Should Nature Have Rights?

Imagine if rivers, forests, and mountains had rights that could protect them just like human beings… This is the idea behind Rights for Nature, a movement that challenges how we’ve traditionally seen nature as something to use and exploit. Instead, it offers a radical shift, recognizing nature’s intrinsic value and granting it legal personhood.

Nature has no voice or legal standing in decision making forums such as governments, NGOs, and businesses and there is no direct accountability for those who seek to destroy it. But change is happening and Ecocide, meaning mass damage or destruction of the environment, is now a crime in national law in several countries and international law isn’t far behind.

Indigenous communities have long viewed humans and nature as part of an extended family which gives them a deep respect for the environment and they are often the most reliable custodians of the planet. The first significant challenge to the West’s human-centred attitudes to nature came in the early 1970s. American law Professor Christopher Stone published a paper titled ‘Should Trees Have Standing?’, asking why non sentient bodies like corporations, ships and nation states are given legal protection, but the natural world isn’t. This kick-started a debate about rights.

Nature writer Robert McFarlane in his recent book ‘Is a River Alive?’ points to the World Charter for Nature back in 1982 which the UK signed. It stated ‘Mankind is a part of nature and life depends on the uninterrupted functioning of natural systems’

In 2008, Ecuador became the first country to embed Rights for Nature into its constitution, and Bolivia followed in 2010, passing the ‘Law of Mother Earth’, which granted rights to ecosystems like rivers and forests.

On March 20th, 2017, the New Zealand government passed legislation recognizing the Whanganui River as holding rights equivalent to a person. The river, or those acting for it, will now be able to sue for its own protection under the law. The same day, a court in India ordered that the Ganges and its main tributary, the Yamuna, be accorded the status of living human entities. 

If our river Tas had similar rights, it would mean local communities could act as guardians, ensuring the river’s health and legally challenge anything that threatened it. In Forncett Justin Farthing and friends have given the Tas the right to flow – it can flood where it wants on the land they manage. Further downstream at Saxlingham Thorpe, supporter Ross Jolliffe has found a rare population of native crayfish and is endeavouring to find out whether water quality is good enough to sustain it. He’s seen a visible deterioration in the Tas water over the past few years (the water is noticeably grey).

The Environment Agency (EA) currently sample the Tas water quality at three locations: Old Hall Bridge, Forncett St Mary, and Shotesham Bridge. The EA say ‘Our monitoring data shows that the river only reaches moderate ecological status overall’ and they’ve recently launched a local project to engage ‘willing’ landowners with river restoration actions.

Campaigners for many rivers, including the Wensum, have drawn up a Right of Rivers Charter. Paul Powesland, from UK based Lawyers for Nature,is helping with the river Thames and says this is a good start. ‘It’s not a legal document but changes perspective, because you believe a river should have rights and do what you can to uphold those rights.’

Lawyers can give free advice through UK charity The Environmental Law Foundation. Client Earth are an international body which sued the EU for the right to go to court to protect the environment, and after 10 years finally won the case

This movement isn’t just about legalities—it’s a shift in mindset. By recognizing nature has rights, we move toward a more holistic view, where we are not separate from the environment, but part of it.

This mindset is gradually gaining traction. In March this year the River Ouse, was the first in England to have its legal rights, including to be free from pollution and to flow naturally, recognised by a local authority. And there are rights campaigns for other UK rivers including the Clyde, the Thames, the Don, the Derwent and the Rye.

In a world facing climate change, biodiversity loss, and environmental destruction, granting nature legal rights is a path toward healing. It’s a reminder that nature isn’t just here for us to take, it’s here for us to protect. And when we start protecting nature as a living entity, we are ultimately protecting ourselves.

References:

Environmental Law Foundation

Guardian article 1st Jan 2024 'Could 2024 be the year nature rights enter the political mainstream?'

Also see our 2021 article on the River Tas in ‘Published articles’ on our website. 

 

July 2025