- An international movement to designate ecocide – the causing of wanton damage to the environment – a crime under the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court, is being led by nations including Peru, Brazil, the Netherlands, Italy, Mexico, and Belgium with Scotland potentially next in joining their ranks.
- Environmental degradation affects everyone, and businesses are not immune, either: climate change and ecosystem collapse can drive up costs, pushing corporations and even entire economies toward the brink.
- “Ecocide law not only addresses the unsustainable nature of 21st century capitalism, but also moves toward a future where business and nature need not be at odds,” a member of Scotland’s Parliament and an author contend in a new op-ed.
- This post is a commentary. The views expressed are those of the authors, not necessarily Mongabay.
Every day, decisions are made worldwide that generate substantial profits but cause severe environmental harm. This degradation affects everyone, including the decision-makers themselves. Business is not immune to externalities: climate change and ecosystem collapse are disrupting operations and driving up costs, pushing economies to the brink.
It is a conundrum: whilst the majority of people and organizations do not set out to destroy nature, existing regulatory frameworks provide few mechanisms for meaningful protection. Indeed, our market-based economies evolved under the assumption that natural resources were infinite. The exploitation of the natural world continues because we lack both the means and the incentive to stop it.
Consider a paper company aiming to reduce costs by sourcing wood from untouched tropical forest in Indonesia. Despite the Environmental, Social, and Governance Department’s objections on grounds including potential social and environmental impacts of habitat loss, depletion of local food sources and air pollution from machinery and vehicle dust, the project goes ahead.
Similarly, picture a company supplying cobalt and lithium for electric vehicle batteries. To bolster supplies amid limited global stocks of these minerals, the firm seeks licenses for deep sea exploration in the western Pacific, disregarding potentially irreversible and widespread damage to the marine environment.
In each case the balance sheet took precedence. So how can we engineer the bottom line in order that threats to nature are not just brushed aside?
A powerful deterrent is needed, a way to prevent the controlling minds in organizations — who are often driven by the prospect of short-term financial gain or power — from making decisions that result in significant environmental harm. Under ‘business as usual’ practices, it is cheaper to harm nature — and ultimately humankind — than it is to protect it.
This is where ecocide law comes in. Defined by an expert panel of top legal minds in 2021, the word ecocide means “unlawful or wanton acts committed with knowledge that there is a substantial likelihood of severe and either widespread or long-term damage to the environment being caused by those acts.”
As a crime, ecocide establishes individual criminal liability for major acts of environmental destruction. This means that anyone, from corporate directors to heads of state, could be found guilty and face imprisonment. The fundamental premise of ecocide law is to introduce a critical factor in decision-making at the highest levels: deterrence against the most severe environmental harms. Whereas the status quo favors profit over nature, ecocide law protects nature above all else.
Ecocide law will also be an important mechanism for the safe introduction of new technologies. For instance, the prospect of deep-sea mining for so-called ‘transition minerals’ puts marine systems in peril, despite its role in ‘greening’ the global economy. Ecocide law also supports climate change mitigation efforts by impeding the destruction of the world’s carbon sinks: our oceans, soils and forests. Because healthy ecosystems play a pivotal role in regulating the climate, maintaining their integrity is crucial for climate resilience.
Unlike existing regulatory approaches that struggle to keep pace with new emerging practices and technologies, often resulting in fragmented and delayed protection, ecocide law provides a single, universal standard — a level of harm beyond which it is no longer morally or legally acceptable to act. Ecocide law focuses on the anticipated environmental impact rather than the actions themselves, making it proactive rather than retroactive.
The movement to designate ecocide an international crime under the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court is spearheaded by Stop Ecocide International. During 2024, Belgium has introduced a domestic crime of ecocide, and the European Union introduced qualified offenses that can be “comparable to ecocide” in its newly revised Environmental Crime Directive — a testament to the impact of this movement. EU member states are now required to incorporate the new law into their national legal frameworks within two years.
Scotland — alongside Peru, Brazil, the Netherlands, Italy, and Mexico — now has the opportunity to become one of the first countries in the world to officially recognize ecocide as a crime. Already part of this historic movement, Scotland is following in the footsteps of nations like Belgium and Ukraine, who have been tireless advocates of anti-ecocide laws. A public consultation for the Ecocide (Prevention) (Scotland) Bill went live in November 2023 and received thousands of supportive responses, highlighting the broad coalition backing this cause. The hope is to introduce the formal proposal in the Scottish Parliament before the end of 2024.
At the international level, Volker Türk, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, and Secretary General Antonio Guterres have unequivocally supported the criminalization of ecocide. As the International Criminal Court seeks to strengthen accountability for environmental offenses, the court’s deputy prosecutor recently alluded to the need for international criminal law to meaningfully engage with the planetary crisis, to avoid it becoming obsolete. Inclusion of a crime of ecocide would help adapt the Rome Statute for the modern world.
By creating a powerful incentive to prioritize nature over short-term gain, the recognition of ecocide as a crime has the potential to transform the way in which business is conducted. Holding decision-makers accountable for the most extreme forms of environmental harm can spark a market shift toward favoring stewardship of our natural world.
Ecocide law not only addresses the unsustainable nature of 21st century capitalism, but also moves toward a future where business and nature need not be at odds. This paradigm shift is more than an aspiration — it is a realistic and necessary step toward ensuring long-term prosperity and wellbeing for our planet and future generations.
Monica Lennon is Member of the Scottish Parliament, Scottish Labour and Co-op MSP for Central Scotland and can be contacted about this topic via her website.
Judith D. Schwartz is an author whose work appears in numerous publications, including The American Prospect, The Guardian, Discover, Scientific American, and YaleE360, and her writings for Mongabay can be viewed here. Her latest book, “The Reindeer Chronicles” is a global tour of earth repair, from Norway to Spain, Hawai’i, New Mexico, and beyond.
Related audio from Mongabay’s podcast: Indigenous rights advocate Galina Angarova and environmental journalist Ian Morse discuss the key concerns, impacts, and questions surrounding the mining of ‘energy transition’ elements, which often are found on Indigenous land, listen here:
See related coverage:
Petroperú’s financial troubles could mean no oil spill remediation, communities fear
Brazil’s Carvalho to lead seabed-mining authority following predecessor’s controversial term
Credits
