SCIEPublish

Thick and Thin Roots—Rights of Nature in Germany and New Zealand

lssue 3, Volume 3
Part of Special Issue Transformative Practices: Rights of Nature and the Good Life
Download PDF
Cite This Article
Contents

Article Open Access

Thick and Thin Roots—Rights of Nature in Germany and New Zealand

Stefan Knauß 1,* Andreas Gutmann 2 André Kahl 3 Jenny García Ruales 4 Tim Wiliams 5 Janina Reimann 2 Klaus Bosselmann 5

Author Information
Other Information
1
Institute of Geosciences and Geography, Martin-Luther-University Halle-Wittenberg, Von-Seckendorff-Platz 4, 06120 Halle (Saale), Germany
2
Kassel Institute for Sustainability, University of Kassel, Mosenthalstrasse 8, 34117 Kassel, Germany
3
Institute for Political Science, Martin-Luther-University Halle-Wittenberg, Emil-Abderhalden-Straße 26/27, 06108 Halle (Saale), Germany
4
Department of Cultural and Social Anthropology, Philipps University of Marburg, 35032 Marburg, Germany
5
Faculty of Law, University of Auckland, Auckland Central, Auckland 1010, New Zealand
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.

Received: 18 November 2025 Revised: 15 December 2025 Accepted: 05 March 2026 Published: 02 April 2026

Creative Commons

© 2026 The authors. This is an open access article under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Views:40
Downloads:8
Ecol. Civiliz. 2026, 3(3), 10010; DOI: 10.70322/ecolciviliz.2026.10010
ABSTRACT: Rights of Nature (RoN) represent an innovative form of environmental governance. However, the diverse application of RoN across varying socio-ecological contexts remains under-researched. This paper employs the “Roots of Rights” (RoR) approach for a comparative analysis. We examine RoN’s institutionalisation, implementation, and contestation in Germany and Aotearoa New Zealand, focusing on underlying relational values. Our analytical framework investigates two core dimensions: political dynamics of marginalisation and the role of relational approaches in the codification process. The findings reveal a fundamental divergence in RoN’s function. In Germany, RoN operates primarily as a radical theoretical tool. It is used by civil society to challenge the prevailing anthropocentric legal tradition. Conversely, legal personhood in New Zealand (e.g., Whanganui River) is a direct political product of Treaty Settlements. These frameworks serve the political self-determination and emancipation of Māori Iwi. Crucially, they codify a deeply-rooted, pre-existing relational worldview (tikanga). We conclude that RoN functions as a “thin” conceptual instrument in Germany, but as a ‘”hick”, politically instrumental means of securing non-hegemonic norms in New Zealand.
Keywords: Rights of Nature; Relational values; Legal personhood; Germany; New Zealand; Māori; Decolonisation; Environmental governance
TOP