The emergent trend of granting legal personhood to natural entities – environmental personhood – is a promising approach to nature's conservation. This inquiry explores its philosophical foundations and prerequisites for successful implementation. It argues that, along with a strong legal framework, its efficacy largely depends on the transition from anthropocentric to ecocentric values and on the appearance of a new ecological identity or eco-self. Critical for implementing the rights of nature are the ecocentric shift in culture and the consequent abandoning the “skin-encapsulated ego” in favor of the ecological self. This shift is what environmentalists strive for but couldn't achieve until now. To fill this gap, attention is given to one among the several traditions which can practically guide the identity transformation, namely Tantra yoga with its embeddedness in the natural world. It explains Tantra yoga's psycho-somatic methodology as a promising eco-spiritual practice to deal with current ecological challenges and to restore our planet's health by evoking biophilia.
TopEnvironmental Personhood In Legal Terms
The essence of Environmental Personhood is the attribution of legal rights to natural entities, an idea first proposed by Christopher Stone in his 1972 article, “Should Trees Have Standing—Toward Legal Rights for Natural Objects.” Stone argued that it is necessary to grant legal personhood to natural entities, in a way which is similar to the way in which legal rights
have been extended, in the course of history, to women, children, minorities, or corporate entities.
There is a growing trend of granting legal personhood to natural entities, i.e., environmental personhood. Over the decades, Stone’s idea has brought about a revolution in legal thinking, thus foregrounding the legal rights of nature. It was implemented for the first time in 2008 by Ecuador when the fundamental rights of the natural ecosystem were introduced into the constitution. Thus, Article 10, Section 2 of the Constitution states: “Nature shall possess the rights recognized for it by the Constitution.” Furthermore, within Chapter 7 (Articles 71–74) of the Constitution of Ecuador, the rights encompass the entitlement to comprehensive reverence for its existence, as well as for the preservation and rejuvenation of its life cycles, structure, functions, and evolutionary mechanisms.
Two years later, in 2010, a similar recognition of nature's rights was established in Bolivia through the “Law of the Rights of Mother Earth”. This legislation establishes a “Defensoría de la Madre Tierra,” (i.e. “Protection of Mother Earth”) analogous to the institution of a human rights ombudsman, “Defensoría del Pueblo” (Łaszewska-Hellriegel, 2022).
The vision behind these constitutional changes – which environmentalists passionately embrace – is that natural entities and ecosystems should not be seen as mere property but as entities with their own rights, e.g., the right to exist and flourish. However, critics have raised concerns about its practical implementation, which is common for new legal developments.
The main point of contention and perhaps the weakest aspect of the concept of environmental personhood lies in the need to appoint a representative—a person or an organization—to act on behalf of the environmental person. The quality of this representation is crucial to ensure the efficacy of environmental personhood. For instance, how can one ensure that the Bolivian nature’s rights ombudsman, “Defensoría de la Madre Tierra,” will function properly? In other words, what will guarantee that the new legal rights will receive sufficient force and effect? According to O’Donnell and Talbot-Jones study of the legal rights of rivers (2018), the crucial factor for the success of environmental personhood is giving it sufficient force and effect.
Achieving sufficient force and effect for nature’s legal rights requires a broader change in the mindset towards natural entities, envisioning them not as property but as subjects of legal rights. For this change, the crucial factor is the social context, including transparency in implementation and governance, freedom from corruption, a strong legal framework, and an ecological shift in public mindset.