Last week, I had the opportunity to represent Earth Law Center at New York Climate Week, speaking on a panel about the rights of rivers in the Balkans. The contrast between Climate Week and my summer in the landscapes of Durango, Colorado could not have been clearer.

In Durango, surrounded by the rugged beauty of the San Juan mountains, the relationship between humanity and nature was inescapable. In the concrete jungle of New York City, that connection is strikingly absent. In Durango, the focus was on grassroots movements harmonizing human existence with nature; in New York, we were weighed down by global policy discussions that often sidelined the voices of nature and local communities.

From left to right: Grant Wilson, me, Sarah Cameron Sunde, Missy Lahren, Will Szal, and Tony Zelle at Climate Week’s “Rivers as a Catalyst for Change” event.

In human rights work, we frequently confront ethical dilemma of advocating for human rights while remaining disconnected from the victims of abuse and the nuances of their experiences. This raises an interesting question for Earth law: does the dilemma extend to rights of nature? Does this dilemma translate to nature’s rights? On the one hand, nature’s rights do not exist in isolation; part of the Earth law movement involves revealing the co-violations of nature’s rights and human rights, highlighting the inevitable overlap between the two. Conversations on the rights of rivers—deeply intertwined with human rights violations—must include the voices of those affected.

The guardianship approach takes this a step further, asserting that only those with direct relationships to natural bodies should represent them in legal settings. In many cases, these are Indigenous communities. In the Balkans, it is the local populations who live alongside rivers, seas, and forests—those most directly impacted—who should be granted legal guardianship.

However, from a truly ecocentric perspective, these conversations should not take place away from the natural bodies themselves. Discussions about the personhood of the Neretva River should unfold on its banks. Policies concerning the rights of the Mediterranean should be implemented on its waters. Conferences like Climate Week ought to happen in the natural world, where the pulse of nature can inform our dialogue.

Dam on the River Neretva, from bankwatch.org.

Yet, during my time at Climate Week, Earth lawyer Tony Zelle posed an intriguing question: if humans are indeed part of nature, if we are one and the same, can cities also be considered nature? This perspective invites a re-evaluation of how we frame our relationship with urban environments and their role within the broader ecological context. It challenges us to consider how urban spaces can be integrated into the Earth law conversation, as we seek to harmonize human development with the rights of nature.

As I continue my legal education, I carry these reflections with me. How can we bridge the gaps between urban activism, human rights, and the rights of nature? The intersection of these fields offers rich potential for co-advocacy, urging us to adopt an ecocentric perspective that recognizes the interconnectedness of all life. By amplifying the voices of those most affected—both human and natural—we can develop holistic strategies that protect both human communities and ecosystems.

Some strategies employed by Earth Law Center include collaborative initiatives that focus on empowering local populations to advocate for their natural environments, ensuring that their cultural ties to the land are respected and integrated into legal frameworks. Workshops that bring together environmental activists, human rights defenders, and Indigenous leaders foster dialogue and shared strategies, creating a united front for both human rights and nature’s rights. Campaigns highlight co-violations work to galvanize broader public support. Some of this work was happening at Climate Week.

A broader cultural understanding that protecting rivers and forests also safeguards the livelihoods and cultural identities of the communities that depend on them is still being built. Our understandings of the downstream impacts on other communities is still growing. What ELC is ultimately working towards is a path toward a future where the health of both humanity and the natural world are prioritized and celebrated.