Chapter 1: Key Players and Conflicting Goals
Summary:
Ecuador is an ecologically rich and biodiverse country thus making it rich in resources and a potentially profitable extraction source. The country is plagued by increasingly high debt and the necessity of confronting its citizens’ needs while at the center of an era focused on the protection of the environment. Consequently, a majority of Ecuador’s revenue is made through invasive environmental procedures that are profitable global industries, including natural gas extraction and mining. These procedures help to pay their global debt and profit the economy but also put their diverse environment at great risk. In addition, Ecuador has given legal rights to nature that are indeed unique and further complicates this situation. This puts the country in a position where it must choose profit or the environment, or attempt to pave a new path for itself.
Sustainability is not a simple concept and its complexities arise as it attempts to include economic success and the voice of the people in addition to the primary protection of the environment. As described in the text, these three aspects: environmental, economic, and social comprise the triple bottom line and expand the scope of the once basic definition. Ecuador is caught in the cycle of needing to extract resources to survive which inhibits their growth because it is the most available and viable option. To help break the cycle and strive towards a more sustainable country, several initiatives were brought forth; from 2007-2013 the Yasuni-ITT initiative was enacted. This initiative by President Correa aimed to stop oil extraction in Yasuni National Park if the global community helped by funding half of the money that would be lost for Ecuador. In more detail, “The project attempted to “strand” these oil assets in order to protect biodiversity, respect the territory of indigenous peoples, combat climate change, and encourage more sustainable economic development” (Sovacool & Scarpaci, 2016, p. 158). This failed due to only a small fraction of the total funds being raised and thus creating a need to begin drilling to make a profit.
Another initiative under Correa is the National Plan for Good Living that uses the phrase of “buen vivir” or in the indigenous Quechuan “sumak kawsay”, which means good living, to achieve a healthy and happy lifestyle of the people through equality and harmony rather than focus on more materialistic things that increase profit. Buen vivir captures the aforementioned definition of sustainability while further rejecting development over environmental health.
The reason why economic development and profit is often prioritized over environmental concerns is discussed in the treadmill of production theory (TOP). The take-home message from this theory is simply that profit outweighs any outside concerns and drives the actions of the players: corporations, state, and citizen workers. Increased economic success results in environmental loss and destruction. For corporations, increasing profit is the focus, leaving environmental effects to be of little importance to them. Actions will not be taken that harm the profit of corporations. The state collects money from both corporations and workers and thus their success determines its own. The state must also protect its workers to be profitable, giving citizen-workers the power to slow development and help the environment. The citizens hold the power to spark change where they see needed, either to enhance profit or protect the environment. In Ecuador, the citizen-workers are comprised of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and social movement actors (SMAs). NGOs are privately run and work to invoke change in areas that are often overlooked in this profit-driven society as discussed in the TOP theory. SMAs work without pay toward a shared goal in their community and can or cannot be considered NGOs. Outside, international actors and funding affects the success and methods of NGOs while the success of SMAs lies in its volunteers. Therefore, NGOs and SMAs have the power to make environmental progress.
Schnaiberg describes TOP as a discussion of production versus environmental success. He poses three situations in dealing with production and the environment to demonstrate the relationship. Economic synthesis benefits production and poses no restrictions on environmental access. Managed scarcity poses some regulations and limits and helps to find a balance between the two. Finally, ecological synthesis imposes much stricter regulations that would prove the hardest to achieve. In order to benefit the environment most and support the latter two situations while slowing the TOP, Schnaiberg feels social unity or unity of the people is essential.
Reflection:
Just as easily as Ecuador can become an example of environmental protection, it can fall back into its ways of resorting to the destruction of its resource richness for profit. This fact is what puts me in awe of the role that Ecuador plays in our world in potentially shifting the focus from greed to awareness. It further demonstrates how easy it is to fall into the cycle of destruction for profit that fuels our world today. Sustainability is certainly no easy task to implement and find success in; often the balance between profit and the environment makes sustainability difficult to achieve. As one source puts it, “Being a developing country, tensions arise between conservation aims and development imperatives, as well as between resource nationalism and much-needed foreign financing” (Escribano, 2013, p. 152). In attempts to act and live more sustainably, perhaps the most important aspect of the concept is that it attempts to unite important facets of our society and any attempt toward this can be seen as a success, no matter how small.
The Yasuni Initiative was very respectable given the ability of world powers to step in and easily be able to contribute to the cause of preserving biodiversity. If I were Ecuadorian, I would assume my support would have been given to this initiative seeing that money would still be raised while protecting our precious biodiversity. However, I would also say that my support would be accompanied by worry and perhaps fear for those Ecuadorians that rely on jobs like this for income and desire for more jobs outside of this field to combat any losses. Similarly, the National Plan for Good Living and “buen vivir” concept sounds wonderful in writing but seems rather hard to achieve in practice in a world driven by money, especially for a country in debt and struggling to compete on a global scale. However, I would love to see this concept adopted and worked towards. As stated in a research article on the topic, “the inclusive nature of buen vivir offers opportunities for diverse peoples to cohere around shared meanings of the 'good life,' while providing the freedom to live variations depending on social and ecological context” (Chaves, Macintyre, Verschoor, & Wals, 2016, p.153). Major changes in laws and outlooks would need to occur to very strictly regulate any environmental impact, which is perhaps too big of a leap initially for a country that struggles to bring in revenue. Slowly working towards buen vivir is both exciting and promising for the future of Ecuador.
References:
Chaves, M., Macintyre, T., Verschoor, G., & Wals, A. E. (2017). Radical ruralities in
practice: Negotiating buen vivir in a Colombian network of sustainability. Journal of Rural Studies, 59, 153-162.
Escribano, G. (2013). Ecuador's energy policy mix: Development versus conservation and
nationalism with Chinese loans. Energy Policy, 57, 152-159.
Sovacool, B. K., & Scarpaci, J. (2016). Energy justice and the contested petroleum
politics of stranded assets: Policy insights from the Yasuní-ITT Initiative in Ecuador. Energy Policy, 95, 158-171.
Summary:
Ecuador is an ecologically rich and biodiverse country thus making it rich in resources and a potentially profitable extraction source. The country is plagued by increasingly high debt and the necessity of confronting its citizens’ needs while at the center of an era focused on the protection of the environment. Consequently, a majority of Ecuador’s revenue is made through invasive environmental procedures that are profitable global industries, including natural gas extraction and mining. These procedures help to pay their global debt and profit the economy but also put their diverse environment at great risk. In addition, Ecuador has given legal rights to nature that are indeed unique and further complicates this situation. This puts the country in a position where it must choose profit or the environment, or attempt to pave a new path for itself.
Sustainability is not a simple concept and its complexities arise as it attempts to include economic success and the voice of the people in addition to the primary protection of the environment. As described in the text, these three aspects: environmental, economic, and social comprise the triple bottom line and expand the scope of the once basic definition. Ecuador is caught in the cycle of needing to extract resources to survive which inhibits their growth because it is the most available and viable option. To help break the cycle and strive towards a more sustainable country, several initiatives were brought forth; from 2007-2013 the Yasuni-ITT initiative was enacted. This initiative by President Correa aimed to stop oil extraction in Yasuni National Park if the global community helped by funding half of the money that would be lost for Ecuador. In more detail, “The project attempted to “strand” these oil assets in order to protect biodiversity, respect the territory of indigenous peoples, combat climate change, and encourage more sustainable economic development” (Sovacool & Scarpaci, 2016, p. 158). This failed due to only a small fraction of the total funds being raised and thus creating a need to begin drilling to make a profit.
Another initiative under Correa is the National Plan for Good Living that uses the phrase of “buen vivir” or in the indigenous Quechuan “sumak kawsay”, which means good living, to achieve a healthy and happy lifestyle of the people through equality and harmony rather than focus on more materialistic things that increase profit. Buen vivir captures the aforementioned definition of sustainability while further rejecting development over environmental health.
The reason why economic development and profit is often prioritized over environmental concerns is discussed in the treadmill of production theory (TOP). The take-home message from this theory is simply that profit outweighs any outside concerns and drives the actions of the players: corporations, state, and citizen workers. Increased economic success results in environmental loss and destruction. For corporations, increasing profit is the focus, leaving environmental effects to be of little importance to them. Actions will not be taken that harm the profit of corporations. The state collects money from both corporations and workers and thus their success determines its own. The state must also protect its workers to be profitable, giving citizen-workers the power to slow development and help the environment. The citizens hold the power to spark change where they see needed, either to enhance profit or protect the environment. In Ecuador, the citizen-workers are comprised of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and social movement actors (SMAs). NGOs are privately run and work to invoke change in areas that are often overlooked in this profit-driven society as discussed in the TOP theory. SMAs work without pay toward a shared goal in their community and can or cannot be considered NGOs. Outside, international actors and funding affects the success and methods of NGOs while the success of SMAs lies in its volunteers. Therefore, NGOs and SMAs have the power to make environmental progress.
Schnaiberg describes TOP as a discussion of production versus environmental success. He poses three situations in dealing with production and the environment to demonstrate the relationship. Economic synthesis benefits production and poses no restrictions on environmental access. Managed scarcity poses some regulations and limits and helps to find a balance between the two. Finally, ecological synthesis imposes much stricter regulations that would prove the hardest to achieve. In order to benefit the environment most and support the latter two situations while slowing the TOP, Schnaiberg feels social unity or unity of the people is essential.
Reflection:
Just as easily as Ecuador can become an example of environmental protection, it can fall back into its ways of resorting to the destruction of its resource richness for profit. This fact is what puts me in awe of the role that Ecuador plays in our world in potentially shifting the focus from greed to awareness. It further demonstrates how easy it is to fall into the cycle of destruction for profit that fuels our world today. Sustainability is certainly no easy task to implement and find success in; often the balance between profit and the environment makes sustainability difficult to achieve. As one source puts it, “Being a developing country, tensions arise between conservation aims and development imperatives, as well as between resource nationalism and much-needed foreign financing” (Escribano, 2013, p. 152). In attempts to act and live more sustainably, perhaps the most important aspect of the concept is that it attempts to unite important facets of our society and any attempt toward this can be seen as a success, no matter how small.
The Yasuni Initiative was very respectable given the ability of world powers to step in and easily be able to contribute to the cause of preserving biodiversity. If I were Ecuadorian, I would assume my support would have been given to this initiative seeing that money would still be raised while protecting our precious biodiversity. However, I would also say that my support would be accompanied by worry and perhaps fear for those Ecuadorians that rely on jobs like this for income and desire for more jobs outside of this field to combat any losses. Similarly, the National Plan for Good Living and “buen vivir” concept sounds wonderful in writing but seems rather hard to achieve in practice in a world driven by money, especially for a country in debt and struggling to compete on a global scale. However, I would love to see this concept adopted and worked towards. As stated in a research article on the topic, “the inclusive nature of buen vivir offers opportunities for diverse peoples to cohere around shared meanings of the 'good life,' while providing the freedom to live variations depending on social and ecological context” (Chaves, Macintyre, Verschoor, & Wals, 2016, p.153). Major changes in laws and outlooks would need to occur to very strictly regulate any environmental impact, which is perhaps too big of a leap initially for a country that struggles to bring in revenue. Slowly working towards buen vivir is both exciting and promising for the future of Ecuador.
References:
Chaves, M., Macintyre, T., Verschoor, G., & Wals, A. E. (2017). Radical ruralities in
practice: Negotiating buen vivir in a Colombian network of sustainability. Journal of Rural Studies, 59, 153-162.
Escribano, G. (2013). Ecuador's energy policy mix: Development versus conservation and
nationalism with Chinese loans. Energy Policy, 57, 152-159.
Sovacool, B. K., & Scarpaci, J. (2016). Energy justice and the contested petroleum
politics of stranded assets: Policy insights from the Yasuní-ITT Initiative in Ecuador. Energy Policy, 95, 158-171.