If Rivers Have Rights, do Fish Have Rights Too? Examining the Relationship Between Rights of Nature and Animal Rights

Abstract

This article examines the intersection of the Rights of Nature (RoN) and animal rights, two increasingly influential paradigms in both academic discourse and judicial practice. While RoN has gained global recognition, with various jurisdictions attributing legal personality and/or rights to natural entities, the inclusion of individual wild animals remains contested. Animal rights scholars have expressed concerns that RoN might sacrifice individual animals too easily, potentially leading to a form of “environmental fascism”. Proponents of rights of nature, in turn, question the adequacy of animal rights as this framework tends to privilege sentient animals over non-sentient entities, potentially endangering the ecological equilibrium. It remains therefore particularly unclear whether and to what extent the recognition of rights of nature implies the recognition of individual animal rights. This article examines the relationship between the two, taking account of the existing case law in different jurisdictions. It argues that, despite some degree of theoretical divergence between RoN and animal rights, the two paradigms can (and should) be reconciled in legal practice, meaning that, if rivers have rights, fish have rights too.