UDTR Global Legal Library

Global Rights of Nature Legal Library

Scholarship · Case Law · Legislation · Constitutions · International Instruments

UDTR Global Legal Classification — UGLC

UDTR Global Legal Classification

Recognize · Represent · Protect · Make Effective

A different way of mapping the Rights of Nature

A global legal classification based on mechanisms and legal effectiveness

A different way of mapping the Rights of Nature — UGLC

The UDTR Global Rights of Nature Legal Library is not designed as a simple collection of publications, legislation or court decisions.

It is built around a multidimensional legal classification method — the UDTR Global Legal Classification (UGLC) — designed to analyse separately the different mechanisms through which legal systems recognize, represent and protect Nature.

Legal personhood is neither the starting point nor the definition of Rights of Nature within this framework. It is examined as one legal technique among others, alongside substantive rights, subject-of-rights status, legal standing, representation, guardianship mechanisms, positive obligations, prevention, restoration, remedies and non-regression.

Each source may therefore be analysed across several distinct dimensions:

what is protected;
which rights or interests are recognized;
which legal mechanism is used;
who may bring an action;
who represents the natural entity;
against whom a claim may be brought;
which court has jurisdiction;
which remedy may be ordered;
and, when the law is tested through litigation, how effective that protection proves to be in practice.

The Library brings together within a single analytical system legal scholarship, case law, constitutions, legislation, international instruments and institutional materials. It documents not only successful recognitions, but also dismissals, inadmissibility decisions, representation failures, standing barriers and other obstacles encountered in the implementation of Nature-related rights.

This methodology makes it possible to distinguish four legally different questions:

Does Nature hold a right?
What is the content of that right?
Who is entitled to enforce it?
Is the legal mechanism actually capable of protecting the ecosystem concerned?

The Library is therefore not intended to promote one particular legal construction. Its purpose is to enable their documented, critical and global comparison.

The inclusion of a source does not imply endorsement of the position it expresses. Scholarship supporting, criticizing or rejecting a particular legal mechanism may all be included whenever it is legally or scientifically relevant.

The long-term objective is to build a research instrument capable of showing not only where Rights of Nature have been recognized, but above all how those rights operate — or fail to operate — in law and in practice.

Recognize · Represent · Protect · Make Effective

Eight independent axes

Axes can be combined; legal personhood belongs only to the legal status axis.

Protected natural entity

The natural entity, territory or ecosystem protected by the source.

Nature · Tree · Forest · River · Stream · Lake · Lagoon · Sea · Mountain · Soil · Wildlife · Species · Territory · Ecosystem · Watershed · Other

Legal status

The legal status attributed to Nature. Subject-of-rights status and legal personhood are distinct classifications; personhood is one technique among others.

No specific status · Subject of rights · Legal personhood · Sui generis legal entity · Common heritage · Common good · Other status

Substantive rights

The content of recognized rights or interests, independently of legal status.

Right to existence · Right to integrity · Right to regeneration · Right to ecological continuity · Right to restoration · Right to water · Right to ecological functions · Right to natural evolution · Non-regression · Irreplaceability · Intrinsic value · Other

Access to justice

Who may bring a claim and on what basis they may access a court.

Legal standing · Legal interest · Citizen action · Association action · Public action · Representative action · Guardian action · Constitutional referral · Other

Representation

Who speaks or acts for the natural entity, including guardians and collective bodies.

Guardian · Institutional representative · State · Local authority · Association · Local community · Indigenous people · Designated person · Collegial body · Other

Obligations and duty-bearers

Who owes duties and which positive, negative, preventive or conservation obligations apply.

State · Local authority · Company · Owner · Operator · Public authority · Third party · Positive obligation · Negative obligation · Duty of prevention · Duty of conservation · Other

Remedies and sanctions

The protective measures, remedies and sanctions a competent authority can order.

Prevention · Suspension · Injunction · Annulment · Restoration · Reparation · Compensation · Reinstatement · Damages · Administrative sanction · Criminal sanction · Protective measure · Other

Litigation effectiveness

Actual litigation outcomes and procedural obstacles, including dismissals, pending proceedings and failures of implementation.

Recognition · Dismissal · Inadmissibility · Lack of standing · Lack of representation · Lack of jurisdiction · No direct effect · Mixed decision · Interim measure · Appeal · Cassation · Review · Enforcement · Non-enforcement · Pending case · Other

15 references · page 1 / 1

Scholarship

Scholarship · International

DUDA foundations: from characterization to responsibility

DUDA editorial title translation · Original title : Les fondements juridiques de la Déclaration universelle des droits de l'Arbre

Author / institution
Ricardo Rey · DUDA / UDTR · site officiel
Year
2026

This essay explains the legal reasoning behind the Declaration’s three articles. It offers a method for developing normative proposals: identify a living reality, explain its ecological significance and formulate human responsibility. An association’s declaration is expressly distinguished from binding international legislation. Common good remains a characterization specific to this corpus: it neither transfers ownership nor establishes technical common heritage. Proposed responsibility requires reception through competent legal instruments before it creates enforceable obligations. The method does not itself identify a mandatory representative, confer procedural rights or establish any result in litigation.

DUDA editorial summary

UGLC — Eight independent axes

3 of 8 UGLC axes resolved

Protected natural entity
Tree (descriptive context)
Legal status
Common good (scholarly proposal)
Substantive rights
Research pending
Reason

For “DUDA foundations: from characterization to responsibility”, the reviewed scope does not yet provide sufficiently precise evidence on this axis. Seek provisions specifying the content, holders and limits of rights. Absence of classification is not a finding that the mechanism is absent.

Access to justice
Research pending
Reason

For “DUDA foundations: from characterization to responsibility”, the reviewed scope does not yet provide sufficiently precise evidence on this axis. Seek standing/admissibility rules or a ruling addressing standing. Absence of classification is not a finding that the mechanism is absent.

Representation
Research pending
Reason

For “DUDA foundations: from characterization to responsibility”, the reviewed scope does not yet provide sufficiently precise evidence on this axis. Seek an appointment or mandate defining representative powers. Absence of classification is not a finding that the mechanism is absent.

Obligations and duty-bearers
Positive obligation (scholarly proposal)
Remedies and sanctions
Research pending
Reason

For “DUDA foundations: from characterization to responsibility”, the reviewed scope does not yet provide sufficiently precise evidence on this axis. Seek provisions or orders establishing available or ordered remedies. Absence of classification is not a finding that the mechanism is absent.

Litigation effectiveness
Pending validation
Reason

A proposal awaits human validation; no certain classification is inferred from it.

View source

Scholarship · International

Recognising Tree Rights: principles, procedures and effectiveness

DUDA editorial title translation · Original title : Que signifie reconnaître des droits à l’Arbre ?

Author / institution
duda · DUDA / UDTR · site officiel
Year
2026

This study addresses a difficulty within the foundational text: how can it speak of rights when its three articles do not list conventional individual entitlements? Its answer is a framework for later implementation, accompanied by careful distinctions between principles, rights, procedures and effectiveness. The discussion separates holding rights, legal personhood, representation, standing and justiciability. Several implementation instruments are considered without treating them as provisions already contained in the Declaration. Recognition, binding force, enforceability and sanctions remain separate questions requiring verification, rather than completed legal consequences that follow automatically from the language of rights.

DUDA editorial summary

UGLC — Eight independent axes

2 of 8 UGLC axes resolved

Protected natural entity
Tree (descriptive context)
Legal status
Common good (scholarly proposal)
Substantive rights
Research pending
Reason

For “Recognising Tree Rights: principles, procedures and effectiveness”, the reviewed scope does not yet provide sufficiently precise evidence on this axis. Seek provisions specifying the content, holders and limits of rights. Absence of classification is not a finding that the mechanism is absent.

Access to justice
Research pending
Reason

For “Recognising Tree Rights: principles, procedures and effectiveness”, the reviewed scope does not yet provide sufficiently precise evidence on this axis. Seek standing/admissibility rules or a ruling addressing standing. Absence of classification is not a finding that the mechanism is absent.

Representation
Research pending
Reason

For “Recognising Tree Rights: principles, procedures and effectiveness”, the reviewed scope does not yet provide sufficiently precise evidence on this axis. Seek an appointment or mandate defining representative powers. Absence of classification is not a finding that the mechanism is absent.

Obligations and duty-bearers
Research pending
Reason

For “Recognising Tree Rights: principles, procedures and effectiveness”, the reviewed scope does not yet provide sufficiently precise evidence on this axis. Seek provisions identifying duties, duty-bearers and their scope. Absence of classification is not a finding that the mechanism is absent.

Remedies and sanctions
Research pending
Reason

For “Recognising Tree Rights: principles, procedures and effectiveness”, the reviewed scope does not yet provide sufficiently precise evidence on this axis. Seek provisions or orders establishing available or ordered remedies. Absence of classification is not a finding that the mechanism is absent.

Litigation effectiveness
Pending validation
Reason

A proposal awaits human validation; no certain classification is inferred from it.

View source

Scholarship · International

Article I: living organisms, biological responsiveness and the common good

DUDA editorial title translation · Original title : L’ARBRE, ÊTRE VIVANT SENSIBLE, SOURCE DE VIE ET BIEN COMMUN DE L’HUMANITÉ

Author / institution
duda · DUDA / UDTR · site officiel
Year
2026

The Article I commentary separates a short statement into four propositions: the generic Tree, a living organism, biological responsiveness and characterization as a common good. It explains why acknowledging these features does not itself confer legal personhood or give a tree a legal veto. Sensitivity here means the capacity to detect environmental changes and respond, without automatically asserting subjective consciousness. Common good does not displace ownership regimes. Distinguishing biological evidence, normative choices and positive law allows the commentary to consider different tree contexts without claiming that one uniform protection regime already applies to all of them.

DUDA editorial summary

UGLC — Eight independent axes

3 of 8 UGLC axes resolved

Protected natural entity
Tree (descriptive context)
Legal status
Common good (scholarly proposal)
Substantive rights
Intrinsic value (scholarly proposal)
Access to justice
Research pending
Reason

For “Article I: living organisms, biological responsiveness and the common good”, the reviewed scope does not yet provide sufficiently precise evidence on this axis. Seek standing/admissibility rules or a ruling addressing standing. Absence of classification is not a finding that the mechanism is absent.

Representation
Research pending
Reason

For “Article I: living organisms, biological responsiveness and the common good”, the reviewed scope does not yet provide sufficiently precise evidence on this axis. Seek an appointment or mandate defining representative powers. Absence of classification is not a finding that the mechanism is absent.

Obligations and duty-bearers
Research pending
Reason

For “Article I: living organisms, biological responsiveness and the common good”, the reviewed scope does not yet provide sufficiently precise evidence on this axis. Seek provisions identifying duties, duty-bearers and their scope. Absence of classification is not a finding that the mechanism is absent.

Remedies and sanctions
Research pending
Reason

For “Article I: living organisms, biological responsiveness and the common good”, the reviewed scope does not yet provide sufficiently precise evidence on this axis. Seek provisions or orders establishing available or ordered remedies. Absence of classification is not a finding that the mechanism is absent.

Litigation effectiveness
Pending validation
Reason

A proposal awaits human validation; no certain classification is inferred from it.

View source

Scholarship · International

Article II: ecological interdependence and the limits of legal translation

DUDA editorial title translation · Original title : DE L’EXISTENCE DE L’ARBRE DÉPEND LA VIE SUR LA PLANÈTE

Author / institution
duda · DUDA / UDTR · site officiel
Year
2026

This synthesis examines the scientific mechanisms supporting Article II: carbon, water, soils, habitats and microclimates. Dependence of Life is understood as a systemic and contextual relationship, rather than direct dependence of every organism on each individual tree. This distinction determines how the foundational proposition is interpreted. The described effects vary with biomes, soils, species and scale. The synthesis therefore rejects universal promises attached to planting and explains that conservation does not replace reductions in fossil fuel emissions. It supports normative reasoning without establishing autonomous water or regeneration rights, mandatory representatives or an enforceable judicial remedy.

DUDA editorial summary

UGLC — Eight independent axes

1 of 8 UGLC axes resolved

Protected natural entity
Tree (descriptive context)
Legal status
Research pending
Reason

For “Article II: ecological interdependence and the limits of legal translation”, the reviewed scope does not yet provide sufficiently precise evidence on this axis. Seek an operative provision defining status and its effects without inferred legal personhood. Absence of classification is not a finding that the mechanism is absent.

Substantive rights
Research pending
Reason

For “Article II: ecological interdependence and the limits of legal translation”, the reviewed scope does not yet provide sufficiently precise evidence on this axis. Seek provisions specifying the content, holders and limits of rights. Absence of classification is not a finding that the mechanism is absent.

Access to justice
Research pending
Reason

For “Article II: ecological interdependence and the limits of legal translation”, the reviewed scope does not yet provide sufficiently precise evidence on this axis. Seek standing/admissibility rules or a ruling addressing standing. Absence of classification is not a finding that the mechanism is absent.

Representation
Research pending
Reason

For “Article II: ecological interdependence and the limits of legal translation”, the reviewed scope does not yet provide sufficiently precise evidence on this axis. Seek an appointment or mandate defining representative powers. Absence of classification is not a finding that the mechanism is absent.

Obligations and duty-bearers
Research pending
Reason

For “Article II: ecological interdependence and the limits of legal translation”, the reviewed scope does not yet provide sufficiently precise evidence on this axis. Seek provisions identifying duties, duty-bearers and their scope. Absence of classification is not a finding that the mechanism is absent.

Remedies and sanctions
Research pending
Reason

For “Article II: ecological interdependence and the limits of legal translation”, the reviewed scope does not yet provide sufficiently precise evidence on this axis. Seek provisions or orders establishing available or ordered remedies. Absence of classification is not a finding that the mechanism is absent.

Litigation effectiveness
Pending validation
Reason

A proposal awaits human validation; no certain classification is inferred from it.

View source

Scholarship · International

Article III — Act with Trees in a Spirit of Fraternity and Solidarity

DUDA editorial title translation · Original title : Article III — Agir avec l’Arbre dans un esprit de fraternité et de solidarité

Author / institution
DUDA / UDTR · site officiel
Year
2026

A text from the official doctrinal corpus of the Universal Declaration of Tree Rights addressing ‘Article III — Act with Trees in a Spirit of Fraternity and Solidarity’. It documents the Declaration’s foundations, scope or interpretation. The date is the publication date recorded in the CMS.

DUDA editorial summary

UGLC — Eight independent axes

0 of 8 UGLC axes resolved

Protected natural entity
Research pending
Reason

The Article III title/body discrepancy prevents reliable attribution of the analysis to the intended source. Seek a text defining the protected natural entity. No negative finding or certain classification is added.

Legal status
Research pending
Reason

The Article III title/body discrepancy prevents reliable attribution of the analysis to the intended source. Seek an operative provision defining status and its effects without inferred legal personhood. No negative finding or certain classification is added.

Substantive rights
Research pending
Reason

The Article III title/body discrepancy prevents reliable attribution of the analysis to the intended source. Seek provisions specifying the content, holders and limits of rights. No negative finding or certain classification is added.

Access to justice
Research pending
Reason

The Article III title/body discrepancy prevents reliable attribution of the analysis to the intended source. Seek standing/admissibility rules or a ruling addressing standing. No negative finding or certain classification is added.

Representation
Research pending
Reason

The Article III title/body discrepancy prevents reliable attribution of the analysis to the intended source. Seek an appointment or mandate defining representative powers. No negative finding or certain classification is added.

Obligations and duty-bearers
Research pending
Reason

The Article III title/body discrepancy prevents reliable attribution of the analysis to the intended source. Seek provisions identifying duties, duty-bearers and their scope. No negative finding or certain classification is added.

Remedies and sanctions
Research pending
Reason

The Article III title/body discrepancy prevents reliable attribution of the analysis to the intended source. Seek provisions or orders establishing available or ordered remedies. No negative finding or certain classification is added.

Litigation effectiveness
Research pending
Reason

The Article III title/body discrepancy prevents reliable attribution of the analysis to the intended source. Seek a ruling, judicial follow-up or official enforcement record. No negative finding or certain classification is added.

View source

Scholarship · International

Stone and DUDA: doctrinal dialogue and distinct legal constructions

DUDA editorial title translation · Original title : Christopher D. Stone et la Déclaration universelle des droits de l’Arbre

Author / institution
Ricardo Rey · DUDA / UDTR · site officiel
Year
2026

This note compares Christopher D. Stone’s proposal with the architecture of the Universal Declaration of Tree Rights. It identifies a shared concern: making natural entities’ own interests visible. It nevertheless argues that their starting points, methods and institutional instruments remain distinct rather than interchangeable. The note discusses representation and the entity’s own injury in Stone’s proposal, then situates DUDA before litigation through characterization of living reality and human responsibility. These comparisons establish neither a mandatory guardian nor standing. Direct interpretation of Stone still requires his 1972 essay; the association’s account is primary evidence of its own comparative position.

DUDA editorial summary

UGLC — Eight independent axes

4 of 8 UGLC axes resolved

Protected natural entity
Tree (descriptive context)
Legal status
Common good (scholarly proposal)
Substantive rights
Research pending
Reason

For “Stone and DUDA: doctrinal dialogue and distinct legal constructions”, the reviewed scope does not yet provide sufficiently precise evidence on this axis. Seek provisions specifying the content, holders and limits of rights. Absence of classification is not a finding that the mechanism is absent.

Access to justice
Legal standing (scholarly proposal)
Representation
Guardian (scholarly proposal)
Obligations and duty-bearers
Research pending
Reason

For “Stone and DUDA: doctrinal dialogue and distinct legal constructions”, the reviewed scope does not yet provide sufficiently precise evidence on this axis. Seek provisions identifying duties, duty-bearers and their scope. Absence of classification is not a finding that the mechanism is absent.

Remedies and sanctions
Research pending
Reason

For “Stone and DUDA: doctrinal dialogue and distinct legal constructions”, the reviewed scope does not yet provide sufficiently precise evidence on this axis. Seek provisions or orders establishing available or ordered remedies. Absence of classification is not a finding that the mechanism is absent.

Litigation effectiveness
Pending validation
Reason

A proposal awaits human validation; no certain classification is inferred from it.

View source

Scholarship · International

Defining forests: ecological classification and non substitution

DUDA editorial title translation · Original title : Ce qu’est une forêt — et ce qui ne l’est pas — au regard de la Déclaration universelle des droits de l’Arbre

Author / institution
Ricardo Rey · DUDA / UDTR · site officiel
Year
2026

This study proposes a global classification of wooded systems within the Declaration’s framework. Its contribution is to reject automatic equivalence between tree cover and forest ecosystems. Origin, integrity, continuity, management and trajectory require separate examination to identify what a conservation or restoration initiative actually maintains. The framework separates ecological condition, tenure, governance and trajectory; territorial status alone proves neither integrity nor degradation. Non substitution of primary forests is a doctrinal proposal rather than a worldwide rule in force. Detection limits and ecological reference conditions remain essential when interpreting observations or assessing restoration programmes and their proposed legal significance.

DUDA editorial summary

UGLC — Eight independent axes

2 of 8 UGLC axes resolved

Protected natural entity
Forest (descriptive context) · Tree (descriptive context)
Legal status
Research pending
Reason

For “Defining forests: ecological classification and non substitution”, the reviewed scope does not yet provide sufficiently precise evidence on this axis. Seek an operative provision defining status and its effects without inferred legal personhood. Absence of classification is not a finding that the mechanism is absent.

Substantive rights
Irreplaceability (scholarly proposal)
Access to justice
Research pending
Reason

For “Defining forests: ecological classification and non substitution”, the reviewed scope does not yet provide sufficiently precise evidence on this axis. Seek standing/admissibility rules or a ruling addressing standing. Absence of classification is not a finding that the mechanism is absent.

Representation
Research pending
Reason

For “Defining forests: ecological classification and non substitution”, the reviewed scope does not yet provide sufficiently precise evidence on this axis. Seek an appointment or mandate defining representative powers. Absence of classification is not a finding that the mechanism is absent.

Obligations and duty-bearers
Research pending
Reason

For “Defining forests: ecological classification and non substitution”, the reviewed scope does not yet provide sufficiently precise evidence on this axis. Seek provisions identifying duties, duty-bearers and their scope. Absence of classification is not a finding that the mechanism is absent.

Remedies and sanctions
Research pending
Reason

For “Defining forests: ecological classification and non substitution”, the reviewed scope does not yet provide sufficiently precise evidence on this axis. Seek provisions or orders establishing available or ordered remedies. Absence of classification is not a finding that the mechanism is absent.

Litigation effectiveness
Pending validation
Reason

A proposal awaits human validation; no certain classification is inferred from it.

View source

Scholarship · International

Threat, protection and recognition: three distinct operations

DUDA editorial title translation · Original title : Menacé, protégé, reconnu : trois notions que le droit ne doit pas confondre

Author / institution
duda · DUDA / UDTR · site officiel
Year
2026

This contribution distinguishes scientific assessment of extinction risk, protection under positive law and normative recognition proposed by the Declaration. These categories are not three degrees on a single scale. Treating them as synonyms obscures both the source of a classification and the consequences it can support. A threat list does not itself create legal prohibitions. Conversely, location or function may support protection of a tree whose species is not threatened. DUDA recognition adds normative consideration for ordinary trees, while any binding implementation still requires a competent legal instrument. None of these categories alone establishes legal personhood, standing or proven enforcement.

DUDA editorial summary

UGLC — Eight independent axes

1 of 8 UGLC axes resolved

Protected natural entity
Tree (descriptive context)
Legal status
Research pending
Reason

For “Threat, protection and recognition: three distinct operations”, the reviewed scope does not yet provide sufficiently precise evidence on this axis. Seek an operative provision defining status and its effects without inferred legal personhood. Absence of classification is not a finding that the mechanism is absent.

Substantive rights
Research pending
Reason

For “Threat, protection and recognition: three distinct operations”, the reviewed scope does not yet provide sufficiently precise evidence on this axis. Seek provisions specifying the content, holders and limits of rights. Absence of classification is not a finding that the mechanism is absent.

Access to justice
Research pending
Reason

For “Threat, protection and recognition: three distinct operations”, the reviewed scope does not yet provide sufficiently precise evidence on this axis. Seek standing/admissibility rules or a ruling addressing standing. Absence of classification is not a finding that the mechanism is absent.

Representation
Research pending
Reason

For “Threat, protection and recognition: three distinct operations”, the reviewed scope does not yet provide sufficiently precise evidence on this axis. Seek an appointment or mandate defining representative powers. Absence of classification is not a finding that the mechanism is absent.

Obligations and duty-bearers
Research pending
Reason

For “Threat, protection and recognition: three distinct operations”, the reviewed scope does not yet provide sufficiently precise evidence on this axis. Seek provisions identifying duties, duty-bearers and their scope. Absence of classification is not a finding that the mechanism is absent.

Remedies and sanctions
Research pending
Reason

For “Threat, protection and recognition: three distinct operations”, the reviewed scope does not yet provide sufficiently precise evidence on this axis. Seek provisions or orders establishing available or ordered remedies. Absence of classification is not a finding that the mechanism is absent.

Litigation effectiveness
Pending validation
Reason

A proposal awaits human validation; no certain classification is inferred from it.

View source

Scholarship · United States

Stone (2010): nature’s rights, guardians and court access

DUDA editorial title translation · Original title : Should Trees Have Standing? Law, Morality, and the Environment

Author / institution
Christopher D. Stone
Year
2010 · original essay : 1972

This record concerns the third edition of Christopher D. Stone’s book, published in 2010, rather than the 1972 article alone. The Oxford University Press excerpt reviewed here supports discussion of proposed institutionalised guardians and their relationship with court access. The DUDA/UGLC reading distinguishes that scholarly proposal from powers actually conferred by positive law. The complete book remains unreviewed: proposed classifications concern only the accessible passage and provide neither a synthesis of every chapter nor an assessment of the proposals’ implementation.

DUDA editorial summary

UGLC — Eight independent axes

3 of 8 UGLC axes resolved

Protected natural entity
Nature (scholarly proposal)
Legal status
Research pending
Reason

For “Stone (2010): nature’s rights, guardians and court access”, the reviewed scope does not yet provide sufficiently precise evidence on this axis. Seek an operative provision defining status and its effects without inferred legal personhood. Absence of classification is not a finding that the mechanism is absent.

Substantive rights
Research pending
Reason

For “Stone (2010): nature’s rights, guardians and court access”, the reviewed scope does not yet provide sufficiently precise evidence on this axis. Seek provisions specifying the content, holders and limits of rights. Absence of classification is not a finding that the mechanism is absent.

Access to justice
Guardian action (scholarly proposal)
Representation
Guardian (scholarly proposal)
Obligations and duty-bearers
Research pending
Reason

For “Stone (2010): nature’s rights, guardians and court access”, the reviewed scope does not yet provide sufficiently precise evidence on this axis. Seek provisions identifying duties, duty-bearers and their scope. Absence of classification is not a finding that the mechanism is absent.

Remedies and sanctions
Research pending
Reason

For “Stone (2010): nature’s rights, guardians and court access”, the reviewed scope does not yet provide sufficiently precise evidence on this axis. Seek provisions or orders establishing available or ordered remedies. Absence of classification is not a finding that the mechanism is absent.

Litigation effectiveness
Pending validation
Reason

A proposal awaits human validation; no certain classification is inferred from it.

View source

Case law

Case law · Colombia

Río Atrato: rights-holder status and joint representation in T-622/16

DUDA editorial title translation · Original title : Sentencia T-622/16

Author / institution
Cour constitutionnelle de Colombie
Year
2016

In T-622/16, the Corte Constitucional de Colombia recognises the Atrato River, its basin and tributaries as a rights-bearing entity entitled to protection, conservation, maintenance and restoration. It establishes joint representation by the State and communities and orders structural measures addressing mining pollution. The judgment consequently connects ecological protection with biocultural rights. Its rights-holder formulation does not by itself establish general legal personhood, while the existence of mandatory orders provides no proof that they were implemented or that ecological recovery followed.

DUDA editorial summary

UGLC — Eight independent axes

7 of 8 UGLC axes resolved

Protected natural entity
River · Watershed
Legal status
Subject of rights
Substantive rights
Right to restoration
Access to justice
Research pending
Reason

For “Río Atrato: rights-holder status and joint representation in T-622/16”, the reviewed scope does not yet provide sufficiently precise evidence on this axis. Seek standing/admissibility rules or a ruling addressing standing. Absence of classification is not a finding that the mechanism is absent.

Representation
Guardian · Local community · State
Obligations and duty-bearers
Public authority
Remedies and sanctions
Injunction · Restoration
Litigation effectiveness
Recognition
View source

Legislation and constitutions

Legislation · Spain

Mar Menor: personhood, ecological rights and action under Law 19/2022

DUDA editorial title translation · Original title : Ley 19/2022, de 30 de septiembre, para el reconocimiento de personalidad jurídica a la laguna del Mar Menor y su cuenca

Author / institution
Cortes Generales · Boletín Oficial del Estado
Year
2022

Spain’s Law 19/2022 declares the Mar Menor lagoon and its basin to have legal personality and recognises them as a subject of rights. It specifies ecological entitlements, establishes collective governance and permits any natural or legal person to defend the ecosystem before the competent authority. Administrative duties and invalidity of contrary acts complement these mechanisms. Their distinct textual foundations require separating personhood, substantive rights, representation and standing. The statute establishes a normative framework, but does not itself demonstrate restoration secured through litigation or the lagoon’s ecological recovery.

DUDA editorial summary

UGLC — Eight independent axes

7 of 8 UGLC axes resolved

Protected natural entity
Lagoon · Watershed
Legal status
Legal personhood · Subject of rights
Substantive rights
Right to existence · Right to natural evolution · Right to restoration
Access to justice
Citizen action
Representation
Collegial body
Obligations and duty-bearers
Duty of prevention · Public authority
Remedies and sanctions
Annulment
Litigation effectiveness
Research pending
Reason

For “Mar Menor: personhood, ecological rights and action under Law 19/2022”, the reviewed scope does not yet provide sufficiently precise evidence on this axis. Seek a ruling, judicial follow-up or official enforcement record. Absence of classification is not a finding that the mechanism is absent.

View source

Legislation · New Zealand

Te Awa Tupua (Whanganui River Claims Settlement) Act 2017

Author / institution
Parlement de Nouvelle-Zélande
Year
2017

The Act recognizes Te Awa Tupua as an indivisible and living whole and grants it legal personhood. Te Pou Tupua exercises its rights and responsibilities on its behalf. The framework forms part of the settlement of the Whanganui iwi’s claims and reflects their relationship with the river.

DUDA editorial summary

UGLC — Eight independent axes

0 of 8 UGLC axes resolved

Protected natural entity
Research pending
Reason

Access to the official Te Awa Tupua text does not yet allow verifiable review of the provisions. Seek a text defining the protected natural entity. No negative finding or certain classification is added.

Legal status
Research pending
Reason

Access to the official Te Awa Tupua text does not yet allow verifiable review of the provisions. Seek an operative provision defining status and its effects without inferred legal personhood. No negative finding or certain classification is added.

Substantive rights
Research pending
Reason

Access to the official Te Awa Tupua text does not yet allow verifiable review of the provisions. Seek provisions specifying the content, holders and limits of rights. No negative finding or certain classification is added.

Access to justice
Research pending
Reason

Access to the official Te Awa Tupua text does not yet allow verifiable review of the provisions. Seek standing/admissibility rules or a ruling addressing standing. No negative finding or certain classification is added.

Representation
Research pending
Reason

Access to the official Te Awa Tupua text does not yet allow verifiable review of the provisions. Seek an appointment or mandate defining representative powers. No negative finding or certain classification is added.

Obligations and duty-bearers
Research pending
Reason

Access to the official Te Awa Tupua text does not yet allow verifiable review of the provisions. Seek provisions identifying duties, duty-bearers and their scope. No negative finding or certain classification is added.

Remedies and sanctions
Research pending
Reason

Access to the official Te Awa Tupua text does not yet allow verifiable review of the provisions. Seek provisions or orders establishing available or ordered remedies. No negative finding or certain classification is added.

Litigation effectiveness
Research pending
Reason

Access to the official Te Awa Tupua text does not yet allow verifiable review of the provisions. Seek a ruling, judicial follow-up or official enforcement record. No negative finding or certain classification is added.

View source

Constitution · Ecuador

Ecuador 2008: constitutional rights of nature and demands for protection

DUDA editorial title translation · Original title : Constitución de la República del Ecuador

Author / institution
Assemblée constituante de l’Équateur
Year
2008

Articles 10 and 71–74 of Ecuador’s Constitution identify nature as a subject of rights and specify guarantees covering existence, ecological processes, regeneration and restoration. Any person, community, people or nationality may demand compliance from public authorities. Restoration of nature remains independent of compensation owed to affected human beneficiaries. This constitutional architecture distinguishes substantive entitlements from the mechanism for invoking protection. It should not be treated as a general declaration of legal personhood, a mandatory guardianship scheme, or evidence that a particular judicial claim or restoration project succeeded.

DUDA editorial summary

UGLC — Eight independent axes

5 of 8 UGLC axes resolved

Protected natural entity
Nature
Legal status
Subject of rights
Substantive rights
Right to ecological functions · Right to existence · Right to regeneration · Right to restoration
Access to justice
Citizen action
Representation
Research pending
Reason

For “Ecuador 2008: constitutional rights of nature and demands for protection”, the reviewed scope does not yet provide sufficiently precise evidence on this axis. Seek an appointment or mandate defining representative powers. Absence of classification is not a finding that the mechanism is absent.

Obligations and duty-bearers
Duty of prevention · State
Remedies and sanctions
Research pending
Reason

For “Ecuador 2008: constitutional rights of nature and demands for protection”, the reviewed scope does not yet provide sufficiently precise evidence on this axis. Seek provisions or orders establishing available or ordered remedies. Absence of classification is not a finding that the mechanism is absent.

Litigation effectiveness
Research pending
Reason

For “Ecuador 2008: constitutional rights of nature and demands for protection”, the reviewed scope does not yet provide sufficiently precise evidence on this axis. Seek a ruling, judicial follow-up or official enforcement record. Absence of classification is not a finding that the mechanism is absent.

View source

International instruments

International instrument · International

UN 2009: the Harmony with Nature resolution

DUDA editorial title translation · Original title : Harmony with nature : resolution / adopted by the General Assembly

Author / institution
United Nations General Assembly · Assemblée générale des Nations unies
Year
2009

This record concerns resolution A/RES/64/196, adopted by the General Assembly on 21 December 2009 and issued on 12 February 2010. Reading both pages confirms invitations to exchange experience, an agenda item and a request for a Secretary-General report. These mechanisms organise institutional dialogue. The DUDA/UGLC analysis identifies nature as the subject of that policy position, without attributing personhood, substantive rights or court access to it. Later programme developments remain separate; this document establishes no litigation effectiveness. Its institutional steps require their own subsequent follow-up assessment.

DUDA editorial summary

UGLC — Eight independent axes

1 of 8 UGLC axes resolved

Protected natural entity
Nature (policy position)
Legal status
Research pending
Reason

For “UN 2009: the Harmony with Nature resolution”, the reviewed scope does not yet provide sufficiently precise evidence on this axis. Seek an operative provision defining status and its effects without inferred legal personhood. Absence of classification is not a finding that the mechanism is absent.

Substantive rights
Research pending
Reason

For “UN 2009: the Harmony with Nature resolution”, the reviewed scope does not yet provide sufficiently precise evidence on this axis. Seek provisions specifying the content, holders and limits of rights. Absence of classification is not a finding that the mechanism is absent.

Access to justice
Research pending
Reason

For “UN 2009: the Harmony with Nature resolution”, the reviewed scope does not yet provide sufficiently precise evidence on this axis. Seek standing/admissibility rules or a ruling addressing standing. Absence of classification is not a finding that the mechanism is absent.

Representation
Research pending
Reason

For “UN 2009: the Harmony with Nature resolution”, the reviewed scope does not yet provide sufficiently precise evidence on this axis. Seek an appointment or mandate defining representative powers. Absence of classification is not a finding that the mechanism is absent.

Obligations and duty-bearers
Research pending
Reason

For “UN 2009: the Harmony with Nature resolution”, the reviewed scope does not yet provide sufficiently precise evidence on this axis. Seek provisions identifying duties, duty-bearers and their scope. Absence of classification is not a finding that the mechanism is absent.

Remedies and sanctions
Research pending
Reason

For “UN 2009: the Harmony with Nature resolution”, the reviewed scope does not yet provide sufficiently precise evidence on this axis. Seek provisions or orders establishing available or ordered remedies. Absence of classification is not a finding that the mechanism is absent.

Litigation effectiveness
Research pending
Reason

For “UN 2009: the Harmony with Nature resolution”, the reviewed scope does not yet provide sufficiently precise evidence on this axis. Seek a ruling, judicial follow-up or official enforcement record. Absence of classification is not a finding that the mechanism is absent.

View source

Comparative legal approaches

Institutional study · European Union

Darpö, European Parliament (2021): nature’s rights and access to justice

DUDA editorial title translation · Original title : CAN NATURE GET IT RIGHT? A Study on Rights of Nature in the European Context

Author / institution
Jan Darpö · European Parliament, Policy Department for Citizens’ Rights and Constitutional Affairs, Directorate-General for Internal Policies
Year
2021

Jan Darpö’s study for the European Parliament, completed in March 2021, critically assesses what rights of nature might add to European environmental law. The sections reviewed distinguish personhood, court access and enforcement problems. The author favours strengthening environmental organisation oversight and considers reforms to remedial mechanisms. The DUDA/UGLC reading retains these orientations as scholarly proposals rather than enacted legislation. The official report is accessible; the sections examined do not establish subsequent implementation, and the author’s opinions are not automatically Parliament’s official position.

DUDA editorial summary

UGLC — Eight independent axes

3 of 8 UGLC axes resolved

Protected natural entity
Nature (scholarly proposal)
Legal status
Research pending
Reason

For “Darpö, European Parliament (2021): nature’s rights and access to justice”, the reviewed scope does not yet provide sufficiently precise evidence on this axis. Seek an operative provision defining status and its effects without inferred legal personhood. Absence of classification is not a finding that the mechanism is absent.

Substantive rights
Research pending
Reason

For “Darpö, European Parliament (2021): nature’s rights and access to justice”, the reviewed scope does not yet provide sufficiently precise evidence on this axis. Seek provisions specifying the content, holders and limits of rights. Absence of classification is not a finding that the mechanism is absent.

Access to justice
Association action (scholarly proposal)
Representation
Research pending
Reason

For “Darpö, European Parliament (2021): nature’s rights and access to justice”, the reviewed scope does not yet provide sufficiently precise evidence on this axis. Seek an appointment or mandate defining representative powers. Absence of classification is not a finding that the mechanism is absent.

Obligations and duty-bearers
Research pending
Reason

For “Darpö, European Parliament (2021): nature’s rights and access to justice”, the reviewed scope does not yet provide sufficiently precise evidence on this axis. Seek provisions identifying duties, duty-bearers and their scope. Absence of classification is not a finding that the mechanism is absent.

Remedies and sanctions
Restoration (scholarly proposal)
Litigation effectiveness
Pending validation
Reason

A proposal awaits human validation; no certain classification is inferred from it.

DOI : 10.2861/4087

View source

Documents remain hosted by their original institutions and publishers. Only metadata and access links are recorded here. Verification statuses are stated in each record. Published references sitemap.