Ecological Personhood (debate)

[The Hammer]

Granting legal ‘personhood’ to nature is a growing movement – can it stem biodiversity loss?

The rights-of-nature movement emerged as a response to economic pressures on ecosystems. But the success of projects depends on how well legal liability is defined.

theconversation.com

What are your thoughts on granting Personhood to ecological sites: such as waterfalls, mountains/ranges, cave systems, or even entire ecological systems?


"Many Indigenous peoples have long emphasised the intrinsic value of nature. In 1972, the late University of Southern California law professor Christopher Stone proposed what then seemed like a whimsical idea: to vest legal rights in natural objects to allow a shift from an anthropocentric to an intrinsic worldview."


I think in an age where rapid ecological exploitation and destruction run rampant, and with a legal system that already justifies the concept of abstract entities (a la Corporationa via Citizens United in the US) having legal Personhood, this will allow for the better legal defense of that which has more needs and less of a voice.


"Ecuador was the first country to enshrine rights of nature in its 2008 constitution. Since then, a growing number of countries have followed in awarding rights of nature. This includes Aotearoa New Zealand, where legal personhood was granted to the Whanganui River, the former national park Te Urewera and soon the Taranaki maunga."


This allows persons to take legal actions on behalf of ecological systems, whether or not that person was directly impacted by environmental loss/degradation.


"Ecosystems can become separate entities with their own agency, in the same way other non-human entities such as charitable trusts and organisations can exist as separate entities in law.'


There is a lot more covered in the article, but I thought I'd at least start off the conversation. For those interested feel free to read it.

 

[Quintessence]

I'm a Druid and an animist. It probably goes without saying where I stand on such matters.

I've been slowly reading through Robin Wall Kimmer's "Braiding Sweetgrass" over the past few moons. I've already read a fair amount of environmental and ecological literature prior to this, but I've started to turn my attention to indigenous peoples as I recognize my own religious tradition is a reconstructed indigenous religion. The parallels I find between historical indigenous wisdom and the course my own religion has developed into are... striking and cannot be merely coincidental.

There's something that happens when you start to thoughtfully consider the non-human world around you as inherently worthy and equal to (if not vastly greater than) yourself. You avoid stepping on the earthworms fleeing from their burrows during a heavy rain. You hesitate before pulling a weed in your garden, apologizing to it. You see Sun rise in the morning and are grateful for the gift of light and energy. You eat your food and realize with profundity that something gave up its life for you, then you whisper a prayer in thanks. You want to give back, to show respect, so that the gods - the spirits, the earth - will continue to be like the generous and giving motherfather who supports flourishing.

But most see these things as absurdities. Indigenous wisdom and indigenous science will have its reprise - for it must - but I don't think we are there. I'll contribute a short expert from Dr. Kimmer's book that shines a light on where we might be if we paid more attention to indigenous ways of life and living:

​

The guidelines for the Honorable Harvest are not written down, or even consistently spoken of as a whole - they are reinforced in small acts of daily life. But if you were to list them, they might look something like this: ​

​

Know the ways of the ones who take care of you, so that you may take care of them.​

Introduce yourself. Be accountable as the one who comes asking for life. ​

Ask permission before taking. Abide by the answer.​

Never take the first. Never take the last. ​

Take only what you need.​

Take only that which is given.​

Never take more than half. Leave some for others.​

Harvest in a way that minimizes harm.​

Use it respectfully. Never waste what you have taken. ​

Share. ​

Give thanks for what you have been given.​

Give a gift, in reciprocity for what you have taken.​

Sustain the ones who sustain you and the earth will last forever.​

​

From "Braiding Sweetgrass" by Robin Wall Kimmer, pg 183​

​

​

 

[beenherebeforeagain]

In addition to legal existence of such things as lakes and watersheds and species, I'd like to suggest legal protections for interest of the future generations, requiring that the costs and benefits of current action at least several generations ahead before being undertaken.

 

[beenherebeforeagain]

I'm a Druid and an animist. It probably goes without saying where I stand on such matters.

I've been slowly reading through Robin Wall Kimmer's "Braiding Sweetgrass" over the past few moons. I've already read a fair amount of environmental and ecological literature prior to this, but I've started to turn my attention to indigenous peoples as I recognize my own religious tradition is a reconstructed indigenous religion. The parallels I find between historical indigenous wisdom and the course my own religion has developed into are... striking and cannot be merely coincidental.

There's something that happens when you start to thoughtfully consider the non-human world around you as inherently worthy and equal to (if not vastly greater than) yourself. You avoid stepping on the earthworms fleeing from their burrows during a heavy rain. You hesitate before pulling a weed in your garden, apologizing to it. You see Sun rise in the morning and are grateful for the gift of light and energy. You eat your food and realize with profundity that something gave up its life for you, then you whisper a prayer in thanks. You want to give back, to show respect, so that the gods - the spirits, the earth - will continue to be like the generous and giving motherfather who supports flourishing.

But most see these things as absurdities. Indigenous wisdom and indigenous science will have its reprise - for it must - but I don't think we are there. I'll contribute a short expert from Dr. Kimmer's book that shines a light on where we might be if we paid more attention to indigenous ways of life and living:

​

The guidelines for the Honorable Harvest are not written down, or even consistently spoken of as a whole - they are reinforced in small acts of daily life. But if you were to list them, they might look something like this: ​

​

Know the ways of the ones who take care of you, so that you may take care of them.​

Introduce yourself. Be accountable as the one who comes asking for life. ​

Ask permission before taking. Abide by the answer.​

Never take the first. Never take the last. ​

Take only what you need.​

Take only that which is given.​

Never take more than half. Leave some for others.​

Harvest in a way that minimizes harm.​

Use it respectfully. Never waste what you have taken. ​

Share. ​

Give thanks for what you have been given.​

Give a gift, in reciprocity for what you have taken.​

Sustain the ones who sustain you and the earth will last forever.​

​

From "Braiding Sweetgrass" by Robin Wall Kimmer, pg 183​

​

​

I found her books Sweetgrass and Moss to be very enlightening. Very much consistent with the way I experience the world.

 

[Brickjectivity]

What are your thoughts on granting Personhood to ecological sites: such as waterfalls, mountains/ranges, cave systems, or even entire ecological systems?

Don't do it everywhere all at once. Test the idea at a few sites for a couple of decades.

Have any other countries tried it, or are we the testers?

 

[McBell]

Granting legal ‘personhood’ to nature is a growing movement – can it stem biodiversity loss?

The rights-of-nature movement emerged as a response to economic pressures on ecosystems. But the success of projects depends on how well legal liability is defined.

theconversation.com

What are your thoughts on granting Personhood to ecological sites: such as waterfalls, mountains/ranges, cave systems, or even entire ecological systems?


"Many Indigenous peoples have long emphasised the intrinsic value of nature. In 1972, the late University of Southern California law professor Christopher Stone proposed what then seemed like a whimsical idea: to vest legal rights in natural objects to allow a shift from an anthropocentric to an intrinsic worldview."


I think in an age where rapid ecological exploitation and destruction run rampant, and with a legal system that already justifies the concept of abstract entities (a la Corporationa via Citizens United in the US) having legal Personhood, this will allow for the better legal defense of that which has more needs and less of a voice.


"Ecuador was the first country to enshrine rights of nature in its 2008 constitution. Since then, a growing number of countries have followed in awarding rights of nature. This includes Aotearoa New Zealand, where legal personhood was granted to the Whanganui River, the former national park Te Urewera and soon the Taranaki maunga."


This allows persons to take legal actions on behalf of ecological systems, whether or not that person was directly impacted by environmental loss/degradation.


"Ecosystems can become separate entities with their own agency, in the same way other non-human entities such as charitable trusts and organisations can exist as separate entities in law.'


There is a lot more covered in the article, but I thought I'd at least start off the conversation. For those interested feel free to read it.

I agree with the article:

Our recommendation is that future rights-of-nature frameworks need to have well-defined legal rights and include appointed guardians, established as separate legal entities with limited liability, as well as the support of representatives from interest groups.​

​

Without a detailed explanation who is responsible for what, any rights-of-nature declaration will be problematic.