Authored By: Christy Teh Xing Ti
Multimedia University
ABSTRACT
“What you do makes a difference, and you have to decide what kind of difference you want to make.” Ensuing the passing of Dr. Jane Goodall, her infamous quote has been echoing louder than ever. From her renowned discovery on chimpanzees, to becoming the United Nations (UN) Messenger of Peace, it is indisputable that her legacy transcends mere human relations. As such, this article intends to highlight the impact that Dr. Jane Goodall has brought forth within the realm of environmental and animal law, specifically through the Jane Goodall Act, the U.S. Endangered Species Act, as well as her contributions via the Nonhuman Rights Project (NhRP). In light of her transformative work from primatology into environmental advocacy, much emphasis remains on the impact upon the next generation via the Roots and Shoots programme, serving as a grassroots engagement into legal and civic momentum for species protection.
1.0 INTRODUCTION
From a legal standpoint, environmental law represents the governance of human interaction with the natural world by protecting ecosystems and conserving biodiversity. Historically, the rise of modern environmental law is evidently seen in the U.S. Endangered Species Act 1973 which reflected the consensus that there ought to be stronger legal protections in order to combat human-driven extinctions. With that being said, the institutional intertwining between science, policy, and law through Dr. Jane Goodall’s legacy has not only shaped a species-to-species understanding, it has also revolutionised the drafting of legal safeguards.
In the 1960s, Dr. Jane Goodall started off her scientific work in Tanzania by documenting the behaviours of our closest living relatives – chimpanzees.1 Through her groundbreaking discovery, we have arrived at an understanding that blurred theorised boundaries between humans and other primates. Over the years, Dr. Jane Goodall’s immersive role as a researcher gradually brought her into the world of being a global advocate. Being the founder of Jane Goodall Institute and the Roots and Shoots youth program,2it has allowed mainstreaming of ethical arguments on animal sentience, welfare, and conservation, which subsequently provides a channel for scientific findings to enter legal debates as both evidence and moral impetus.
There are however several dimensions when it comes to the relationship between Dr. Jane Goodall and environmental law. First off, the findings and discovery of Dr. Jane Goodall has been used as expert evidence in regulatory proceedings concerning primates, captive animal welfare, and habitat protection. Secondly, from a normative stance, Dr. Jane Goodall’s moral advocacy for environmental preservation contributed to the opinions that undergirds legislative initiatives, such as the Jane Goodall Act in Canada.3 Next, with the credibility of a scientist-advocate with broad public trust like Dr. Jane Goodall, it tends to garner a more responsive impact in order to materially shape the law.
2.0 JANE GOODALL ACT (CANADA)
In Canadian public discourse, the “Jane Goodall Act” refers to the legislative proposals of Bill S-218 and Bill S-241 that aims to strengthen federal protections against the possession, breedings, and trade of certain wild animals in captivity. The key policy features highlighted necessary bans on captivities, permit systems for accredited facilities, and harsher penalties to be imposed for illegal trade. As the proponents of the bills suggest, it serves to fill up the lacunae of the law that allows for “roadside zoos” and private owners to engage in commercial exploitation.4 Moreover, it opens the door to a new legislative perspective whereby certain captive animals shall have limited legal standing in allowing for court-appointed advocates to represent their interest in legal proceedings.
The rationale behind the proposal of the Jane Goodall Act reflects a multifaceted impact towards environmental law. Ethically, advocates argue that certain wild animals suffer in captivity due to physical and psychological deprivation of their natural habitat. From a conservation standpoint, the contention remains that by allowing private ownership, it undermines species protection by providing a leeway for illegal trading. However, critics raised concerns over the possible backfire from categorical bans that impedes legitimate conservation breeding and rescue programs.5 Thus, various calls have been made to balance welfare and conservation against institutional animal management concerns.
According to the Canadian Parliamentary records, Bill S-241 reflects a renewed legislative interest as compared to the prior Bill S-218 (commonly labelled as the Jane Goodall Act). However, there is evidence of political and regulatory friction in the passing of the intended Bills, particularly on S-241, as it has been dropped from the Senate’s order paper back in February 2024.6In the midst of legislative dynamics surrounding the Act, it illustrates the vulnerability of advocate-backed initiatives from stakeholder pushback, where the ultimate enactment depends on legislative priorities.
3.0 U.S. ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT
The United States (U.S.) Endangered Species Act 1973 (“ESA”) was enacted with the prevention of extinction and promotion of recovery of species in mind. Through ESA, the establishment of a scientific listing process sets off the requirement for federal agencies to consult prior to taking any actions that would potentially jeopardise listed species or adversely affect critical habitat, as provided under Section 7.7 Moreover, under Section 9, it stipulates the prohibition of unauthorised “take” of listed terrestrial and freshwater species.8
As we backtrack to 1973, it has been understood that the Congress enacted the ESA amid mounting scientific evidence of accelerating extinctions and ecological collapse within the United States. With the support of public and scientific communities, the statute provided enforceable tools to address the extinction crises, simultaneously reflecting a normative shift in law towards recognising a more intrinsic approach in biodiversity. Notably, in the case of Tennessee Valley Authority v Hill, the Supreme Court enforced ESA in its judgment even when it meant halting a major federal infrastructure project to protect the snail darter fish.9
Thus, a precedent has been set where it underscored the judicial willingness of the court to prioritise statutory conservation mandates when the language of the Congress is clear. Consequently, scientists like Dr. Jane Goodall can provide influential expert statements of affidavits in ESA-related rulings. Although the implementation of the ESA suffers constraints, yet its legal basis and structure remains as the standard for species protection globally.
4.0 NONHUMAN RIGHTS PROJECT (NhRP)
Apart from the ESA, Dr. Jane Goodall was also a board member of the Nonhuman Rights Project (NhRP) which advocates for the legal rights of nonhuman animals. From her decades of research, it has revealed that chimpanzees possess complex emotional, social, and intellectual capabilities. Therefore, it forms the empirical foundation for many of NhRP’s legal arguments, where Dr. Jane Goodall herself has submitted expert declarations in support of the habeas corpus petitions for chimpanzees and other highly sentient species to be subjected to personhood under common law.
Significantly, in the case Matter of Nonhuman Rights Project v Lavery,10the New York Appellate Division dismissed the petition by NhRP and held that personhood requires the capacity for legal duties, in which chimpanzees could not meet. This is further affirmed in the case of Matter of Nonhuman Rights Project v Breheny,11 where the New York Court of Appeal again rejected the claim for Happy, the elephant at the Bronx Zoo, to be granted personhood. Thus, the court firmly holds that habeas corpus applies only to human beings, though dissenting judges recognised the moral and legal significance of the arguments presented. Simultaneously, it also clarifies that legal personhood is tethered to historical doctrine, whereby the extension of such matter remains with the legislature rather than the courts, subjected to the separation of powers.
With that being said, though both cases were unsuccessful in court, they eventually mark pivotal moments in the transformation of animal law. It highlights the contributions of scientist-advocates like Dr. Jane Goodall in shaping the global dialogue on the extension of fundamental rights beyond just homosapiens. Ultimately, the NhRP which is guided by the fundamentals of Dr. Jane Goodall’s scientific legacy and humanitarian ethos serves as a bridge between the ever-evolving scientific understanding, and the moral and legal evolution of society towards inclusivity and empathy for all sentient beings.
5.0 CARRYING THE TORCH
Considering Dr. Jane Goodall’s commitment and ability to leverage public influence, she has been named as the UN Messenger of Peace back in 2002.12 As they always say, with great power comes great responsibility, Dr. Jane Goodall took this opportunity to elevate climate, biodiversity, and animal-welfare discussions at an international level. Therefore, the UN platform magnified her voice in urging nations to make biodiversity commitments and also to recognise the interdependence of human and ecological health. With all the groundworks laid by her, only time can tell who is to take the leverage and step up to the forefront.
In addition to that, the establishment of the Roots and Shoots programme under the Jane Goodall Institute has created localised constituencies that amplifies the call for legal reform, addressing community-specific problems in three interconnected areas – people, animals, and the environment. Through this programme, younger generations are able to be educated on the science behind biodiversity loss, while being provided the advocacy tools for legislative and regulatory changes.13 With its worldwide operation, the programme’s cumulative effect in legal protections at local and national levels have been significantly rewarding, which can be seen through events like the Project Suara Bumi 2024 in Malaysia.14
Now comes the golden question, who is to be the chosen one that is to take up the torch? In various interviews and speeches given out by Dr. Jane Goodall, it has been repeatedly reiterated that ordinary people can take the step to make a change. Yes, that is right, you and I are the chosen one. This includes personal choices, community projects, and political engagements to frame matters for legal change.15 No voice is without significance, as the practical legal consequence stemming from Dr. Jane Goodall’s influence wasn’t a stand alone task. Alternatively, it was her movement that created the social conditions in compelling lawmakers to enact stronger protections for the environment as a whole.
6.0 CONCLUSION
After all that is said, Dr. Jane Goodall’s life work illustrates how scientific discovery and moral advocacy can interlock to influence law. It is safe to say that the result is not a simple transcription from one scientist’s discovery into enacted statues; rather, the influence that Dr. Jane Goodall builds an understanding as a form of authoritative testimony when laws and regulations are contested. Legally speaking, the U.S. Endangered Species Act represents a concrete example of Dr. Jane Goodall’s impact. Although Goodall herself was not named as a party to the case of Tennessee Valley Authority v Hill, yet it exemplifies how statutory text and congressional purpose backed by scientific concern about extinction can compel courts to defend species even against economically significant projects.
Apart from that, Dr. Jane Goodall’s expert statements have been used to support claims of complex cognition in primates like that great apes. Although the courts have been cautious in the expansion of legal recognition for non-human beings, yet it significantly contributed to the alteration of conceptual terrain. This consequently catalyses legislative reforms or administrative policy changes that aims to improve welfare and protection of species and habitat. With Dr. Jane Goodall’s impact, such a shift not only complements statutory reforms but also mirrors ecological expectations.
Last but not least, the everlasting legacy of Dr. Jane Goodall through the Roots and Shoots programme ensures the continuous cultivation of future changemakers who will press on for stronger environmental governance. In the legal realm, Dr. Jane Goodall’s role as a scientist-advocate represents a model on how empirical knowledge can be translated into legal outcomes. This is achieved not by legal drafting alone, but by building informed publics and cross-sector institutions that are able to create the momentum needed for a durable legal change. As such, what is more fitting than to end with Dr. Jane Goodall’s final message to the world, “I want to make sure that you all understand that each and every one of you has a role to play. You may not know it, you may not find it, but your life matters and you are here for a reason.”
BIBLIOGRAPHY
United States Endangered Species Act 1973, s.7
United States Endangered Species Act 1973, s.9
Tennessee Valley Authority v Hill [1978] 437 U.S. 153
Matter of Nonhuman Rights Project, Inc. v Lavery [2018] NY Slip Op 03309 Matter of Nonhuman Rights Project, Inc. v Breheny [2022] NY Slip Op 03859
S-241, An Act to amend the Criminal Code and the Wild Animal and Plant Protection and Regulation of International and Interprovincial Trade Act (great apes, elephants and certain other animals, 1st Session, Canada 2024
Marianne Schnall, “The Life And Legacy Of Dr. Jane Goodall: Her Timeless Words of Wisdom” (Forbes, 3 October 2025) <https://www.forbes.com/sites/marianneschnall/2025/10/03/the-life-and-legacy-of-dr-jane-gooda ll-her-timeless-words-of-wisdom/> accessed 13 October 2025
“Program Roots & Shoots” (Jane Goodall Institute) <https://janegoodall.org/our-work/our-approach/roots-shoots/> accessed 13 October 2025
“Everything You Need to Know About the Jane Goodall Act” (Jane Goodall Institute Canada, 2 June 2022) <https://janegoodall.ca/our-stories/everything-you-need-to-know-about-the-jane-goodall-act/> accessed 13 October 2025
Donald Neil Plett, “‘Clumsy’ Jane Goodall Act would hinder zoos’ conversation work: Senator Plett” (Senate of Canada, 19 October 2023) <https://sencanada.ca/en/sencaplus/opinion/clumsy-jane-goodall-act-would-hinder-zoos-conserv ation-work-senator-plett/> accessed 13 October 2025
“Messenger of Peace: Jane Goodall” (United Nations) <https://www.un.org/en/messengers-peace/jane-goodall> accessed 13 October 2025
“Roots & Shoots Malaysia – Project Suara Bumi (Voices of the Earth)” (Jane Goodall Institute Roots & Shoots) <https://rootsandshoots.global/roots_and_shoots_malaysia_suara_bumi_project/> accessed 13 October 2025
APPENDICES
Plagiarism Checker: Dupli Checker
Plagiarism Percentage: 6%
AI Checker: ZeroGPT
AI Percentage: 0%
1 Marianne Schnall, “The Life And Legacy Of Dr. Jane Goodall: Her Timeless Words of Wisdom” (Forbes, 3 October 2025)
<https://www.forbes.com/sites/marianneschnall/2025/10/03/the-life-and-legacy-of-dr-jane-goodall-her-timeless-wor ds-of-wisdom/> accessed 13 October 2025.
2 “Program Roots & Shoots” (Jane Goodall Institute) <https://janegoodall.org/our-work/our-approach/roots-shoots/> accessed 13 October 2025.
3 “Everything You Need to Know About the Jane Goodall Act” (Jane Goodall Institute Canada, 2 June 2022) <https://janegoodall.ca/our-stories/everything-you-need-to-know-about-the-jane-goodall-act/> accessed 13 October 2025.
4Ibid.
5 Donald Neil Plett, “‘Clumsy’ Jane Goodall Act would hinder zoos’ conversation work: Senator Plett” (Senate of Canada, 19 October 2023) <https://sencanada.ca/en/sencaplus/opinion/clumsy-jane-goodall-act-would-hinder-zoos-conservation-work-senator plett/> accessed 13 October 2025.
6 S-241, An Act to amend the Criminal Code and the Wild Animal and Plant Protection and Regulation of International and Interprovincial Trade Act (great apes, elephants and certain other animals, 1st Session, Canada 2024.
7 United States Endangered Species Act 1973, s.7.
8 United States Endangered Species Act 1973, s.9.
9[1978] 437 U.S. 153.
10 Matter of Nonhuman Rights Project, Inc. v Lavery [2018] NY Slip Op 03309.
11 Matter of Nonhuman Rights Project, Inc. v Breheny [2022] NY Slip Op 03859.
12 “Messenger of Peace: Jane Goodall” (United Nations) <https://www.un.org/en/messengers-peace/jane-goodall> accessed 13 October 2025.
13 “Program Roots & Shoots” (Jane Goodall Institute) <https://janegoodall.org/our-work/our-approach/roots-shoots/> accessed 13 October 2025.
14 “Roots & Shoots Malaysia – Project Suara Bumi (Voices of the Earth)” (Jane Goodall Institute Roots & Shoots) <https://rootsandshoots.global/roots_and_shoots_malaysia_suara_bumi_project/> accessed 13 October 2025.
15 Marianne Schnall, “The Life And Legacy Of Dr. Jane Goodall: Her Timeless Words of Wisdom” (Forbes, 3 October 2025) <https://www.forbes.com/sites/marianneschnall/2025/10/03/the-life-and-legacy-of-dr-jane-goodall-her-timeless-wor ds-of-wisdom/> accessed 13 October 2025.
