Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cb9f654ff-r5d9c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-08-05T17:59:36.152Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

3 - Taking Environmental Rights in the Anthropocene Seriously

The Case of Biodiversity and the Nagoya Protocol

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 March 2023

By
Peter Gottschalk
Edited by
Walter F. Baber  and
James R. May
Walter F. Baber
Affiliation:
California State University, Long Beach
James R. May
Affiliation:
Widener University, Delaware Law School
Get access

Summary

More than fifty years after Christopher Stone (1972) suggested that natural objects should have legal rights, we have seen a rise in the recognition of environmental rights (Boyd, 2012; Sanders, 2018). Whether we call this a wave, trend or “a rights revolution” matters little. There has in any case been a rise in public attention and a wave of academic writings about environmental rights.

Information

Type
Chapter
Information
Environmental Human Rights in the Anthropocene
Concepts, Contexts, and Challenges
 , pp. 52 - 69
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2023

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Anderson, M.R. (1996). Human Rights Approaches to Environmental Protection: An Overview. In Boyle, A.E. and Anderson, M.R, eds., Human Rights Approaches to Environmental Protection. Oxford: Clarendon Press, pp. 1–23.Google Scholar
Armsworth, P.R., Kendall, B.E., and Davis, F.W. (2004). An Introduction to Biodiversity Concepts for Environmental Economists. Resource and Energy Economics 26, pp. 115–36.Google Scholar
Aubry, S., Frison, C, Medaglia, J.C. et al. (2021). Bringing Access and Benefit Sharing into the Digital Age. Plants People Planet 4(1), pp. 1–8.Google Scholar
Batavia, C. (2017). For Goodness Sake! What Is Intrinsic Value and Why Should We Care? Biological Conservation 209, pp. 366–76.Google Scholar
Bavikatte, K.S. (2014). Stewarding the Earth: Rethinking Property and the Emergence of Biocultural Rights. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bavikatte, K.S. and Bennett, T. (2015). Community Stewardship: The Foundation of Biocultural Rights. Journal of Human Rights and the Environment 6(1), pp. 7–29.Google Scholar
Birnie, P., Boyle, A., and Redgwell, C. (2009). International Law and the Environment. Oxford: Oxford University Press,Google Scholar
Bogojevic, S. and Rayfuse, R., eds. (2018). Environmental Rights in Europe and Beyond. Oxford: Hart Publishing.Google Scholar
Boyd, D.R. (2012). The Environmental Rights Revolution. A Global Study of Constitutions, Human Rights, and the Environment. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press.Google Scholar
Boyle, A. (2007). Human Rights or Environmental Rights? A Reassessment. Fordham Environmental Law Review 18(3), pp. 471–511.Google Scholar
Boyle, A. and Chinkin, C. (2007). The Making of International Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Boyle, J. (1997). Shamans, Software, and Spleens: Law and the Construction of the Information Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Bridgewater, P. and Rotherham, I. D. (2019). A Critical Perspective on the Concept of Biocultural Diversity and Its Emerging Role in Nature and Heritage Conservation. People and Nature 1(3), pp. 291–304.Google Scholar
Carter, N. (2007). The Politics of the Environment: Ideas, Activism, Policy, 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ceballos, G., Ehrlich, P.R, and Dirzo, R. (2017). Biological Annihilation via the Ongoing Sixth Mass Extinction Signaled by Vertebrate Population Losses and Declines. Proceedings of the National Academy of the United States of America 114(30), pp. E6089–E6096.Google Scholar
Cittadino, F. (2019). Incorporating Indigenous Rights in the International Regime on Biodiversity Protection. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
D’Amato, A. and Chopra, S.K. (1991). Whales: Their Emerging Right to Life. American Journal of International Law 85(1), pp. 21–62.Google Scholar
Darpö, J. (2021). Can Nature Get It Right? A Study on Rights of Nature in the European Context. Brussels: European Union. www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/STUD/2021/689328/IPOL_STU(2021)689328_EN.pdf [Accessed 3 December 2021].Google Scholar
Domaradzki, S., Khvostova, M., and Pupovac, D. (2019). Karol Vasak’s Generations of Rights and the Contemporary Human Rights Discourse. Human Rights Review 20(4), pp. 423–43.Google Scholar
Dupuy, P.-M. and Viñuales, J.E. (2018). International Environmental Law. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dutfield, G. and Suthersanen, U. (2019). Traditional Knowledge and Genetic Resources: Observing Legal Protection through the Lens of Historical Geography and Human Rights. Washburn Law Journal 58(2), pp. 399–448.Google Scholar
The Economics of Ecosystems & Biodiversity (TEEB, 2010).Google Scholar
Elands, B.H.M., Vierikko, K., Andersson, E. et al. (2019). Biocultural Diversity: A Novel Concept to Address Human–Nature Interrelations, Nature Conservation and Stewardship in Cities. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 40, pp. 29–34.Google Scholar
Etty, T., Heyvaert, V, Carlarne, C et al. (2020). Editorial: Indigenous Rights Amidst Global Turmoil. Transnational Environmental Law 9(3), pp. 385–91.Google Scholar
Franklin, S. (2003). Re-thinking Nature–Culture: Anthropology and the New Genetics. Anthropological Theory 3(1), pp. 65–85.Google Scholar
Freedman, R. (2013). Third Generation Rights: Is there Room for Hybrid Constructs within International Human Rights Law? Cambridge Journal of International and Comparative Law 2(4), pp. 935–59.Google Scholar
Garver, G. (2013). The Rule of Ecological Law: The Legal Complement to Degrowth Economics. Sustainability 5(1), pp. 316–37.Google Scholar
Gibson, J. (2011). Community Rights to Culture: The UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. In Allen, S. and Xanthaki, A., eds., Reflections on the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Oxford: Hart Publishing, pp. 433–53.Google Scholar
Glowka, L. and Normand, V. (2013). The Nagoya Protocol on Access and Benefit-sharing: Innovations in International Environmental Law. In Morgera, E., Buck, M.. & Tsioumani, E., eds., The 2010 Nagoya Protocol on Access and Benefit-sharing in Perspective. Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, pp. 21–52.Google Scholar
Gratani, M., Sutton, S.G., Butler, J.R.A. et al. (2016). Indigenous Environmental Values as Human Values. Cogent Social Sciences 2(1).Google Scholar
Gunningham, N. and Young, M.D. (1997). Toward Optimal Environmental Policy: The Case of Biodiversity Conservation. Ecology Law Quarterly 24(2), pp. 243–98.Google Scholar
Helfer, L. (2004). Regime Shifting: The TRIPs Agreement and New Dynamics of Intellectual Property Lawmaking. Yale Journal of International Law 29, pp. 1–83.Google Scholar
Hiskes, R.P. (2017). With Apologies to the Future: Environmental Human Rights and the Politics of Communal Responsibility. The International Journal of Human Rights 21(9), pp. 1401–16.Google Scholar
Hossein, K. and Ballardini, R.M. (2021). Protecting Indigenous Traditional Knowledge Through a Holistic Principle-Based Approach. Nordic Journal of Human Rights 39(1), pp. 51–72.Google Scholar
Howarth, W. (2006). The Progression Towards Ecological Quality Standards. Journal of Environmental Law 18(1), pp. 3–35.Google Scholar
Hughes, H. and Vadrot, A.B.M. (2019). Weighting the World: IPBES and the Struggle over Biocultural Diversity. Global Environmental Politics 19(2), pp. 14–37.Google Scholar
Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) (2020) Pandemics Report. https://ipbes.net/sites/default/files/2020-12/IPBES%20Workshop%20on%20Biodiversity%20and%20Pandemics%20Report_0.pdf [Accessed 3 December 2021].Google Scholar
Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) (2021). Global Assessment Report on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. https://ipbes.net/global-assessment [Accessed 3 December 2021].Google Scholar
Jeffries, B. (2020). The Loss of Nature and the Rise of Pandemics. Protecting Human and Planetary Health. Switzerland: WWF.Google Scholar
Knox, J. (2017). Report of the Special Rapporteur on the Issue of Human Rights Obligations Relating to the Enjoyment of a Safe, Clean, Healthy and Sustainable Environment. UN: Human Rights Council, A/HRC/34/49.Google Scholar
Kotzé, L.J. (2014). Human Rights and the Environment in the Anthropocene. The Anthropocene Review 1(3), pp. 252–75.Google Scholar
McGraw, D.M. (2002). The CBD – Key Characteristics and Implication for Implementation. RECIEL: Review of European, Comparative & International Law 11(1), pp. 17–28.Google Scholar
Merrills, J.G. (1996). Environmental Protection and Human Rights: Conceptual Aspects. In Boyle, A.E. and Anderson, M.R, eds., Human Rights Approaches to Environmental Protection. Oxford: Clarendon Press, pp. 25–41.Google Scholar
Miteva, D.A., Pattanayak, S.K., and Ferraro, P.J. (2012) Evaluation of Biodiversity Policy Instruments: What Works and What Doesn’t? Oxford Review of Economic Policy 28(1), pp. 69–92.Google Scholar
Morar, N., Toadvine, T., and Bohannan, B.J.M. (2015). Biodiversity at Twenty-five Years: Revolution or Red Herring? Ethics, Policy & Environment 18(1), pp. 16–29.Google Scholar
Morgera, E. (2019). Under the Radar: The Role of Fair and Equitable Benefit-sharing in Protecting and Realising Human Rights Connected to Natural Resources. International Journal of Human Rights 23(7), pp. 1098–1139.Google Scholar
Morgera, E., Tsioumani, E., and Buck, M., eds. (2014). Unraveling the Nagoya Protocol: A Commentary on the Nagoya Protocol on Access and Benefit-sharing to the Convention on Biological Diversity. Leiden: Brill/Nijhoff.Google Scholar
Nickel, J. (1993). The Human Right to a Safe Environment: Philosophical Perspectives on Its Scope and Justification. Yale Journal of International Law 18(1), pp. 281–95.Google Scholar
Nickel, J.W. (2007). Making Sense of Human Rights, 2nd ed. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
Nijar, G.S. (2010). Incorporating Traditional Knowledge in an International Regime on Access and Benefit Sharing: Problems and Prospects. European Journal of International Law 21(2), pp. 457–75.Google Scholar
Nollkaemper, , A. (2014). Framing Elephant Extinction. ESIL Reflections 3(6). https://esil-sedi.eu/framing-elephant-extinction/ [Accessed 3 December 2021].Google Scholar
O’Neill, K. (2009). The Environment and International Relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Pepper, D. (1996) Environmentalism, Modern: An Introduction. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Pereira, H.M., Navarro, L.M., and Martins, I.S. (2012). Global Biodiversity Change: The Bad, the Good, and the Unknown. Annual Review of Environment and Resources 37, pp. 25–50.Google Scholar
Peters, A. (2016). Global Animal Law: What It Is and Why We Need It. Transnational Environmental Law 5(1), pp. 9–23.Google Scholar
Redgwell, C. (1996). Life, The Universe and Everything: A Critique of Anthropocentric Rights. In Boyle, A.E. and Anderson, M.R, eds., Human Rights Approaches to Environmental Protection. Oxford: Clarendon Press, pp. 71–87.Google Scholar
Reid, C.T. (2018). Pitfalls in Promoting Environmental Rights. In Bogojevic, S. and Rayfuse, R., eds., Environmental Rights in Europe and Beyond. Oxford: Hart Publishing, pp. 27–47.Google Scholar
Reid, C.T. and Nsoh, W. (2016). The Privatization of Biodiversity? New Approaches to Conservation Law. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Robin, L. (2014). Wilderness in a Global Age, Fifty Years On. Environmental History 19(4), pp. 721–7.Google Scholar
Sanders, K. (2018). “Beyond Human Ownership”: Property, Power, and Legal Personality for Nature in Aotearoa New Zealand. Journal of Environmental Law 30(2), pp. 207–34.Google Scholar
Sarr, M., Goeschl, T., and Swanson, T. (2008). The Value of Conserving Genetic Resources for R&D: A Survey. Ecological Economics 67(2), pp. 184–93.Google Scholar
Savaresi, A. (2014). The International Human Rights Law Implications of the Nagoya Protocol. In Morgera, E., Tsioumani, E. and Buck, M., eds., Unraveling the Nagoya Protocol: A Commentary on the Nagoya Protocol on Access and Benefit-sharing to the Convention on Biological Diversity. Leiden: Brill/Nijhoff, pp. 53–81.Google Scholar
Schimmöller, L. (2020). Paving the Way for Rights of Nature in Germany: Lessons Learnt from Legal Reforms in New Zealand and Ecuador. Transnational Environmental Law 9(3), pp. 569–92.Google Scholar
Shaver, L. (2010). The Right to Science and Culture. Wisconsin Law Review 1, pp. 122–84.Google Scholar
Shelton, D. (2001). Environmental Rights. In Alston, P., ed., Peoples’ Rights. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 185–258.Google Scholar
Sinjela, M. and Ramcharan, R. (2005). Protecting Traditional Knowledge and Traditional Medicines of Indigenous Peoples through Intellectual Property Rights: Issues, Challenges and Strategies. International Journal on Minority and Group Rights 12(1), pp. 1–24.Google Scholar
Sprigge, T.L.S. (1987). Are There Intrinsic Values in Nature? Journal of Applied Philosophy 4(1), pp. 21–8.Google Scholar
Stamatopolou, E. (2011). Taking Cultural Rights Seriously: The Vision of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. In Allen, S. and Xanthaki, A., eds., Reflections on the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Oxford: Hart Publishing, pp. 387–412.Google Scholar
Sterner, T. et al. (2019). Policy Design for the Anthropocene. Nature Sustainability 2, pp. 14–21.Google Scholar
Stone, C. (1972). Should Trees have Standing? Toward Legal Rights for Natural Objects. Southern California Law Review 45, pp. 450–501.Google Scholar
Stucki, S. and Sparks, T. (2020). The Elephant in the (Court)Room): Interdependence of Human and Animal Rights in the Anthropocene. www.ejiltalk.org/the-elephant-in-the-courtroom-interdependence-of-human-and-animal-rights-in-the-anthropocene/?utm_source=mailpoet&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=ejil-talk-newsletter-post-title_2 [Accessed 3 December 2021].Google Scholar
Suarez, D. and Corson, C. (2013). Seizing Center Stage: Ecosystem Services, Live, at the Convention on Biological Diversity. Human Geography 6(1), pp. 64–79.Google Scholar
Suiseeya, K.R.M. (2014). Negotiating the Nagoya Protocol: Indigenous Demands for Justice. Global Environmental Politics 14(3), pp. 102–24.Google Scholar
Sunder, M. (2007). The Invention of Traditional Knowledge. Law & Contemporary Problems 70(2), pp. 97–124.Google Scholar
Takac, D. (1996). The Idea of Biodiversity: Philosophies of Paradise. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Tanasescu, M. (2020). Rights of Nature, Legal Personality, and Indigenous Philosophies. Transnational Environmental Law 9(3), pp. 429–53.Google Scholar
Taylor, B. and Zimmerman, M. (2005). Deep Ecology. In Taylor, B., ed., Encyclopedia of Religion and Nature. London: Continuum, pp. 456–60.Google Scholar
Tobin, B. (2014). Biopiracy by Law: European Union Draft Law Threatens Indigenous Ppeoples’ Rights over their Traditional Knowledge and Genetic Resources. European Intellectual Property Review 36(2), pp. 124–36.Google Scholar
Tollefson, J. (2020). Why Deforestation and Extinctions Make Pandemics More Likely. Nature 584(7820), pp. 175–6.Google Scholar
Turnhout, E. et al. (2013). Rethinking Biodiversity: From Goods and Services to “Living With”. Conservation Letters 6(3), pp. 154–61.Google Scholar
Walløe Tvedt, M. and Schei, P.J. (2014). The Term “Genetic Resources”: Flexible and Dynamic while Providing Legal Certainty? In Oberthür, S. and Rosendal, G.K., eds., Global Governance of Genetic Resources: Access and Benefit Sharing after the Nagoya Protocol. London: Routledge, pp. 18–32.Google Scholar
Webster, E. and Mai, L. (2020). Transnational Environmental Law in the Anthropocene. Transnational Environmental Law 11(1–2), pp. 1–15.Google Scholar
Wilke, M. (2014). A Healthy Look at the Nagoya Protocol: Implications for Global Health Governance. In Morgera, E., Buck, M., and Tsioumani, E., eds., The 2010 Nagoya Protocol on Access and Benefit-sharing in Perspective. Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff, pp. 123–48.Google Scholar
Wolff, F. (2014). The Nagoya Protocol and the Diffusion of Economic Instruments for Ecosystem Services in International Environmental Governance. In Oberthür, S. and Rosendal, G.K., eds., Global Governance of Genetic Resources: Access and Benefit Sharing after the Nagoya Protocol. London: Routledge, pp. 132–57.Google Scholar
Wood, H.W. Jr. (1985). The United Nations World Charter for Nature: The Developing Nations’ Initiative to Establish Protections for the Environment. Ecology Law Quarterly 12, pp. 977–96.Google Scholar
Yotova, R. and Knoppers, B.M. (2020). The Right to Benefit from Science and Its Implications for Genomic Data Sharing. European Journal of International Law 31(2), pp. 665–91.Google Scholar

Accessibility standard: Unknown

Accessibility compliance for the PDF of this book is currently unknown and may be updated in the future.

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×