UDTR — Radar mondial des droits de la Nature

What If the Black Forest Owned Itself? A Constitutional Property Law Perspective on Rights of Nature

Identification

Clé publique

doi:10.1017/s2047102522000322

Auteurs

Björn Hoops

Année déclarée

2022

Langue déclarée

en

Type source

article

Première détection

2026-11-09T19:04:47.829578+00:00

Dernière observation des métadonnées

2026-11-10T16:58:51.435788+00:00

Dernière vérification HTTP

Non effectuée

Institutions déclarées par la source

University of Groningen

Pays d’affiliation déclarés

NL

Résumé documentaire — langue originale

Abstract Ownership has been a key tool in the exploitation of nature for centuries. However, ownership could also shield natural entities from extraction and pollution if it were vested in them, rather than in humans or corporations. Through a case study of German constitutional property law, this article examines the normative content of this constitutional right. It argues that in owning themselves, natural entities would have numerous tools to fend off human interference with their self-determination. Constitutional property law would require any harmful activity affecting the natural entity to be based upon legislation and necessary to achieve a public purpose. The natural entity would enjoy broader access to justice. Courts would also often award appropriate remedies; where the natural entity would be awarded only compensation, this would be unsatisfactory because money cannot replace nature. The article finds that constitutional property law offers the potential for further protection from human interference, which has not been realized because of anthropocentric value judgments prevalent in German legal doctrine. Ecocentric approaches to ownership and invalidity as a standard remedy would play an important role in unlocking the full potential of ownership for environmental protection.

Identifiants

DOI

10.1017/s2047102522000322

OPENALEX

W4296463535

OPENAIRE

doi_dedup___::0a4a1a10962e72267a1ca46337b3b0f2

Repères documentaires

Famille documentaire

Doctrine

Types déclarés par les sources

Article · article

Juridictions étudiées — sources explicites

DE

Libellés de juridiction dans les sources

Allemagne

Éditeurs

Cambridge University Press

Entités naturelles mentionnées

Forêt

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 · Document 3

• DOI · https://doi.org/10.1017/s2047102522000322
• Document · https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/transnational-environmental-law/article/what-if-the-black-forest-owned-itself-a-constitutional-property-law-perspective-on-rights-of-nature/AD9FACDC6F6BC4EBD59E8C23EEF74472
• OpenAlex · https://openalex.org/W4296463535

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.

• New Transitions from Human Rights to the Environment to the Rights of Nature · CITES
• ‘Beyond Human Ownership’? Property, Power and Legal Personality for Nature in Aotearoa New Zealand · CITES
• openalex:w2773984425 · CITES
• openalex:w2800871897 · CITES
• openalex:w2801757869 · CITES
• Conceptualizing Human Stewardship in the Anthropocene: The Rights of Nature in Ecuador, New Zealand and India · CITES
• openalex:w2916944976 · CITES
• Indigenous Peoples, the International Trend Toward Legal Personhood for Nature, and the United States · CITES
• Rights of nature, legal personality, and indigenous philosophies · CITES
• Enter Sandman: The Viability of Environmental Personhood to US Soil Conservation Efforts · CITES
• Environmental Personhood · CITES

5 références entrantes au sein du corpus détecté

Statut documentaire

Pertinence à examiner

Bibliothèque

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