Environmental philosophers and other people say that biological communities — ecosystems, habitats, species and populations — have a right to exist. They’re not just valuable because they’re someone’s property. Environmental lawyers say courts should recognize this right, and could allow people to represent nature as legal guardians or trustees.
Were nature’s rights recognized before the Deepwater Horizon wellhead blew, the destruction might have been avoided. In its aftermath, future disasters might at least be averted. If nothing else, pollution’s toll would be fully acknowledged in courts of law, not just public conscience.
“There is room in our legal system to expand the concept of guardianship,” said Patricia Siemen, executive director of the Center for Earth Jurisprudence. “The inlets and the marshes, the beaches that are damaged, species of birds that are threatened — each one may have its own guardian, with a right to speak for the interests of that being, and the legal authority to speak for that being.”
Legal recognition of ecological rights was originally proposed in 1972 by University of Southern California law professor Christopher Stone, who floated the idea as an academic exercise but became convinced of its justification. To Stone, arguments against the intrinsic rights of animals and ecosystems to exist were no more coherent than historical arguments against the rights of foreigners, children or women.
Related posts:
- More on the BP oil spill[lang_de]More on the BP oil spill[/lang_de][lang_zh]More on the BP oil spill[/lang_zh]
- More on the BP oil spill Pt. 2[lang_de]More on the BP oil spill Pt. 2[/lang_de][lang_zh]More on the BP oil spill Pt. 2[/lang_zh]
- ESR and T4IA giving you some schooling
- Borderland Science Reasearch Foundation – Viktor Schauberger, Nature was my teacher[lang_de]Borderland Science Reasearch Foundation – Viktor Schauberger, Nature was my teacher[/lang_de][lang_zh]Borderland Science Reasearch Foundation – Viktor Schauberger, Nature was my teacher[/lang_zh]
- Impediments to a Post-Scarcity Future











































Comments