Abstract
<p>The rights of nature doctrine have emerged as a crucial legal framework, granting ecosystems and natural entities personhood to challenge human centric systems. In today’s digital age, the monitoring, management, and replication of natural systems has rapidly heightened, for example AI climate models or blockchain tracked resources, depicting that traditional frameworks prove to be inadequate. This paper argues that the personhood of the environment must evolve and develop further to consist of the digital extension of said natural systems, ensuring to recognize both opportunities and threats it poses. Analyzing comparative case studies, including but not limited to Ecuador’s constitutional recognition of nature, New Zealand’s Whanganui River Jurisprudence, Bolivia’s statutory recognition of the Rights of Mother Earth, and Colombia’s judicial extension of personhood to ecosystems, and thus emerging legal frameworks of digital and artificial personhood under European law, this paper identifies and accentuates on a critical gaps; law currently treats nature and technology as distinct entities ergo failing to address the reciprocity between ecological and digital rights and systems.This paper questions; how can legal personhood evolve to account for the digitization of nature?. In an attempt to bridge this overlooked gap, this paper introduces the concept of “Digital Ecological Jurisprudence” (DEJ); a framework that reworks and reconceptualizes legal personhood to consist of digital representations, algorithmic governance, and ecological data sovereignty. The study further evaluates how artificial intelligence has transformed environmental governance from reactive to predictive systems, subsequently exposing gaps in accountability, liability, and regulatory oversight. Through the integration of environmental philosophy, systems theory, and cyberlaw, DEJ proposes mechanisms for granting nature a voice in governance utilizing technological tools not just as instruments but as agents for environmental accountability. It further establishes principles of shared responsibility between state institutions and private technological actors, precautionary digital governance, and extended legal personhood. This paper demonstrates that recognizing nature’s digital rights is not a theoretical exercise but a genuine and practical necessity for the prevention of technological exploitation and the continuous thriving of ecological sustainability. The impacts arenumerous, from global policy, ethics of AI, and environmental law, suggesting a paradigm shift where legal protection of ecosystems is inseparable from digital regulation.</p>