The problem isn't the importance but the practicalities - it is abundantly clear who has standing to sue on behalf of corporations and they have common interests.

Who can claim to speak for a forrest and not be mere sophists? A hunter, hiker, and a lumberjack all have different interests in a forest. Unless it is privately owned in entirety there is nobody who can claim standing unless the standards are anarchic enough that literally anyone can sock-puppet the entity.