A Rights Turn in Biodiversity Litigation?

The article examines how lawsuits connect harm to species and ecosystems with human rights, Indigenous peoples’ rights, and the rights of nature. It reviews developments in biodiversity and rights-based climate litigation, then examines a preliminary, non-exhaustive collection of 49 biodiversity cases from 20 jurisdictions. It groups the cases by the rights they invoke, considers opportunities and challenges for future litigation, and includes a table of cases.

It identifies four overlapping approaches: the right to a healthy environment; other rights such as life, health, food, and culture; Indigenous peoples’ rights; and the rights of nature. A single case may draw on more than one approach.

The article discusses cases involving the protection of Philippine forests, the effects of environmental damage on communities along Colombia’s Atrato River, and threats to Ecuador’s Los Cedros forest from mining. Together, they show how claims can address both ecological harm and its consequences for people and communities.

Indigenous peoples’ claims can connect biodiversity protection with territory, culture, and participation in decisions affecting ancestral lands. Rights of nature claims can ask courts to consider harm to an ecosystem itself. The article treats both as important paths for biodiversity litigation.

The article finds signs of one, but does not claim that a settled shift has occurred. Its case collection is preliminary, and many lawsuits have yet to develop a clear account of how biodiversity loss violates particular rights.

The Kunming–Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework gives advocates commitments and targets—including the goal of conserving 30 percent of land and water areas by 2030—to draw on when assessing government action. The article considers how litigation might help put those commitments into practice; the framework does not automatically create an enforceable domestic claim.

The article is useful for lawyers, community and Indigenous advocates, researchers, and policymakers working on biodiversity protection. Its case survey and legal categories offer a starting point for finding relevant decisions, developing claims, and identifying where stronger evidence or legal arguments are needed.