Share this Post:

unEARTHED. The Earthjustice Blog

It Takes a Good Lawyer To Be a Good Steward


    SIGN-UP for our latest news and action alerts:
   Please leave this field empty

Facebook Fans

Related Blog Entries

by Jessica Knoblauch:
Friday Finds: Kraft’s Blue Box Chemical Blues

Bloggers think chemicals in macaroni are cheesy Two food bloggers are campaigning against the use of chemical additives in the popular Kraft macaroni...

by Tom Turner:
Film:

A stunning, inspiring new documentary film, A Fierce Green Fire, The Battle for a Living Planet, had its theatrical premiere in New York on March 1, a...

by Jessica Knoblauch:
Friday Finds: The Ocean’s Plastics Predicament

Tiny plastics clog the world’s oceans By now we all know about the Great Pacific Garbage Patch—a giant mess of trash in the ocean—b...

Earthjustice on Twitter

View Ben Barron's blog posts
29 July 2013, 9:49 AM
Or why environmental law depends on anthropocentrism

The idea that humans should come first when it comes to our relationship with the natural world traces back to the roots of western culture. For example, in Genesis 1:26, God orders that mankind will “have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, and over every creeping thing that creeps upon the earth.” According to that train of thought, we are the stewards of the planet. The earth belongs to us. It is ours to till and to keep—and to exploit, if we wish. There is a name for this kind of thinking: it’s called anthropocentrism. Humans at the center.

As the field of environmental law has developed and expanded, anthropocentrism has remained at its core. Since the first case Earthjustice ever argued, Sierra Club v. Morton, the key issue has been whether lawyers have “standing” to represent earth’s threatened species and spaces. To have standing, Earthjustice must represent a human client that has suffered or will suffer an “injury in fact” because of pollution, species extinction, or any other threat to the planet’s wellbeing.

For a large number of environmentalists, anthropocentrism is a bad thing. Many believe that wilderness should be protected for its own sake, not because it benefits the human race. Although environmental lawyers have won many victories for the good of the planet, some believe that environmental law is problematic because it promotes anthropocentrism.

But perhaps there is a positive way to think about anthropocentrism, and by extension, environmental law. Maybe it isn’t such a bad thing to put humans at the center—not because we are the most important, but because to control our environmental impact we have to focus on ourselves. If a sustainable human relationship with the planet can be achieved, it will have to come through human actions. We still have an obligation to be stewards: not only of the planet, but also of ourselves.

And of course, the key to limiting our impact is to regulate the activities that create that impact. And that is why we need environmental law.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <p> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <blockquote>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

More information about formatting options

Type the characters you see in this picture. (verify using audio)
Type the characters you see in the picture above; if you can't read them, submit the form and a new image will be generated. Not case sensitive.