This paper elucidates different conceptions of nature underpinning current debates on citizenship and sustainability. The “environment” is central to green writings on citizenship, yet the meaning of this term is often overlooked. When discussing environmental responsibilities and rights, are we dealing with nature, the environment or sustainability? Does this difference matter? What are the implications of such difference for citizenship and environmental politics? What is it to be protected with citizenship entitlements to and obligations towards nature, to which ends and on which grounds? Are non-human beings included within conceptions of nature informing ecological citizenships? Different notions of green citizenship are considered to explore how nature is conceived and politicised. First, I deal with ecological citizenship as a means to achieve justice. Here, nature is understood in relation to a fair use of ecological space, and sustainability is thought to be achieved through a just distribution of resources and risks. A second approach views citizenship as a vehicle for ecological modernisation and sustainable development; from this perspective, nature is conceived as a resource to be managed for the sake of efficiency and growth. Thirdly, when related to political deliberation ecological citizenship is grounded on a conception of nature as a socially constructed discourse about which there is disagreement and lack of objective knowledge, or as something which has to be represented and interpreted through human lenses. Finally, I examine ecocentric approaches which identify nature with the biotic community and politicise it through an ethics of moral extensionism.
