Estrellita and the possibility of nature-based animal rights
Identification
- Public canonical key
- doi:10.71389/gjal.152403
- Authors
- Eva Bernet Kempers
- Reported year
- 2025
- Reported language
- en
- Source type
- article
- First detected
- 2026-11-09T19:04:47.721945+00:00
- Last metadata observation
- 2026-11-09T19:11:36.717597+00:00
- Last HTTP verification
- Not checked
Documentary abstract — original language
In its judgement of 23 January 2022, the Constitutional Court of Ecuador concluded that individual animals are subjects of rights under the constitutional provision that recognises the rights of nature. Building upon a number of earlier cases in which rivers and mangroves had been recognised as rights-holders, it set out a framework for how animal rights should be understood in the Ecuadorian context. Through its conceptualization of the rights of animals as a dimension of nature’s rights, it bridged the tensions between the more systemic approach to environmental protection on the one hand, and the more individualist approach of animal law on the other hand. This article will discuss the Estrellita judgement, taking it as a starting point to investigate the possibility of ‘nature-based animal rights’ as an alternative to the common understanding of animal rights as being grounded in the properties of individual beings. This investigation will then lead to a proposal for systemically integrating animal rights within the broader normative framework of rights of nature, reconciling the tensions between the ecosystem and the individual.
Identifiers
- OPENALEX
- W4407203246
- DOI
- 10.71389/gjal.152403
- OPENAIRE
- doi_dedup___::91eadfbf01b1c3677e14dc36b42fa978
Documentary context
- Documentary family
- Scholarship
- Source-reported types
- Article · article
- Natural entities mentioned
- River · Ecosystem
Entity mentions are not evidence of legal recognition. Jurisdiction studied is separate from author affiliation country.
Sources
OpenAIRE · Record 1
OpenAlex · Record 1 · Record 2
Documented bibliographic relations
Source-declared references and links; they do not establish legal support or UGLC qualification. Up to 20 outgoing references are displayed.
8 incoming references within the detected corpus
Documentary field provenance
Source-backed values and values with unresolved provenance are kept separately. Bibliographic provenance validates no legal claim.
- Title
- Documentary source reported
- Publication
- Documentary source reported
- Authors
- Documentary source reported
- Document type
- Documentary source reported
- Jurisdiction
- Not recorded
- Court
- Not recorded
- Issuing authority
- Not recorded
- Publisher
- Not recorded
- DOI
- Documentary source reported
- ISBN
- Not recorded
- Official identifier
- Not recorded
- Source URL
- Documentary source reported
- Source-reported status
- Not recorded
- Amendment / repeal
- Not recorded
Cite this reference
Eva Bernet Kempers. Estrellita and the possibility of nature-based animal rights. 2025. https://doi.org/10.71389/gjal.152403
JSON · CSL-JSON · BibTeX · RIS · CSV · JSON-LD ·
APA, Chicago, ISO 690: bibliographic formats using available fields. OSCOLA / Bluebook: structured data only; full legal citation compliance is not claimed without verification of required elements.
- APA
- Eva Bernet Kempers. (2025). Estrellita and the possibility of nature-based animal rights. https://doi.org/10.71389/gjal.152403
- Chicago
- Eva Bernet Kempers. Estrellita and the possibility of nature-based animal rights. 2025. https://doi.org/10.71389/gjal.152403
- ISO 690
- Eva Bernet Kempers. Estrellita and the possibility of nature-based animal rights. 2025. https://doi.org/10.71389/gjal.152403
UDTR Global Rights of Nature Legal Library. Estrellita and the possibility of nature-based animal rights. Documentary record: https://www.declarationuniverselledesdroitsdelarbre.org/global-rights-of-nature-radar/reference/r-055f77a67dd5c7e9e58f87c9e76e9ca3/ · Last HTTP verification: not performed
Field provenance and record version
Version 1640922ba212acfa · udtr-reference-1.1.2
- Title
- OpenAIRE · source · 2026-11-09T19:06:44.925690+00:00
OpenAlex · source · 2026-11-09T19:11:36.717597+00:00 - Authors
- OpenAIRE · source · 2026-11-09T19:06:44.925690+00:00
OpenAlex · source · 2026-11-09T19:11:36.717597+00:00
Multiple reported values; disagreement retained. - Year
- OpenAIRE · source · 2026-11-09T19:06:44.925690+00:00
OpenAlex · source · 2026-11-09T19:11:36.717597+00:00 - Identifiers
- OpenAIRE · source · 2026-11-09T19:06:44.925690+00:00
OpenAlex · source · 2026-11-09T19:11:36.717597+00:00
Multiple reported values; disagreement retained. - Source URL
- OpenAIRE · source · 2026-11-09T19:06:44.925690+00:00
OpenAlex · source · 2026-11-09T19:11:36.717597+00:00 - Source-reported author ORCID
- OpenAlex · source · 2026-11-09T19:11:36.717597+00:00
History tracks record metadata and does not certify the state of the law.
6928aa97ee645a03 · 2026-11-09T19:11:36.717597+00:00
0121ae13e5e5002f · 2026-11-09T19:11:36.717597+00:00
50eff5f274d24b05 · 2026-11-09T19:11:36.717597+00:00
1640922ba212acfa · 2026-11-09T19:11:36.717597+00:00
Research dossiers and documentary relations
Source roles
Discovery source · https://doi.org/10.71389/gjal.152403
Discovery source · https://openalex.org/W4407203246
An authority link alone does not verify a legal claim. Abstracts and full texts remain subject to their source terms.
Documentary status
Relevance pending
Library
This identity is not yet included in the Legal Library.