RON recognizes nature as a rights holder and shows how existing laws regulate, rather than stop, the destruction of the natural world. RoN laws treat Nature as a legal personality, conceptualize Nature at the ecosystem level, and at least implicitly recognize that humans are part of these ecosystems.
This leads to the question of how nature may claim its rights. Guardians with appropriate expertise could be appointed as representatives - the public may be empowered to bring litigation on behalf of natural entities.
There are institutional differences, and it is one thing to institutionalize a new norm into law, but quite another thing to strengthen emerging norms through practice.
Collection of articles - https://therightsofnature.org/ron-conference-articles/
(One thing to always hold in mind, is the artificiality of rights in the first place. Don’t mistake this tool for some underlying truth that such a thing as individual ‘rights’ exist. Law is a technology that enables us to coordinate and enforce ethics. An approach like Rights of Nature understandably must anthropomorphise other forms of life and ‘project’ our notions of personhood on to them. I embrace this artificiality, because these laws are a useful, highly practical mechanism that can protect ecosystems.)
Ecojurisprudence monitor - https://ecojurisprudence.org/