Georg Winter
Basic text
“RIGHTS OF NATURE /
BIOCRACY”*
1. On the current situation and its demand
Through the exploitation of natural resources and the
strain put on the environment by pollutants, our
technological civilization is becoming disconnected from
our ecosystem on such a high level that, in the long run,
the self-destruction of humanity seems not only possible,
but exceedingly likely. Hence our most important future
objective is the reunification of our technological
civilization with our natural environment.
The wall between nature and our technological
civilization must fall!
It is about a quest for the reunification of nature and
technological civilization!
* This contribution is repeated at the end of every volume of the series
“Economic texts concerning the rights of nature / biocracy” and forms
a bridge to the next volume.
2 Georg Winter
The basic demand of this reunification is the fundamental
decision of human society for a sustainable path of
development. The core condition for this in turn is the
general recognition of the “rights of nature”.
2. Phases of development in the relationship
between nature and civilization so far
So far, four phases of development in the relationship
between nature and civilization are to be noted:
1 Primary equilibrium phase – Homo integratus
In the early history of humanity, there was a primary state
of equilibrium in which the activities of humans hardly
impacted the ecosystem. We can describe this phase as
Homo integratus, humans integrated into nature.
2 Relative equilibrium phase - Homo occupans
What followed was a state of relative equilibrium in which
a structured exploitation of resources began, but did not
overwhelm the ecosystem. Humans increasingly occupied
habitats until they achieved a dominant position in the
following phase.
3 Disequilibrium phase - Homo dominans
Massive escalation of the technological activities of
humans qualitatively developed into an endangerment of
the long term existence of human life on earth.
Basic text 3
4 Critical phase - Homo isolatus
We currently find ourselves in the fourth, critical phase in
which humans in many countries on earth have physically
and mentally isolated themselves from nature and
denatured into Homo isolatus. People working in industry
are often viewed merely as means of production,
consumers as sources of profit, plants and animals as
commodities.
We can predict two alternative development axes,
each with three phases of development:
3. “Business-as-usual scenario”
starting from the critical phase
1 Confrontational phase - Homo egocentricus
In the business-as-usual scenario, humans enter a
confrontational phase in which they live only for their
immediate benefit as Homo egocentricus. By doing so,
they risk, in the medium and long term, extreme
destruction and damage – an acceleration of climate
change, catastrophic famine in other countries, military
conflicts over scarce resources and regions that are still
ecologically functional.
2 Destructive phase - Homo anarchicus
The transition into the next phase, the destructive phase,
is fluent. It is marked by overpopulation, mass mortality,
wars over migration and resources, self-defensive
terrorism, and a breakdown of social, cultural and
4 Georg Winter
economic order. It is the hour of Homo anarchicus with its
survival-of-the-fittest aggression.
3 Secondary equilibrium phase under exclusion of
humanity - Homo extinctus
The final phase of this scenario is the secondary
equilibrium phase, which arises when the overstraining of
the ecosystem through emissions, the total exploitation of
resources and the existential wars between the remaining
population groups have led to the extensive extinction of
humanity and subsequently to the protection of nature
from further intrusion by humans. At the end of the
business-as-usual scenario, we find an extinct human
race, Homo extinctus, which once believed itself to be
Homo sapiens.
4. Change-of-course scenario starting from the
critical phase
Our hope and motivation is that starting at the critical
phase, a change-of-course scenario is also possible.
1 Reorientation phase - Homo solidarius
A reorientation phase will lead to the formation of Homo
solidarius, which develops responsibility for disadvantaged
sections of the population, for developing countries in need
of aid, for future generations, and for the protection of
nature and biological diversity. The realization of the selfendangerment of humanity will lead to national laws and
international contracts that will prevent ecological
depletion.
Basic text 5
2 Adaptation phase - Homo fraternus
What follows is an environmentally conscious adaptation
phase in which a sense of responsibility and actions
based on solidarity develop into a culture of fraternity. The
fraternal human, Homo fraternus, acts as a member of a
family which encompasses all living beings, all current
and future generations of humans, plants and animals on
the entire planet. The economic system is integrated into
the ecosystem, which then gradually heals.
3 Secondary equilibrium phase with inclusion of
humanity - Homo reintegratus
While at the end of the first scenario (business-as-usual)
nature enters a secondary equilibrium phase without the
participation of humanity, the change-of-course scenario
leads to nature entering a secondary equilibrium phase
which includes human participation. Increased
environmental consciousness, bitter experience, and
scientific discovery come into effect. Humans reintegrate
themselves into the ecosystem, thus becoming Homo
reintegratus. The technological civilization of humanity
has reached a state of permanent harmony with nature.
5. Position and awareness on the crossroads of
the two development alternatives
Almost tragically, numerous truly environmentally
conscious entrepreneurs struggling for the ecological
optimum are aware that their enterprise is – directly or
indirectly, more or less – participating in the depletion of
earth’s finite resources and by polluting the atmosphere,
6 Georg Winter
even within legal boundaries, contributing to the
continuing destruction of the environment.
Thousands of entrepreneurs are under way to loosen
this entanglement in the global work of destruction. Many
introduce a management system that gives direction to all
areas of the enterprise, from employee training to
logistics, from product development and production down
to the architecture of the production facilities, providing
orientation not only toward economic success but also
toward environmental protection (“environmentally
conscious business management”). Some even include
additional social factors (“Corporate Social Responsibility”, CSR). These entrepreneurs experience that
in many cases, it is possible to minimize resource usage
and atmospheric pollution and, by doing so, improve their
enterprise’s economic success and ability to compete on
the market.
However, far-sighted entrepreneurs are aware that by
such methods they can reduce, but not entirely eliminate
their enterprise’s contribution to the global work of
destruction. The current general economic framework
makes it impossible for entrepreneurs to truly act
sustainably. Their production would become so expensive
that competitors who do not take sustainability into
account and thus have lower costs would elbow them off
the market.
Courageous entrepreneurs face this dilemma by going
beyond entrepreneurial optimization and also becoming
active on a macroeconomic level, i.e. in areas such as
civil voting, associations and economic politics.
There is a necessity to work for the creation of
sustainability-oriented frameworks of economic activity.
What we need is a pertinent ecological framework
Basic text 7
arrangement. The core point here is – as mentioned
repeatedly – the recognition of “rights of nature”.
6. “Human Rights” and “Rights of Nature”
Generally, nature is not dependent on humans granting it
rights. In fact, humans are dependent on nature offering
conditions for life that make their survival possible. Nature
doesn’t care if climatic changes, volcanic eruptions or
diseases encroach upon the constitutional right of humans
to physical well-being.
Nature is above every species it has produced,
including the human species and its legal system.
By “granting” nature its own rights and thus placing it
on the same level as humans within our legal system,
humanity is also serving itself. The best way for humans
to protect themselves is by protecting nature from
themselves. If humans recognize and enforce a basic
right of all living beings to exist, this represents a survival
strategy for humans as well. In the long run, it will not be
possible to enforce human rights without recognizing the
rights of nature.
“Human rights” require “rights of nature”. Many of the
rights granted to humans in the “Universal Declaration of
Human Rights” lose their meaning in the case of
continued destruction of the environment. Someone who
has no access to drinkable water due to environmental
destruction will have little use for the human right to
freedom of speech. The human right to property becomes
a farce when a tsunami caused by climate change rolls
over the towns of an island.
8 Georg Winter
But human rights need rights of nature not only in order
to assert themselves and retain real meaning, but also to
gain a watertight justification
Human rights were conceived mainly as liberties. But
liberty does not mean being allowed to do anything one
wants. Liberty is not capricious freedom; it is the freedom
to do what does not harm others. In this way, liberty is
defined by the limits and rights of others, thus being
defined and limited. By addressing nature as a carrier of
its own rights and thus as a legal subject (instead of
simply a legal object) one does no more and no less than
placing it on one level with the “others”.
In that case, rights of nature occupy the same rank as
human rights, and that is the key facet of their recognition
that makes them enforceable. The legal systems of many
states already demand that the concerns of nature be
taken into account in some well defined way. Recognizing
nature’s own rights, however, clearly goes a step further!
“Rights of nature” are not to be confused with the
natural rights of humans in the sense of natural law.
According to the teachings of natural law, humans gain
certain basic rights not because these rights are given to
them by the state, but simply through being a human and
thus a natural, rational being. The “rights of nature” on the
other hand describe rights given to other living things by
state jurisdiction.
There is a big difference between charging humans
with certain duties toward nature – as in current
jurisprudence – and giving nature its own basic rights.
This difference will manifest itself in public consciousness,
future judicial developments, and political agendas
Even in times of slavery and serfdom, there were more
or less binding codes of conduct for the treatment of
slaves and serfs. But the abolition of slavery and serfdom
Basic text 9
did not come until the people were given their own rights
by the legal systems – regardless of their social standing.
The same applies and will apply to the “rights of
nature”! Putting them on an equal footing is the lever for
actual implementation and enforcement.
7. “Rights of nature” and “Biocracy”
Humanity must realize that all states of the world are
superseded by a state of higher order. This state is
nature. The state territory is the biosphere, the state
populace is the totality of all life forms, and authority of the
state is the evolution of all life. The state form is biocracy,
a government of life.
If humans wish to survive, they must reproduce the
biocratic order they live under along with all other life
forms in the order of their respective nation-states. This
does not exclude the simultaneous fulfillment of ethical
and cultural demands of humans; on the contrary, it
constructively includes them.
Throughout the course of history, the circle of those
who contribute to the formation of state consensus has –
apart from certain regressions – continually increased:
From solitary rule (monarchy, tyrannis) to the rule of the
few (aristocracy, oligarchy) onward to the rule of the
majority (polity, democracy).
This development continues within democracy: from
the class-based vote to the general vote; add to this
the expansion of the circle of those eligible to vote
10 Georg Winter
(introduction of women’s suffrage, the right of
foreigners to vote, the reduction of the voting age).1
The next consistent step is the expansion of participation
to humanity’s fellow creatures. It leads us from democracy
to biocracy. By taking this step, the human state makes
sure that the survival interest of all living beings is
secured in state ordinance, represented in parliament,
and implemented in practical politics in such a way, as if
the living species had a seat and a say in parliament. A
number of basic expedient legal instruments have already
been developed by the legal sciences. What seems like a
utopia actually represents a survival strategy for humans
as well.
Evolution granted humans rationality and thus a
quantum leap in terms of power. Nature will drive humans
to extinction unless they balance this quantum leap in
power with a quantum leap in ethical consciousness.
Such ethics demand that we preserve life, foster life, and
allow life to flourish.
Let us briefly sum up:
The state form biocracy is an expanded democracy in
which not only humans but all living things are recognized
as populace, equipped with basic rights and – by means
of appropriate forms of representation – represented in
1
Cf. Eberhard Seidel/Eberhard K. Seifert (2011): „Biokratie“ –
Weiterentwicklung politischer Willensbildung (“’Biocracy’ – further
development of political consensus formation”) in: Seidel, E.
(publisher), Georg Winter – Pionier der umweltbewussten
Unternehmensführung (“Georg Winter – pioneer of environmentally
conscious business administration”). Festschrift for Georg Winter in
light of his 70th Birthday, Marburg, p. 495.
Basic text 11
parliament. The state form biocracy means: to respect
human dignity, to preserve and foster life, to resolve value
conflicts with conscientious consideration, and to
resolutely defend endangered life.
The conceptual connection between “rights of nature” and
“biocracy” can be described as follows – by all means in
the sense of a formal definition:
The sufficiently comprehensive codification of the
rights of nature represents the normative conception of
biocracy.
The sufficiently comprehensive implementation and
conservation of the rights of nature represents the
descriptive realization of biocracy.
The total recognition of and adherence to the “rights of
nature” represents the implementation of biocracy.
8. Augmentation of the Declaration of Human
Rights through a Declaration of the Rights of Nature
On December 10th 1948, the general assembly of the
United Nations passed the “Universal Declaration of
Human Rights”.
Precisely 60 years later, on December 10th 2008, a
group of renowned experts followed my invitation to the
HAUS DER ZUKUNFT in Hamburg to discuss if and how
the “Universal Declaration of Human Rights” should be
expanded to include a “Universal Declaration of the
Rights of Nature”.
The basis of the discussion was the outline of the
Declaration of the Rights of Nature which included the
following regulations:
12 Georg Winter
„Every living thing possesses natural dignity and the
right – within the boundaries of natural cycles and food
chains – to live according to its nature.
Humans have the duty to preserve and protect each
other and their fellow creatures. They are to protect the
individual creature, the population and the species, as
well as the natural cohabitation (biotope) and the
landscape as a habitat.
Humans may only interfere with the living rights of their
fellow creatures in such cases in which they are
pursuing goals which, after rational consideration,
appear to have priority.
Humans may not interfere with the living rights of their
fellow creatures if the same goal can be achieved
through different or milder means.
The signatory states are to ensure that the rights of
nature and the observation of the duties of humans are
enforced by means of civil law, penal law, administrative
law and all other areas of jurisdiction.“2
The only country thus far to incorporate the rights of
nature into its constitution is Ecuador. The man
responsible for this achievement is Alberto Acosta who,
on October 20th 2009, following an invitation by the Federal
President of Germany in the course of the event „Diversity
of Modernity – Perspectives of Modernity“ talked
extensively about the rights of nature in a keynote
presentation. Our initiative, in collaboration with Alberto
2
Outline for a Declaration of the Rights of Nature on initiative of Dr.
Georg Winter, expert discussion in the HAUS DER ZUKUNFT
10.12.2008 in Hamburg.
Basic text 13
Acosta, is currently developing a strategy for further
steps.3
9. Biocracy Prize for juristic works on
participatory rights of nature
In 2008, on the 20th anniversary of the research center for
environmental law at the University of Hamburg, I founded
the Biocracy Prize for juristic discussions about
participatory rights of nature, which was awarded for the
first time in 2010, and the second time in 2013.
The research center for environmental law at the
faculty for legal sciences, University of Hamburg, which is
directed by Hans-Joachim Koch, the former long-standing
chairman of the expert council for environmental
questions of the German federal government (2002-
2008), describes the assignment for the prize as follows:
“Art. 20a of the [German] constitution obligates the state
to protect the natural necessities of life and the animals in
responsibility to future generations. In the democratic
process of consensus formation, however, nature and
future generations do not have a voice. Rather, they
must rely on the parliaments to appropriately and
voluntarily commit to the protection of nature and the
future, and on the administrations to consistently take
legislative action in this regard.
3
3rd Discussion round „Vielfalt der Moderne“ (“Diversity of Modern
Times”) following the Initiative of the Federal President on
20.10.2009 in Berlin, with a keynote presentation by economist
Alberto Acosta about the Ecuadorian constitution, which postulates
the indigenous concept of „sumak kawsay“, or „good life“.
14 Georg Winter
In order to implement effective protection of nature and the
environment, legal instruments are being developed to
allow for effective representation of intergenerational
environmental protection in political and executive
decision making processes on a national level, but also
in the European Union and in the framework of the
international community.
This includes, among other things, further development
of public participation, class action, and organizational
structures of the state which can secure the observation
of environmental concerns in a joint effort.”4
Putting the aforementioned areas of concern into more
concrete terms, the research center for environmental law
at the University of Hamburg has named research fields in
which scientific works for the “Research prize for
jurisprudential works for the protection of the natural
necessities of life and the animals” which I founded.5
Participation of the public in environmental matters –
stocktaking and perspectives in international and
European law as well as in German environmental law.
State-level, European and international institutions as
“attorneys of nature” – institutional and problems of
transferring control competencies to independent
specialized bodies.
4
Cf online: http://www.haus-der-zukunft-hamburg.de/download/
umweltrecht/biokratiepreis-auslobungstext.pdf, from 10-03-2011.
5
Cf online: http://www.haus-der-zukunft-hamburg.de/download/
umweltrecht/biokratiepreis-auslobungstext.pdf, from 10.03.2011.
Basic text 15
The idea of an international environmental court –
institutional, procedural and competency-related
aspects.
Conservation of vital natural resources as a joint effort in
political and administrative decision making bodies.
So far, the Biocracy Prize has been awarded twice, to four
individuals in total.
10. From United Nations to United Nature –
initiative for a Flag of United Nature
On December 10th 2008, marking the 60th anniversary of
the Declaration of Human Rights, at 5 minutes to 12, four
northern German environmental institutions raised the Flag
of United Nature which I designed – as a symbol for the
urgency of the amendment of human rights to include the
rights of nature.
The participants were the HAUS DER ZUKUNFT in
Hamburg, which had existed for ten years that day, the
Eekholt Wildlife Park in Schleswig-Holstein, as well as the
“Zukunftszentrum Mensch-Natur-Technik-Wissenschaft”
(ZMTW; “Future Center Humanity-Nature-TechnologyScience”) in Niecklitz, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, and the
Embassy of Wildlife of the German Wildlife Foundation –
all institutions that have played a pioneer role in the
spreading of environmentally oriented knowledge in
Germany.
The „Flag of United Nature“ as it is named in contrast
to the „Flag of United Nations“ symbolizes peace with our
planet earth with a blue circular area on a white
background. Numerous white stars on the circular area
16 Georg Winter
represent the different forms of life in all their diversity.
Humanity, symbolized by a yellow star, settles in equally
among the totality of all life forms.
We humans are not just citizens of our state. We are
also citizens of planet earth. We vouch for the entire
biosphere and thus also for ourselves. May all nations;
and also the United Nations; act out of this awareness.
Our future hangs on a sovereign that is above nations and
also above the United Nations. And the name of this
sovereign is: United Nature.
Key aspects that went into the debates about the rights
of nature on December 10th 2008 in the HAUS DER ZUKUNFT were ones I was already able to lay out at the
“World Life Culture Forum” in Gyeonggi/South Korea.
Invited as founder and representative of the HAUS DER
ZUKUNFT, Hamburg, I held a presentation on June 21st
2006 on the topic: „From United Nations to United Nature
– Harmonization between Human Civilization and Nature
by Environmental Management and Biomimicry”. At the
end of the conference, the Flag of United Nature, donated
by the HAUS DER ZUKUNFT, was carried through the
enthralled assembly by a procession of students.6
6
Winter, Georg (2006): From United Nations to United
Nature – Harmonization between Human Civilization and
Nature by Environmental Management and Biomimicry,
presentation at the Life Economy Session of the World LifeCulture Forum in Gyeonggi, South Korea, 2006. In the
conference transcription: world life-culture forum_gyeonggi,
Life Thought and Global Salim (Livelihood) Movement – For
a New Civilization of East Asia and Pacific, WLCF2006 Paper
Book, p. 383ff.
Basic text 17
Let us raise the Flag of United Nature together and
embark towards a reunification of nature and our
technological civilization.
11. 1993 – Biocracy discussed at an international
economic forum for the first time
As early as September 9th 1993, I introduced my biocracy
idea to representatives of the economy as chairman of the
International Network for Environmental Management,
INEM. For this I chose the International Conference on
ECO-Management in Tokyo, where I held the second
keynote presentation, next to the President of the Science
Council of Japan, Dr. Jiro Kondo. Our general topic was
titled: „Towards an Industrial Agenda for Sustainable
Development“. I had expanded the title of my
presentation: „A Vision for the New Millennium“.
The hosts of the conference were INEM, the Eco-Life
Center (the Japanese membership union of INEM), and
the United Nations University. The conference was
supported on the Japanese end by the Ministry of
International Trade and Industry (MITI), the Japan
Environment Agency, and the Federation of Economic
Organizations (Keidanren). On an international level, the
conference was backed by the International Council for
Local Environment Initiatives, the International
Organization for Standardization, the United Nations
Industrial Development Organization, the Foundation for
Earth Environment, and the Global Environment Forum.
Important cornerstones on the way toward an
environmentally conscious society and economy had
been set: the Stockholm Conference of 1972, which
18 Georg Winter
brought environmental problems to the awareness of the
global public; the report of the World Commission on
Environment and Development (Brundtland Commission)
from the year 1987, which brought the concept of
sustainable development into the public eye; the World
Industry Conference on Environmental Management,
WICEM II, 1991 in Rotterdam, preceded by WICEM I in
Versailles; and finally in 1992 in Rio de Janeiro, the
International Industry Conference on Sustainable
Development with the ratification of Agenda 21, which in
chapter 30 calls on industry to be fully committed partners
in the realization of sustainable development.
The International Industry Conference on Sustainable
Development, which took place in 1992 in the context of
the Global Forum of UNCED in Rio de Janeiro, was
organized by INEM in cooperation with its Brazilian
membership union SIGA. This Industry Conference was
the main contribution of global industry to the Global
Forum, where a cross-sector exchange of opinions
between different societal groups of the world took place,
including labor unions, environmental initiatives, women’s
associations, youth groups, religious communities,
scientific associations, and indigenous peoples.
The International Conference on Eco-Management,
which took place in Tokyo in 1993, also stands in this
context of economic history. It was the first international
conference to follow the Global Forum of UNCED in which
a conclusion could be drawn in terms of how far
industrialists in the different countries had implemented,
or were willing to implement, Agenda 21. While Dr. Jiro
Kondo was invited as an exponent of science in broadest
terms, I had received the invitation to the presentation as
a representative of the international movement for
environmentally conscious business management.
Basic text 19
As of 1972, starting in the industrial enterprise Ernst
Winter & Sohn, which at the time was a family business, I
had developed and introduced the first integrated system
of environmentally conscious business management,
which focuses all areas and levels of business not only on
economic success, but also on environmental goals. My
1987 book on environmentally conscious business
management, based on practical experience, was
translated into 12 languages and was the first on the topic
in all countries. The European Union and the
Environmental Program of the United Nations supported
the distribution of the book on the Winter Model.
To create a nation-wide exchange of experience, in
1984 the “Bundesdeutscher Arbeitskreis für Umweltbewusstes Management” (B.A.U.M. e.V.; “German
Workgroup for Environmental Management”) was brought
to life. In 1991, B.A.U.M. e.V. – the earliest and largest
environmental initiative of the economy – was, in the
presence of the King of Sweden, taken up into the “500
Role of Honor” of the Environmental Program of the
United Nations. B.A.U.M. e.V., which today counts over
500 companies as members, celebrated its 25-year
anniversary in 2014.
Following the example of B.A.U.M. e.V. several
business associations for environmentally conscious
management have been founded in different countries
with my help and in 1991, banded together to form the
“International Network for Environmental Management”
(INEM e.V.). I received the “Change the World best
Practice Award” of the Club of Budapest in 2003 for the
initiation and development INEM e.V., which already
counted 19 membership unions in 1993, at the time of the
Industry Conference in Tokyo. At that time (and later until
20 Georg Winter
2004) I served as Chairman of B.A.U.M. e.V. and INEM
e.V.
In my presentation in Tokyo in 1993, I postulated four
possibly simultaneous courses of development of the
global movement for environmentally conscious
management. By the year 2000, the developments had
not occurred on the scale I had deemed possible in 1993.
Now in the year 2014, however, it has become clear that
progress is being made along those four courses of
development, even though they are still much too
hesitant. My exact words in Tokyo were:
“(1) The number of environmentally oriented businesses will
reach a critical mass. Large and medium-sized businesses
will practice environmentally oriented management following
an integrated system. Through successful example, these
businesses will find imitators in their respective branches. In
a sort of chain reaction, environmentally conscious
management will spread globally to other businesses.
(2) The quality of environmentally conscious business
management will experience a quantum leap. Pioneer
businesses in different countries will cooperate with
scientists to develop and successfully test a new model for
environmentally conscious business management. This new
generation of environmentally oriented business
management will allow for an increase in value creation
while simultaneously offering a drastic reduction of absolute
resource usage and absolute strain on the environment.
(3) In numerous countries environmentally oriented
businesses will greatly surpass their competitors in
productivity and market share. State leaders will have
introduced measures to realize environmental protection in
all ministerial areas. These states will see existing or
emerging economic frameworks that will bring about a strong
entrepreneurial self-interest in environmentally oriented
Basic text 21
business management. Due to the taxation of energy and
scarce resources, and due to extremely high costs of waste
disposal, enterprises that save energy and minimize waste
will have an extreme cost advantage. Because of the
simultaneous easing of taxation on human labor, the pressure
on businesses to cut jobs will have been reduced.
(4) The majority of management schools will promote an
ethos of fairness not only toward humans, but toward all
forms of life. The ethical demand for fairness toward all
forms of life in the biosphere will at the same time be
understood as a demand of practical rationality for the
survival of humanity. “To preserve life, to foster life, to bring
developable life to its highest value” (Albert Schweitzer) –
This threefold demand will be recognized as a guideline for
the thoughts and actions of broad circles of enterprise.
Environmentally conscious business management and
environmentally conscious state administration will be
increasingly understood as the result of a lifestyle conscious
of the internal world (internally conscious environmental
consciousness).”
In the section “Visions of a new form of state in the new
millennium“ of my presentation in Tokyo in 1993, I
developed the idea of biocracy in the following words:
„In many countries today the form of state is democracy. The
populace is the sovereign and enforces its will through a free
election of political representatives. Democracy takes every
human seriously as a citizen, even if they are poor, simple,
fragile, or modest. It gives every citizen equal power through
the right to vote.
1 Further development of Democracy
Democracy too is a form of state that requires further
development. It must take seriously not only every human,
but every living thing, a nettle as much as a cherry tree, a
22 Georg Winter
frog as much as a horse. For every living thing has its dignity
and plays its part and in some way contributes to the
preservation of the balance of nature. Plants and animals
can’t put in their vote in an election. Therefore, the state
must ensure that the existential interests of these living
creatures also be given political effectiveness.
To achieve this, we must utilize different instruments of state
and civil law: For example, the security of the natural
necessities of life for humans, animals and plants must be
given constitutional importance. The environmental minister
must, just like the financial minister, be given a veto right in
governmental decisions. Environmental associations must
receive the right to sue those who damage the environment
to cease and desist, or to pay reparations. By these and
other means the state must ensure that the existential
interests of all living things be represented in governmental
decision-making, in jurisprudence, and in every day
economic activity.
2 The break-through to biocracy
Human democracy is in reality an oligarchy of the “naked
apes”. Measured in terms of biomass, humans represent a
minority among the living creatures, and this minority
overrules the disenfranchised majority. True democracy is
only possible if we acknowledge that the “populace of earth”
consists not only of humans, but also of plants and animals,
in short, of the totality of all living creatures.
Shouldn’t we make the totality of all living creatures the
sovereign of the state? Shouldn’t governments understand
themselves as the carriers of a mandate of all living
creatures and act accordingly? Shouldn’t we develop human
democracy into a democracy of all living creatures? We must
achieve a break-through to a new form of state, namely
biocracy. Human history has known monarchy, aristocracy,
oligarchy and democracy. Shouldn’t our time of increased
endangerment of all life be ripe for biocracy?
Basic text 23
In the biocratic parliament – metaphorically speaking – trees
are equally entitled to a seat and a say. We should listen
closely to the trees. We may find that they represent our true
interests better that we do ourselves. Either we humans
reach a democracy of all life, namely biocracy, or our
species will one day end under the dictatorship of death.
If we reach for our visions, we will realize all that is possible.
If we only aim for what is possible, we will be caught in
routine and then our civilization will have no chance of
surviving in the long run.”
12. Final highlighting of current initiatives
The introductory statement on the current situation under
point (1) above concerned larger global interrelations in a
rather abstract way. Going back to this point, the following
final comments should be dedicated specifically to current
initiatives:
In order to more strongly include the “voice of nature”
in the current lively debate about the energy revolution,
I funded and published a pamphlet concerning this
question: Wicke, L./Schulte von Drach, M.C.: The
energy revolution. More climate protection, but socially
and economically viable, published by Georg Winter,
Neumünster and Hamburg 2013.
The HAUS DER ZUKUNFT in Hamburg is planning a
conference for the end of November 2015 which is
primed by the following series of texts:
“RIGHTS OF NATURE / BIOCRACY” IN THE
DIMENSION OF THE ECONOMY.
24 Georg Winter
The development of the concept of biocracy towards a
fertile transdisciplinary and interdisciplinary term is to be
further funded and pushed forward.
In this context the Biocracy Prize I founded will,
following the conference, also be opened to works in
the areas of economic and educational sciences. An
opening for the natural sciences had already taken
place the last time the prize was awarded in 2013.7
The last raising of the Flag of United Nature occurred
on May 18th 2014 at the cultural train station of
Ottensoos near Nuremberg. Professor Volker
Stahlmann, in the company of his spouse Renate
Kirchhoff Stahlmann and numerous guests, raised the
flag on a high flagpole in the entrance area of the train
station.
Further raisings of the flag both in and outside the country
will follow.
13. Literature
Expert discussion about the rights of Nature in the HAUS DER
ZUKUNFT, in Hamburg, on 10.12.2008, Documentation,
Winter Family Archive Sign. B 82
7
Award winner was Professor Berndt Heydemann, former
environmental minister of the state of Schleswig-Holstein, in his
function as chairman of the “Zukunftszentrum Mensch-NaturTechnik-Wissenschaft” (ZMTW; “Future Center Humanity-NatureTechnology-Science”) in Nieklitz, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern.
Basic text 25
Schweitzer, Albert (1988): Die Ehrfurcht vor dem Leben,
Grundtexte aus fünf Jahrzehnten, (“Reverence of nature, basic
texts from five decades”) published by Hans Walter Bähr, 5th
,
unchanged edition, C.H.Beck, Munich (Becksche Reihe; Band
255)
Seidel, Eberhard (2012) (editor): Georg Winter – Pionier der
umweltbewussten Unternehmensführung (“Georg Winter –
Pioneer of environmentally conscious business
administration”), Metropolis publishing company, Marburg
2012
Winter, Georg (1983): Qualität als unternehmerischer
Unternehmensgrundsatz (“Quality as an entrepreneurial
axiom of enterprise”), in: Deutsches Pfarrerblatt, 12 (1983), P.
592-596
Winter, Georg (1987) (editor): Das umweltbewusste
Unternehmen. Ein Handbuch der Betriebsökologie mit 22
Check-Listen für die Praxis (“The environmentally conscious
enterprise. A handbook of business ecology with 22
checklists for practice”), C.H.Beck, Munich
Winter, Georg (1988): Business and the Environment,
McGraw-Hill Book Company
Winter, Georg (1989): Enterprise et Environnement
(“Business and the Environment”), McGraw Hill Paris
Winter, Georg (1993): „A Vision for the New Millennium” in:
Conference transcript of the International Conference on EcoManagement – Towards an Industrial Agenda for
Sustainable Development, Tokyo, 9.-10. November 1993,
organized by The United Nations University and Japan Ecolife Center in cooperation with The International Network for
Environmental Management (INEM)
Winter, Georg (1994): Kostenvorteil durch Umweltschutz – umweltbewusstes Management ist weltweit auf dem Vormarsch,
in: Umwelt und Beruf (“Cost benefit through environmental
protection – environmentally conscious management globally
26 Georg Winter
on the rise, in: Environment and profession”), Süddeutsche
Zeitung from 8.-9. Januar 1994
Winter, Georg (1998) (editor): Das umweltbewusste
Unternehmen, die Zukunft beginnt heute. (“The
environmentally conscious enterprise, the future starts
today”), Vahlen publishing company, Munich
Winter, Georg (2006): From United Nations to United Nature
– Harmonization between Human Civilization and Nature by
Environmental Management and Biomimicry, presentation at
the Life Economy Session of the World Life-Culture Forum
in Gyeonggi, South Korea, 2006. In the conference
transcription: world life-culture forum_gyeonggi, Life Thought
and Global Salim (Livelihood) Movement – For a New
Civilization of East Asia and Pacific, WLCF2006 Paper Book
Winter, Georg (2009): Wie ein B.A.U.M. e.V. gepflanzt wurde
– ein Interview mit Dr. Georg Winter (“How a B.A.U.M. [lit.
‘tree’] e.V. was planted – an interview with Dr. Georg Winter”),
in: B.A.U.M. Yearbook 2009, Hamburg, P. 46-49
Winter, Georg (2010): Der Natur gerecht warden (“Doing nature
justice”), in: Zukunft geben, 23 Skizzen zum Stiften (“Giving
future, 23 sketches for endowment”), published by
Gemeinnützige Treuhandstelle Hamburg e.V., Frankfurt a.M.
===
Georg Winter
Basic text
“RIGHTS OF NATURE /
BIOCRACY”*
1. On the current situation and its demand
Through the exploitation of natural resources and the
strain put on the environment by pollutants, our
technological civilization is becoming disconnected from
our ecosystem on such a high level that, in the long run,
the self-destruction of humanity seems not only possible,
but exceedingly likely. Hence our most important future
objective is the reunification of our technological
civilization with our natural environment.
The wall between nature and our technological
civilization must fall!
It is about a quest for the reunification of nature and
technological civilization!
* This contribution is repeated at the end of every volume of the series
“Economic texts concerning the rights of nature / biocracy” and forms
a bridge to the next volume.
2 Georg Winter
The basic demand of this reunification is the fundamental
decision of human society for a sustainable path of
development. The core condition for this in turn is the
general recognition of the “rights of nature”.
2. Phases of development in the relationship
between nature and civilization so far
So far, four phases of development in the relationship
between nature and civilization are to be noted:
1 Primary equilibrium phase – Homo integratus
In the early history of humanity, there was a primary state
of equilibrium in which the activities of humans hardly
impacted the ecosystem. We can describe this phase as
Homo integratus, humans integrated into nature.
2 Relative equilibrium phase - Homo occupans
What followed was a state of relative equilibrium in which
a structured exploitation of resources began, but did not
overwhelm the ecosystem. Humans increasingly occupied
habitats until they achieved a dominant position in the
following phase.
3 Disequilibrium phase - Homo dominans
Massive escalation of the technological activities of
humans qualitatively developed into an endangerment of
the long term existence of human life on earth.
Basic text 3
4 Critical phase - Homo isolatus
We currently find ourselves in the fourth, critical phase in
which humans in many countries on earth have physically
and mentally isolated themselves from nature and
denatured into Homo isolatus. People working in industry
are often viewed merely as means of production,
consumers as sources of profit, plants and animals as
commodities.
We can predict two alternative development axes,
each with three phases of development:
3. “Business-as-usual scenario”
starting from the critical phase
1 Confrontational phase - Homo egocentricus
In the business-as-usual scenario, humans enter a
confrontational phase in which they live only for their
immediate benefit as Homo egocentricus. By doing so,
they risk, in the medium and long term, extreme
destruction and damage – an acceleration of climate
change, catastrophic famine in other countries, military
conflicts over scarce resources and regions that are still
ecologically functional.
2 Destructive phase - Homo anarchicus
The transition into the next phase, the destructive phase,
is fluent. It is marked by overpopulation, mass mortality,
wars over migration and resources, self-defensive
terrorism, and a breakdown of social, cultural and
4 Georg Winter
economic order. It is the hour of Homo anarchicus with its
survival-of-the-fittest aggression.
3 Secondary equilibrium phase under exclusion of
humanity - Homo extinctus
The final phase of this scenario is the secondary
equilibrium phase, which arises when the overstraining of
the ecosystem through emissions, the total exploitation of
resources and the existential wars between the remaining
population groups have led to the extensive extinction of
humanity and subsequently to the protection of nature
from further intrusion by humans. At the end of the
business-as-usual scenario, we find an extinct human
race, Homo extinctus, which once believed itself to be
Homo sapiens.
4. Change-of-course scenario starting from the
critical phase
Our hope and motivation is that starting at the critical
phase, a change-of-course scenario is also possible.
1 Reorientation phase - Homo solidarius
A reorientation phase will lead to the formation of Homo
solidarius, which develops responsibility for disadvantaged
sections of the population, for developing countries in need
of aid, for future generations, and for the protection of
nature and biological diversity. The realization of the selfendangerment of humanity will lead to national laws and
international contracts that will prevent ecological
depletion.
Basic text 5
2 Adaptation phase - Homo fraternus
What follows is an environmentally conscious adaptation
phase in which a sense of responsibility and actions
based on solidarity develop into a culture of fraternity. The
fraternal human, Homo fraternus, acts as a member of a
family which encompasses all living beings, all current
and future generations of humans, plants and animals on
the entire planet. The economic system is integrated into
the ecosystem, which then gradually heals.
3 Secondary equilibrium phase with inclusion of
humanity - Homo reintegratus
While at the end of the first scenario (business-as-usual)
nature enters a secondary equilibrium phase without the
participation of humanity, the change-of-course scenario
leads to nature entering a secondary equilibrium phase
which includes human participation. Increased
environmental consciousness, bitter experience, and
scientific discovery come into effect. Humans reintegrate
themselves into the ecosystem, thus becoming Homo
reintegratus. The technological civilization of humanity
has reached a state of permanent harmony with nature.
5. Position and awareness on the crossroads of
the two development alternatives
Almost tragically, numerous truly environmentally
conscious entrepreneurs struggling for the ecological
optimum are aware that their enterprise is – directly or
indirectly, more or less – participating in the depletion of
earth’s finite resources and by polluting the atmosphere,
6 Georg Winter
even within legal boundaries, contributing to the
continuing destruction of the environment.
Thousands of entrepreneurs are under way to loosen
this entanglement in the global work of destruction. Many
introduce a management system that gives direction to all
areas of the enterprise, from employee training to
logistics, from product development and production down
to the architecture of the production facilities, providing
orientation not only toward economic success but also
toward environmental protection (“environmentally
conscious business management”). Some even include
additional social factors (“Corporate Social Responsibility”, CSR). These entrepreneurs experience that
in many cases, it is possible to minimize resource usage
and atmospheric pollution and, by doing so, improve their
enterprise’s economic success and ability to compete on
the market.
However, far-sighted entrepreneurs are aware that by
such methods they can reduce, but not entirely eliminate
their enterprise’s contribution to the global work of
destruction. The current general economic framework
makes it impossible for entrepreneurs to truly act
sustainably. Their production would become so expensive
that competitors who do not take sustainability into
account and thus have lower costs would elbow them off
the market.
Courageous entrepreneurs face this dilemma by going
beyond entrepreneurial optimization and also becoming
active on a macroeconomic level, i.e. in areas such as
civil voting, associations and economic politics.
There is a necessity to work for the creation of
sustainability-oriented frameworks of economic activity.
What we need is a pertinent ecological framework
Basic text 7
arrangement. The core point here is – as mentioned
repeatedly – the recognition of “rights of nature”.
6. “Human Rights” and “Rights of Nature”
Generally, nature is not dependent on humans granting it
rights. In fact, humans are dependent on nature offering
conditions for life that make their survival possible. Nature
doesn’t care if climatic changes, volcanic eruptions or
diseases encroach upon the constitutional right of humans
to physical well-being.
Nature is above every species it has produced,
including the human species and its legal system.
By “granting” nature its own rights and thus placing it
on the same level as humans within our legal system,
humanity is also serving itself. The best way for humans
to protect themselves is by protecting nature from
themselves. If humans recognize and enforce a basic
right of all living beings to exist, this represents a survival
strategy for humans as well. In the long run, it will not be
possible to enforce human rights without recognizing the
rights of nature.
“Human rights” require “rights of nature”. Many of the
rights granted to humans in the “Universal Declaration of
Human Rights” lose their meaning in the case of
continued destruction of the environment. Someone who
has no access to drinkable water due to environmental
destruction will have little use for the human right to
freedom of speech. The human right to property becomes
a farce when a tsunami caused by climate change rolls
over the towns of an island.
8 Georg Winter
But human rights need rights of nature not only in order
to assert themselves and retain real meaning, but also to
gain a watertight justification
Human rights were conceived mainly as liberties. But
liberty does not mean being allowed to do anything one
wants. Liberty is not capricious freedom; it is the freedom
to do what does not harm others. In this way, liberty is
defined by the limits and rights of others, thus being
defined and limited. By addressing nature as a carrier of
its own rights and thus as a legal subject (instead of
simply a legal object) one does no more and no less than
placing it on one level with the “others”.
In that case, rights of nature occupy the same rank as
human rights, and that is the key facet of their recognition
that makes them enforceable. The legal systems of many
states already demand that the concerns of nature be
taken into account in some well defined way. Recognizing
nature’s own rights, however, clearly goes a step further!
“Rights of nature” are not to be confused with the
natural rights of humans in the sense of natural law.
According to the teachings of natural law, humans gain
certain basic rights not because these rights are given to
them by the state, but simply through being a human and
thus a natural, rational being. The “rights of nature” on the
other hand describe rights given to other living things by
state jurisdiction.
There is a big difference between charging humans
with certain duties toward nature – as in current
jurisprudence – and giving nature its own basic rights.
This difference will manifest itself in public consciousness,
future judicial developments, and political agendas
Even in times of slavery and serfdom, there were more
or less binding codes of conduct for the treatment of
slaves and serfs. But the abolition of slavery and serfdom
Basic text 9
did not come until the people were given their own rights
by the legal systems – regardless of their social standing.
The same applies and will apply to the “rights of
nature”! Putting them on an equal footing is the lever for
actual implementation and enforcement.
7. “Rights of nature” and “Biocracy”
Humanity must realize that all states of the world are
superseded by a state of higher order. This state is
nature. The state territory is the biosphere, the state
populace is the totality of all life forms, and authority of the
state is the evolution of all life. The state form is biocracy,
a government of life.
If humans wish to survive, they must reproduce the
biocratic order they live under along with all other life
forms in the order of their respective nation-states. This
does not exclude the simultaneous fulfillment of ethical
and cultural demands of humans; on the contrary, it
constructively includes them.
Throughout the course of history, the circle of those
who contribute to the formation of state consensus has –
apart from certain regressions – continually increased:
From solitary rule (monarchy, tyrannis) to the rule of the
few (aristocracy, oligarchy) onward to the rule of the
majority (polity, democracy).
This development continues within democracy: from
the class-based vote to the general vote; add to this
the expansion of the circle of those eligible to vote
10 Georg Winter
(introduction of women’s suffrage, the right of
foreigners to vote, the reduction of the voting age).1
The next consistent step is the expansion of participation
to humanity’s fellow creatures. It leads us from democracy
to biocracy. By taking this step, the human state makes
sure that the survival interest of all living beings is
secured in state ordinance, represented in parliament,
and implemented in practical politics in such a way, as if
the living species had a seat and a say in parliament. A
number of basic expedient legal instruments have already
been developed by the legal sciences. What seems like a
utopia actually represents a survival strategy for humans
as well.
Evolution granted humans rationality and thus a
quantum leap in terms of power. Nature will drive humans
to extinction unless they balance this quantum leap in
power with a quantum leap in ethical consciousness.
Such ethics demand that we preserve life, foster life, and
allow life to flourish.
Let us briefly sum up:
The state form biocracy is an expanded democracy in
which not only humans but all living things are recognized
as populace, equipped with basic rights and – by means
of appropriate forms of representation – represented in
1
Cf. Eberhard Seidel/Eberhard K. Seifert (2011): „Biokratie“ –
Weiterentwicklung politischer Willensbildung (“’Biocracy’ – further
development of political consensus formation”) in: Seidel, E.
(publisher), Georg Winter – Pionier der umweltbewussten
Unternehmensführung (“Georg Winter – pioneer of environmentally
conscious business administration”). Festschrift for Georg Winter in
light of his 70th Birthday, Marburg, p. 495.
Basic text 11
parliament. The state form biocracy means: to respect
human dignity, to preserve and foster life, to resolve value
conflicts with conscientious consideration, and to
resolutely defend endangered life.
The conceptual connection between “rights of nature” and
“biocracy” can be described as follows – by all means in
the sense of a formal definition:
The sufficiently comprehensive codification of the
rights of nature represents the normative conception of
biocracy.
The sufficiently comprehensive implementation and
conservation of the rights of nature represents the
descriptive realization of biocracy.
The total recognition of and adherence to the “rights of
nature” represents the implementation of biocracy.
8. Augmentation of the Declaration of Human
Rights through a Declaration of the Rights of Nature
On December 10th 1948, the general assembly of the
United Nations passed the “Universal Declaration of
Human Rights”.
Precisely 60 years later, on December 10th 2008, a
group of renowned experts followed my invitation to the
HAUS DER ZUKUNFT in Hamburg to discuss if and how
the “Universal Declaration of Human Rights” should be
expanded to include a “Universal Declaration of the
Rights of Nature”.
The basis of the discussion was the outline of the
Declaration of the Rights of Nature which included the
following regulations:
12 Georg Winter
„Every living thing possesses natural dignity and the
right – within the boundaries of natural cycles and food
chains – to live according to its nature.
Humans have the duty to preserve and protect each
other and their fellow creatures. They are to protect the
individual creature, the population and the species, as
well as the natural cohabitation (biotope) and the
landscape as a habitat.
Humans may only interfere with the living rights of their
fellow creatures in such cases in which they are
pursuing goals which, after rational consideration,
appear to have priority.
Humans may not interfere with the living rights of their
fellow creatures if the same goal can be achieved
through different or milder means.
The signatory states are to ensure that the rights of
nature and the observation of the duties of humans are
enforced by means of civil law, penal law, administrative
law and all other areas of jurisdiction.“2
The only country thus far to incorporate the rights of
nature into its constitution is Ecuador. The man
responsible for this achievement is Alberto Acosta who,
on October 20th 2009, following an invitation by the Federal
President of Germany in the course of the event „Diversity
of Modernity – Perspectives of Modernity“ talked
extensively about the rights of nature in a keynote
presentation. Our initiative, in collaboration with Alberto
2
Outline for a Declaration of the Rights of Nature on initiative of Dr.
Georg Winter, expert discussion in the HAUS DER ZUKUNFT
10.12.2008 in Hamburg.
Basic text 13
Acosta, is currently developing a strategy for further
steps.3
9. Biocracy Prize for juristic works on
participatory rights of nature
In 2008, on the 20th anniversary of the research center for
environmental law at the University of Hamburg, I founded
the Biocracy Prize for juristic discussions about
participatory rights of nature, which was awarded for the
first time in 2010, and the second time in 2013.
The research center for environmental law at the
faculty for legal sciences, University of Hamburg, which is
directed by Hans-Joachim Koch, the former long-standing
chairman of the expert council for environmental
questions of the German federal government (2002-
2008), describes the assignment for the prize as follows:
“Art. 20a of the [German] constitution obligates the state
to protect the natural necessities of life and the animals in
responsibility to future generations. In the democratic
process of consensus formation, however, nature and
future generations do not have a voice. Rather, they
must rely on the parliaments to appropriately and
voluntarily commit to the protection of nature and the
future, and on the administrations to consistently take
legislative action in this regard.
3
3rd Discussion round „Vielfalt der Moderne“ (“Diversity of Modern
Times”) following the Initiative of the Federal President on
20.10.2009 in Berlin, with a keynote presentation by economist
Alberto Acosta about the Ecuadorian constitution, which postulates
the indigenous concept of „sumak kawsay“, or „good life“.
14 Georg Winter
In order to implement effective protection of nature and the
environment, legal instruments are being developed to
allow for effective representation of intergenerational
environmental protection in political and executive
decision making processes on a national level, but also
in the European Union and in the framework of the
international community.
This includes, among other things, further development
of public participation, class action, and organizational
structures of the state which can secure the observation
of environmental concerns in a joint effort.”4
Putting the aforementioned areas of concern into more
concrete terms, the research center for environmental law
at the University of Hamburg has named research fields in
which scientific works for the “Research prize for
jurisprudential works for the protection of the natural
necessities of life and the animals” which I founded.5
Participation of the public in environmental matters –
stocktaking and perspectives in international and
European law as well as in German environmental law.
State-level, European and international institutions as
“attorneys of nature” – institutional and problems of
transferring control competencies to independent
specialized bodies.
4
Cf online: http://www.haus-der-zukunft-hamburg.de/download/
umweltrecht/biokratiepreis-auslobungstext.pdf, from 10-03-2011.
5
Cf online: http://www.haus-der-zukunft-hamburg.de/download/
umweltrecht/biokratiepreis-auslobungstext.pdf, from 10.03.2011.
Basic text 15
The idea of an international environmental court –
institutional, procedural and competency-related
aspects.
Conservation of vital natural resources as a joint effort in
political and administrative decision making bodies.
So far, the Biocracy Prize has been awarded twice, to four
individuals in total.
10. From United Nations to United Nature –
initiative for a Flag of United Nature
On December 10th 2008, marking the 60th anniversary of
the Declaration of Human Rights, at 5 minutes to 12, four
northern German environmental institutions raised the Flag
of United Nature which I designed – as a symbol for the
urgency of the amendment of human rights to include the
rights of nature.
The participants were the HAUS DER ZUKUNFT in
Hamburg, which had existed for ten years that day, the
Eekholt Wildlife Park in Schleswig-Holstein, as well as the
“Zukunftszentrum Mensch-Natur-Technik-Wissenschaft”
(ZMTW; “Future Center Humanity-Nature-TechnologyScience”) in Niecklitz, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, and the
Embassy of Wildlife of the German Wildlife Foundation –
all institutions that have played a pioneer role in the
spreading of environmentally oriented knowledge in
Germany.
The „Flag of United Nature“ as it is named in contrast
to the „Flag of United Nations“ symbolizes peace with our
planet earth with a blue circular area on a white
background. Numerous white stars on the circular area
16 Georg Winter
represent the different forms of life in all their diversity.
Humanity, symbolized by a yellow star, settles in equally
among the totality of all life forms.
We humans are not just citizens of our state. We are
also citizens of planet earth. We vouch for the entire
biosphere and thus also for ourselves. May all nations;
and also the United Nations; act out of this awareness.
Our future hangs on a sovereign that is above nations and
also above the United Nations. And the name of this
sovereign is: United Nature.
Key aspects that went into the debates about the rights
of nature on December 10th 2008 in the HAUS DER ZUKUNFT were ones I was already able to lay out at the
“World Life Culture Forum” in Gyeonggi/South Korea.
Invited as founder and representative of the HAUS DER
ZUKUNFT, Hamburg, I held a presentation on June 21st
2006 on the topic: „From United Nations to United Nature
– Harmonization between Human Civilization and Nature
by Environmental Management and Biomimicry”. At the
end of the conference, the Flag of United Nature, donated
by the HAUS DER ZUKUNFT, was carried through the
enthralled assembly by a procession of students.6
6
Winter, Georg (2006): From United Nations to United
Nature – Harmonization between Human Civilization and
Nature by Environmental Management and Biomimicry,
presentation at the Life Economy Session of the World LifeCulture Forum in Gyeonggi, South Korea, 2006. In the
conference transcription: world life-culture forum_gyeonggi,
Life Thought and Global Salim (Livelihood) Movement – For
a New Civilization of East Asia and Pacific, WLCF2006 Paper
Book, p. 383ff.
Basic text 17
Let us raise the Flag of United Nature together and
embark towards a reunification of nature and our
technological civilization.
11. 1993 – Biocracy discussed at an international
economic forum for the first time
As early as September 9th 1993, I introduced my biocracy
idea to representatives of the economy as chairman of the
International Network for Environmental Management,
INEM. For this I chose the International Conference on
ECO-Management in Tokyo, where I held the second
keynote presentation, next to the President of the Science
Council of Japan, Dr. Jiro Kondo. Our general topic was
titled: „Towards an Industrial Agenda for Sustainable
Development“. I had expanded the title of my
presentation: „A Vision for the New Millennium“.
The hosts of the conference were INEM, the Eco-Life
Center (the Japanese membership union of INEM), and
the United Nations University. The conference was
supported on the Japanese end by the Ministry of
International Trade and Industry (MITI), the Japan
Environment Agency, and the Federation of Economic
Organizations (Keidanren). On an international level, the
conference was backed by the International Council for
Local Environment Initiatives, the International
Organization for Standardization, the United Nations
Industrial Development Organization, the Foundation for
Earth Environment, and the Global Environment Forum.
Important cornerstones on the way toward an
environmentally conscious society and economy had
been set: the Stockholm Conference of 1972, which
18 Georg Winter
brought environmental problems to the awareness of the
global public; the report of the World Commission on
Environment and Development (Brundtland Commission)
from the year 1987, which brought the concept of
sustainable development into the public eye; the World
Industry Conference on Environmental Management,
WICEM II, 1991 in Rotterdam, preceded by WICEM I in
Versailles; and finally in 1992 in Rio de Janeiro, the
International Industry Conference on Sustainable
Development with the ratification of Agenda 21, which in
chapter 30 calls on industry to be fully committed partners
in the realization of sustainable development.
The International Industry Conference on Sustainable
Development, which took place in 1992 in the context of
the Global Forum of UNCED in Rio de Janeiro, was
organized by INEM in cooperation with its Brazilian
membership union SIGA. This Industry Conference was
the main contribution of global industry to the Global
Forum, where a cross-sector exchange of opinions
between different societal groups of the world took place,
including labor unions, environmental initiatives, women’s
associations, youth groups, religious communities,
scientific associations, and indigenous peoples.
The International Conference on Eco-Management,
which took place in Tokyo in 1993, also stands in this
context of economic history. It was the first international
conference to follow the Global Forum of UNCED in which
a conclusion could be drawn in terms of how far
industrialists in the different countries had implemented,
or were willing to implement, Agenda 21. While Dr. Jiro
Kondo was invited as an exponent of science in broadest
terms, I had received the invitation to the presentation as
a representative of the international movement for
environmentally conscious business management.
Basic text 19
As of 1972, starting in the industrial enterprise Ernst
Winter & Sohn, which at the time was a family business, I
had developed and introduced the first integrated system
of environmentally conscious business management,
which focuses all areas and levels of business not only on
economic success, but also on environmental goals. My
1987 book on environmentally conscious business
management, based on practical experience, was
translated into 12 languages and was the first on the topic
in all countries. The European Union and the
Environmental Program of the United Nations supported
the distribution of the book on the Winter Model.
To create a nation-wide exchange of experience, in
1984 the “Bundesdeutscher Arbeitskreis für Umweltbewusstes Management” (B.A.U.M. e.V.; “German
Workgroup for Environmental Management”) was brought
to life. In 1991, B.A.U.M. e.V. – the earliest and largest
environmental initiative of the economy – was, in the
presence of the King of Sweden, taken up into the “500
Role of Honor” of the Environmental Program of the
United Nations. B.A.U.M. e.V., which today counts over
500 companies as members, celebrated its 25-year
anniversary in 2014.
Following the example of B.A.U.M. e.V. several
business associations for environmentally conscious
management have been founded in different countries
with my help and in 1991, banded together to form the
“International Network for Environmental Management”
(INEM e.V.). I received the “Change the World best
Practice Award” of the Club of Budapest in 2003 for the
initiation and development INEM e.V., which already
counted 19 membership unions in 1993, at the time of the
Industry Conference in Tokyo. At that time (and later until
20 Georg Winter
2004) I served as Chairman of B.A.U.M. e.V. and INEM
e.V.
In my presentation in Tokyo in 1993, I postulated four
possibly simultaneous courses of development of the
global movement for environmentally conscious
management. By the year 2000, the developments had
not occurred on the scale I had deemed possible in 1993.
Now in the year 2014, however, it has become clear that
progress is being made along those four courses of
development, even though they are still much too
hesitant. My exact words in Tokyo were:
“(1) The number of environmentally oriented businesses will
reach a critical mass. Large and medium-sized businesses
will practice environmentally oriented management following
an integrated system. Through successful example, these
businesses will find imitators in their respective branches. In
a sort of chain reaction, environmentally conscious
management will spread globally to other businesses.
(2) The quality of environmentally conscious business
management will experience a quantum leap. Pioneer
businesses in different countries will cooperate with
scientists to develop and successfully test a new model for
environmentally conscious business management. This new
generation of environmentally oriented business
management will allow for an increase in value creation
while simultaneously offering a drastic reduction of absolute
resource usage and absolute strain on the environment.
(3) In numerous countries environmentally oriented
businesses will greatly surpass their competitors in
productivity and market share. State leaders will have
introduced measures to realize environmental protection in
all ministerial areas. These states will see existing or
emerging economic frameworks that will bring about a strong
entrepreneurial self-interest in environmentally oriented
Basic text 21
business management. Due to the taxation of energy and
scarce resources, and due to extremely high costs of waste
disposal, enterprises that save energy and minimize waste
will have an extreme cost advantage. Because of the
simultaneous easing of taxation on human labor, the pressure
on businesses to cut jobs will have been reduced.
(4) The majority of management schools will promote an
ethos of fairness not only toward humans, but toward all
forms of life. The ethical demand for fairness toward all
forms of life in the biosphere will at the same time be
understood as a demand of practical rationality for the
survival of humanity. “To preserve life, to foster life, to bring
developable life to its highest value” (Albert Schweitzer) –
This threefold demand will be recognized as a guideline for
the thoughts and actions of broad circles of enterprise.
Environmentally conscious business management and
environmentally conscious state administration will be
increasingly understood as the result of a lifestyle conscious
of the internal world (internally conscious environmental
consciousness).”
In the section “Visions of a new form of state in the new
millennium“ of my presentation in Tokyo in 1993, I
developed the idea of biocracy in the following words:
„In many countries today the form of state is democracy. The
populace is the sovereign and enforces its will through a free
election of political representatives. Democracy takes every
human seriously as a citizen, even if they are poor, simple,
fragile, or modest. It gives every citizen equal power through
the right to vote.
1 Further development of Democracy
Democracy too is a form of state that requires further
development. It must take seriously not only every human,
but every living thing, a nettle as much as a cherry tree, a
22 Georg Winter
frog as much as a horse. For every living thing has its dignity
and plays its part and in some way contributes to the
preservation of the balance of nature. Plants and animals
can’t put in their vote in an election. Therefore, the state
must ensure that the existential interests of these living
creatures also be given political effectiveness.
To achieve this, we must utilize different instruments of state
and civil law: For example, the security of the natural
necessities of life for humans, animals and plants must be
given constitutional importance. The environmental minister
must, just like the financial minister, be given a veto right in
governmental decisions. Environmental associations must
receive the right to sue those who damage the environment
to cease and desist, or to pay reparations. By these and
other means the state must ensure that the existential
interests of all living things be represented in governmental
decision-making, in jurisprudence, and in every day
economic activity.
2 The break-through to biocracy
Human democracy is in reality an oligarchy of the “naked
apes”. Measured in terms of biomass, humans represent a
minority among the living creatures, and this minority
overrules the disenfranchised majority. True democracy is
only possible if we acknowledge that the “populace of earth”
consists not only of humans, but also of plants and animals,
in short, of the totality of all living creatures.
Shouldn’t we make the totality of all living creatures the
sovereign of the state? Shouldn’t governments understand
themselves as the carriers of a mandate of all living
creatures and act accordingly? Shouldn’t we develop human
democracy into a democracy of all living creatures? We must
achieve a break-through to a new form of state, namely
biocracy. Human history has known monarchy, aristocracy,
oligarchy and democracy. Shouldn’t our time of increased
endangerment of all life be ripe for biocracy?
Basic text 23
In the biocratic parliament – metaphorically speaking – trees
are equally entitled to a seat and a say. We should listen
closely to the trees. We may find that they represent our true
interests better that we do ourselves. Either we humans
reach a democracy of all life, namely biocracy, or our
species will one day end under the dictatorship of death.
If we reach for our visions, we will realize all that is possible.
If we only aim for what is possible, we will be caught in
routine and then our civilization will have no chance of
surviving in the long run.”
12. Final highlighting of current initiatives
The introductory statement on the current situation under
point (1) above concerned larger global interrelations in a
rather abstract way. Going back to this point, the following
final comments should be dedicated specifically to current
initiatives:
In order to more strongly include the “voice of nature”
in the current lively debate about the energy revolution,
I funded and published a pamphlet concerning this
question: Wicke, L./Schulte von Drach, M.C.: The
energy revolution. More climate protection, but socially
and economically viable, published by Georg Winter,
Neumünster and Hamburg 2013.
The HAUS DER ZUKUNFT in Hamburg is planning a
conference for the end of November 2015 which is
primed by the following series of texts:
“RIGHTS OF NATURE / BIOCRACY” IN THE
DIMENSION OF THE ECONOMY.
24 Georg Winter
The development of the concept of biocracy towards a
fertile transdisciplinary and interdisciplinary term is to be
further funded and pushed forward.
In this context the Biocracy Prize I founded will,
following the conference, also be opened to works in
the areas of economic and educational sciences. An
opening for the natural sciences had already taken
place the last time the prize was awarded in 2013.7
The last raising of the Flag of United Nature occurred
on May 18th 2014 at the cultural train station of
Ottensoos near Nuremberg. Professor Volker
Stahlmann, in the company of his spouse Renate
Kirchhoff Stahlmann and numerous guests, raised the
flag on a high flagpole in the entrance area of the train
station.
Further raisings of the flag both in and outside the country
will follow.
13. Literature
Expert discussion about the rights of Nature in the HAUS DER
ZUKUNFT, in Hamburg, on 10.12.2008, Documentation,
Winter Family Archive Sign. B 82
7
Award winner was Professor Berndt Heydemann, former
environmental minister of the state of Schleswig-Holstein, in his
function as chairman of the “Zukunftszentrum Mensch-NaturTechnik-Wissenschaft” (ZMTW; “Future Center Humanity-NatureTechnology-Science”) in Nieklitz, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern.
Basic text 25
Schweitzer, Albert (1988): Die Ehrfurcht vor dem Leben,
Grundtexte aus fünf Jahrzehnten, (“Reverence of nature, basic
texts from five decades”) published by Hans Walter Bähr, 5th
,
unchanged edition, C.H.Beck, Munich (Becksche Reihe; Band
255)
Seidel, Eberhard (2012) (editor): Georg Winter – Pionier der
umweltbewussten Unternehmensführung (“Georg Winter –
Pioneer of environmentally conscious business
administration”), Metropolis publishing company, Marburg
2012
Winter, Georg (1983): Qualität als unternehmerischer
Unternehmensgrundsatz (“Quality as an entrepreneurial
axiom of enterprise”), in: Deutsches Pfarrerblatt, 12 (1983), P.
592-596
Winter, Georg (1987) (editor): Das umweltbewusste
Unternehmen. Ein Handbuch der Betriebsökologie mit 22
Check-Listen für die Praxis (“The environmentally conscious
enterprise. A handbook of business ecology with 22
checklists for practice”), C.H.Beck, Munich
Winter, Georg (1988): Business and the Environment,
McGraw-Hill Book Company
Winter, Georg (1989): Enterprise et Environnement
(“Business and the Environment”), McGraw Hill Paris
Winter, Georg (1993): „A Vision for the New Millennium” in:
Conference transcript of the International Conference on EcoManagement – Towards an Industrial Agenda for
Sustainable Development, Tokyo, 9.-10. November 1993,
organized by The United Nations University and Japan Ecolife Center in cooperation with The International Network for
Environmental Management (INEM)
Winter, Georg (1994): Kostenvorteil durch Umweltschutz – umweltbewusstes Management ist weltweit auf dem Vormarsch,
in: Umwelt und Beruf (“Cost benefit through environmental
protection – environmentally conscious management globally
26 Georg Winter
on the rise, in: Environment and profession”), Süddeutsche
Zeitung from 8.-9. Januar 1994
Winter, Georg (1998) (editor): Das umweltbewusste
Unternehmen, die Zukunft beginnt heute. (“The
environmentally conscious enterprise, the future starts
today”), Vahlen publishing company, Munich
Winter, Georg (2006): From United Nations to United Nature
– Harmonization between Human Civilization and Nature by
Environmental Management and Biomimicry, presentation at
the Life Economy Session of the World Life-Culture Forum
in Gyeonggi, South Korea, 2006. In the conference
transcription: world life-culture forum_gyeonggi, Life Thought
and Global Salim (Livelihood) Movement – For a New
Civilization of East Asia and Pacific, WLCF2006 Paper Book
Winter, Georg (2009): Wie ein B.A.U.M. e.V. gepflanzt wurde
– ein Interview mit Dr. Georg Winter (“How a B.A.U.M. [lit.
‘tree’] e.V. was planted – an interview with Dr. Georg Winter”),
in: B.A.U.M. Yearbook 2009, Hamburg, P. 46-49
Winter, Georg (2010): Der Natur gerecht warden (“Doing nature
justice”), in: Zukunft geben, 23 Skizzen zum Stiften (“Giving
future, 23 sketches for endowment”), published by
Gemeinnützige Treuhandstelle Hamburg e.V., Frankfurt a.M.
