Description
Protecting nature is a pressing global concern, particularly with accelerating climate change and resource exploitation. Despite signs of a shifting landscape, nature protection remains an urgent issue. Ecological jurisprudence refers to the legal recognition of the intrinsic value of the non-human world, challenging traditional anthropocentric frameworks that regard nature as property. Globally, there are various governance approaches to nature protection under ecological jurisprudence. This paper aims to compare how different regions adopt distinct governance models to institutionalise nature protection. It will draw on a global dataset comprising 592 entries of ecological jurisprudence to identify broad regional patterns in governance approaches. The dataset captures the diversity of regulatory, constitutional and community-based frameworks, allowing for a comprehensive assessment of how nature is recognised and governed worldwide. Building on this overview, the paper will focus on Latin America and Oceania, regions that are pioneers in ecological jurisprudence and rich in ecosystems, habitats and biodiversity, to examine their governance approaches. The findings are expected to provide insights and establish generalisations regarding regional governance for nature protection. Specifically, the comparative analysis of Latin America and Oceania will highlight two distinctly different approaches. Latin America stands out with its Rights of Nature frameworks, while Oceania embraces indigenous models. By integrating empirical analysis with theoretical reflection, this paper will contribute to ongoing debates on ecological jurisprudence and governance frameworks. Fundamentally, the paper will emphasise the importance of recognising multiple nature-based solutions and advocating for a diverse governance approach to protect ecosystems, habitats and biodiversity.
