Ecological debt refers to the accumulation of debts of Northern countries (from a date determined in the past to the present) for having looted the Southern states with the exploitation of their resources, degradation of their natural habitat, the beggars of local people and/or free work from the ward space for waste disposal. The definition itself has changed over the years and some experts have tried larger concept specifications.
In the definition of ecological debt, two types of aspects are understood: the ecological damage caused by time by a country in one or another country or ecosystem outside the national jurisdiction through the pattern of production and consumption; and the exploitation or use of the ecosystem from time to time by a country at the expense of equal rights to this ecosystem by another country.
Because there is a lack of historical aspect in the definition of sustainable development (framed in Brundtland Reports), the concept of ecological debt gives light to a hidden, violent and unfair process behind the current global situation. It also brings power and justice to the center of the stage, to reveal control over resources and pollution loads as a matter of power relations.
Video Ecological debt
History
The term 'ecological debt' first appeared on paper in 1985, in a yellow book entitled "Women in the Movement" made by the German ecologist Eva Quistorp and edited by the Green Party in Germany in 1985. The work was intended to was used for a workshop he gave on 'women, peace and ecology' in Nairobi during the UN Women's Conference (the first such workshop).
In 1992, this term appeared again in two reports published in various places around the world: " Deuda ecolÃÆ'³gica " by Robleto and Marcelo in Chile and " MiljÃÆ'¶skulden " by JonalÃÆ' ¶v in Sweden. The Robleto and Marcelo reports, published by critical NGOs of Instituto de Ecologia Politica (IEP), are the political and activist responses to the global environmental negotiations that took place during the Rio Summit. This explains the debate that has occurred in Latin America since the 1980s about the crucial natural heritage that has been consumed and not returned (ie ecological debt). On the other hand, the purpose of Jernel's report is to calculate Swedish debt for future generations and is intended to serve nationally for Swedish Environmental Advisors. Although the latter has wider worldwide influence in concept debates, it is important to note that both reports have opposite approaches in considering ecological debt: Robleto and Marcelo's report expresses it in symbolic terms, with a focus on moral and political aspects, while the Jernel reports ¶v tries to quantify and monetize it in economic terms.
In 1994, Colombian lawyer Borrero, wrote a book on ecological debt. This refers to the environmental obligations of Northern countries for the excessive, historical and current production of greenhouse gases per capita. This concept was later reused by several environmental organizations from Global South. The campaign on ecological debt was launched in 1997 by Ecuadorian Accion Ecologica and Friends of the Earth.
Overall, the ecological 'movement' was born from the convergence of three major factors during the 80s-90s: 1) the consequences of the debt crisis in the 70s due to volcker shocks or drastic increase in interest rates (followed by an adjustment structure created by the US to solve stagflation in 1981, thereby placing third world countries in debt in impossible circumstances in terms of debt repayment); 2) increased environmental awareness as seen before (activists and NGOs attending the Rio Summit in 1992); 3) increased recognition of the violence caused by colonialism over the years (demand for recognition over 500 years, since Columbus arrived in North America).
In 2009, ecologist Ariel Salleh explains how the capitalist process works in the global North exploiting nature and humans simultaneously, ultimately maintaining a large ecological debt in his article, "Ecological Debt: Embodied Debt". At the 1992 Rio Earth Summit, politicians and corporate leaders from the North globally introduced the solution that should be for the global debt crisis in the global South. They propose 'debt for natural exchanges', which basically means that countries with biodiversity and abundant environmental resources will surrender them to the global North in return for the World Bank to reduce their debt.
Feminist environmental activists, Indigenous activists, and farmers from Global South, reveal how the Global North is much more indebted to Global South. Salleh justifies this by explaining how a 500-year colonization process involving resource extraction has caused great damage and destruction to the Global South ecosystem. In fact, scientists at the US National Academy of Sciences claim that in the period 1961-2000, by analyzing the cost of greenhouse gas emissions created by the rich (North Global) alone, it has become clear that the rich have imposed climate change on the poor far greater than the poor's foreign debt. All of these environmental degradation is the amount of ecological debt, seizing the source of people's livelihoods in the South of the World.
In 2009 also, Andrew Simms used ecological debt in a more bio-physical way and defined it as resource consumption from within an ecosystem that exceeds the regenerative capacity of the system. This is seen especially in non-renewable resources where consumption goes beyond production. In a general sense in his work, this refers to the depletion of global resources beyond the ability of the Earth to regenerate them. Concepts in this sense are based on the bio-physical carrying capacity of an ecosystem; through ecological footprint measurements of human society can determine the rate at which it exhausts natural resources. Ultimately, sustainability imperatives require human society to live in the means of an ecological system to support life in the long term. Ecological debt is a feature of an unsustainable economic system.
Maps Ecological debt
Political dimension
Historical context
There is some debate surrounding the idea of ​​ecological debt and this is largely because the concept arises from various social movements in response to the injustice distribution of the consequences of climate change on the environment and livelihoods of the people.
Salleh specifically shows how the ecological debt manifested in the environmental destruction and associated climate change that the North has created is made possible through the process of modernization and capitalism. The emergence of natural-cultural divisions arising from rapid industrialization is a perfect illustration of human dualism-a trait in which man has a central role above all else. Human ideas embedded in the ecosystem they live in are essential to the discipline of political ecology.
In political ecology, which reconnects nature and economy, ecological debt is important because it recognizes that colonization not only leads to a loss of culture, way of life and language for Indigenous peoples, but has shaped the world economy into an economy that monetizes and commercializes the environment. For example, when the colonization of South America occurred more than 500 years ago, European settlers brought their Eurocentric values, saw themselves better than and were therefore entitled to the knowledge of indigenous peoples and the land where they lived. In the perceived colonial world, large corporations and Western governments tend to provide solutions to global warming by commodifying nature and hoping to profit from it. A better attitude from this has created conditions for global warming to occur, making the ecological footprint of the North soar, while also building huge ecological debt to fully repay the entire South South of their financial debt.
During the Rio Earth Summit in 1992, NGOs created a Debt Agreement, a document that collected all information to better define the concept of ecological debt. They demanded compensation for damage for 500 years (1992 exactly 500 years after Columbus's arrival in North America). It was the first impulse, reversing the flow, but still as a manuscript not recognized by international institutions or leading countries at that time.
Today
In the 2000s, two networks were created and are still in existence today: The Southern Equity Societies Credit Union Guild (SPEDCA), a network of creditors who launched campaigns for ecological debt recognition, and the European Network for Ecological Recognition (ENRED) debtor.
During the COP in Copenhagen in December 2009, some governments from developing countries or countries most vulnerable to the consequences of climate change (such as Bolivia, Mauritania, Chad, or island nations such as the Maldives or Haiti) argue that the principle of collective responsibility demands state or country wealth (such as the United States, some European countries, China) go beyond donations or credit adaptations and make reparations that recognize ecological debt for excessive emissions for decades. The top US ambassador, Todd Stern, firmly rejected the diplomats' argument from these countries that the United States is in such debt.
COP 21 in Paris brings little progress with increased financial assistance for developing countries. Although the aim is to prepare future actions to be taken to adapt to climate change and consider losses and damages (especially displaced persons) of some countries, no real action is adopted. There is no acknowledgment of responsibility but only recommendations.
Calculation
Climate debt
When discussing about ecological debt, climate debt emerges as the only attempt to calculate debt. It combines two distinct elements: debt adaptation which is the cost that people must pay to adapt to irresponsible climate damage to them, and debt consumption or emission debt that is compensated for emitting carbon at the moment.
Calculations
The academic work on the calculation of ecological debt came later. An article published in 2008 looked at the distribution of ecological impacts for various human activities. Studies are also produced at the regional level in countries, for example for Orissa in India.
As seen earlier, the calculation of ecological debt implies various aspects related to political ecology. When calculating the amount of emissions, some scholars ignore the inequalities of emissions from the past while others consider historical accountability.
In 2000, Neumayer calculated what he called 'historical emissions', which consisted of actual historical emission differences (from a certain date in the past) and the same per capita emissions (current emissions).
Theoretically, it is possible to place the value of money on ecological debt by calculating the value of environmental and social externalities associated with the extraction of historic resources and adding an approximate value to the share of global pollution problems borne by poor countries as a result of the high levels of consumption in which rich. This includes efforts to assess the external costs associated with climate change.
By 2015, Matthews proposes a method for calculating ecological debt, looking at the accumulation of `carbon debt 'for each country. This model uses historical estimates of fossil fossil fossil CO 2 national and population and this since 1960. Next, it runs a comparison between annual temperature changes by each country's emissions compared with changes in proportional temperature every state of the world population (same year). This provides the accumulation of credits and debts associated with a larger range of emissions and the 'climate debt' gained will be the difference between the actual temperature changes (caused by each country) and their per capita share of global temperature changes.
Other scholars have proposed a different approach, a 'modified share of equity' approach, which will take into account the basic needs of individual countries and will cost each part of the emissions. However, this approach brings potential ethical and political problems to quantitatively determine what will be the same.
Key debate
Although some developing countries have recently participated in increased carbon emissions, the situation tends to remain uneven among developing and developed countries on who is most affected and most polluting.
Recent research on ecological debt focuses more on sub-topics as the idea of ​​historical responsibility (whether a country is considered ethically responsible or responsible for carbon emissions prior to 1990, when universal warming is universally recognized), the climate debt component (see section above), the difficulty in deciding when to start calculating the emissions of the past and if this debate slows the implementation of the program or the consecration of legal and political debt through the agreement.
Present a major debate focusing on how the debt will be repaid. First, some academics have pushed the cancellation of financial debt rather than being paid for ecological damage and then pay back the nation's national debt. However, financial debt is not even approved by people (especially in developing countries), calling it an unjust "Volcker debt". Accepting this option may have the risk of legitimizing the credit for this financial debt. The second solution proposed is the Basic Income Security (BIG) or universal basic income. This consists of routine cash payments to everyone in the community (or country) and has proven to be of some kind in some places around the world (such as Namibia).
Another debate addresses the fact that the risk of ecological debt to "commodify nature", such as ecosystem services. Researchers have overcome this risk by showing how it will broaden the objectifying tendency, monetization and ultimately commoditize nature. In addition, the language of debt, payments, credit and so on is understood in most Northern countries, and mostly focused on the recognition of errors but not payments for lost services for example.
Resources
Books
- Ecological debt: planetary health and wealth of nations, Andrew Simms, Pluto books, 2005
- Larkin, Amy (2013). Environmental Debt: The Hidden Cost of a Changing Global Economy ISBNÃ, 9781137278555
Report
- Ecological debt. History, meaning, and relevance for environmental justice, Warlenius, R. et al., 2015
-
J. Timmons Roberts and Bradley C. Parks (2009). "Uneconomical Ecological Exchange, Ecological Debt, and Climate Justice: The History and Implications of Three Related Ideas for a New Social Movement". International Journal of Comparative Sociology . 50 (3-4): 381-408. doi: 10.1177/0020715209105147. - North-South Relations and Ecological Debt: Presenting Counter-Hegemonic Discourse, Critical Sociology, 2009, VOL 35 (2); page 225-252
- Toward a Play Level Field, Pay Ecological Debt, or Make Environmental Space: Three Stories of International Environmental Cooperation, Osgoode Hall Law Journal, 2005, VOL 43; NUMB 1/2, page 137-170
- Elaboration of the concept of ecological debt, Center for Sustainable Development, Ghent University, 2004
- Loans for Debt: Ecological Debt Education Project, Friends of the Earth Scotland, 2003
- Who owes anyone ?: Climate change, debt, equity, and survival, Christian Aid, 1999
See also
- The carbon footprint
- Carrying capacity
- Ecological economics
- Ecological footprint
- Environmental racism
References
External links
- Global Networking Network - Ecological Debt Days
- New Economy Foundation - Ecological Debt Days
- The European Network for Ecological Debt recognition
- World Summit on Sustainable Development 2002 - Ecological Debt
Source of the article : Wikipedia
0 Comments