UDTR — Radar mondial des droits de la Nature

Humans matter too: a misanthropic misunderstanding of ecocentrism is derailing the ecocide debate

Identification

Clé publique

doi:10.1080/13642987.2026.2656484

Auteurs

Darryl Robinson

Année déclarée

2026

Langue déclarée

en

Type source

article

Première détection

2026-11-09T19:12:04.742868+00:00

Dernière observation des métadonnées

2026-11-09T19:12:04.742868+00:00

Dernière vérification HTTP

Non effectuée

Institutions déclarées par la source

Queen's University · Queens University

Résumé documentaire — langue originale

In this article, I unpack the extremely widespread misuse of terms “anthropocentric” and “ecocentric” that has spread like a virus throughout the current ecocide literature, leading numerous scholars to denounce any consideration of human interests as “anthropocentric”. The ecocide literature is replete with the continually-echoed assertion that an “ecocentric” provision must feature an absolute prohibition, with no allowance for human impacts. These are demonstrable misunderstandings of both terms. Ecocentrism is concerned for all living things, including humans. Furthermore, ecocentrism does not ignore basic science. Hence it recognizes that humans, like all creatures, cannot survive without drawing from and impacting the environment. While numerous ecocide commentators reject any balancing between human and non-human interests, this ironically precludes the sophisticated assessment that an ecocentric position requires. To exclude consideration of human well-being is not “ecocentric”; it is “misanthropic”. This widespread error in ecocide literature has led to prescriptions that are scientifically ungrounded and ethically untenable. It has impeded the needed nuanced debate. This is one of two companion articles that discuss recurring common over-simplifications which are currently impairing the ecocide debate. The companion article unpacks the empirical and ethical reasons why simply banning all high-impact activity is not as simple as proponents appear to assume. The goal of these two articles is to foster a “second phase” of the ecocide debate, a more mature discussion that is conversant with environmental ethics, science, and the limits of criminal law.

Identifiants

OPENALEX

W7154935882

DOI

10.1080/13642987.2026.2656484

Repères documentaires

Famille documentaire

Doctrine

Types déclarés par les sources

article

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

Sources

OpenAlex · Document 1 · Document 2

• DOI · https://doi.org/10.1080/13642987.2026.2656484
• OpenAlex · https://openalex.org/W7154935882

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:w1927508922 · CITES
• openalex:w2008727260 · CITES
• openalex:w2073141645 · CITES
• openalex:w2109850972 · CITES
• Making Wild Law Work—The Role of ‘Connection with Nature’ and Education in Developing an Ecocentric Property Law · CITES
• openalex:w2496455427 · CITES
• openalex:w2771549989 · CITES
• Anthropocentrism: More than Just a Misunderstood Problem · CITES
• openalex:w2889021054 · CITES
• openalex:w3191652750 · CITES
• Earth Jurisprudence · CITES
• openalex:w4298339389 · CITES
• openalex:w4327969648 · CITES
• openalex:w4387058731 · CITES
• openalex:w4398155252 · CITES
• openalex:w4400018756 · CITES
• openalex:w4401228724 · CITES
• From ecocide to ecocentrism: Conceptualising environmental victimhood at the International Criminal Court · CITES
• openalex:w4403942326 · CITES
• ‘Human, all too human’: the anthropocentricisation of ecocide · CITES

0 références entrantes au sein du corpus détecté

Statut documentaire

Pertinence à examiner

Bibliothèque

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