On July 1, 2025, the reassessment of Swedish hydropower plants will resume under the framework of its national plan – a necessary and long-delayed effort. Swedish rivers are heavily impacted by dams, which have harmed ecosystems and the species dependent on freely flowing water, but traditional legal reforms are no longer sufficient. In an era where the collapse of nature threatens humanity’s future, it is time to recognize nature’s right to exist – and give it the same legal weight as human rights.

Humans have appointed themselves the measure of all things, but the advantages evolution has given humans have often been devastating for other species and entire ecosystems. Humans are extremely efficient hunters and fishers, and they have devastated oceans, wetlands, rivers, plains, and forests. Human-made chemicals spread through the food chain, and the use of fossil fuels impacts the entire planet.

How does this affect humans? According to the World Economic Forum, 55% of the world’s GDP relies on ecosystem services such as pollination, clean water, oxygen-rich seabeds, fish stocks, living forests, and stable climates. When these systems are damaged or destroyed, humans are also affected. Human-caused environmental disasters have previously wiped out civilizations, and it could happen again. Humanity’s dependence on nature is not ideological – it is existential.

But the same evolutionary advantages also make humans capable of restoring, protecting, and giving voice to nature.

Nature carries little weight

Naturally flowing water is rare in Sweden today, largely due to the expansion of dams for hydropower. A reliable source of renewable energy, it has long played a vital role in Sweden’s energy supply, and has contributed globally to the transition from fossil fuels.

However, hydropower severely impacts ecosystems that rely on free-flowing water. The consequences for biodiversity and aquatic species have been significant. Dams alter water flows, block migratory routes for species, and affect both the food chain and a range of ecosystem services.

To ensure long-term sustainability, modern water legislation in line with the EU’s Water Framework Directive is required, as well as updated environmental permits for all hydropower plants. These permits must ensure free migratory paths for fish and other species and reduce negative ecosystem impacts.

However, relying solely on legal reforms within the current worldview is not enough. The Swedish Environmental Code aims to protect nature by regulating human impact, but nature itself lacks rights. This has led to a severely degraded Baltic Sea, drained wetlands, dammed waterways, and tree plantations instead of real forests.

Environmental laws are still based on cost-benefit analyses, where the value of nature is weighed against economic gain. Even though economy and nature are inseparable, nature tends to lose when pitted against economic interests. Nature is viewed as something owned and managed, not as a living whole with the right to exist. As long as nature’s value is measured by its potential for exploitation rather than its intrinsic worth, legislation will continue to protect profit over life.

This is where the concept of the rights of nature comes in. A few decades ago, this idea was seen as odd, but now – in light of the biodiversity crisis – it’s a logical approach.

Changing the legal status of nature would result in a changed perception of that same nature.

In Ecuador, the rights of nature are enshrined in the constitution. In New Zealand, rivers and mountains have been granted legal personhood. In Spain, a few years ago, an initiative was launched to protect the saltwater lagoon Mar Menor by changing its legal status. Due to over-fertilization from local agriculture, oxygen depletion and dead seabeds occurred. When several tons of fish and shellfish washed ashore trying to escape high levels of hydrogen sulfide in the water, it sparked a citizen initiative. This resulted in the Mar Menor lagoon being granted the same legal status as an individual, with the right to exist, thrive, and be preserved, providing better means to protect the ecosystem through court decisions.

These are not symbolic gestures, but effective legal tools.

A natural right to exist

Sweden should advocate for a similar transformation of the law. The expansion of Swedish hydropower has led to sharply reduced salmon populations, and eels are on the verge of extinction. These species are without rights, yet they have a natural right to exist – and thus a right to the migratory paths that make their existence possible. The waterways and their ecosystems also have a natural right to exist. Human power threatens this right, and it is therefore humanity’s responsibility to ensure nature’s continued existence.

Granting legal rights to nature means that certain boundaries cannot be negotiated – just as human rights should not be conditional.

Some might object that a river or an eel cannot speak in a courtroom. But there are also humans who lack that ability. In such cases, a legal guardian is appointed. In the same way, nature can be given representatives to act on its behalf in court.

See related: How do ‘rights of nature’ and ‘legal personhood’ laws differ, and what’s their conservation potential?

Humans must stop separating civilization from nature. When we destroy ecosystems, we are not only destroying the habitats of other species but also our own. Today’s generation may not see the downfall of its civilization, but eventually the bill will come – and it will be unpayable.

Humans are inventive, and it is entirely possible to remove dams, open migratory paths, restore waterways, wetlands, and entire seas. It is also entirely possible to give nature and its species a new kind of legal standing – one that elevates nature’s place in the human worldview.

Experiences from around the world also show that ecosystems managed by Indigenous peoples are often in better condition than those under state control. According to the UN’s panel on biodiversity, some of the world’s best-preserved natural areas are on Indigenous lands. In the Swedish context, it is therefore reasonable to strengthen the Sámi people’s influence over the landscapes where their culture was formed. Preserved culture often leads to preserved nature.

In Hávamál, the Old Norse collection of wise sayings, it is stated:

Cattle die, kin die, one day you too shall die.
One thing I know that never dies: the judgment of the dead.

Not even today’s generation can escape its legacy. How do we want to be remembered?

Emil Siekkinen is an environmental writer and advocate focused on ecological justice, biodiversity, and the intersection of law and nature.

Related audio from Mongabay’s podcast: When rivers gain rights, life can thrive, author Robert MacFarlane argues, listen here:

See related coverage:

Taranaki Maunga, New Zealand mountain, declared a ‘legal person’

Sweden’s ‘nature friendly’ reputation is being shot to pieces (commentary)

How unsustainable is Sweden’s forestry? ‘Very.’ Q&A with Marcus Westberg and Staffan Widstrand

Sámi rights must not be sacrificed for green energy goals of Europe (commentary)