UDTR — Radar mondial des droits de la Nature

‘Rights of Nature’ as co-constitution of law and religion: comparing the law-making process in the creation of legal personhood for the Ganges River and the Amami rabbit

Identification

Clé publique

doi:10.1080/09637494.2026.2649830

Auteurs

Moe Nakazora

Année déclarée

2026

Langue déclarée

en

Type source

article

Première détection

2026-11-09T19:04:47.848331+00:00

Dernière observation des métadonnées

2026-11-10T16:58:51.503304+00:00

Dernière vérification HTTP

Non effectuée

Institutions déclarées par la source

University of Tsukuba

Pays d’affiliation déclarés

JP

Résumé documentaire — langue originale

Previous comparative Rights of Nature (RoN) research has predominantly focused on secular dimensions, examining the diversity of legal designs and frameworks across cases sharing the meta-norm of Earth Jurisprudence. While some studies acknowledge religion as a factor shaping diverse RoN forms, they tend to treat religious contexts as stable, essentialised ‘legal cultures’ that pre-exist the law-making process. This contribution proposes an alternative approach to comparison based on ethnographic fieldwork in India and Japan. Instead of analysing existing laws or judgments, I compare how the legal concept of RoN becomes entangled with religious matters in the process of a court of law reaching its decision. To achieve this, I focus on two cases: the 2017 public interest litigation in the Uttarakhand High Court, which granted the Ganges River ‘the same legal rights as humans’, and the Amami Oshima court case (1995–2000) against the construction of a golf course, in which the plaintiffs were the Amami rabbit and three other animal species. By comparing how lawyers compared the ‘Rights of Nature’ concept with people’s religious interests, feelings, and natural entities, I elucidate the dynamic entanglement and co-making of legal and religious elements and the under-researched multiplicity of emergent RoN cases.

Identifiants

DOI

10.1080/09637494.2026.2649830

OPENALEX

W7155061344

OPENAIRE

doi_________::ecca724de8a13844ca964f19accc785e

Repères documentaires

Famille documentaire

Doctrine

Types déclarés par les sources

Article · article

Entités naturelles mentionnées

Fleuve / rivière · Espèce

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

Sources

OpenAIRE · Document 1

OpenAlex · Document 1 · Document 2

• DOI · https://doi.org/10.1080/09637494.2026.2649830
• OpenAlex · https://openalex.org/W7155061344

Relations bibliographiques documentées

Références et liens déclarés par les sources ; ils ne constituent pas une preuve juridique ni une qualification UGLC. Affichage limité à 20 références sortantes.

• openalex:w1530218722 · CITES
• openalex:w2031322854 · CITES
• ‘Beyond Human Ownership’? Property, Power and Legal Personality for Nature in Aotearoa New Zealand · CITES
• Toward a property rights theory of legal rights for rivers · CITES
• Conferring legal personality on the world’s rivers: A brief intellectual assessment · CITES
• River Goddesses, Personhood and Rights of Nature: Implications for Spiritual Ecology · CITES
• The Politics of Rights of Nature: Strategies for Building a More Sustainable Future · CITES
• openalex:w4213259298 · CITES
• openalex:w4280606172 · CITES
• The Rights of Nature as a Bridge between Land-Ownership Regimes: The Potential of Institutionalized Interplay in Post-Colonial Societies · CITES
• openalex:w4389512398 · CITES
• Comparative Analysis of Rights of Nature (Ron) Cases Worldwide: Features of Emergence and Implementation · CITES
• Putting the rights of nature on the map. A quantitative analysis of rights of nature initiatives across the world – Second Edition · CITES
• openalex:w575988172 · CITES
• openalex:w920793572 · CITES

1 références entrantes au sein du corpus détecté

Statut documentaire

Validée documentairement

Bibliothèque