Plant rights

This article has been registered in the quality assurance biology for improvement due to formal or content-related deficiencies . This is done in order to bring the quality of the biology articles to an acceptable level. Please help improve this article! Articles that are not significantly improved can be deleted if necessary.

Read the more detailed information in the minimum requirements for biology articles .

Important information is missing from this article or section. Help Wikipedia by researching and pasting it .

As plants rights are subjective rights for individual plants understood analogous to human rights and animal rights . They are to be distinguished from plant protection law . Plant rights are sometimes considered as a requirement in ethics . The extension of the legal term to plants as legal subjects are part of some physiocentric concepts of natural ethics such as biocentrism and holistic concepts such as ecocentrism . Christopher D. Stone compares the legal status of plants with those without legal capacity , e.g. B. minors , and demands guardianship through a “ friend of a natural object ” ( Christopher D. Stone:, German: “friend of a natural object”). Examples Stone leads class action privileges of various environmental organizations - form which experts and lawyers - to such. B. the Environmental Defense Fund or Friends of the Earth .

Plant rights appear questionable because in most cultures plants do not meet the criteria for being a legal subject .

Plant rights are not comparable to nature conservation, understood as an objective right , or the concepts of giving nature or natural phenomena a dignity.

Rheinau theses

In the Rheinau Theses on the Rights of Plants in 2008, a group of authors and scientists (including Florianne Koechlin , Beat Sitter-Liver , Günter Altner and Jürg Stöcklin ) called for “moral concerns” in dealing with plants and animals. In fact, this group attributed individuality to plants (quote: “Plants are individuals too”). In an extensive catalog, they demand rights, which, however, are primarily directed against the genetic modification and patenting of plant species for commercial purposes, in particular the production of sterile plants.

literature

• Christopher D. Stone: Do trees have rights? Plea for the proper rights of nature. Translation from English by Hanfried Blume. 2013, ISBN 978-3-927369-81-8
• Peter Schiwy: German Plant Protection Law . Commentary and Legal Collection with International Regulations , ISBN 978-3-7962-0395-4

Individual evidence

1. ^ Beat Sitter-Liver , Klaus Peter Rippe : Pros and Cons: Do plants have rights? In: Research Institute for Philosophy Hanover (ed.), Fiph-Journal No. 18, autumn 2011, page 16/17
2. ↑ Christopher D. Stone: Should Trees Have Standing? Toward Legal Rights for Natural Objects . In: David Schmidtz, Elizabeth Willott (Eds.): Environmental Ethics: What Really Matters, What Really Works . Oxford University Press, 2012, ISBN 978-0-19-979351-8 , pp. 87 (English).
3. ↑ Christopher D. Stone: Should Trees Have Standing? Toward Legal Rights for Natural Objects . In: David Schmidtz, Elizabeth Willott (Eds.): Environmental Ethics: What Really Matters, What Really Works . Oxford University Press, 2012, ISBN 978-0-19-979351-8 , pp. 85-90 (English).
4. ^ Matthew Hall: Plants as Persons: A Philosophical Botany . SUNY Press, 2011, ISBN 1-4384-3428-6 .
5. ↑ Beat Sitter-Liver et al .: Rheinauer theses on the rights of plants. 2008 (pdf)