Environment
Legal personhood for nature
The legal recognition of natural entities — rivers, ecosystems, nature as a whole — as rights-holders able to be represented in court through appointed guardians.
Definition
Legal personhood for nature confers on a natural entity the status of a legal person, giving it rights that courts must enforce and enabling representatives to act on its behalf. Landmark examples include Ecuador's 2008 constitution recognising the rights of Pachamama (nature), Bolivia's 2011 Law of the Rights of Mother Earth, and New Zealand's 2017 Te Awa Tupua Act granting the Whanganui River legal personhood with Crown- and iwi-appointed guardians.
References
Definition, Stone origin, Ecuador 2008, Bolivia 2011, Whanganui 2017
Model diversity, guardianship, institutional and enforcement requirements
Overview
What it means
The idea, traced to Christopher Stone's 1972 essay Should Trees Have Standing? , solves a standing problem: nature itself, as a rights-holder, can be defended in court rather than relying on plaintiffs to show personal injury.
Models differ — Ecuador grants nature broad substantive rights (including, per its Constitutional Court, a river's right to flow), while the Whanganui model emphasises representation and reflects the river's relationship with Māori.
The approach draws on indigenous worldviews in which nature is a subject, not property; implementation success depends on funded institutions and enforcement, which have often lagged the legal texts.
How it is used
Rights-of-nature provisions appear in constitutions, statutes, court rulings (e. g. Colombia's Atrato River) and local ordinances, and inform litigation, treaty settlements and corporate-environmental debates.
Why it matters
It is the leading legal innovation attempting to shift environmental law from regulating use of nature to recognising nature's own interests.
Review
Public comments appear only after editor acceptance. Draft comments stay in the review queue.
Reviewers choose the definition or an overview paragraph, leave a comment or replacement, and attach evidence or a source link.
Editors compare reviewer cards side by side. AI may help find agreement, conflicts, unsupported claims and possible source issues.
Only an editor-accepted synthesis changes the public page. Reviewer identities are shown only with consent and an editorial decision to attribute them.
Submitted reviews stay private until an editor decides whether to accept and attribute them.
Contribute to this entry
Help improve this definition
Your contribution is private while it is checked. Nothing changes on this page unless an editor accepts it.
Loading verified endorsements… Endorsements are not votes and never determine publication.
Endorse this definition
Endorse the exact version shown here. This is not a vote, and publication remains an editorial decision.
Review board
Comment on a specific line. Each reviewer stays separate until an editor accepts a merged draft.
Each person comments on the definition or overview in their own draft card, with role, evidence and suggested wording kept together.
AI can compare comments against the current text, flag conflicting claims, surface missing evidence and identify where reviewers agree.
An editor merges compatible suggestions into a draft change, checks sources, records disagreements and decides what can be published.