing Marine Governance Framework in India

Constitutional Provisions

Article 48A

Directs the State to protect and improve the environment.

Article 51A(g)

Fundamental Duty of every citizen to protect forests, lakes, rivers and wildlife.

Article 21

The Supreme Court has interpreted the Right to Life to include the right to a clean and healthy environment.

Major Laws

• Environment (Protection) Act, 1986
• Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ) Notification
• Biological Diversity Act, 2002
• Wildlife Protection Act, 1972
• Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974

Related Government Initiatives

• Deep Ocean Mission
• Blue Economy Policy
• Sagarmala Programme
• National Coastal Mission
• Integrated Coastal Zone Management (ICZM)
• Marine Protected Areas (MPAs)

Challenges in Recognising Rights of Nature

1. Representation Problem

A major question remains:

Who truly speaks for nature?

Possible stakeholders include:

• Marine scientists
• Indigenous communities
• Fisherfolk
• Environmental lawyers
• Local governments
• Civil society

Balancing these perspectives can be difficult.

2. Conflict with Development

Infrastructure projects such as:

• Ports
• Offshore drilling
• Mining
• Coastal tourism

may face legal challenges if ecosystems possess enforceable rights.

3. Legal Ambiguity

Questions remain regarding:

• Liability
• Enforcement
• Jurisdiction
• Accountability of guardians
• Conflict resolution mechanisms

4. Symbolism vs Practical Impact

Critics argue that granting legal personhood without effective enforcement risks becoming a symbolic exercise rather than delivering meaningful environmental protection.

Way Forward

1. Strengthen ecosystem-based governance in environmental institutions.
2. Incorporate ecological representation into policy-making bodies.
3. Empower coastal communities and traditional fisherfolk in marine governance.
4. Improve scientific monitoring of marine ecosystems.
5. Promote ecosystem restoration alongside sustainable economic development.
6. Integrate Rights of Nature principles into environmental jurisprudence where appropriate.
7. Advance Blue Economy initiatives that balance conservation with livelihoods.

Know the Terms

Anthropocentrism

A philosophy that places humans at the centre of environmental decision-making.

Ecocentrism

An environmental ethic that recognises the intrinsic value of ecosystems, irrespective of their usefulness to humans.

Rights of Nature

A legal doctrine recognising ecosystems as rights-bearing entities entitled to protection and restoration.

Legal Personhood

Recognition by law that an entity can possess legal rights and responsibilities. Besides humans, corporations, trusts and, increasingly, certain natural ecosystems have been granted legal personhood in some jurisdictions.

Blue Economy

The sustainable use of ocean resources for economic growth, improved livelihoods and ecosystem conservation.

UPSC Prelims Practice Question

Q. Consider the following statements regarding the Rights of Nature movement:

1. It recognises ecosystems as entities possessing intrinsic rights.
2. New Zealand has granted legal personhood to the Whanganui River.
3. India’s Supreme Court has permanently recognised the Ganga and Yamuna as legal persons.
4. The concept represents a shift from anthropocentric to ecocentric environmental governance.

Which of the statements given above are correct?

(a) 1, 2 and 4 only
(b) 1 and 3 only
(c) 2, 3 and 4 only
(d) 1, 2, 3 and 4

Answer: (a)

Explanation

• Statement 1: Correct. The Rights of Nature doctrine recognises ecosystems as having intrinsic rights, such as the rights to exist, regenerate and be restored.
• Statement 2: Correct. New Zealand enacted legislation in 2017 recognising the Whanganui River as a legal person represented by appointed guardians.
• Statement 3: Incorrect. The Uttarakhand High Court declared the Ganga and Yamuna legal persons in 2017, but the Supreme Court stayed that order; there is no final nationwide recognition.
• Statement 4: Correct. The movement reflects a transition from a human-centred (anthropocentric) approach to an ecosystem-centred (ecocentric) approach.