Right to Roam Movement, England: a human rights case study
How does England’s Right to Roam movement intersect with human rights, justice and peace? Would the recognition of access to nature as a universal human right enhance peace with justice, including for the natural environment?
These are the questions I attempt to answer in this essay, with reference to the place of humans in nature, the contemporary eco-crisis and in the context of England’s unique cultural and natural history. I had a good time researching and writing. It’s a piece of academic scholarship, so be prepared for that kind of read.
Here’s how it begins, minus the references.
Introduction
This essay explores the assertion that exclusion of the public from 92% of England’s land and 97% of its rivers denies the principle of a universal human right (HR) to access nature, upholding structural and cultural violences of class-based inequality, resulting in political and social conflict, and contributing to England’s mental health and ecological crises.
This hypothesis is explored using a case study of England’s Right to Roam (R2R) movement. The contemporary movement builds on a history of activism and controversy regarding private property rights versus freedom of access to England’s countryside. Activists argue that the centuries-old evolution of exclusion from land has normalised legal concepts, or “fictions”, of ownership and trespass, resulting in entrenched inequality and a harmful alienation from nature. The R2R movement asserts that R2R is an ancient custom/state of being with deep cultural roots which can co-exist with private ownership, fostering community caring for, and connection to nature.
The movement claims that without the freedom to be in nature, our collective sense of responsibility for nature is lost, sacrificing our health and the health of our environment, because they are one.