Chapter 6 Review
Organizational Bust, 2000 to 2006
In 2000 and 2001, ecoimperialist funding of Ecuadorian NGOs dramatically decreased. This occurred for three reasons: dollarization destabilized Ecuador’s political/economic system, US funds were focused on the Middle East after 9/11, and two large scale projects that had been providing funding for years (SUBIR and Programa Podocarpus) finally ended. Most NGOs couldn’t survive without the extensive amounts of foreign aid that they were used to, and either shut down or downsized. This, along with ecodependents’ failure to prevent the OCP pipeline, opened the door for ecoresistors and ecoentrepreneurs to take their place.
The ecodependent organizations that did survive the drastic decrease in foreign funding were able to do so largely by changing their agendas to match those of their potential sponsors. Previously, ecodependents had made an effort to find and work with a donor who shared similar goals. This changed during the Organizational Bust era; NGOs left behind their specific areas of focus and worked in whatever area was being funded (i.e. conservation when funded, sustainable development when funded, minority participation when funded). The remaining ecoimperialists funding Ecuadorian NGOs gained even more control over the environmental agenda than they had in previous years, as other sources of income for NGOs were few and far between. Many started acting like consultants, moving quickly from project to project without a long-term commitment. Others turned to ecotourism- but the revenue generated did not compare to previous donations from ecoimperialists.
One thing that hadn’t changed since the boom era was the increasingly unclear question of “Is there an environmental movement in Ecuador?” The answer isn’t black and white, but in my opinion, the answer at this point was no. The competition and infighting amongst NGOs over funding and who got which project destroyed any chance for unity the ecodependents once had. Plus, if foreigners were sponsoring every project, was any movement ever truly going to be Ecuadorian, or just an extension of the Global North’s movement? As I’ve been reading and learning more about these organizations, I’ve gained much more respect for groups that have found ways of sustaining themselves in the long-term through methods such as ecotourism and sustainable, organic products; I’m glad that we’ll be supporting ventures like these when we visit in January. It’s impressive knowing that these organizations have survived without vast membership networks like their Global North counterparts or large amounts of foreign funding; I believe that if Ecuador is to have its own united environmental movement, it will come about through the cooperation of these types of groups along with ecoresistors (the reasonable ones) and ecoentrepreneurs. I agree with the mainstream environmentalists that radical organizations like Acción Ecológica can damage the unity of the national movement. Their obstructionist tactics and refusal to work with the gringos reminds me of congressional Republicans’ obstructionist agenda during President Obama’s terms in office- opposing just for the sake of opposing. Although they don’t always cooperate with the ecodependents, AE’s existence is necessary in creating smaller-scale grassroots movements in local communities throughout the country. I disagree with them on some fronts, but this service that they provide is an important one if there ever is to be a lasting national environmental movement.
Unlike the NGOs, ecoresistors could interact with locals directly, and teach them how to support environmental protection and sustainable development without foreign funding. They did/do this by promoting lifestyle changes that incorporate the environment into local communities, sometimes by working in partnership with local governments. Somewhat ironically, the downfall of many environmental NGOs led to their former employees getting jobs in government and consultancies, fulfilling one of FN’s original goals of having environmentalists ‘on the inside’. These environmentally conscious insiders made partnerships with ecoresistors much easier.
The transition from boom to bust provided an excellent opportunity for ecoresistors to show how they differed from ecodependents. Take, for example, the 1997 movement in Intag against Japanese mining company Bishi Metals. When citizens learned of the damage the copper extraction would cause, they started a grassroots education campaign that increased resistance to mining, and after a series of confrontations, burned down the company’s camp and forced them out of the country. DECOIN, an ecoresistant group in the area, helped develop alternatives to mining jobs, such as coffee cooperative and a women’s craft group. They showed locals how environmental protection was directly beneficial to the community with projects like watershed protection. Later, about 6 months after burning down another mining camp (this time a Canadian company), DECOIN led a march of Intag citizens all the way to Quito to show the Ministry of Energy and Mines that they would not tolerate mining in their region (Zorrilla, 2008). Similar groups developed around the country, such as C-CONDEM, which fought (and continues to fight) the destruction of mangroves on the coast to build shrimp farms. These organizations provide the missing link between the citizens and the environment that larger often NGOs fail to develop. The people viewing nature as part of their lives is a vital step in creating a national environmental movement.
It should also be mentioned that various ecoentrepreneur groups were founded during the Bust era. These organizations, unlike ecoresistors, were not responding to crisis and didn’t offer any alternatives to traditional development or the political system. Instead, they worked within the system to address issues such as access to clean water and green spaces.
In 2005, ecoresistors truly came to the forefront when they participated in the first National Environmental Assembly (ANA) alongside ecodependent groups. I see this cooperation during a time of political crisis to be the mark of a true environmental movement. Their voices were heard, and parts of the declaration they drafted made their way into the country’s new constitution in 2008. The end of the era is marked by the election of President Correa, a populist and socialist who incorporated environmental action into his campaign. His election brought hope of a shift from economic to ecological synthesis.
References
Zorrilla, C. (2008, January 1). A Brief History of Resistance to Mining in Intag, Ecuador. Retrieved September 18, 2017, from http://www.decoin.org/2008/01/a-brief-history-of-resistance-to-mining-in-intag-ecuador/
In 2000 and 2001, ecoimperialist funding of Ecuadorian NGOs dramatically decreased. This occurred for three reasons: dollarization destabilized Ecuador’s political/economic system, US funds were focused on the Middle East after 9/11, and two large scale projects that had been providing funding for years (SUBIR and Programa Podocarpus) finally ended. Most NGOs couldn’t survive without the extensive amounts of foreign aid that they were used to, and either shut down or downsized. This, along with ecodependents’ failure to prevent the OCP pipeline, opened the door for ecoresistors and ecoentrepreneurs to take their place.
The ecodependent organizations that did survive the drastic decrease in foreign funding were able to do so largely by changing their agendas to match those of their potential sponsors. Previously, ecodependents had made an effort to find and work with a donor who shared similar goals. This changed during the Organizational Bust era; NGOs left behind their specific areas of focus and worked in whatever area was being funded (i.e. conservation when funded, sustainable development when funded, minority participation when funded). The remaining ecoimperialists funding Ecuadorian NGOs gained even more control over the environmental agenda than they had in previous years, as other sources of income for NGOs were few and far between. Many started acting like consultants, moving quickly from project to project without a long-term commitment. Others turned to ecotourism- but the revenue generated did not compare to previous donations from ecoimperialists.
One thing that hadn’t changed since the boom era was the increasingly unclear question of “Is there an environmental movement in Ecuador?” The answer isn’t black and white, but in my opinion, the answer at this point was no. The competition and infighting amongst NGOs over funding and who got which project destroyed any chance for unity the ecodependents once had. Plus, if foreigners were sponsoring every project, was any movement ever truly going to be Ecuadorian, or just an extension of the Global North’s movement? As I’ve been reading and learning more about these organizations, I’ve gained much more respect for groups that have found ways of sustaining themselves in the long-term through methods such as ecotourism and sustainable, organic products; I’m glad that we’ll be supporting ventures like these when we visit in January. It’s impressive knowing that these organizations have survived without vast membership networks like their Global North counterparts or large amounts of foreign funding; I believe that if Ecuador is to have its own united environmental movement, it will come about through the cooperation of these types of groups along with ecoresistors (the reasonable ones) and ecoentrepreneurs. I agree with the mainstream environmentalists that radical organizations like Acción Ecológica can damage the unity of the national movement. Their obstructionist tactics and refusal to work with the gringos reminds me of congressional Republicans’ obstructionist agenda during President Obama’s terms in office- opposing just for the sake of opposing. Although they don’t always cooperate with the ecodependents, AE’s existence is necessary in creating smaller-scale grassroots movements in local communities throughout the country. I disagree with them on some fronts, but this service that they provide is an important one if there ever is to be a lasting national environmental movement.
Unlike the NGOs, ecoresistors could interact with locals directly, and teach them how to support environmental protection and sustainable development without foreign funding. They did/do this by promoting lifestyle changes that incorporate the environment into local communities, sometimes by working in partnership with local governments. Somewhat ironically, the downfall of many environmental NGOs led to their former employees getting jobs in government and consultancies, fulfilling one of FN’s original goals of having environmentalists ‘on the inside’. These environmentally conscious insiders made partnerships with ecoresistors much easier.
The transition from boom to bust provided an excellent opportunity for ecoresistors to show how they differed from ecodependents. Take, for example, the 1997 movement in Intag against Japanese mining company Bishi Metals. When citizens learned of the damage the copper extraction would cause, they started a grassroots education campaign that increased resistance to mining, and after a series of confrontations, burned down the company’s camp and forced them out of the country. DECOIN, an ecoresistant group in the area, helped develop alternatives to mining jobs, such as coffee cooperative and a women’s craft group. They showed locals how environmental protection was directly beneficial to the community with projects like watershed protection. Later, about 6 months after burning down another mining camp (this time a Canadian company), DECOIN led a march of Intag citizens all the way to Quito to show the Ministry of Energy and Mines that they would not tolerate mining in their region (Zorrilla, 2008). Similar groups developed around the country, such as C-CONDEM, which fought (and continues to fight) the destruction of mangroves on the coast to build shrimp farms. These organizations provide the missing link between the citizens and the environment that larger often NGOs fail to develop. The people viewing nature as part of their lives is a vital step in creating a national environmental movement.
It should also be mentioned that various ecoentrepreneur groups were founded during the Bust era. These organizations, unlike ecoresistors, were not responding to crisis and didn’t offer any alternatives to traditional development or the political system. Instead, they worked within the system to address issues such as access to clean water and green spaces.
In 2005, ecoresistors truly came to the forefront when they participated in the first National Environmental Assembly (ANA) alongside ecodependent groups. I see this cooperation during a time of political crisis to be the mark of a true environmental movement. Their voices were heard, and parts of the declaration they drafted made their way into the country’s new constitution in 2008. The end of the era is marked by the election of President Correa, a populist and socialist who incorporated environmental action into his campaign. His election brought hope of a shift from economic to ecological synthesis.
References
Zorrilla, C. (2008, January 1). A Brief History of Resistance to Mining in Intag, Ecuador. Retrieved September 18, 2017, from http://www.decoin.org/2008/01/a-brief-history-of-resistance-to-mining-in-intag-ecuador/