Landmark legal rulings recognizing rivers as legal persons have reshaped environmental law in several countries over the past two decades. However, a new report suggests that granting legal rights to nature alone has not been enough to halt environmental degradation, as existing legal and political systems continue to prioritize economic development over ecological protection.

The findings come from a report released by the Stockholm Environment Institute (SEI), which examined the implementation of rights-of-rivers laws in Colombia and Bangladesh. The study concludes that while legal recognition represents a significant milestone, meaningful ecological recovery depends on stronger institutions, political commitment, community participation and broader reforms that redefine humanity’s relationship with nature.

The rights of nature movement has gained global momentum by arguing that ecosystems, rivers, forests and wildlife possess inherent rights to exist, flourish and regenerate, rather than being viewed solely as resources for human exploitation. Courts and legislatures in several countries have increasingly embraced this legal philosophy, recognizing natural entities as legal persons capable of being represented before the law.

Despite these advances, the SEI report finds that legal personhood has yet to translate into substantial environmental improvements in many jurisdictions.

Researchers focused on two internationally significant cases. In 2016, Colombia’s Constitutional Court recognized the Atrato River and its tributaries as legal entities with rights to protection, conservation, restoration and maintenance. Three years later, Bangladesh’s Supreme Court extended legal personhood to every river in the country, making it one of the most ambitious rights-of-nature rulings in the world.

Both decisions were widely celebrated as historic breakthroughs in environmental jurisprudence. Yet years later, pollution, illegal extraction of natural resources and habitat degradation continue to threaten the rivers they were intended to protect.

According to the report, the principal challenge lies not in the legal recognition itself but in the institutions responsible for implementing these decisions. Existing governance systems remain fragmented, underfunded and largely structured around human economic interests rather than ecological wellbeing.

The study argues that many legal systems continue to regard rivers primarily as economic assets supporting industries such as mining, agriculture, hydropower and urban development. As a result, newly established legal rights for ecosystems often conflict with long-standing economic priorities and regulatory frameworks that favor resource extraction.

In Colombia, the Constitutional Court ordered the government to establish restoration plans for the Atrato River and created a guardianship model under which both government agencies and Indigenous and Afro-descendant communities would represent the river’s interests.

The Atrato River flows through the Chocó region, one of the world’s most biologically diverse and rain-rich landscapes. The river supports local livelihoods, transportation, food security and cultural traditions while sustaining extensive tropical rainforest ecosystems.

However, the report states that implementation has progressed slowly because of inadequate financial support, administrative delays and poor coordination among government agencies. Illegal mining operations continue to expand across the watershed, causing mercury contamination, deforestation and severe ecological damage.

Researchers also point to changing political priorities that could further complicate environmental protection efforts, particularly where governments promote increased mining or fossil fuel development as part of national economic strategies.

Bangladesh adopted a different legal approach when its Supreme Court granted legal personhood to all rivers in 2019. Rather than defining specific legal rights for rivers, the court issued multiple directives aimed at reducing pollution, preventing illegal encroachment and strengthening river governance.

The National River Conservation Commission was appointed as the legal guardian of the country’s rivers. However, subsequent legal appeals weakened several of the court’s directives, limiting the commission’s authority and reducing its ability to enforce environmental protections effectively.

Bangladesh’s rivers form one of the world’s largest delta systems and are central to agriculture, fisheries, transportation and the livelihoods of millions of people. Despite the landmark ruling, pollution, river encroachment and environmental degradation remain widespread across many waterways.

The report argues that both Colombia and Bangladesh continue to operate within legal traditions that fundamentally prioritize human development over ecological integrity.

In Bangladesh, researchers trace many of today’s governance structures to colonial-era policies introduced during British rule in the eighteenth century. Those systems were designed primarily to maximize agricultural productivity, manage land revenue and strengthen state control over natural resources rather than protect ecosystems.

The report concludes that many of these institutional approaches remain embedded in contemporary environmental governance, limiting the transformative potential of rights-of-nature legislation.

The findings align with broader assessments of the global rights of nature movement published earlier this year. According to the Community Environmental Legal Defense Fund (CELDF), despite the rapid expansion of rights-of-nature laws worldwide, biodiversity loss, pollution and climate change continue to intensify.

The organization notes that rights-of-nature initiatives frequently encounter strong resistance from industries involved in mining, fossil fuel extraction, construction, manufacturing and large-scale real estate development. In some countries, governments have introduced legislation specifically designed to prevent new rights-of-nature laws from being adopted.

At the same time, other nations have expanded legal protections for ecosystems. Ecuador became the first country in the world to include the rights of nature in its Constitution in 2008. Since then, its Constitutional Court has relied on those constitutional protections to revoke mining permits in environmentally sensitive forests, although such decisions have generated significant legal and political opposition.

A key conclusion of the Stockholm Environment Institute report is that local communities play a decisive role in determining whether rights-of-nature laws achieve meaningful environmental outcomes.

The researchers found major differences between the governance models adopted in Colombia and Bangladesh. Bangladesh placed responsibility almost entirely in the hands of a government commission, resulting in a centralized administrative system with limited opportunities for local participation.

By contrast, Colombia established a co-governance model in which Indigenous peoples and Afro-descendant communities share legal guardianship of the Atrato River alongside state authorities. Community representatives formed a collective body responsible for representing the interests of residents throughout the river basin and ensuring that local ecological knowledge informs decision-making.

The report identifies this collaborative approach as one of the most promising aspects of Colombia’s implementation, allowing environmental management to better reflect local ecological conditions, seasonal cycles and traditional land-use practices.

Nevertheless, significant challenges remain. Community guardians often operate with limited financial resources, restricted authority over public budgets and inadequate institutional support. In addition, environmental defenders working to protect rivers and forests continue to face serious security risks in several regions.

The report concludes that legal recognition should be viewed as the beginning rather than the culmination of environmental protection efforts. Without comprehensive legal reforms, effective enforcement, sustained political commitment and meaningful participation by Indigenous peoples and local communities, rights-of-nature laws are unlikely to reverse decades of environmental degradation.

As more countries explore granting legal rights to rivers, forests and ecosystems, researchers argue that future success will depend not only on changing legal definitions but also on transforming the institutions, governance systems and development models that continue to shape humanity’s relationship with the natural world.