The Role of Ecological Economics in Latin American Public Policy by Bernardo Aguilar

ECOLEC-05598; No of Pages 4 Ecological Economics xxx (2016) xxx–xxx

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Ecological Economics journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolecon

Commentary

The Role of Ecological Economics in Latin American Public Policy: Latin American Consensus at the ISEE Washington Meeting Brazilian Society of Ecological Economics (ECOECO)a, Argentine-ruguayan Association of Ecological Economics (ASAUEE)b, Mesoamerican and Caribbean Society of Ecological Economics (SMEE)c, Andean Society of Ecological Economics (SAEE)d, Joseph S. Weiss e,⁎ a

c/o Universidade Federal Rural do Rio de Janeiro, Av. Presidente Vargas, 417 | 9° andar, Rio de Janeiro, RJ 20071-003, Brazil c/o Facultad de Ingenieria y Ciencias Hidricas, Universidad Nacional del Litoral (UNL), Ciudad Universitaria, Piso 3, Paraje El Pozo, 3000 Santa Fe, Argentina c c/o Fundación Neotropica, Calle 49, 200 oeste y 25 norte de Cámara de Industrias, San Pedro de Montes de Oca, San José, Costa Rica d c/o Universidad del Valle, Ciudad Universitaria Meléndez, Calle 13, 100-00, Edif. 341, Cali, Colombia e Universidade de Brasilia, Centro para Desenvolvimento Sustentável, Campus Universitário Darcy Ribeiro - Gleba A 70.904-970, Brasilia, DF, Brazil b

A R T IC L E

IN F O

Article history: Received 22 March 2017 Accepted 30 March 2017 Available online xxxx Keywords: Latin America Ecological Economics Societies Ecological Economics Public Policy

In the last two centuries, technology and industry developed and human population grew at an accelerated pace, accompanied by severe environmental deterioration. The twentieth century transformation consisted of expanded productive capacity, increased worker productivity and income per capita. Meanwhile, income disparities between the richest and the poorest increased, along with cultural transformations and changes in political and power structures. Latin America continued on the periphery of the world system. Sustainable development cannot be achieved without including three irreplaceable basic concepts: human needs, physical constraints and moral restraints. Satisfying basic needs requires integral socioeconomic development in places where they are not met, not necessarily through economic growth.

1. Introduction This is the consensus reached at the roundtable “Preparing a Latin American Position Paper” held at the 14th International Society of Ecological Economics (ISEE) in Washington, June 26–29, 2016, hosted by the College of Agriculture, Urban Sustainability and Environmental Sciences (CAUSES) of the University of the District of Columbia. During that session, the content and form of this document were discussed seeking an ecological-economic consensus on public policies in our region. As a result of the roundtable, after changes made subsequent to the Washington meeting, the presidents of the four regional societies, among the authors of this consensus, approved this document, ad referendum of their memberships.1 ⁎ Corresponding author. E-mail addresses:ecoeco.secretaria@gmail.com, lopezcal@hotmail.com, presidentesmee@gmail.com, mario.perez@correounivalle.edu.co, josephweissbr@gmail.com. 1 An earlier version was prepared as one of the outcomes of the XI National Meeting of the Brazilian Society of Ecological Economics (ECOECO) and the VII Ibero-American Congress of Development and Environment (CISDA), held from 8 to 11 September 2015, on the Araraquara campus of São Paulo State University – UNESP. It was consistent with the theme of the Congress: Applications of the ecological economics to Latin American Public Policies. It was presented at the Ordinary Assembly of ECOECO, with the participation of the presidents of the four regional societies.

2. Consensus Based upon a broad analysis of Latin America's situation and the asymmetries of power in the world economy that limit the prospects for global governance, we affirm the gravity of that the current situation at the continental level. We identify the need for a special effort to lead decision making at all levels to achieve the objectives specified principally in the following themes summarized below: 1) Well-being indicators appropriate to social and environmental sustainability and a search for a better and more inclusive development metric, representing the interests of all those who speak with Latin American voices, especially the most vulnerable groups; 2) The decoupling of economic growth from the use of energy and materials as well as from environmental degradation; 3) Technical innovation with reduced environmental impacts, generation of employment and social benefits, taking into account each country's contribution to global investment, according to its possibilities; 4) The universalization of low-carbon agriculture and livestock production at all scales;

Please cite this article as: Weiss, J.S., The Role of Ecological Economics in Latin American Public Policy: Latin American Consensus at the ISEE Washington Meeting, Ecol. Econ. (2016), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.03.041

J.S. Weiss / Ecological Economics xxx (2016) xxx–xxx

5) The evaluation and equitable distribution of ecosystem service beneﬁts among all species and peoples in this and future generations; 6) Sustainable management of increasingly scarce natural resources and of ever more deteriorated ecosystems; 7) Sustainable, fair and creative urbanization, making cities pleasant places to live and socialize; 8) The empowerment of indigenous peoples and local communities to exercise their right to governance and direct participation in the political decisions affecting their territories, including the questioning of the need for large projects; 9) Ecocentric ethics and consciousness raising of social actors regarding the onset of planetary ecosystem resilience thresholds and the inevitable consequences of the expansion of a consumer society; and 10) A better distribution of power and organization of global system governance, adapting human activity to the world's biophysical limits and seeking environmental justice.

3. Problem Summary and Proposed Solutions 1) Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is not the appropriate indicator to measure well-being. It's almost exclusive use in economic policy for this purpose induces unsustainable economic growth and does not promote the equitable distribution of wealth generated in the process. Growth in the scale of the economy brings costs that, at the margin, outweigh their benefits. Per capita income does not measure well-being and certainly does not reflect happiness. We propose: ✓ Adopt a more inclusive indicator of progress than GDP, while applying new macro-social models that put the well-being of the needy population first. ✓ Macroeconomic policies compatible with sustainability and income redistribution. ✓ Promote equitable and universal improvement of well-being while simultaneously allocating resources efficiently for economic and environmental benefit. ✓ Environmental stress metrics, such as per capita pollution, ecological footprint, virtual water and net primary production, should be considered in addressing the measurement of sustainable development objectives. ✓ Multidimensional progress indicators defined in the Sustainable Development Objectives, are needed, with efforts to strengthen national data banks. ✓ Define more realistic and improve monitoring capabilities of the proposed indicators. ✓ In addition to family income and housing, peoples' well-being needs to be measured by the quality of public health services, access to drinking water, education, sanitation, transportation, public safety, etc. 2) The traditional process of economic growth in Latin America is associated with intensive materials and energy use, as well as the continuously increasing pressures on the environment. This neoextractivism is aggravated given that the region is a net exporter of primary commodities. In addition to directly or indirectly exploiting large areas, it uses them in a predatory and inefficient manner, along with inequitable distribution of the gains. It appears to be increasingly difficult to reduce materials and energy use concurrent with growth in the economy. We propose: ✓ Recognize there are different paths to sustainable development of developed, emerging and developing countries. ✓ The evaluation of these paths should focus on ways to promote equity in the distribution of wealth and, at the same time, reduce its metabolic intensity. ✓ Achieve this by readjusting national economies, to focus on reduction in greenhouse gas emissions and increasing productivity, while considering rebound effects.

✓ Strengthen and integrate national plans for water and solid waste management, climate change mitigation and adaptation, and energy efficiency programs. ✓ Link them to plans to eliminate poverty and inequality, in accordance with the decoupling proposal disseminated by the United Nations Environment Program. ✓ Rethink and question the mainstream notion that hydropower generation is clean and sustainable. ✓ Advance in the generation of electricity from other renewable sources, thus assuaging social and environmental conflicts over river use and pressure on water resources. 3) Technological innovations are not neutral. They need to be qualified. On one hand, there are technological eco-innovations, generated mainly in the advanced countries, which reduce environmental impact and increase production efficiency. They deserve to be transferred to developing countries in the form of foreign aid. On the other hand, there are innovations consisting of expensive capital-intensive production activities leading to social and environmental conflicts, not suitable for the nations of the continent. These are the opposite of so-called “social technologies,” aimed at low-cost creative solutions for low-income populations. We propose: ✓ Focus innovation and dissemination on social technologies, by strengthening endogenous capabilities, benefitting low-income groups and affected local communities. ✓ Introduce other innovations that help maintain ecosystem functions and services. For example, processing equipment for products of social and biological diversity chains (Brazil nuts, rubber, and renewable plant biomass fuels), solar energy for isolated communities, low cost, community-manufactured cisterns, etc. 4) Universalize Low-Carbon Agriculture. Agriculture and livestock, a key sector in Latin America, is firmly integrated in the global market. Together with the resulting forest conversion, it is the continent's main source of greenhouse gas emissions. This continues despite existing policies to promote good mitigation practices and dissemination of innovations that help one adapt to climate change. The sector still is heavily dependent on chemical inputs that affect human health and ecosystems, as well as inefficient water use, soil fertility loss and erosion. Landed property concentration continues, while the sector continues to be a way of life for thousands of impoverished peasants. Most agroecological farmers and extractivists, whose products are free of toxic inputs, have limited market access and are restricted in geographical coverage. We propose: ✓ Low-carbon agriculture and livestock husbandry, integrated with forestry, must be adopted by all, together with the wide dissemination of integrated pest management, while preventing impacts on human health and ecosystems; ✓ Increased productivity and avoided deforestation are anticipated with such practices; ✓ Improved and expanded public policies that favor agro-ecology, sustainable forest product extraction, stronger protected area systems and management of the public forest estate; ✓ Economic instruments should be combined with regulatory land use policies to reduce harmful human activities; ✓ The territorial rights of indigenous peoples must be respected; ✓ Support for family farming and land reform for landless peasants should be adapted and expanded; ✓ Expanded public policies leading to improved terms of trade for family farming and agro-extractivist agriculture with respect to their reduced environmental degradation effects; and ✓ Guaranteed access to land for rural social movements for subsistence and improved quality of life. 5) Despite modest progress in estimating and compensating for environmental, ecosystem, social and cultural services, public policies generally ignore the rights of local communities and

J.S. Weiss / Ecological Economics xxx (2016) xxx–xxx

✓

✓ ✓ 6)

✓

✓ ✓

✓

indigenous peoples, the intangible assets of nature and their local and global benefits. We propose: Respect and quantify environmental services, provided especially by low-income groups, to ensure that water producers and other natural resource protectors be compensated for the services they provide in an equitable fashion. Legally recognize ecosystem service providers to permit that benefits are fairly and directly distributed by beneficiaries. Strengthen public capacity to implement compensation systems for these services at all levels. Natural resources. There is internal and external pressure to appropriate and use natural resources, especially water, and to degrade biomes. Once considered relatively abundant, they now have to be seen as increasingly scarce and critical natural capital. There are few efforts to create protected areas, and indeed in some nations, such areas have been reduced. Therefore, their preservation is urgent, since they are absolutely essential for life and cannot be replaced. We propose: Sustainable management of natural resources, beginning with the basic premise that they have measurable economic value and represent ecosystem services provided by nature. Integrated and holistic ecosystem management, determining quantity (provision services) and quality (control services). Sufficient resources to adopt “green infrastructure”, with adequate budgetary allocation, including permanent forest protection, appropriate watershed, spring and riverbank management, equitable criteria for primary and treated water use charges, asserting the right to water, as well as proper soil use and management. Urbanization. This intense process of the second half of the 20th century is giving rise today to several regional megalopolises in the LAC region, by allowing real estate speculation, irregular land occupation and inappropriate housing for low-income population. These pose public policy challenges to a dignified and sustainable life with strengthened human capacities. We propose: Recovering the long-term sustainable urban planning approach is a sine qua non to face the challenge that Latin American cities become more pleasant places for life and human sociability. Urban plans and projects and their effective implementation must require sustainable and fair land use, environment and cultural heritage protection, housing, health, sustainable mobility, universal access to basic sanitation services, public safety, adequate urban waste disposal and green living spaces. These actions as well as others should lead to the collective good, the development of human capabilities, rural-urban integration and a dignified life. Indigenous peoples' rights are not respected as defined in Resolution 169 of the International Labour Organization (ILO) and the subsequent United Nations declaration of indigenous peoples' rights, extended to other traditional peoples and local communities. They often question the need for large projects. The social and environmental problems associated with investment in large-scale projects such as roads, railways, ports, airports, mining and hydroelectric power remain unresolved. This is attested to by the numerous conflicts that have arisen involving affected peoples and environmental issues leading to a significant increase in legal proceedings motivated by unfulfilled claims of their rights. It appears that, in general, environmental licenses for these types of works are granted without regard to compliance with contractual conditions and environmental regulations. We propose: The empowerment of indigenous, afro descendent and traditional peoples as well as local communities and compliance with their social, political and governance rights. As far as large-scale projects are concerned, establish a permanent dialogue between civil society, the entrepreneur and

✓ ✓

✓

✓ ✓

✓ 10)

✓

✓ ✓ ✓

government, on the respect for their rights and on key social and environmental issues, from their initial planning stages. Therefore, give priority to the fair distribution of benefits or compensation to affected populations. Consider and study investment alternatives with less environmental impact, including other modes of transport such as waterways, management systems and energy demand reduction policies. These should be evaluated with the effective participation of the affected stakeholders, considering the projects' direct and indirect social and environmental impacts. Project evaluation should integrate private values with social, cultural and environmental values of affected public assets, through tools such as socio-environmental cost-benefit analysis, social multi-criteria and strategic environmental assessment at an aggregated scale. Use predefined thresholds applicable to both private and public projects, as well as changes in institutional and regulatory frameworks. Thus, licensing procedures should be improved, with specific guidelines similar to those proposed by the World Commission on Dams, especially its rights approach (World Commission on Dams, 2000). These solutions can increase rather than reduce project profitability indicators, but should above all generate community well-being. The environment is still predominantly seen as an obstacle to production rather than an opportunity to adopt eco-innovations and achieve sustainable production. The anthropocentric prevails over the ecocentric ethic, with a consciousness that ignores the importance of reducing the impact of socio-economic activities on the environment and climate change. The planet cannot support reproducing the consumption patterns of the rich countries' middle and upper classes, even though consumers desire them, encouraged by corporations and the several communications media. We propose: Spread the idea that it is possible to implement a new model that reconciles development with sustainability, with changes in consumption habits and production technologies. Teach society the economic advantage of effective change, reconciled with the goals of human and ecosystem health. Improve strategies for greater public awareness and better public policies to bring these changes about, with an emphasis on public and private communication and on universal education, regarding sustainable development at all levels. Disseminate the many local examples of success such as Bhutan's national experience, as well as that of others. The concentration of power limits decision-making on human activity becoming consistent with planetary limits and social and environmental challenges. It also constrains the organization of governance at global, national and local levels, leading to the lack of institutions and processes needed for social and environmental change. Decision-making systems are needed at all levels, which translate into the respect for planetary boundaries and the observance of decisions taken. We propose: Adjust anthropogenic activities to ecological limits through changes in the power structure and the design and implementation of policies and projects, based on lessons learned. Adopt democratic management and implementation of social and environmental policies at the global, national and local levels, with cooperation between governments, the private sector and society. Adjust the capacity of the United Nations, as well as of nationstates and local governments. Include this issue on the agenda of international forums. Build civil society organizations' effective participation in decision making.

J.S. Weiss / Ecological Economics xxx (2016) xxx–xxx

✓ Adopt a new South–South model for partnership and cooperation among countries, with the support of the UN and global organizations. ✓ Formulate policies, implement projects and programs, with the participation of endogenous national experts. ✓ Improve positive models of existing North–South cooperation agreements. Contributors The following ISEE members contributed with signiﬁcant text changes: Bernardo Aguilar González, SMEE President, Fundación Neotrópica, Costa Rica; Soﬁa Avila-Calero, Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona, Spain; Aleida Azamar Alonso and David Barkin, Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana, Mexico; Alberto López Calderón, ASAUEE President, Universidad Nacional del Litoral (UNL), Argentina; Clóvis Cavalcanti ISEE President-Elect and ECOECO Honorary President, Fundação Joaquim Nabuco, Brazil; Maria Amelia Enríquez, Universidade Federal do Pará, Brazil; Junior Ruiz Garcia, Universidade Federal do Paraná, Brazil; Claudio Fernandez Macor, UNL, Argentina; Peter H.

May, ECOECO President, Universidade Federal Rural do Rio de Janeiro, Brazil; Claudio Passalía, UNL, Argentina; Mario Alejandro Perez Rincon, SAEE President, Universidad del Valle, Columbia.

Acknowledgements We wish to express our thanks to Luciana Togeiro and Sabine O′Hara and their teams for organizing the referred ECOECO and ISEE meetings which made this consensus possible; and to Zeze Weiss for English editing. This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors. References World Commission on Dams, 2000. Dams and Development: A New Framework for Decision-making. Earthscan Publications Ltd., London and Sterling, VA:p. 356. https:// www.internationalrivers.org/sites/default/files/attached-files/world_commission_on_ dams_final_report.pdf accessed March 17, 2017. (Previously found at www.unep.org/ dams/accessed June 12, 2016. No longer, given change in UNEP platform).