La Naturaleza como destinataria directa de protección en la jurisprudencia costarricense: análisis a la luz de la Opinión Consultiva 32/25 de la Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos
Identification
- Public canonical key
- doi:10.15517/jthbg248
- Authors
- Mario Peña Chacón
- Reported year
- 2026
- Reported language
- es
- Source type
- article
- First detected
- 2026-11-09T19:16:32.636063+00:00
- Last metadata observation
- 2026-11-09T19:16:32.636063+00:00
- Last HTTP verification
- Not checked
Documentary abstract — original language
This article examines the evolution of Costa Rican jurisprudence that treats Nature as a direct recipient of legal protection. It shows autonomous protection grounded in intrinsic value and in the principles of prevention, precaution, and non-regression. The analysis is framed by Advisory Opinion AO-32/25, which reaffirms the autonomous right to a healthy environment and the collective public-interest status of Nature. The article argues that Costa Rica is consolidating ecological constitutionalism aimed at effective biodiversity protection.
Identifiers
- OPENALEX
- W7216581782
- DOI
- 10.15517/jthbg248
Documentary context
- Documentary family
- Scholarship
- Source-reported types
- article
Entity mentions are not evidence of legal recognition. Jurisdiction studied is separate from author affiliation country.
Sources
OpenAlex · Record 1 · Record 2 · Record 3
- DOI · https://doi.org/10.15517/jthbg248
- Document · https://revistas.ucr.ac.cr/index.php/rjuridicas/article/view/8645
- OpenAlex · https://openalex.org/W7216581782
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
Mario Peña Chacón. La Naturaleza como destinataria directa de protección en la jurisprudencia costarricense: análisis a la luz de la Opinión Consultiva 32/25 de la Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos. 2026. https://doi.org/10.15517/jthbg248
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
- Mario Peña Chacón. (2026). La Naturaleza como destinataria directa de protección en la jurisprudencia costarricense: análisis a la luz de la Opinión Consultiva 32/25 de la Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos. https://doi.org/10.15517/jthbg248
- Chicago
- Mario Peña Chacón. La Naturaleza como destinataria directa de protección en la jurisprudencia costarricense: análisis a la luz de la Opinión Consultiva 32/25 de la Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos. 2026. https://doi.org/10.15517/jthbg248
- ISO 690
- Mario Peña Chacón. La Naturaleza como destinataria directa de protección en la jurisprudencia costarricense: análisis a la luz de la Opinión Consultiva 32/25 de la Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos. 2026. https://doi.org/10.15517/jthbg248
UDTR Global Rights of Nature Legal Library. La Naturaleza como destinataria directa de protección en la jurisprudencia costarricense: análisis a la luz de la Opinión Consultiva 32/25 de la Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos. Documentary record: https://www.declarationuniverselledesdroitsdelarbre.org/global-rights-of-nature-radar/reference/r-7252f84170b7fe7b07f6040baeb9e97e/ · Last HTTP verification: not performed
Field provenance and record version
Version 39c18ff9d3d4ccbb · udtr-reference-1.1.2
- Title
- OpenAlex · source · 2026-11-09T19:16:32.636063+00:00
- Authors
- OpenAlex · source · 2026-11-09T19:16:32.636063+00:00
- Year
- OpenAlex · source · 2026-11-09T19:16:32.636063+00:00
- Identifiers
- OpenAlex · source · 2026-11-09T19:16:32.636063+00:00
- Source URL
- OpenAlex · source · 2026-11-09T19:16:32.636063+00:00
- Source-reported author ORCID
- OpenAlex · source · 2026-11-09T19:16:32.636063+00:00
History tracks record metadata and does not certify the state of the law.
9722241224f0b10e · 2026-11-09T19:16:32.636063+00:00
220f8ca68572703a · 2026-11-09T19:16:32.636063+00:00
6cdf640212a442c9 · 2026-11-09T19:16:32.636063+00:00
39c18ff9d3d4ccbb · 2026-11-09T19:16:32.636063+00:00
Research dossiers and documentary relations
Source roles
Discovery source · https://doi.org/10.15517/jthbg248
Discovery source · https://revistas.ucr.ac.cr/index.php/rjuridicas/article/view/8645
Discovery source · https://openalex.org/W7216581782
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.