The right to a healthy environment: lights and shadows of the anthropocentric legal approach

The “theory of the convergence” suggests that “[i]f two theories have exactly the same practical implications, we shouldn’t spend our time worrying about what other differences there might be between” regarding the difference between non-anthropocentric and anthropocentric approaches in law. This chapter starts with considering the legal meaning of the right to a healthy environment in an anthropocentric perspective, and whether protection of the environment can be indirectly achieved through the protection of a human right. The chapter will draw upon Italian legal system and case law, in a comparative perspective with other countries where relevant examples can be drawn. The chapter will argue for the need to critically rethink the right to a healthy environment. The applicability of rights of Nature presents several obstacles at the practical level because of issues related to legal personhood. We will argue that a new set of rights is needed, rights that deal with the ecological integrity of ecosystems and that would replace the anthropocentric right to a healthy environment. The right of ecological integrity would present an ideal balance between the rights of Nature and the right to a healthy environment. It would recognize that human beings should have a mutually enhancing ecological relationship with the environment. The ecological integrity approach would go beyond the human-centred legal paradigm connected to the protection of ecosystems and the right to a healthy environment.