Ecological restoration in rights‐of‐nature laws and restoration as a substantive right of nature: challenges and opportunities

Introduction A growing number of countries have adopted legislation that recognizes nature as a subject of rights. The purpose of many rights‐of‐nature laws is linked to restoring biodiversity and ecosystems. Consequently, an ecosystem's right to restoration has emerged as a substantive right of nature. Objectives This study examines the extent to which rights‐of‐nature laws and restoration as a substantive right of nature build on principles and practices of ecological restoration. Methods This article presents the results of a comparative analysis of four legal decisions, six legislative acts, and two resolutions on the rights of nature in relation to criteria based on principles and practices in ecological restoration. Results The general aim of ecological restoration is reflected in the analyzed cases. However, ecosystem restoration as an ecological concept is challenging to the judiciary, which in many cases does not identify what the right to restoration means, even in cases in which ecological restoration is a substantive right of nature. Central aspects of ecosystem restoration are not reflected in the reviewed cases, including the principle that environmental change and historical trajectory are considered in restoration. Conclusions The courts' and legislators' lack of a clear definition of restoration and of specific measures regarding what restoration means for a particular ecosystem likely affects enforcement of restoration as a right. In line with previous research, the right to restoration could be paired with flexible standards for implementation. Principles in environmental restorative justice could inform the development of ecosystem restoration as a substantive right of nature.