Property for Nature

doi:10.1017/9781108769327.015

11 - Property for Nature

from Part III - Perspectives

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 16 March 2023

Yaëll Emerich

Edited by

Sandy Lamalle and

Peter Stoett

Show author details

Sandy Lamalle: Affiliation:
Concordia University, Montréal
Peter Stoett: Affiliation:
Ontario Tech University

Book contents

Get access

Summary

Property law is increasingly confronted with limits and modifications arising from environmental and social contexts. The objective of this chapter is to highlight how property law can provide answers to environmental challenges, by adapting several of its fundamental concepts to the polymorphism of environmental and social issues. Starting with a study of the theoretical movement of Earth jurisprudence, the chapter suggests that it is possible to consider Nature as a subject of legal interests, allowing it to acquire legal standing. It also suggests that it is necessary to reconceptualise property and its narrative to develop, in both civil and common law, a more limited, relational and functional conception of property. In addition, the polymorphic heritage of property law makes it possible to call upon the civilian concept of patrimony, in its symbolic or technical function, to protect the environment.

Keywords

property law nature biocentrism ecocentrism civil law common law patrimony ecosystems legal subject trust

Type: Chapter
Information: Representations and Rights of the Environment , pp. 259 - 286

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108769327.015 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2023

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Primary Sources

Canadian Pacific Railway Co. v. Vancouver (City) 2006 SCC 5Google Scholar

Fiducie du Domaine Saint-Bernard (Re) 2006 CanLII 56910 (QC RACJ); SOQUIJ AZ-50390964Google Scholar

Lachance (Succession de) 2008 QCCS 1094; JE 2008–846Google Scholar

Sierra Club v. Morton, 405 US 727 (1972)Google Scholar

St Lawrence Cement Inc. v. Barrette 2008 SCC 64Google Scholar

Wallot v. Québec (Ville de) 2011 QCCA 1165Google Scholar

Secondary Sources

Constitution of the Republic of Ecuador 2008, Political Database of the Americas, arts. 71–72, translation. http://pdba.georgetown.edu/Constitutions/Ecuador/english08.html. [Constitution of Ecuador]Google Scholar

Constitution of the Plurinational State of Bolivia 2009, Oxford University Press, preamble, www.constituteproject.org/constitution/_Bolivia_2009.pdf [Constitution of Bolivia]Google Scholar

Government of New Zealand (2017a). Te Awa Tupua (Whanganui River Claims Settlement) Act 2017, assent 20 March 2017, Government of New ZealandGoogle Scholar

Government of New Zealand (2017b). Te Awa Tupua (Whanganui River Claims Settlement) Act 2017, assent 20 March 2017. Version as 12 April 2022Google Scholar

Act to affirm the collective nature of water resources and to promote better governance of water and associated environments (the Water Act), RLRQ c. C-6.2, Art. 8 [Water Act]Google Scholar

Administrative Procedure Act, 5 USC §§ 701ff.Google Scholar

Civil Code of Lower CanadaGoogle Scholar

French Civil Code, translated by David W. Gruning, Art. 544, www.legifrance.gouv.fr/Traductions/en-English/Legifrance-translations Google Scholar

Natural Heritage Conservation Act, c. C-61.01Google Scholar

Québec, Hansard, National Assembly, vol. 41, no. 44, 11 June 2009Google Scholar

AG Res. 2749 (XXV) 16 December 1970Google Scholar

UN Conference on the Human Environment, Declaration of the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment (June 1972), www.un-documents.net/unchedec.htm Google Scholar

UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (adopted 10 December 1982, entered into force 16 November 1994) 1833 UNTS 3 (UNCLOS)Google Scholar