Neshan Gunasekera: International rule of law and principles of democracy in every element is connected to the rights of nature. And the Ecuadorian constitution, the changes in Bolivia, all this really matter, not only in those countries but globally, and we are part of a broader ecological justice system. So if you’re going stand against that for narrow political gain, I, I believe being as optimistic as I can, you’re going be brushed aside because nature is way too powerful. Nature doesn’t need us, we need nature. And I think that’s the realization we are coming to quite slowly because any act that we have has a positive impact on the planet. But also, if you’re not careful, every act could have a negative impact and impact on nature has no national boundaries or borders. It has a global impact, whether it’s the way we use water on a day-to-day basis or massive industrial complexes, that builds weapons. And I think this is…we need to come up with a better way of governing ourselves in respecting that our role within nature is very limited.

Mike DiGirolamo: Welcome to the Mongabay Newscast. I’m your co-host, Mike DiGirolamo, bringing you weekly conversations with experts, authors, scientists, and activists working on the front lines of conservation—shining a light on some of the most pressing issues facing our planet and holding people in power to account. This podcast is edited on Gadigal Land.

Today on the newscast, we speak with Neshan Gunasekera, the CEO of the World Future Council. Gunasekera is a lawyer with expertise in environmental and international human rights law. He joins me to discuss the World Future Council’s Policy Award, which highlights how legal systems and policies can be applied to create just frameworks.

The eight winners of this year’s award include policies and laws from Bhutan, Austria, Panama, Spain, Peru, New Zealand, South Africa, and Uganda. Additionally, the BBNJ Agreement—also known as the Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction Agreement, which we’ve covered on the podcast before—also took home an award.

Gunasekera tells me about some key highlights from these award winners, specifically the passage of Rights of Nature laws. This is also something we’ve covered before, especially the case of the Whanganui River, which was granted legal personhood in New Zealand. He discusses key criticisms and positives these laws represent, and why he feels they are the start of policy frameworks that recognize humans are reliant on nature—and that it is nature that gives us rights, not the other way around.

Mike: Neshan, welcome to the Mongabay Newscast. It’s a pleasure to have you with us.

Neshan: Pleasure to be here, Mike, and thank you for the kind invitation.

Mike: Can you first tell us what the World Future Council is and what it does?

Neshan: The World Future Council was set up after many years of consultation, with a view to voicing concerns for the long-term human future and for future generations. It was also established to address a loophole in global governance regarding the medium- and long-term consideration of our impact on the planet.

It has brought together some of the most incredible changemakers who form the council. Right now, there are 50 councillors selected from various parts of the world, who are exemplary leaders and visionaries—people who have done incredible things in their own lifetimes and continue to build a legacy across generations. The Future Council is based on those principles.

Mike: And each year you have what’s called the World Future Policy Award. Can you tell us what it is and why it focuses on different topics each year?

Neshan: Yes, Mike. The World Future Policy Award is considered the world’s leading and pioneering award for future-just lawmaking and for championing those who support such movements. Since 2009, we’ve been giving this award to recognize that change—and a paradigm shift—is possible when looking at future-just frameworks based on principles of international law. The award highlights the need for future-oriented decision-making at a time when multiple crises affect us as a species and as a planet.

These policies champion a shift in consciousness. Each year, the World Future Council focuses its efforts on different areas. For example, in 2009 the focus was on food security. In 2025, the theme is Living in Harmony with Nature and Future Generations.

Mike: Can you go into more detail about why that topic was selected for 2025?

Neshan: There are multiple considerations by the Council in selecting a theme. Living in Harmony with Nature and Future Generations was chosen in recognition of incredible movements across the world connected to what we broadly call the Rights of Nature movement or Earth trusteeship. These bring intergenerational solidarity to what we must do to ensure that, in this century, we act as responsible guardians of the Earth, not as a dominating species.

For too long, humanity has followed a narrow, short-term way of engaging with the planet, disconnecting from the very systems we depend on. This year’s theme reflects the need to reconnect with Earth and to learn from Indigenous worldviews that have existed for millennia but were neglected over the last three to four hundred years, especially since the Industrial Revolution. That’s the main reasoning behind the Council’s choice.

Mike: Looking at the selection criteria for the policies that became winners, what were you and the World Future Council looking for?

Neshan: The selection criteria are based on principles of international law—particularly environmental and intergenerational law. We call it a “future-just lawmaking framework.” After three to four years of internal discussion, this framework was finalized around 2007–2008 and then put into practice.

When evaluating policies, we look at how they impact communities, how they involve key stakeholders—especially at the local level—and how their influence extends beyond a short election cycle. We assess whether these policies have long-term, tangible impacts.

We also examine who is behind them: the organizations, movements, and individuals who have championed them, often against serious odds. We consider how well these policies are supported by scientific evidence and whether they foster evidence-based policymaking for future generations.

The process includes detailed interviews with civil society, local communities, scientists, policymakers, and other stakeholders to assess actual impact and sustainability.

This is the 14th edition of the World Future Policy Awards. In about 10 years, we plan to revisit earlier winners to see how those policies have evolved or been implemented. It’s essential to reflect on whether these frameworks continue to function and to incorporate other knowledge systems and experiences. This long-term approach is deeply influenced by the Indigenous wisdom represented within the Council.

Mike: It’ll be interesting to see what your reflections are in 10 years. There are eight winners this year, including initiatives in Panama, Spain, and New Zealand. What drew your attention to these policies?

Neshan: This year, while exploring what it means to live in harmony with nature, we focused on how a paradigm shift in understanding interconnectedness and interdependence with Mother Earth can take shape. We looked at biodiversity, Rights of Nature, guardianship, and sustainable development—and how these influence our relationship with the natural world.

We also drew from the insights of councilors such as the late Dame Jane Goodall and Grandmother Nganura from the Māori worldview, which encouraged us to consider deeper spiritual connections to nature.

There were over 40 nominations, from which we selected eight. These include biodiversity-related laws in South Africa and Uganda, and Rights of Nature legislation in Spain and Panama.

The Te Awa Tupua (Whanganui River) Act in New Zealand, for example, embodies the wisdom of Whanganui iwi, who see themselves as inseparable from the river. Their philosophy—“I am the river, and the river is me”—captures a profound ecological truth: our breath depends on the trees, and the trees depend on the river.

This simplicity is powerful and often forgotten. The World Future Council works to institutionalize such paradigms, including lobbying for recognition of future generations’ voices at the UN and EU levels. The goal is to ensure that we honor ancestral wisdom while being considered good ancestors ourselves.

Mike: We’ve discussed the Whanganui River before, but one Rights of Nature case we haven’t explored is Mar Menor in Spain. It was granted legal personhood three years ago—the only ecosystem in Europe with that recognition—but it remains unprotected. Water pollution continues, and marine die-offs are recurring. What’s holding it back?

Neshan: It’s a complex situation. Mar Menor’s recognition was incredibly inspirational, led largely by women and local communities with deep ecological knowledge. Often referred to as Europe’s largest saltwater lagoon, Mar Menor reminds us that even a “local” body of water is connected to global waterways.

The movement was supported by scientists who dedicated their lives to monitoring the lagoon’s health and proving pollution impacts, particularly from agricultural runoff. The World Future Council wanted to acknowledge this courage.

The initiative has also inspired others—in Switzerland, Austria, and Germany. But we must also recognize the structural challenges: economic and political developments that restrict such progress.

Mar Menor doesn’t exist in isolation from what’s happening in Panama or New Zealand. These movements are interconnected. Despite global challenges and negative news cycles, the people behind these efforts inspire hope. Many dedicate their entire lives to this cause and pass the work to the next generation.

Legal action and strategic litigation are important, but they must be combined with storytelling and community-driven inspiration. Mar Menor, I believe, is a turning point for Europe—and we must seize that momentum.

Mike: For people disheartened by the slow progress since its recognition, what would you say to reassure them?

Neshan: What they’ve achieved is extraordinary. The Rights of Nature movement places ecological and Earth-centered justice at its core. The activists supporting Mar Menor have done something deeply important—not just for Spain, but for the world.

This is a long-term struggle. They are not alone; they are supported by movements across Europe, the Pacific, and beyond. The work ahead involves linking local action to broader governance frameworks. Real change requires amplifying these efforts globally.

The World Future Council aims to strengthen this paradigm shift through solidarity with movements from the Pacific, Latin America, and Africa. Together, these voices are reshaping global governance.

Mike (note): Hello listeners, and thanks for tuning in. Rights of Nature laws are a topic we’ve covered many times on this podcast. For more, check out our episodes with Victoria Kahui and Elizabeth Mendenhall, which discuss the Whanganui River and the BBNJ Agreement. If you’d like to support the Mongabay Newscast, please leave us a review or email feedback to podcast[at]mongabay.com.

Mike: Another criticism of Rights of Nature laws is that they impose Western legal systems on something far more complex—arguably making them a flawed way of protecting nature. What’s your response?

Neshan: That criticism highlights a real tension. Current legal systems often view humans as a dominant species and nature as a resource. But Rights of Nature frameworks turn that on its head.

It’s not about humans granting rights to nature—it’s recognizing that we are nature. We’re interconnected and interdependent. Guardianship and Earth trusteeship are the principles shaping this shift.

A powerful example is the case brought by Pacific Island youth to the International Court of Justice. These students—Pacific Islands Students Fighting Climate Change—pushed the UN General Assembly to seek an advisory opinion on states’ responsibilities regarding climate change. Over 90 countries participated, marking one of the most significant cases of this century.

Their initiative came not only from Rights of Nature thinking but from Indigenous worldviews—principles of guardianship and stewardship deeply rooted in Pacific and Māori traditions.

On July 23, the ICJ issued a groundbreaking advisory opinion on state responsibilities to future generations. It harmonized environmental treaties, including the Paris Agreement, with customary international law—acknowledging Indigenous systems as vital to global legal development.

Mike: From a human rights perspective, how instrumental are these laws for Indigenous sovereignty?

Neshan: They’re crucial. We’re at a defining moment in aligning human rights with ecological justice. Indigenous communities, who live most closely with their environments, embody this connection.

Tragically, many of these defenders face persecution and even death for protecting what sustains us all. Human rights law must evolve beyond static, black-letter interpretations to embrace life with a living planet.

The Rights of Nature and Earth Trusteeship movements give humanity a renewed sense of purpose—reminding us that the time for action is now.

Mike: Laws are only as useful as they’re enforced. Ecuador, for example, has Rights of Nature in its constitution, but enforcement remains inconsistent. Is there room for international mechanisms, perhaps an ecocide law, to help uphold these principles?

Neshan: That’s an essential question. We’re a quarter into the 21st century, and we must recognize that national borders mean little to the environment.

International rule of law, democracy, and ecological justice are intertwined. The idea of “ecocide” has been around since the 1972 Stockholm Conference and was later championed by barrister Polly Higgins. It’s now being advanced by Vanuatu as an amendment to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.

There’s growing momentum. Still, laws alone are insufficient without behavioral change and awareness. The ICJ—the highest court in the world—has no enforcement arm, yet its moral authority shapes global norms.

Judicial systems, whether in Ecuador, Australia, or The Hague, form a broader ecosystem of justice. They must work in harmony, fostering a consciousness shift toward peaceful dispute resolution. Only then can we truly claim to be good ancestors.

Mike: I won’t ask you to pick a favorite, but is there one award winner you feel has the most potential to scale globally?

Neshan: That’s a tough one. I’d agree with the jury’s selection for the Global Impact Award: New Zealand’s Te Awa Tupua (Whanganui River) Act.

It took decades—perhaps centuries—of effort. The 2017 Act formally recognized the Whanganui River and its people, granting the river legal personhood and the ability to bring claims against the Crown. This is a monumental paradigm shift.

What’s more, the model continues to evolve. The iwi and government are co-designing governance frameworks through tribunals and local councils. It’s dynamic, not symbolic. Other nations are learning from it, adapting its lessons rather than copying it outright.

Mike: Is there another winner you’d like to highlight before we wrap up?

Neshan: Yes, Panama’s Rights of Nature Law—Law 287 of 2022. It’s quite new but represents a major step forward, led by women scientists and politicians working with communities to drive systemic change.

I’d also mention the UN Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction (BBNJ) Treaty—often called the High Seas Treaty—which recently reached its 60th ratification and will enter into force in January 2026. Recognizing that 71% of our planet is ocean and has equal rights is an extraordinary shift.

Together, these examples—from Panama to New Zealand to Spain—show how these movements are connected and gaining strength.

Mike: Where can listeners learn more about these award winners and the World Future Council?

Neshan: Please visit the World Future Council website and the dedicated World Future Policy Award page. I’ll share the details with you, Mike, for the show notes.

Before we close, I’d like to share something that inspires me—a story told by the late scientist Wangari Maathai about the hummingbird. When the forest was burning, all the big animals stood aside, but the little hummingbird carried water in its beak, flying back and forth to douse the flames. Wangari reminded us that everything we do matters, no matter how small. We can all be that hummingbird.

Mike: Neshan Gunasekera, thank you so much for joining us.

Neshan: Thank you, Mike.

Mike: To learn more about the World Future Policy Award winners and the World Future Council, see the links in the show notes.

If you’re enjoying the Mongabay Newscast, please share it with a friend and leave a review. You can support our work at patreon.com/mongabay. We’re a nonprofit newsroom, and every contribution—no matter how small—helps us continue bringing you stories from nature’s frontlines. Follow us on social media at @mongabay on Instagram, Threads, Bluesky, Mastodon, Facebook, TikTok, and YouTube. Thank you, as always, for listening.