ABSTRACT
This chapter compares the politics of granting legal personhood to the Whanganui River in Aotearoa New Zealand, the Atrato River in Colombia and the Ganga and Yamuna rivers in India. The analysis employs three comparative lenses: the characteristics of the state, the political economy of extraction and resource use, and the politics of knowledge. The chapter highlights significant differences in state capacity and sovereignty among the three postcolonial countries, influencing the implementation and impact of river rights. Economic interests tied to resource extraction are shown to be key drivers of environmental degradation and also factors that impact the effectiveness of legal personhood. Extractivism is of particular importance in the case of the Atrato River. The chapter further examines the interplay of different knowledge traditions, including Indigenous perspectives, state law, religion and scientific understandings of nature. The Whanganui case, resulting from extensive negotiations, is presented as the most successful in integrating local knowledge into law. In contrast, the top-down judicial decisions in Colombia and India face challenges of limited state sovereignty, entrenched economic interests and disconnect from broader political processes. Ultimately, the chapter argues that understanding the political context is crucial for appreciating the emergence and effects of legal personhood for rivers.
