Scaling up Buen Vivir: Globalizing Local Environmental Governance from Ecuador

Abstract

How does the population of a small Ecuadorian province influence the development strategies pursued nationally and consequently push the global conversation toward an alternative model of sustainable development? This article explores watershed management reform in Tungurahua, Ecuador, to analyze how local communities challenged the dominant international model of sustainable development and drew on indigenous norms to offer an alternative. These communities resisted proposals by a transnational network advocating watershed management reforms that coupled conservation with markets for ecosystem services. Community members, however, did not reject the idea of reforming watershed management, and they negotiated with transnational advocates to create an alternative program rooted in indigenous norms. Tungurahua’s indigenous communities labeled their effort Mushuk Yuyay (Quichua for “new ideas”) to emphasize their departure from the development approach favored internationally. Their approach sought to realize the Quichua concept sumak kawsay (buen vivir in Spanish or wellbeing in English), which refers to living in harmony with nature, rather than dominating nature or removing human presence through conservation. In this study of Tungurahua’s watershed management reform, we show how the emerging ideal of sumak kawsay was institutionalized and put into practice.The Tungurahua case demonstrates the significance of historically marginalized indigenous communities in political processes and the influence of indigenous norms on the global discourse regarding how to organize society around practices that harmonize human relationships with nature.1 This article explains how the Tungurahuan peoples’ operationalization and institutionalization of the indigenous concepts mushuk yuyay and sumak kawsay through Tungurahua’s “new governance model” for sustainable watershed management provided a model for Ecuador’s National Plan for Wellbeing. This plan guides Ecuador’s development strategy, which has become part of a greater international campaign for the rights of nature and alternative paths of sustainable development—a global movement for buen vivir. It has influenced the global discourse on sustainable development by providing a concrete example of an alternative to the dominant approach pursued through the Rio+20 UN Conference on Sustainable Development. Consequently, the Tungurahua case illuminates how local populations working with competing interpretations from international agendas construct environmental governance regimes, and how the scaling up of these regimes carry local norms of environmental management to the global level to challenge dominant international norms.We primarily use process tracing to analyze the bargaining process that incorporated indigenous norms into Tungurahua’s innovative watershed management regime, the subsequent institutionalization of these norms in Ecuador’s constitution and national development plan, and the influence on global discourse surrounding sustainable development. Evidence comes from primary documents, personal observation, and seventy-eight in-depth interviews collected during two years of fieldwork between 2009 and 2011. Interviewees were selected using social maps of the watershed’s stakeholders produced by local NGOs and snowball sampling to identify less-obvious relationships. Interviewees included representatives of municipal, provincial and national governments, local and international NGOs, donor agencies, private companies, indigenous and farmers associations, and community organizations. Comparing interviews of this diverse range of stakeholders with primary documents and direct observation allowed us to triangulate the data, increasing the credibility and validity of results.The ancient indigenous concept of buen vivir recognizes the indelible human link to the Earth. It contains a set of norms regarding humans’ need to live within their natural environment through a balanced, or sustainable, process. In recent years, these norms have become prominent throughout the Andes, including through the Ecuadorian and Bolivian constitutions and the declarations of indigenous rights movements.2 Ecuador’s 2008 constitution preamble states, “We decide to construct a new form of civil society, in diversity and harmony with nature to achieve el buen vivir, el sumak kawsay.”3 According to Alberto Acosta, the president of Ecuador’s Constitutional Assembly, the significance of incorporating buen vivir into the constitution lies in its reorientation of the country’s development model.4 Buen vivir breaks with the internationally dominant notion of development as accumulation through economic growth. Proponents see it as an alternative to conventional development that overcomes a false dilemma posed by Western ideals.5The dominant international concept of development derives from the Western ideals of individualism, progress as the linear unfolding of history, and the separation of humankind from nature. Western thought has long presented individuals as lords or lawmakers of nature, while viewing development as increasing consumption and production.6 This leads to nature being framed as a quantity of natural resources to be manipulated by individuals to pursue development. In the 1980s, concern with the environmental consequences of rapid development gave rise to the dominant concept of sustainable development, which seeks both ecological sustainability and economic growth.7 Despite disagreement over the best strategy, most approaches to sustainable development start from the premise that human intervention in nature is problematic. Particularly before the 1990s, most international environmental organizations viewed economic growth as the cause of environmental problems, such as incursion of pristine areas by extractive processes. They advocated a pure conservation approach of delineating natural areas to be conserved and protected from human intervention, for example through the creation of national parks.8 Since the 1992 UN Conference on Environment and Development, it has been widely accepted that poverty spurs environmental degradation and economic growth is the solution. Despite this shift, international discourse has remained centered on the dilemma of how to protect the environment given humanity’s right to exploit nature for economic growth.To reconcile the problems of poverty and conservation, many Northern NGOs and donor agencies promote integrated conservation and development projects in low-income countries. These projects combine macroeconomic poverty eradication measures with protecting fragile ecosystems from encroachment by poor people.9 The poverty-reduction component typically focuses on integrating local production into export markets. On the conservation side, market mechanisms are advocated to give local communities incentives to engage in conservation. Markets for ecosystem services are created by valuing ecosystems and the benefits they provide to humans, like access to clean water. Those who benefit from ecosystem services (e.g., water users) pay to help ensure those services continue. Assuming local actors will conserve and restore designated natural areas if adequately compensated, markets for ecosystem services are promoted as a way to change the incentives of local actors to engage in less ecologically destructive behaviors.10Rooted in indigenous worldviews, buen vivir rejects conventional notions of development based on Western ideals of individualism, a dualism between humankind and nature, and a linear notion of progress rooted in material growth. According to theorist Eduardo Gudynas:[T]he underlying principle of buen vivir is that wellbeing can only occur in a community, which is social but also encompasses nature … man is part of and not contrary to nature. Buen vivir thus goes beyond Western dualism where nature opposes society, and the individual opposes the community.11Buen vivir sidesteps the Western sustainable development dilemma by seeking neither to dominate nature nor to conserve and protect it from human intervention. Rather than a linear progression of accumulation, development is understood as the attainment and reproduction of the equilibrium state of buen vivir, which refers to living in harmony with nature.Buen vivir is difficult to define because it is not meant to be a preformulated route to sustainable development. Fundamental to the concept is the recognition of rights of a diversity of peoples, deliberation, and respect for many ideas. It involves a dialogue within and among communities to determine the best pathways of sustainable development. Therefore, buen vivir will manifest itself differently in various social and environmental contexts. Tungurahua’s watershed management regime provides one concrete example.Ecuadorian principles of buen vivir are discernable from its institutionalization in the 2008 constitution and the government’s five-year development plan, called the National Plan for Buen Vivir. Ecuador’s constitution presents buen vivir as a set of rights.12 Articles 12 and 13 recognize the principle of food sovereignty and establish Ecuadorians’ right to water and “sufficient nutritional food, preferably produced locally and in keeping with [communities’] various identities and cultural traditions.” Article 14 recognizes “the right of the population to live in a healthy and ecologically balanced environment that guarantees sustainability and good living (sumak kawsay),” achieved through “the protection of ecosystems, biodiversity and the integrity of the country’s genetic assets, the prevention of environmental and the of natural rights and access to and vivir is not human The constitution nature as a not an and it including “the right to be and its integrity as an ecosystem human rights and the rights of nature, buen vivir that and … their in the of respect for diversity and of with that buen vivir be the of a new development model is balanced and of cultural biodiversity and the natural of this in Ecuador’s of and its national development plan for buen constitution and national plan for buen vivir provide one of the of a new development model based on buen vivir. the principles into are the of buen vivir as an alternative to conventional development. This is the of internationally. In Ecuadorian buen vivir within the of the Rio+20 by on the of Article in the This article states, “We are that in to achieve a among the social and environmental of and it is to promote harmony with also presented a plan for buen vivir within the Community of and the of In this local indigenous norms are being up to the global level to challenge dominant norms and a new of nature into international development on a network of pathways that and processes. In international a for international a to their and is the through the local actors can global discourse by local to the global level through a process that between local and international by are to international for local This through the of and use of international typically by local in of international of these processes has been in the of environmental governance in The of national is one example of how and the growth of transnational during the and in a of international example is the international to create the and for environmental In Ecuador, the state created an environment as a of state The based on international norms of environmental management, coupled with markets for ecosystem which were by the and from international organizations like and the local their and in transnational environmental They from their with global but also their and many international environmental organizations incorporated into their discourse and the norms of their local civil society most of Ecuador’s indigenous This created a network of through various transnational most the to in the but also including the by of the Northern indigenous and environmental to the from the to the of Ecuador, and the of the of these and processes local political and processes that are but which a process of development both the local and global This is by Tungurahua’s watershed management reform where bargaining and social to the of indigenous norms of buen vivir into environmental the local which were up to the national and global a transnational of local and international actors promoted a for a fragile watershed local farmers and indigenous they viewed as the and of natural Rather than the however, in bargaining that the program to local The national to use it as a model for their national plan for buen vivir. This institutionalization of buen vivir presented of the dominant international approach to sustainable development with a their to challenge the dominant approach in international which and in indigenous communities as In this Tungurahua’s with of the process of development that the bargaining for with a on social and on and international the 1980s, international and Ecuadorian NGOs working with local communities to production in the the principle water for Tungurahua’s They on this because of Tungurahua’s population poverty and for the country’s food were with by of the into the as the watershed’s of the the and quantity of water to including farmers in and The water and produced water with of and indigenous living in areas the water and water for and while indigenous farmers living in the watershed’s were marginalized from the 1990s, a of organizations sought to the water and development agencies like projects by local development NGOs like and long with indigenous communities and water to production and water The of Ecuador’s National for was also through its to water and water these organizations with This in its watershed management an for the Spanish to as to these various and create a integrated for the in and to strategies for to the provincial was to community to identify their development The of water by and in the these to political water was a This the provincial government’s on watershed management in the and to be to for a the provincial a with and to resources and strategies with the of a new for sustainable, watershed These were by through with dominant international advocated a market for ecosystem services to water incentives and conservation and provincial in a to a for ecosystem services program based on the in The idea was to water consumption and use this to pay to conserve and restore to create a watershed management by a for ecosystem services a the government’s of water the an but that the be through a on water The provincial and were the social of watershed management are to and pay the to be the an of around over the two or they will be to with their for plan was a in It called for a of two of water to conservation, and development on the was to social for watershed management reform, and the provincial were the with of and the plan the program on the of poor farmers to They that of the from the while provide and and consumption for only this but also the idea of markets for ecosystems individual on They these to the and of nature, which indigenous The of the the provincial and a for ecosystem services The for ecosystem and and the provincial such a have the reform but advocates and watershed management through a process. the surrounding for ecosystem to of for into how of advocated a which with to create a development was with the watershed management create in the watershed and to a process the provincial This was to become Tungurahua’s a approach to development within the provincial and to identify and this on representatives of various and private organizations a provincial to on a development and for The a “new Tungurahuan provincial that be and in which actors combine to achieve development in the province the living new Tungurahuan provincial was one through the creation of to the areas as of and These as allowed to in working with and proposals to The was of working with the and society organizations these be given and on with the provincial Tungurahua’s was of and private organizations in the in the indigenous of Tungurahua of and of of Tungurahua its indigenous be and promoted indigenous in the In a of the indigenous to the governance and for indigenous long with Tungurahua’s indigenous and they were by and political Quichua peoples, they with national indigenous as in and on a set of Quichua communities and organizations in the an to the to their influence in the new were but to that their from on to including and water to provide the and resources to create a that the of and were to of the that were being their they movement to of the and and to in the two representatives as to indigenous and concrete to and one of their to the indigenous On the indigenous a with to provide and on natural but was and the indigenous an campaign in indigenous by in of the indigenous organizations. This process was but the was According to one indigenous were and that this was the only process that the this as but it as because they their political … in this and accepted the idea of They were to see if the organizations and were … we also to be in strategies and to an plan on a on poverty and to for which greater the process community development and they pursue these within the the indigenous with the of their to form a to pursue management, and to their Mushuk Yuyay ideas”) to their approach to governance and development with that by the Ecuadorian international NGOs, and donor Rather than a on individualism, economic and protecting nature from human intervention, Mushuk norms with buen vivir. It advocated a governance process based on dialogue and for diverse and cultural to the of through a development based on the management of and Mushuk Yuyay understood sustainable development as and wellbeing through a that integrated the of ecosystems, food and to create healthy of Mushuk Yuyay was and for the which is not only an water but also is a cultural and for Ecuador’s indigenous Tungurahua’s indigenous the with a by many peoples, but it also their for access to and water. In with buen vivir, their sought to the wellbeing of the ecosystem by communities living within it to their wellbeing while a with nature. Community were created to the of areas with including those with Consequently, was integrated into a new program that Western and indigenous Mushuk Yuyay also with to promote food and They created the of of Tungurahua to farmers in ecological practices that and Rather than for export a to that were ecologically and provided a also projects to local markets in and the of water and and were from water areas and with including and not with (e.g., were to provide The was created to and process and to human and indigenous Mushuk Yuyay a campaign that promoted the of was to their within the In the indigenous their through an called and of the and of allowed the indigenous to dominate the and governance they of in the and of around management throughout the by and Mushuk produced a in the of indigenous communities to the and create management while indigenous communities a for ecosystem services which they with they the idea that water from areas indigenous communities for providing the of watershed they resources to production in areas to the of of poor communities living in the In the a for the idea of water to a to and economic development the community management advocates this to their to create a local to with and on a but the approach of markets with pure conservation. According to of the indigenous the to and … to and they because this is because these need to their this is that we a new way of the is part of Mushuk Yuyay … the creation of a that us to in the local economic of the living in the This be than an that this or to to to protect water. of we we have a that we to the with new and promote alternative production and provide can have production and need to use a of that if provide

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 55 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.