In recent years, the urgency to address environmental degradation has reached unprecedented levels, compelling legal scholars, policymakers, and environmental activists to advocate for the formal criminalization of “ecocide.” This emerging concept refers to the most egregious acts of environmental destruction that cause widespread, severe, and long-lasting damage to ecosystems. Experts publishing in The BMJ have underscored the imperative that individuals—particularly those in positions of power such as corporate executives and government officials—must be held personally accountable for such violations. This push for criminal accountability represents a transformative shift in environmental justice, moving beyond traditional regulatory frameworks toward a legal paradigm where environmental harm is treated as a grave criminal offense.
The origins of the term “ecocide” date back to 1970 when biologist Arthur Galston first introduced it to describe the extensive environmental damage caused during the Vietnam War. His alarm over the use of herbicides and defoliants that devastated vast swathes of forest and agricultural land signaled an early recognition of environmental destruction as a moral and legal crisis. Over fifty years later, as climate change accelerates with multifaceted impacts—including rising sea levels, accelerated biodiversity loss, and disrupted biogeochemical cycles—there is growing momentum to enshrine ecocide as an international crime. This would provide a robust legal mechanism to deter and punish actions that irreparably harm the natural world.
One of the most promising legal developments in this respect occurred in May 2025, when Scotland introduced a pioneering bill seeking to criminalize ecocide domestically. This legislative effort places Scotland alongside a handful of nations including Argentina, Belgium, the Dominican Republic, Italy, the Netherlands, and Peru, all of which have begun to recognize ecocide in their legal systems. Such national enactments are critical because they complement and strengthen the prospect of international criminal accountability. The integration of ecocide into the jurisdictional scope of the International Criminal Court (ICC) is also being actively proposed as a watershed moment for environmental law, potentially allowing prosecution of severe environmental crimes on a global scale.
Despite these advances, significant challenges remain within the ICC framework. The current system predominantly entrusts states with the responsibility to investigate and prosecute crimes under its jurisdiction. This decentralized enforcement mechanism means that progress toward ecocide criminalization depends heavily on the willingness and capacity of individual countries to adopt and rigorously apply relevant laws. Therefore, it is essential that countries with the legal and political will step forward as leaders. The United Kingdom, for example, introduced a bill in 2023 aimed at criminalizing ecocide, yet this proposal has stagnated in Parliament. Expert commentary suggests that reviving and advancing such legislation could position the UK as an exemplar in the global environmental governance landscape.
The rationale for criminalizing ecocide at the domestic level is multifaceted and deeply rooted in legal theory and environmental ethics. By shifting the burden of responsibility onto individuals, including high-ranking decision-makers, criminal laws establish personal liability that regulatory fines or civil remedies often fail to achieve. This personal accountability serves as a potent deterrent, influencing corporate and governmental behavior by creating tangible legal risks for those who authorize or enable environmental destruction. Criminal sanctions also carry expressive significance; recognizing environmental harm as a criminal offense signals a profound societal condemnation that transcends bureaucratic compliance and fosters a broader cultural commitment to ecological stewardship.
Environmental harm historically has been treated primarily as a regulatory matter—addressed through administrative penalties, permits, and mitigation measures. However, such approaches frequently lack the capacity to prevent large-scale harm or ensure justice for affected communities and ecosystems. Incorporating criminal law into environmental protection not only elevates the seriousness of these offenses but also catalyzes systemic change in societal values and legal norms. According to the scholarship featured in The BMJ, the expressive power of criminal law can engender shifts in human consciousness, promote accountability, and stimulate policy innovations that align with long-term planetary sustainability.
Public support for the criminalization of ecocide is robust and growing. A comprehensive Ipsos survey conducted in 2024 involving 22,000 respondents across the G20 countries revealed 72% overall approval for criminalizing ecocide. Intriguingly, support within the UK was even higher, with 78% of respondents favoring such legislation. This widespread public endorsement reflects a deepening awareness of the interconnectedness between environmental health and human well-being, as well as a desire for legal frameworks that can effectively address the root drivers of environmental crises. Harnessing this consensus through legislative action represents a significant opportunity for governments.
The environmental implications of criminalizing ecocide extend beyond deterrence. They embody a shift toward recognizing the intrinsic rights of ecosystems and non-human entities—a philosophical evolution aligned with concepts such as Earth jurisprudence and rights of nature. This legal recognition challenges anthropocentric paradigms by affirming the inherent value of ecological systems, regardless of their direct utility to humans. Establishing ecocide as a criminal offense would place environmental harm on a par with other universally condemned crimes, such as genocide and war crimes, reflecting its profound impact on biodiversity, human livelihoods, and future generations.
Technically, defining ecocide in legal terms requires precise and comprehensive language that captures the scale, severity, and intent of harmful acts while balancing the need for enforceability and evidence standards. The proposed definitions typically focus on acts causing substantial environmental damage or destruction that is either deliberate or recklessly indifferent to the consequences. Establishing the thresholds for what constitutes “widespread,” “long-term,” and “severe” damage is a complex process involving ecological science, jurisprudence, and policy considerations. These thresholds are critical to avoid ambiguity and ensure that criminal prosecutions are grounded in clear, measurable criteria.
Enforcement mechanisms also present nuanced challenges, necessitating the integration of expert ecological evidence, forensic environmental science, and sophisticated investigative techniques. Prosecutors would need to demonstrate causation between the accused’s actions and the environmental harm, assess intent or negligence, and evaluate the broader impacts on ecosystems and human populations. Successful prosecutions would likely require multidisciplinary teams, including environmental scientists, legal experts, and community stakeholders. Developing these capabilities represents a major institutional undertaking but is essential for creating a credible and effective deterrent to ecocide.
Finally, criminalizing ecocide has significant implications for global climate justice and sustainable development. Environmental destruction disproportionately affects vulnerable and marginalized communities who often lack political power and legal protections. By holding powerful actors criminally liable, ecocide legislation can contribute to addressing systemic inequities and promoting inclusive environmental governance. Further, it can stimulate global cooperation, as many environmental harms transcend national boundaries. The UK’s potential leadership in passing domestic ecocide legislation could catalyze broader international momentum, fostering norms that prioritize the planet’s health and future prosperity.
In summary, treating ecocide as a criminal offense represents a paradigm shift in legal, ethical, and environmental frameworks. This editorial in The BMJ highlights the urgent need for countries, particularly the UK, to enact domestic laws criminalizing ecocide and actively participate in institutionalizing this crime internationally via courts such as the ICC. With mounting public support, scientific clarity, and political will, criminalization of ecocide offers a powerful tool to hold individuals accountable, deter environmental destruction, and signal a profound societal commitment to planetary stewardship for generations yet to come.
Subject of Research: Not applicable
Article Title: Editorial: Criminalising ecocide
News Publication Date: 20-Aug-2025
Web References: http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.r1715
References:
- The BMJ Editorial, “Criminalising ecocide,” 20 August 2025
Image Credits: Not provided
Keywords: Environmental issues, Environmental policy, Public policy, Science policy, Government, Political science
