The article critiques common Western/anthropocentric beliefs that have dominated ecological spaces, asking readers if ecocentrism, which argues for the intrinsic value of nature, can be used as a framework for justice. Author and masters student Virginia McAll analyzes a case study of how the awarding of legal personhood to Muteshekau-shipu in 2021, commonly known as Magpie River in Canada, has changed conversations of justice, and whether recognising bodies of water as having “rights” could achieve a greater justice, and if so, for whom? The decision to grant Muteshekau-shipu legal personhood was prompted by the damaging impacts of damming for hydroelectric purposes by Hydro-Quebec, and the declaration formed part of wider efforts to protect the biocultural rights of Innus with ongoing land-claims treaty processes. The decision was established through mirror resolutions from the Innu Council of Ekuanitshit and Regional County of Minganie and granted nine legal rights and established guardians to act on the river’s behalf. Based on the case of Muteshekau-shipu, and other international Rights of Nature policies, McAll comes to the conclusion that as a legal tool, ecocentrism can enhance justice for nature. However, based on arguments by Professor Elizabeth Macpherson, ecocentrism by itself does not challenge power structures or create equitable resolutions. Therefore, decolonization must inform ecocentrism in order to ensure justice.
