The making of rights of nature: nine patterns in a decade of empirical research on social-ecological drivers and actors

Abstract Rights of Nature (RoN) cases, where nature is granted legal rights, are rapidly gaining traction across the globe. Although there are many individual and comparative case studies, the extent to which emerging RoN cases share specific patterns that can be observed in the processes leading to the adoption of RoN is yet to be understood. To fill this gap, we provide a systematic literature review of the decade of empirical research on the RoN. Building on the Institutional Analysis and Development framework, our review uses an in-depth analysis, with a special focus on eliciting evolving patterns across cases. The analysis demonstrated that the drivers of RoN processes are extraordinarily complex and case-specific, shaping our understanding of RoN itself. The identified nine patterns show that understanding RoN as a ‘revolutionary ecocentric movement’ is too simplistic, and it should rather be understood as a boundary object that connects place-based non-human and human well-being and relations, as well as formal and informal institutional conditions. The review revealed that themes such as justice, property rights, and personal engagement of powerful actors have been key in driving RoN cases worldwide. Likewise, contrary to the conventional perception, concern for the environment is not a common driver of RoN, and Indigenous or local communities cannot be universally and simply described as advocating actors for RoN, while undoubtedly it is often their interests that are most affected by RoN reforms. However, RoN-related rules tend to create space for questioning the purely instrumental and short-term perspectives towards nature and for redirecting the focus to relational and representational thinking. We found that disciplinary silos contributed to the historically veiled image of RoN due to insufficient engagement with interdisciplinary and decolonizing research methods. The revealed patterns can guide scholars, practitioners, and policymakers in rapidly growing cases worldwide to learn from the existing empirical knowledge. Our study is particularly valuable in times when multiple local-to-global and increasingly acute challenges around nature and biodiversity are putting pressure on societies to develop more ‘fundamental’ or ‘transformative’ approaches bridging science, policy, and practice and especially those that can better integrate diverse knowledge systems of Indigenous and local communities.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Environmental Research Communications
Published
2025-06-18
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1088/2515-7620/ade5f2
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Environmental law and policy
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
31.97

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The making of rights of nature: nine patterns in a decade of empirical research on social-ecological drivers and actors

Ilkhom Soliev, F. Pirscher, M. M. Schreiber
2 citations
Environmental Research Communications
Environmental law and policy
31.97
article

The making of rights of nature: nine patterns in a decade of empirical research on social-ecological drivers and actors

Ilkhom Soliev, F. Pirscher, M. M. Schreiber
article en
2 citations

Abstract

Abstract Rights of Nature (RoN) cases, where nature is granted legal rights, are rapidly gaining traction across the globe. Although there are many individual and comparative case studies, the extent to which emerging RoN cases share specific patterns that can be observed in the processes leading to the adoption of RoN is yet to be understood. To fill this gap, we provide a systematic literature review of the decade of empirical research on the RoN. Building on the Institutional Analysis and Development framework, our review uses an in-depth analysis, with a special focus on eliciting evolving patterns across cases. The analysis demonstrated that the drivers of RoN processes are extraordinarily complex and case-specific, shaping our understanding of RoN itself. The identified nine patterns show that understanding RoN as a ‘revolutionary ecocentric movement’ is too simplistic, and it should rather be understood as a boundary object that connects place-based non-human and human well-being and relations, as well as formal and informal institutional conditions. The review revealed that themes such as justice, property rights, and personal engagement of powerful actors have been key in driving RoN cases worldwide. Likewise, contrary to the conventional perception, concern for the environment is not a common driver of RoN, and Indigenous or local communities cannot be universally and simply described as advocating actors for RoN, while undoubtedly it is often their interests that are most affected by RoN reforms. However, RoN-related rules tend to create space for questioning the purely instrumental and short-term perspectives towards nature and for redirecting the focus to relational and representational thinking. We found that disciplinary silos contributed to the historically veiled image of RoN due to insufficient engagement with interdisciplinary and decolonizing research methods. The revealed patterns can guide scholars, practitioners, and policymakers in rapidly growing cases worldwide to learn from the existing empirical knowledge. Our study is particularly valuable in times when multiple local-to-global and increasingly acute challenges around nature and biodiversity are putting pressure on societies to develop more ‘fundamental’ or ‘transformative’ approaches bridging science, policy, and practice and especially those that can better integrate diverse knowledge systems of Indigenous and local communities.

Environmental Research CommunicationsVol. 7(7)
Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society (CA), Luther University (KR), German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (DE), Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg (DE)
Arts and Humanities Research Council
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 1%
Environmental law and policy
31.97
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.