UDTR — Radar mondial des droits de la Nature

Rights of nature and the legal architecture of the oceans

Identification

Clé publique

openalex:w4416255257

Auteurs

Gabriela Arguello · Vonintsoa Rafaly · Nkeiru Scotcher

Année déclarée

2022

Langue déclarée

en

Type source

COMM

Première détection

2026-11-09T19:04:47.881751+00:00

Dernière observation des métadonnées

2026-11-10T16:58:51.311991+00:00

Dernière vérification HTTP

Non effectuée

Institutions déclarées par la source

Centre de Droit Maritime et Océanique · Centre de droit maritime et océanique · Göteborgs Universitet = University of Gothenburg · Nantes Université · Nantes Université - UFR Droit et Sciences Politiques · Nantes Université - pôle Sociétés · University of Gothenburg · University of Strathclyde · University of Strathclyde [Glasgow] · Université de Nantes

Pays d’affiliation déclarés

FR · GB · SE

Résumé documentaire — langue originale

Recent studies on ocean connectivity show that humans and the marine environment are inextricably intertwined (Rogers, 2014; Popova et al. 2019) and that the oceans deliver vital ecosystem services for maintaining living conditions on Earth. Although our existence hangs in the balance, human activities continue to severely impact the ocean's natural systems. Marine biodiversity loss and climate change bring to the fore the legal system’s role in preserving the socio-ecological balance of the marine environment. Undoubtedly, the Law of the Sea has been fertilized by developments taking place in environmental law (e.g., ecosystem approach, area-based management tools). However, the Law of the Sea’s ethos continues to rely on the jurisdictional division of the ocean into maritime zones and the protection of the marine environment is mostly sectoral. Systemic fragmentation problems are rife in the Law of the Sea because institutions, decision-makers and legislation are developed along these sectoral lines with little connectivity. In this current ethos, States play a fundamental stewardship role, but socio-environmental concerns have been overridden by resource-grabbing practices (Ranganathan 2019). To further complicate matters, effects of environmental degradation are felt far away from its sources making it difficult to apply key principles such as the precautionary principle. This is because key factors such as the relevant State/stakeholder and data are changeable as interests and priorities change. Scholars, such as Cloutier de Repentigny (2020) suggest revisiting ‘human geological agency’ to deconstruct current State sovereignty and jurisdiction. The Rights of Nature (RoN) approach goes to the heart of the existing system and argues for reorganizing interests and priorities. This reorganisation is necessary because environmental law principles have failed to mitigate harmful ecological practices and adapt to global ecological change. (Kotzé, 2019). By including Nature as a subject of law with rights, conversations about the governance of the oceans can transcend sectoral and State-centred boundaries. Theoretically, we utilise the RoN approach as a critical lens to examine the role of law where interests are multisectoral and challenges ecologically connected. This approach follows the recognition by the UN General Assembly that a “paradigm shift from a human-centric society to an Earth-centred global ecosystem” is needed to ensure a resilient planet (UN Doc. A/75/266 (2020)). From a practical perspective, the we discuss whether RoN has been legally considered in a marine environmental setting. We pay special attention to States leading this discourse such as Ecuador whose 2008 Constitution recognizes Nature as a subject of rights. Arguably, Ecuador’s constitutional recognition could be seen as a pathway from anthropocentric to biocentric law. Our analysis focuses on the jurisprudence developed by States on this issue such as the Ecuadorian Constitutional Court’s reasonings in the 2015 Marmeza case where the Court explicitly acknowledged that aquaculture activities taking place at the Cayapas Mataje Mangrove Ecological Reserve violated the rights of nature. We finally reflect on the potential offered by RoN to re-imagine the law of the sea beyond inter-state rules.

Identifiants

OPENAIRE

dedup_wf_002::7d188a8c4119d9a994e018eaa5d3a1a2

OPENALEX

W4416255257

HAL

hal-05129852

Repères documentaires

Famille documentaire

Communication / colloque

Types déclarés par les sources

COMM · Other ORP type · conference-paper

Entités naturelles mentionnées

Océan · Mer · Écosystème

Les mentions d’entités ne constituent pas une preuve de reconnaissance juridique. La juridiction étudiée est distincte du pays d’affiliation des auteurs.

Sources

HAL · Document 1 · Document 2

OpenAIRE · Document 1

OpenAlex · Document 1 · Document 2

• Document · https://hal.science/hal-05129852
• Document · https://hal.science/hal-05129852v1
• OpenAlex · https://openalex.org/W4416255257

Statut documentaire

Publication académique détectée

Bibliothèque

Cette identité n’est pas encore intégrée à la Bibliothèque juridique.