From barriers to boundary objects: Rights of nature in Australia

Pilon-Summons, C; Pratt, S; Brown, PJ; Baumber, A

From barriers to boundary objects: Rights of nature in Australia

Pilon-Summons, C Pratt, S Brown, PJ Baumber, A

Permalink

Publisher:: ELSEVIER SCI LTD
Publication Type:: Journal Article
Citation:: Environmental Science and Policy, 2022, 134, pp. 13-22
Issue Date:: 2022-08-01

Open Access

Copyright Clearance Process

Recently Added
In Progress
Open Access

This item is open access.

The embargo period expires on 1 Aug 2024

Adobe PDF

Download Accepted versionAdobe PDF (386.89 kB)

View on publisher's site

View statistics

Full metadata record

Field	Value	Language
dc.contributor.author	Pilon-Summons, C
dc.contributor.author	Pratt, S
dc.contributor.author	Brown, PJ
dc.contributor.author	Baumber, A https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8560-8661
dc.date.accessioned	2022-06-22T04:39:31Z
dc.date.available	2022-06-22T04:39:31Z
dc.date.issued	2022-08-01
dc.identifier.citation	Environmental Science and Policy, 2022, 134, pp. 13-22
dc.identifier.issn	1462-9011
dc.identifier.issn	1873-6416
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/10453/158314
dc.description.abstract	Human pervasiveness on the Earth System, characterised by unprecedented social and environmental crises, demands a reimagining of human-Nature relations. Emerging from Earth Jurisprudence, a Rights of Nature (RoN) approach has been proposed as a legal and conceptual mechanism to interrogate exploitative human-Nature relations and facilitate an Earth-centric transition within Western systems of law and governance. While this concept has gained recent traction in Australia, RoN creation and recognition still faces significant practical and conceptual barriers. This article presents the results of an exploratory qualitative analysis articulating the perspectives of state members of parliament, local councillors, lawyers, academics, advocates, and community volunteers to provide insight and understanding into perceived obstacles to RoN creation and recognition in Australia. Twenty-five key barriers were identified and categorised into a novel taxonomy called the Barriers and Enablers to Rights of Nature (BERN) Framework, with the most salient including: (1) Dominant Paradigms, namely anthropocentrism, economic ideologies, political ideologies and partisanship, and social and political conservatism; (2) Regulatory Obstacles, including the existing regulatory system and rights structures; (3) Vested Interests; and (4) Power, including limited opportunity to participate in decision-making, access to decision-makers, and government levels. In articulating these factors, stakeholder dissonance regarding the employment, definition, and framing of RoN was observed, indicating RoN functions as a boundary object in the Australian context. We consider how identifying RoN as a boundary object may impact advocacy, as well as the implications it may have for overcoming barriers to RoN creation and recognition.
dc.language	English
dc.publisher	ELSEVIER SCI LTD
dc.relation.ispartof	Environmental Science and Policy
dc.relation.isbasedon	10.1016/j.envsci.2022.03.013
dc.rights	info:eu-repo/semantics/embargoedAccess
dc.subject	05 Environmental Sciences, 07 Agricultural and Veterinary Sciences, 16 Studies in Human Society
dc.subject.classification	Environmental Sciences
dc.title	From barriers to boundary objects: Rights of nature in Australia
dc.type	Journal Article
utslib.citation.volume	134
utslib.for	05 Environmental Sciences
utslib.for	07 Agricultural and Veterinary Sciences
utslib.for	16 Studies in Human Society
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Provost
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Provost/TD School
utslib.copyright.status	open_access	*
utslib.copyright.embargo	2024-08-01T00:00:00+1000Z
dc.date.updated	2022-06-22T04:39:30Z
pubs.publication-status	Accepted
pubs.volume	134

Abstract:

Human pervasiveness on the Earth System, characterised by unprecedented social and environmental crises, demands a reimagining of human-Nature relations. Emerging from Earth Jurisprudence, a Rights of Nature (RoN) approach has been proposed as a legal and conceptual mechanism to interrogate exploitative human-Nature relations and facilitate an Earth-centric transition within Western systems of law and governance. While this concept has gained recent traction in Australia, RoN creation and recognition still faces significant practical and conceptual barriers. This article presents the results of an exploratory qualitative analysis articulating the perspectives of state members of parliament, local councillors, lawyers, academics, advocates, and community volunteers to provide insight and understanding into perceived obstacles to RoN creation and recognition in Australia. Twenty-five key barriers were identified and categorised into a novel taxonomy called the Barriers and Enablers to Rights of Nature (BERN) Framework, with the most salient including: (1) Dominant Paradigms, namely anthropocentrism, economic ideologies, political ideologies and partisanship, and social and political conservatism; (2) Regulatory Obstacles, including the existing regulatory system and rights structures; (3) Vested Interests; and (4) Power, including limited opportunity to participate in decision-making, access to decision-makers, and government levels. In articulating these factors, stakeholder dissonance regarding the employment, definition, and framing of RoN was observed, indicating RoN functions as a boundary object in the Australian context. We consider how identifying RoN as a boundary object may impact advocacy, as well as the implications it may have for overcoming barriers to RoN creation and recognition.

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

http://hdl.handle.net/10453/158314