Abstract



Contemporary environmental crises, ranging from climate change and mass extinction to widespread pollution of natural resources, stem from a profound gap between technical knowledge and moral will. This fundamental research, employing conceptual analysis and a comparative methodology, explores the philosophical roots of these crises in anthropocentrism and traces the historical shift toward biocentrism, ecocentrism, and the rights of nature. By introducing four analytical indicators—ontological basis of value, scope of responsibility, criteria of justice, and legalizability—this study provides a critical comparison of the major ethical frameworks and addresses the existing gap in integrating these frameworks with Islamic and indigenous ethical traditions. The analysis reveals that each framework offers distinct insights: anthropocentrism emphasizes human accountability, biocentrism extends moral consideration to all living beings, ecocentrism prioritizes the integrity of entire ecosystems, and the rights of nature movement seeks to translate ethical imperatives into enforceable legal norms. The findings indicate that solutions to the environmental crisis are not merely technological or legal but require a fundamental transformation in worldviews, responsible consumption patterns, and the acceptance of collective responsibility grounded in ecological citizenship and an ethics of care. The study emphasizes the necessity of integrating ethics, law, education, and civic action to foster a sustainable relationship with nature, while also drawing upon religious and indigenous wisdom as complementary resources for moral renewal.