Tobias Becker

• The debate surrounding the recognition of the Rights of Nature has gained global prominence, providing a legal and ethical approach that fundamentally reshapes societal perspectives on their connection with the natural world. This paper explores the challenges of aligning the Rights of Nature with European societal values, highlighting how conventional Western legal systems and cultural attitudes have limited public support for Rights of Nature initiatives. The Rights of Nature (RoN) grants natural entities—such as rivers, forests, and ecosystems—inherent rights, akin to human rights, to exist and thrive independently of human use or exploitation. This perspective, deeply rooted in ecocentric values and often influenced by Indigenous worldviews, diverges sharply from the anthropocentric frameworks that have historically shaped European legal and environmental policies (Kauffman & Martin, 2017). Influential milestones, such as Ecuador’s 2008 Constitution and New Zealand’s 2017 Te Awa Tupua Act, have set significant precedents for RoN by recognizing ecosystems and natural entities as legal persons, affirming their intrinsic right to exist and regenerate without serving solely human interests (New Zealand Parliament, 2017; Constitution of Ecuador, 2008). However, these advances stand in contrast to Europe’s generally anthropocentric legal and cultural perspectives, which frame environmental protection as a means to safeguard human interests. The following section provides an overview of the global RoN movement, underscoring its ecocentric and animistic roots, which emphasize nature’s intrinsic value and agency beyond human utility. A closer look at Europe in section three reveals specific cultural, legal, and political barriers that hinder public support for RoN, including societal unfamiliarity with ecocentric ideals and an ongoing resistance to legal frameworks that prioritize nature's rights. This foundation helps illustrate why Rights of Nature remains an unfamiliar and often controversial concept in Europe, where environmental legislation predominantly supports human welfare and economic growth rather than advocating for nature's independent rights (de Lucia, 2015). The challenges faced by public advocacy for Rights of Nature in Europe are examined in section four through the case of the Mar Menor Lagoon in southeastern Spain. This coastal lagoon, severely impacted by agricultural runoff and nutrient pollution, sparked public campaigns and regional support for its protection. Yet, despite these efforts, proposals to establish the lagoon’s legal personhood encountered substantial resistance. Opposition stemmed from concerns over economic interests, political inertia, and a general lack of societal awareness regarding RoN concepts (García Ruales, Hovden, Kopnina, Robertson & Schoukens, 2023; Guaita-García, Martínez-Fernández, Barrera-Causil, & Fitz, 2022). In the fifth section, this paper advocates for a bottom-up, community-led approach to RoN in Europe, emphasizing the importance of decentralized solutions and public engagement as pathways to overcoming resistance. By fostering local awareness and encouraging grassroots movements, Europe may be better positioned to adopt Rights of Nature frameworks that reflect both ecological needs and societal values. Through this analysis, the paper seeks to provide insights into the interplay between cultural ideologies, legal frameworks, and public perceptions that influence RoN's potential to reshape Europe’s approach to environmental protection.