◆이코노미스트가 글로벌 차세대 경제 리더, 청소년 기자단 영 저널리스트와 함께합니다. 영 저널리스트 기자단은 프리미엄 경제지 이코노미스트, 논술 전문 기관 Ni 에듀케이션과 함께 주요 시사 이슈를 팔로우업하고 직접 기획, 취재, 기사 작성 활동을 하며 사회적 문제를 고심하고 해결 방안을 제시하는 과정을 경험하게 됩니다. 이번 기사는 영 저널리스트 기자단이 현 사회현상에 대해 학생들 시선에서 ‘왜’라는 질문을 갖고 직접 취재해 작성한 기획기사입니다. 영 저널리스트 기자단의 기획기사는 영문과 국문, 두 형태로 게재합니다.  

As environmental pollution, climate change, and ecosystem destruction become increasingly severe, questions are growing over whether existing environmental laws are sufficient to protect nature. In response to these concerns, the concept of the Rights of Nature has emerged. Rather than viewing nature merely as a resource for human use, the Rights of Nature represents a legal and philosophical approach that recognizes ecosystems and the natural environment as entities with rights of their own that deserve protection.

In recent years, this discussion has taken a new form on Jeju Island, South Korea, where efforts are underway to recognize Gotjawal forests and Indo-Pacific bottlenose dolphins as eco-legal person. An eco-legal person is a legal entity that grants a particular ecosystem or natural entity legal status, recognizing it as an independent subject of rights rather than merely human property or an object of protection. Proposals to recognize forests and animals as eco-legal persons raise an important question: Can we move beyond an anthropocentric legal system and redefine the relationship between humans and nature?

These efforts are not limited to Jeju. Around the world, discussions continue over how the Rights of Nature can be incorporated into existing legal systems. Mexico, one of the world's most biodiverse countries, has become a particularly important setting for these discussions. Indigenous worldviews have played a significant role in shaping perspectives that regard humans and nature not as separate entities, but as interconnected parts of a larger whole. These traditional perspectives resonate with contemporary efforts to develop new legal approaches to protecting nature.

What, then, does it actually mean to grant legal rights to nature? Where did the concept of the Rights of Nature originate, and what challenges arise when applying it to real-world legal systems? Furthermore, how can South Korea's discussion of eco-legal persons connect with the global Rights of Nature movement?

To explore these questions, we interviewed Marco Antonio Beltrán Navarro, an environmental engineering expert and counselor with specialized knowledge of Mexico's environmental legal framework and Indigenous worldviews. Through this interview, we examined both the potential and limitations of the Rights of Nature and explored the significance of Jeju Island's efforts to designate South Korea's first eco-legal person within the broader global movement to redefine the relationship between humans and nature. 

Q: What led you to study the Rights of Nature?

A: I became interested in the Rights of Nature because it represents a fundamental shift in how we think about law. Traditionally, the main question has been how humans can manage nature effectively. The Rights of Nature takes this a step further by asking whether ecosystems themselves should be recognized as subjects of rights. This challenges several assumptions deeply embedded in modern legal systems. Since I’m from Mexico, I realized that this concept was not entirely new. Indigenous peoples have long understood humans not as beings separate from nature, but as part of it. Studying the Rights of Nature has allowed me to connect modern legal innovation with ancient philosophical traditions that remain deeply relevant today.

Q: Mexico is one of the most biodiverse countries in the world. How do you think this rich biodiversity has influenced the development of the Rights of Nature movement in Mexico?

A: I believe Mexico's remarkable biodiversity has created favorable conditions for the emergence of the Rights of Nature movement. This is partly thanks to the efforts of local communities and individuals who have worked to protect the environment. What makes Mexico particularly interesting is the intersection of biological and cultural diversity. The country is home to a wide range of Indigenous communities whose worldviews recognize rivers, forests, mountains, and animals as living entities deserving of respect. This cultural heritage has influenced academic discussions, civil society initiatives, and certain judicial decisions related to environmental protection.

Q: What do you think is the most important lesson modern society should learn from Indigenous perspectives?

A: I believe it begins with recognizing that humans are not the owners of nature, but rather beings who live within it as part of it. In many Indigenous traditions in Mexico, the relationship with nature is understood in terms of reciprocity rather than exploitation. Rights come with responsibilities, and human well-being and survival depend on maintaining a balance with the ecosystems that sustain life. This perspective does not mean rejecting scientific or technological progress. Instead, we need to recognize that progress should not be measured solely by economic growth, but also by whether we can preserve ecological balance for future generations.

Q: What has been the greatest challenge in integrating Indigenous philosophies into modern legal systems?

A: Fundamentally, the greatest challenge lies in translating fundamentally different worldviews into the language of law. Modern legal systems are generally structured around individual rights, property, and economic interests. Indigenous philosophies, on the other hand, often emphasize collective responsibility, interdependence, and the intrinsic value of ecosystems themselves. The goal should not be to replace one legal tradition with another, but to foster respectful dialogue between different legal and cultural traditions. To achieve this successfully, it is not enough to simply add Indigenous terms or concepts to existing laws. All communities must be given a genuine opportunity to participate in the process.

“Environmental Laws Shaped by Human Standards Must Recognize Rights of Nature”

Q: Why do you think granting legal rights to nature can be more effective than existing environmental protection laws?

A: Existing environmental laws often focus on determining how much environmental damage can be tolerated. In contrast, recognizing the Rights of Nature changes the legal perspective through which we view the natural environment. Rather than treating ecosystems merely as objects to be protected, this approach recognizes them as subjects of rights entitled to remain healthy and be protected. This shift in perspective can strengthen judicial oversight, increase accountability, and encourage governments and society to consider the long-term health and resilience of ecosystems when making decisions. However, the Rights of Nature should not be viewed as a replacement for existing environmental laws. Instead, they can complement the existing legal framework by providing a new ethical and legal foundation for environmental governance.

Q: You mentioned that recognizing nature as a living entity has influenced legal and institutional changes in Mexico. Could you explain how the Mexican Federal Constitution specifically addresses environmental protection and the relationship between humans and nature?

A: The Mexican Constitution does not currently explicitly recognize the Rights of Nature. However, as this issue has increasingly come before the courts and more related cases have been brought forward, judicial decisions interpreting the Rights of Nature favorably have become more common. This has clearly expanded the discussion surrounding the Rights of Nature.

Q: I don’t think simply recognizing the Rights of Nature will immediately transform the relationship between human and nature.

A: That's right. Changing the law does not mean that everyone will immediately change their behavior. Cultural change is necessary to transform people's actions, and I believe education is essential to bringing about this change. This is what I consider the greatest challenge. In addition to changing laws and institutions to protect the Rights of Nature, we must also work to help more people understand their importance, just as you are doing now. Nature provides the resources we need to survive, and protecting it is also a way of giving back and recognizing the value of what we receive from it. Therefore, it is important to foster cultural change through education at every level, especially in elementary, middle, and high schools. We need to ensure that the idea of protecting nature becomes deeply rooted in people's values and behavior.

Q: Do you have any advice for those who support Jeju Island’s efforts to establish Eco Legal Person in South Korea?

A: I have been greatly inspired by the efforts taking place in Jeju because they demonstrate how local communities can contribute to global legal innovation. My advice is to continue building broad coalitions and partnerships that bring together scientists, legal scholars, policymakers, educators, people with traditional local knowledge where appropriate, and members of the public. Successfully establishing the Rights of Nature requires more than legal arguments alone. Public understanding and social legitimacy are equally important.

Throughout the interview, Counselor Marco Beltrán emphasized that “the concept of the Rights of Nature goes beyond simply creating new laws.” Recognizing nature as a subject of rights means changing the way humans perceive the natural world. It requires not only changes in laws and institutions, but also shifts in public awareness and behavior. Legal recognition alone is not enough to ensure that the Rights of Nature leads to meaningful protection, because changing the law and changing how people treat nature are two different challenges. Ultimately, what is needed is a shift in awareness through education and a shared social understanding that protecting nature is a collective responsibility.

As Mexico's experience demonstrates, efforts to redefine the relationship between humans and nature are emerging through the intersection of Indigenous worldviews and modern legal systems. Jeju Island's discussion of eco-legal persons is part of this broader global movement. Granting Gotjawal forests or Indo-Pacific bottlenose dolphins a new legal status would mean more than protecting a single species or ecosystem. It could also encourage society to consider the interconnected well-being of ecosystems and the human communities that depend on them. In particular, if scientific research and data are used to build public support, and diverse stakeholders—including citizens, scientists, legal experts, and policymakers—participate in the discussion, Jeju's efforts could lead to more tangible changes.

Jeju Island is currently pursuing a plan to designate one of its iconic natural features, such as Indo-Pacific bottlenose dolphins or the Gotjawal forests, as South Korea’s first ecological legal person. Kang Seung-oh, director of the Marine and Fisheries Division at the Jeju Provincial Government, stated, “The ninth popularly elected Jeju provincial administration plans to prioritize the designation of tangible natural entities, such as Gotjawal forests, that are separate from residents’ everyday living areas, as ecological legal persons.”

Discussions on designating South Korea's first eco-legal person are still ongoing. However, it is clear that the discussion itself is prompting society to reconsider the relationship between humans and nature.

“Should nature be viewed merely as a resource for meeting human needs, or should it be recognized as a subject of rights that coexists with humanity?”

The search for an answer to this question will extend beyond Jeju Island, becoming part of a broader global effort to grapple with how humanity will live alongside nature in the future.

ⓒ이코노미스트(https://economist.co.kr) '내일을 위한 경제뉴스 이코노미스트' 무단 전재 및 재배포 금지