The report seeks to map out the breadth and depth of what Rights of Nature legislation could cover, including: different possible elements of a legislative framework; case studies; considering subjecthood as a spectrum; the breadth of legal effects Rights of Nature can have; and some possible legislative models. I’m proud and relieved that this is now published, as it may well be my final work on the subject due to medical retirement. I hope this report will be useful to campaigners, scholars and policy makers, and contribute to the ongoing discourse about Rights of Nature.
The germination of this project was the question: what could Rights of Nature legislation in the UK look like? This report does not set out to fully answer this question, but seeks to provide the groundwork for consideration of what form legislative frameworks could take and the contents they might have. There is not one way to bring about Rights of Nature – which is, ultimately, about transforming the breadth of a legal system and relationships with more than human life across society. Instead of one linear route, there are a few dimensions and directions which can be implemented to different intensities and degrees. For the most part, the work is more like different parts of a jigsaw puzzle which compliment each other, rather than competing choices. Ultimately, Rights of Nature seeks to change the dynamic of a legal system so as to cover the various social relations with the more than human. While this would require transformation and legal change on a huge scale, it can be done incrementally and programmatically, as shown in this report, and various strengths and weaknesses of different approaches are discussed. There are many ways in which legislation could end up having little meaningful effect, being formal rights that have no substance, or no teeth, or nature-subjects cannot be meaningfully represented, or other such pitfalls.
One of the key insights is to build outwards from the existing main two models of constitutional rights with ad hoc representation (as in Ecuador) and the ‘personhood’ model seen (with the Mar Menor in Spain and in New Zealand). Instead, this two-dimensional approach (as seen on the diagram) challenges the idea of two distinct models and showing that each exist on a spectrum and can be combined in hybrid approaches, with subjecthood on a spectrum and modular legal effects (each with varying intensity).
CASE STUDIES
The report sets out the breadth and depth of what Rights of Nature legislation could contain using a ‘five elements’ framework: Subjects; Rights; Obligations; Enforcement/Representation; and Other Legal Effects. The report then looks at five legislative case studies using this framework: Western Australia, Federal States of Australia; Bolivia; Peru; Uganda; Spain, the Mar Menor.
During the course of writing this report, I became severely ill with acute post-covid syndrome (‘Author’s Note’ and ‘Methodology and Disclaimer’ sections address this in the report). I will not be able to give presentations on it or write anything up for publication in an academic journal as I might otherwise have, so, anyone who wishes to work with these materials is more than welcome to do so (with appropriate acknowledgement or credit), such as in blog posts, articles, chapters or in presentations. The report is published under a Creative Commons licence.
The report was first published on the Lawyers for Nature website on 19th May 2026 (their announcement blog).