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.

The right to a healthy environment: lights and shadows of the anthropocentric legal approach / Giacomini, Giada; Fratto Rosi Grippaudo, Emanuele. - (2022). ((Intervento presentato al convegno Global Ecological Integrity Group, 28th Annual Meeting tenutosi a Montreal, Canada.

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

Giada Giacomini
Writing – Original Draft Preparation
;
2022

Abstract

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.
File allegati a questo prodotto
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: http://hdl.handle.net/11573/1601902
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus ND
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact