SC now shifting from anthropocentric to ecocentric approach: Justice BV Nagarathna

Describing the contribution of the Supreme Court to environmental jurisprudence as “overwhelming and significant”, its judge B V Nagarathna on Sunday said the apex court is now pushing for a shift from an anthropocentric to an ecocentric approach on this aspect. “Environmental adjudication is an exercise in foresight, requiring courts to govern the present with an alert consciousness of the future,” she said.

She was addressing the valedictory session of a two-day international conference on the topic ‘The Future of Environment and Climate Dynamics’ organised by the National Green Tribunal (NGT) in the Vigyan Bhavan, where President Droupadi Murmu was the chief guest.

Environmental law must move away from treating nature as property, commodity or resource, Justice Nagarathna said while highlighting that Indian traditions have long placed human beings within, and not above, the natural order.

“The contribution of the Supreme Court to environmental jurisprudence has been overwhelming and significant. In fact, the Supreme Court is now pushing for a shift from an anthropocentric approach to an ecocentric approach in matters of environment,” Justice Nagarathna said. An anthropocentric approach regards human beings as the central or most vital element in the universe, while an ecocentric approach places the natural environment and ecosystems at the centre of moral consideration, rather than just human beings. She said this entails recognising that human interests do not, by virtue of being human, enjoy automatic precedence over the interests of the non-human world. Rather, humans bear obligations towards non-human life that exist independently of their utility to them.

“In recent years, courts across many jurisdictions, including the Supreme Court, have emerged as central actors in giving concrete meaning to the idea of environmental justice.

“This aligns environmental protection with substantive equality, insisting that environmental governance must account not only for aggregated outcomes but for their differentiated social impacts,” she said. The apex court judge said that the consequences of environmental decisions are felt differently across regions, jurisdictions, communities and generations.

“Some bear the brunt of degradation more sharply, while others enjoy the benefits of development more fully. This places before us the question of balancing.

“Environmental governance will frequently require reconciliation between development and conservation, between competing uses of natural resources and between present needs and future interests,” Justice Nagarathna said.

She said that such governance is shaped at the intersection of multiple and often competing domains: science, economics, technology, ethics and even politics.

“Legal standards must therefore remain responsive to new information. In today’s world, we increasingly face transboundary environmental crises, pollution, climate change, biodiversity loss, and the degradation of our shared ecosystems,” the SC judge said.

She underlined that environmental protection is a matter of global regulation, requiring states to account for the consequences of their actions beyond their own territorial limits.

“The international community’s engagement with climate change has acquired institutional urgency through the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and its annual conferences of the parties. In that sense, environmental protection has become an arena in which national action and international responsibility are inseparable,” Justice Nagarathna said.

She said the discussions at the present conference have reinforced precisely the point that rivers, forests, oceans, air and ecosystems do not recognise political boundaries and that climate change, biodiversity loss, pollution, land degradation and water scarcity are interconnected challenges.

Justice Nagarathna said that effective management of these challenges depends upon cooperation between jurisdictions, sharing of knowledge and resources, and equitable responsibility sharing among nations.

The apex court judge said the “pancha sankalp” or five commitments that “environmental leadership demands of us comprise the steadiness of earth, the adaptability of water, the urgency of fire, the openness of air, and the breadth of space”.

Justice Nagarathna cited the concept of the Pancha Mahabhutas, or the five elements, to frame what she described as an essential corrective to modern thinking.

“Earth teaches us patience and tolerance. Air teaches us mobility and liberty. Fire teaches us warmth and courage. Sky teaches us equality and broad-mindedness. Water teaches us purity and cleanliness,” she said.

“Nature is neither inert matter nor an object external to our existence. It is our teacher, sustainer and kin,” the judge said, adding that the environmental crisis, at its deepest level, was a crisis in this relationship.

Humanity, she said, had forgotten that it is constituted by the very world over which it claims dominion.

Drawing on the same imagery, Justice Nagarathna said environmental law could be understood through what she termed “pancha siddhant”, or five principles of sustainable development: the polluter pays principle and absolute liability, the precautionary principle, the public trust doctrine and the intergenerational doctrine.

These, she said, now furnish the vocabulary of environmental governance.

Courts adjudicating environmental disputes were not concerned merely with completed wrongs or injuries already caused, she said, but were equally required to respond to risks unfolding in real time, often amid scientific uncertainty and with the potential for irreversible ecological damage.

NGT Chairperson Justice Prakash Shrivastava said environmental protection must go beyond identifying challenges and focus on building laws, institutions and partnerships capable of responding to emerging environmental threats. He said climate change, biodiversity loss, land degradation, pollution, water scarcity and ecosystem decline were interconnected challenges requiring stronger regional and international cooperation.

“Those with fewer resources often face the greatest risk. Climate action must therefore be inclusive, equitable, and attentive to vulnerable communities and future generations,” Justice Shrivastava said.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta said environmental challenges can no longer be addressed by a single institution or discipline and require the combined efforts of law, governance, science, economics and society.

He said climate change was already affecting air, water, forests, biodiversity, cities and agriculture, and environmental law had evolved into a framework concerned with life, dignity, equality and the responsibility towards future generations. “Our objective should not merely be to carry new ideas with us, but to translate those ideas into stronger institutions, better laws, effective implementation, and responsible governance,” Mehta said.

Manohar Lal, Union Minister of Housing and Urban Affairs and Minister of Power, also spoke at the event. The conference brought together eminent judges and judicial representatives from 17 nations, along with participants from India, including environmental experts, secretaries of various ministries, senior government officials, representatives of state judicial academies, district judges, state legal services authorities and other stakeholders.

It aimed to provide a global platform to foster dialogue by connecting environment, development and justice, along with identifying gaps in policy formulation, implementation and enforcement.