Undermining democratic capacity: myth-making and oil development in Amazonian Ecuador

S. Reider, R. Wasserstrom
{"title":"Undermining democratic capacity: myth-making and oil development in Amazonian Ecuador","authors":"S. Reider, R. Wasserstrom","doi":"10.3354/ESEP00142","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Over the past 20 yr, a standard narrative has evolved to describe the impacts of oil development in Ecuador’s Amazon region. According to this narrative, international oil companies exploited weak government oversight to destroy the rain forest and harm native communities. Eventually, Amazonian Indians and environmentalists joined together to fight ‘big oil’ in courts of law and public opinion. This story has been told in countless international campaigns, Internet posts, news and magazine articles, and even in a recent movie. Among North American and European academics, plaintiffs’ lawyers, and journalists, it has now become almost a certainty. Yet many of its assumptions and implications remain unexamined. Are the essential facts true? Should private companies be held accountable for sovereign decisions made by government about oil development and indigenous rights? Why is this discourse so popular in the US, Canada, and Europe, but dismissed by many Ecuadorian social scientists? Using historical evidence and 3 case studies, we conclude that the standard narrative as it stands today obscures more than it explains and may undermine democratic governance in Ecuador.","PeriodicalId":40001,"journal":{"name":"Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics","volume":"13 1","pages":"39-47"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3354/ESEP00142","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

Abstract

Over the past 20 yr, a standard narrative has evolved to describe the impacts of oil development in Ecuador’s Amazon region. According to this narrative, international oil companies exploited weak government oversight to destroy the rain forest and harm native communities. Eventually, Amazonian Indians and environmentalists joined together to fight ‘big oil’ in courts of law and public opinion. This story has been told in countless international campaigns, Internet posts, news and magazine articles, and even in a recent movie. Among North American and European academics, plaintiffs’ lawyers, and journalists, it has now become almost a certainty. Yet many of its assumptions and implications remain unexamined. Are the essential facts true? Should private companies be held accountable for sovereign decisions made by government about oil development and indigenous rights? Why is this discourse so popular in the US, Canada, and Europe, but dismissed by many Ecuadorian social scientists? Using historical evidence and 3 case studies, we conclude that the standard narrative as it stands today obscures more than it explains and may undermine democratic governance in Ecuador.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
破坏民主能力:亚马孙地区厄瓜多尔的神话制造与石油开发
在过去的20年里,描述厄瓜多尔亚马逊地区石油开发影响的标准叙述已经形成。根据这种说法,国际石油公司利用政府监管不力破坏了雨林,伤害了当地社区。最终,亚马逊地区的印第安人和环保人士联合起来,在法庭和公众舆论上与“石油巨头”抗争。这个故事在无数的国际运动、网络帖子、新闻和杂志文章中被讲述,甚至在最近的一部电影中也被讲述。在北美和欧洲的学者、原告律师和记者中,这几乎已成定局。然而,它的许多假设和影响仍未经检验。这些基本事实是真的吗?私营公司是否应该为政府在石油开发和土著居民权利方面的主权决策负责?为什么这种论述在美国、加拿大和欧洲如此流行,却遭到许多厄瓜多尔社会科学家的排斥?通过历史证据和3个案例研究,我们得出结论,今天的标准叙述比解释更模糊,并可能破坏厄瓜多尔的民主治理。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics
Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics Arts and Humanities-Philosophy
CiteScore
7.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
5
期刊介绍: •provides a global stage for presenting, discussing and developing issues concerning ethics in science, environmental politics, and ecological and economic ethics •publishes accepted manuscripts rapidly •guarantees immediate world-wide visibility •is edited and produced by an experienced team
期刊最新文献
Justifying the Precautionary Principle as a political principle The Humanised Zoo: Decolonizing conservation education through a new narrative Ecotheology: environmental ethical view in water spring protection The role of 'Thoughtful Intelligence' in climate statesmanship Cognitive artifacts and human enhancement
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1