Political Ecology: A Latin American Perspective

Enrique Leff Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems (EOLSS) [http://www.eolss.net] Keywords: political ecology, Latin America, environmental crisis, environmental rationality, sustainability, social appropriation of nature, power strategies in nowle!ge, !ecoloni"ation of nowle!ge, environmental epistemology, embo!ie! / embe!!e! nowle!ge, cultural !iversity, politics of !ifference, ra!ical ecology, ecofeminism, environmental ethics, emancipation, otherness, !ialogue of nowle!ges. Contents: #. $he Emergence of %olitical Ecology &. 'ooting %olitical Ecology: (ecoloni"ation of )nowle!ge, 'eappropriation of *ature an! 'einvention of $erritory +. %recursors of Latin American %olitical Ecology ,. Ecological Episteme / %olitical Ecology -. %olitical Ecology / Environmental Epistemology .. Embo!ie! / Embe!!e! )nowle!ge /. Ecological Economics / %olitical Ecology 0. (e1naturali"ation an! 'e1construction of *ature 2. 3ultural %olitics / %olitics of (ifference / Ethics of 4therness #5. 6n1!ifference of Ecological 3onsciousness ##. Ecofeminism an! 7en!er: %hallocracy / (ifference / 4therness #&. Ethics / Emancipation / 8ustainability: $owar!s a (ialogue of )nowle!ge #+. 3onclusions an! %erspectives #,. 7lossary #-. 9ibliography Summary: %olitical ecology e:plores the power relations between society an! nature embe!!e! in social interests, institutions, nowle!ge an! imaginaries that weave the life1worl!s of the people. 6t is the fiel! where power strategies are !eploye! to !econstruct the unsustainable mo!ern rationality an! to mobili"e social actions in the globalise! worl! for the construction of a sustainable future in the entwining of material nature an! symbolic culture. 6t is foun!e! in emancipatory thin ing an! political ethics to renew the meaning an! sustainability of life. %olitical ecology roots theoretical !econstruction in the political arena; beyon! recogni"ing cultural !iversity, tra!itional nowle!ge an! in!igenous peoples< rights, environmentalism contests the hegemonic unification power of the mar et as the fate of human history. %olitical ecology in Latin America is operating a similar proce!ure as the one achieve! by =ar: with >egelian i!ealism, turning the philosophy of post1mo!ernity ?>ei!egger, Levinas, (erri!a@ on its own feet: territoriali"ing thin ing on being, !ifference an! otherness in environmental rationality, roote! on the politics of cultural diversity, territories of difference and ethics of otherness . (ecoloni"ing nowle!ge an! legitimi"ing other nowle!ge/savoir/wis!om open alternative ways of un!erstan!ing reality, nature, human life an! social relations: !ifferent ways of constructing human life in the planet.

1. The Emergence o Political Ecology Allege!ly, the term Apolitical ecologyB appeare! for the first time in the aca!emic literature in an article by Cran $hrone in #2+- ?$hrone, #2+-@. >owever, if political ecology refers to power relations in human1environmental interactions, in hierarchical an! class structures in the process of pro!uction an! the social appropriation of nature, we can trace the precursors of this emergent fiel! of inquiry bac to the historical !ialectical materialism of )arl =ar: an! Crie!rich Engels D even though remaining conceale! un!er the primary contra!iction between capital an! laborD an! the social cooperative anarchism of %eter )ropot in an! his emphasis Dagainst social (arwinismD on mutual ai! in evolution an! survival ?)ropot in, &55-; 'obbins, &5#&@. %olitical ecology was forge! in the crossroa!s of human geography, cultural ecology an! ethnobiology to refer to the power relations regar!ing human intervention in the environment. 6t was establishe! a specific !iscipline an! a new fiel! of inquiry an! social conflict in the early si:ties an! seventies triggere! by the irruption of the environmental crisis, with the pioneering writings of authors li e =urray 9oo chin, Eric Eolf, >ans =agnus En"ensberger an! An!rF 7or". =urray 9oo chin publishe! Our Synthetic Environment, in #2.&, at the time of 'achel 3arsonGs Silent Spring. 6n his article A4wnership an! %olitical Ecology,B Eric Eolf !iscusse! how local rules of ownership an! inheritance Ame!iate between the pressures emanating from the larger society an! the e:igencies of the local ecosystemB ?Eolf, #2/&:&5&@. >ans =agnus En"ensberger publishe! his influential article AA 3ritique of %olitical EcologyB in #2/,. An!rF 7or"<s publishe! his early writings in the ecologist monthly Le Sauvage foun!e! by Alain >ervF, creator of the Crench section of the Crien!s of the Earth. cologie et politique was publishe! in #2/-, followe! by cologie et libert in #2// an! Ecologica in &550. As a new !iscipline Da new fiel! of theoretical inquiry, scientific research an! political actionD, political ecology emerge! primarily from a neo=ar:ist approach to evolving issues that were to configure an ecological episteme associate! with the irruption of the environmental crisis. 9oo chin, En"ensberger an! 7or" inaugurate! the fiel! of political ecology in a neo1=ar:ian inquiry on the con!ition of man<s relation to nature. En"ensberger conceive! political ecology as the practice of unmas ing the i!eology Dthe class interests an! capitalistic appropriation of ecological concernsD behin! the emergent ecological !iscourses on issues such as the limits of growth, population growth an! human ecology. *otwithstan!ing this critique, En"ensberger ac nowle!ges the environmental crisis as being pro!uce! by the capitalistic mo!e of pro!uction. >is critique of the Acritique of i!eology as i!eologyB lea! to review =ar:ist establishe! views on the !evelopment of pro!uctive forces in the Aabolition of wantB. Collowing =arcuse, En"ensberger states that Apro!uctive forces reveal themselves to be !estructive forces [Hthat] threaten all the natural basis of human life [...] $he in!ustrial process, insofar as it !epen!s on these !eforme! pro!uctive forces, threatens its very e:istence an! the e:istence of human society.B >e viewe! the Asociety of superabun!anceB as Athe result of a wave of plun!er an! pillage unparallele! in history; its victims are, on the one han!, the peoples of the thir! worl! an!, on the other, the men an! women of the future. 6t is therefore a in! of wealth that pro!uces unimaginable wantB ?En"ensberger, #2/,:&+@. An!re 7or" argue! that political ecology springs from the critique of economic thought:

8tarting from the critique of capitalism, we arrive to political ecology that, with its in!ispensable critical theory of nee!s, lea!s to !eepen an! ra!icali"e even more the critique of capitalism [H] Ecology only acquires all its critical an! ethical loa! if the !evastations of the Earth, the !estruction of the natural basis of life are un!erstoo! as the consequence of a mo!e of pro!uction; an! that this mo!e of pro!uction !eman!s the ma:imi"ation of profits an! uses techniques that violent biologic equilibriums ?7or", &55.@.

Collowing )arl %olanyi ?#2,,@, An!re 7or" un!erline! the mar et<s ten!ency to appropriate !omains of social an! human life that respon! to ontological or!ers an! meanings other than economic logic. Cor 7or", an! counter to ortho!o: =ar:ist !octrine, the question of alienation an! separation of the wor er from the means of pro!uction was not simply the result of the social !ivision of labor. $his woul! ignore its metaphysical causes an! the ontological !ifference inscribe! alrea!y in economic rationality an! stampe! in the worl! or!er that organi"es an! !etermines human life. 7or" !erive! his AtechnocritiqueB from the !econstruction of economic reason an! reconstruction of the subIect, opening new spaces for self1autonomy of community life against the technological1bureaucratic machine !riven by the economy ?7or", #202@. $he critique of technology was the focus of attention an! reflection of many precursors of political ecology: from questioning of techno logy ?=arcuse, #2.,@ an! the megamachine ?=umfor!, #2/5@, an ample !ebate was opene! aroun! the a!aptation an! appropriation of small an! interme!iate, soft an! sweet technologies ?8chumacher, #2/+@, calling for a Asocial harnessing of technologyB ?>etman, #2/+@. 6van 6llich !istinguishe! Aconvivial technologiesB that propitiate autonomy an! self1management, from Aheteronomous technologiesB that restrain them ?6llich, #2/+@; 7or" !istinguishe! Aopen technologiesB Dthat favor communication, cooperation an! interactionD from Abolt technologiesB ?7or", &550:#.@. %revious to these critical views on technology, Ealter 9enIamin ha! conteste! the technocratic an! positivistic conception of history !riven by the !evelopment of pro!uctive forces. >e critici"e! the A!ecay of the auraB of historical obIects an! of nature ?9enIamin, #2+./#2.0@, an! envisione! a in! of labor which Afar from e:ploiting nature, is capable of !elivering her of the creations which lie !ormant in her womb as potentialsB ?9enIamin, #2,5/#2.0@. 4ther thin ers saw in technology the core an! roots of a crisis of humanity in mo!ernity that woul! manifest later as the environmental crisis: Eeber<s iron cage; >ei!egger<s !estell. LFvi18trauss saw in the entropy law an ineluctable tren! in the !estruction of nature an! ecological !ecay that embraces cultural organi"ation an! the !estiny of humanity, suggesting that Anthropology shoul! turn into Entropology ?LFvi18trauss, #2--@. $hese authors are forerunners of political ecology by having pointe! out the limits of a civili"atory process from which the environmental crisis emerge! an! the power struggles involve! in the social appropriation of nature. Among the precursors of political ecology, =urray 9oo chin was the more comprehensive, ra!ical an! polemical thin er. >e was one of the first to anticipate climate change bac in the early si:ties:
8ince the 6n!ustrial 'evolution, the overall atmospheric mass of carbon !io:i!e has increase! by #+ percent over earlier, more stable, levels. 6t coul! be argue! on very soun! theoretical groun!s that this growing blan et of carbon !io:i!e, by intercepting heat ra!iate! from the earth into outer

space, will lea! to rising atmospheric temperatures, to a more violent circulation of air, to more !estructive storm patterns, an! eventually to a melting of the polar ice caps [H] rising sea levels, an! the inun!ation of vast lan! areas. Car remove! as such a !eluge may be, the changing proportion of carbon !io:i!e to other atmospheric gases is a warning of the impact man is having on the balance of nature ?9oo chin, #2.,@.

9oo chin was the foun!er of the social ecology movement frame! within anarchist, libertarian socialist an! ecological thought, that !erive! in AcommunalismB an! Alibertarian municipalismB, conceive! as !ecentrali"ation of society along ecological an! !emocratic principles. >is essay AEcology an! revolutionary thoughtB ?9oo chin, #2.,@ intro!uce! ecology in ra!ical politics that evolve! to "he ecology of freedom ?#20&/#22#@ an to his #hilosophy of social ecology$ essays on dialectical naturalism ?9oo chin, #225@ [Cor a !iscussion of 9oo chin<s social ecology see Light, #220; for a critique on 9oo chin<s ontological monism an! !ialectical naturalism, see Leff, #220a an! 3lar , &550]. %ostulating hierarchy an! !omination as ey foun!ing historic power relations Dlarger in scope than =ar:ist class strugglesD, he proclaime! ecology as critical an! political in nature, as the organi"ing power that gui!es the reencountering of nature with the anarchist spirit Dits social spontaneity to release the potentialities of society an! humanity, to give free an! unfettere! rein to the creativity of peopleD emancipating society from its !omineering bon!s an! opening the way to a libertarian society. >e un!erline! that A$he e:plosive implications of an ecological approach arise not only from the fact that ecology is intrinsically a critical science Don a scale that the most ra!ical systems of political economy faile! to attainD but it is also an integrative an! reconstructive scienceB ?9oo chin, #2.,@. >erbert =arcuse can be consi!ere! also a precursor of the emergent fiel! of political ecology: his critical theory on technology an! the wor ings of capitalist mo!e of pro!uction gave important groun! for un!erstan!ing the social con!itions for the !estruction of nature. =arcuse<s reflections on nature in his final writings align within the currents of political ecology. $hus, in %ounterrevolution and revolt, at the outburst of the environmental crisis an! in a vein that echoes 9oo chin, he asserte! that AEhat is happening is the !iscovery ?or rather, re!iscovery@ of nature as an ally in the struggle against the e:ploitative societies in which the violation of nature aggravates the violation of man. $he !iscovery of liberating forces of nature an! their vital role in the construction of a free society becomes a new force of social change.B ?=arcuse, #2/&:-2@. *ature is thus integrate! to the emancipatory process of liberation. >owever, =arcuse privileges sensibility an! the aesthetic quality of liberation over 9oo chin<s claim for an ecological rationality an! a !ialectical naturalism to free society from its !omineering bon!s. $hrough these critical views emerging from political ecology, the core of the ecological question shifts the problem of abun!ance Dof liberation from nee! an! subIection of hierarchical an! capitalistic !ominationD to the imperatives of survival. %olitical ecology emerge! as a social response to the oblivion of nature by political economy. 6n the transition from structuralism Dfocuse! on the !etermination of language, the unconscious, i!eology, !iscourse, social an! power structures, mo!e of pro!uction an! economic rationalityD to postmo!ern thin ing, the !iscourse on liberation shifte! to the sustainability of life. Ehile inquiring into the root causes of ecological !ecay, political ecology is inscribe! in the power relations that traverse the emancipatory process towar!s sustainability base! on the potentialities of nature. 6n this conte:t, the political ecology !ebate opene! the way for the emergence of eco1 socialism an! eco=ar:ism ?Leff, #22+, #22-; 9enton, #22.; 4<3onnor, #220; 9ellamy Coster,

&555@. 9y surfacing =ar:<s concept of nature ?8chmi!t, #2/#@ an! analy"ing the capitalistic causes of ecological !ecay, eco=ar:ism uncovere! a Asecon! contra!iction of capitalB, the self1 !estruction of the ecological con!itions of sustainable pro!uction ?4<3onnor, #220@. Curthermore, a new para!igm of pro!uction was conceive!, integrating the eco1technological an! cultural con!itions of pro!uction as an environmental potential for sustainable !evelopment with political power emerging from the environmental movements, gui!e! by an environmental rationality ?Leff, #20., #22-@. %olitical ecology emerge! as a fiel! of theoretical inquiry an! political action in response to the environmental crisis: to the !estruction of the con!itions of sustainability of human civili"ation cause! by the economic process an! the technologi"ation of life. (eparting from a ra!ical critique of the metaphysical foun!ations of mo!ern epistemology, political ecology goes beyon! the proposals for conservation of nature Dpromote! by the 6nternational Jnion for the 3onservation of *ature since its creation in #2,0D, an! policies of environmental management D launche! after the first Eorl! 3onference on >uman Environment, 8toc holm, #2/&D, to inquire on the con!itions for a sustainable life in the ecological stage of economic an! technological hegemonic !omination: in a worl! where Dquoting )arl =ar: an! =arshal 9ermanD Aall that is soli! melts into airB, generating global warming an! the entropic !eath of %lanet Earth. %olitical ecology is the stu!y of power relations an! political conflict over ecological !istribution an! the social struggles for the appropriation of nature; it is the fiel! of controversies on the ways of un!erstan!ing the relations between humanity an! nature, the history of e:ploitation of nature an! the submission of cultures, of their subsumption to capitalism an! to the rationality of the global worl!1system; of power strategies within the geopolitics of sustainable !evelopment an! for the construction of an environmental rationality. $hus conceive!, =ichel Coucault ?#205@ appears as a fun!amental precursor of political ecology by provi!ing the insight to !isentangle the power relations embe!!e! in nowle!ge an! in the institutional framewor s that have constraine!, represse! an! subIugate! nowle!ge for alternative ways of conservation an! construction of sustainable livelihoo!s. 6n Coucault<s views, power is not only a relation of !omination an! a repressive agency. %ower mobili"es !esire to emancipate from, an! to pro!uce new forms of nowle!ge. %olitical ecology is the fiel! where power strategies are conceive! an! social struggles !eploye! to open new pathways for survival an! for constructing a sustainable future. 6t involves the !econstruction of mo!ern rationality an! the construction of an alternative environmental rationality. $he fiel! of political ecology has emerge! from cultural ecology, geographical stu!ies, political economy an! critical rationalism, sprea!ing out to neighboring !isciplines: overlapping with environmental sociology an! ecological economics; e:pan!ing from political economy of the environment to post1!evelopment an! post1colonial stu!ies; blen!ing with eco1=ar:ism, social ecology an! eco1feminism; fusing with theories of comple:ity an! with post1structural an! post1 constructivist approaches to nature. Ket, its scientific status an! research approaches are still being !ebate! an! !efine!: its frontiers an! alliances with other !isciplines; its theoretical genealogies, epistemological framings an! practical strategies ?for an account of the Anglo1 8a:on literature, see %eet L Eatts, &55,; 9iersarc L 7reenberg, &55.; Escobar, &5#5; %eet, Eatts L 'obbins, &5#5; 'obbins, &5#&; for an overview of Crench contributions to political

ecology, see (ebeir, (elFage L >Fmery, #20.; Cerry, #22-; Latour, #222; Lipiet", #222; Ehitesi!e, &55&@. Establishing the fiel! of political ecology in the geography of nowle!ge is a more comple: en!eavor than Iust !elimiting para!igmatic boun!aries between neighboring !isciplines; merging aca!emic tra!itions, forming clusters of research topics, !rawing typologies of nature ontologies, themati"ing problematic areas of intervention an! mapping environmental thin ing. 6t implies !econstructing theoretical fiel!s, resignifying concepts an! mobili"ing !iscursive strategies to forge the i!entity of this new epistemic territory in the configuration of an environmental rationality an! in the construction of a sustainable future. =uch of the political ecology elaborate! in the *orth in the past two !eca!es focuses in agrarian thir! worl! environments, inclu!ing peasant an! in!igenous peoples tra!itional practices, resistance an! activism in the reconstruction of their life territories. %olitical ecology emerges in the 8outh from a politics of !ifference roote! in the ecological an! cultural con!itions of its peoples; from their emancipation strategies for !ecoloni"ation of nowle!ge, reinvention of territories an! reappropriation of nature ?%orto17onMalves L Leff, &5#&@. !. "ooting Political Ecology: #econstruction$#ecoloni%ation "eappropriation o 'ature and "einvention o Territory o Knowledge&

%olitical ecology is the fiel! where power strategies encounter for the !istribution of ecological costs an! potentials in the construction of sustainability. 6n the crossroa!s towar!s a sustainable future, the crucial point is the clash of views to attain its obIectives, traverse! by economic, political an! personal interests. 8ustainability entails the !econstruction of unsustainable rationalities Dof the theories that support them, the !iscourses that inten! to legitimi"e them an! the institutions that establish their function in the social or!erD, as well as the construction of alternative rationalities an! strategies to open paths towar!s sustainability. 4ne main obIective of sustainable societies is to breach inequalities in economic an! ecological !istribution, the outcome of a history of conquest, !omination an! unequal power relations. %olitical ecology traces the construction an! institutionali"ation of hierarchical social structures an! !omineering powers roote! in mo!es of thin ing an! of pro!ucing that have !eterritoriali"e! original cultures. =o!ern rationality constructe! an unsustainable worl! whose signs are visible in the planet<s environmental crisis an! in the Aopen woun!s of Latin AmericaB ?7aleano, #2/#@. $he ecological !estruction generate! by the e:ploitative appropriation of nature !uring the colonial regime an! the present worl! economic or!er was accompanie! by the e:clusion an! oblivion of tra!itional practices an! the imposition of western nowle!ge for the !omination of territories in the conquest of the $hir! Eorl!. $hus, in!igenous peoples claim that their struggles for emancipation are political an! epistemological: !ecoloni"ation of nowle!ge becomes a con!ition for their cultural1political emancipation an! for constructing their sustainable futures. $he claim for !ecoloni"ation of nowle!ge has !eep historical roots in critical thin ing in Latin America. 6t follows the theories on unequal e:change, un!er!evelopment an! !epen!ency of the $hir! Eorl! from the global economy as organi"ing center of the worl!1system ?Amin, #2/.; 7un!er1Cran , #2..; 3ar!oso L Caletto, #2/2; (os 8antos, #2/0; Eallerstein, #2/,, #205,

#202, &5##@. $hese theories set up the bac groun! for present political ecology theory insofar as they conceive! !epen!ency an! un!er!evelopment as a structural state of worl! affairs where poor nations provi!e the natural resources an! cheap labor in an unequal interchange for capital an! technology from A!evelope!B nations; that is, the hegemonic worl! or!er where the unequal Aecological !istributionB within the geopolitics of Asustainable !evelopmentB is inscribe!. $hese theories were further !evelope! by stu!ies on Ainternal colonialismB, where hierarchies an! inequalities are internali"e! an! constructe! within the class structure of poor countries ?7on"Nle" 3asanova, #2.-, 8tavenhagen, #2.-@. A critical inquiry has emerge! in recent times on the %oloniality of &no'ledge ?Lan!er, &555; =ignolo, &555, &5##; =ignolo L Escobar, &552; OuiIano, &550@ an! of Epistemologies of the South ?8ousa 8antos, &550@. (ecoloni"ation of nowle!ge lea!s to inquire how Eurocentric i!eas Dfrom 7ree philosophy to mo!ern science an! technologyD were intro!uce! to tra!itional societies an! cultures through conquest, coloni"ation an! globali"ation, inva!ing in!igenous mo!es of thin ing an! their cultural lifeworl!s, generating as reaction political resistance an! purposive actions for the !ecoloni"ation of nowle!ge as a con!ition for the reappropriation of their natural an! cultural patrimony ?for a compen!ium of Latin American critical social thin ing see =arini L !os 8antos, #222@. $he emancipation purpose in political ecology implies !econstructing metaphysical thin ing an! logocentric science institute! as a hegemonic power by mo!ern economic/scientific/technologic rationality. 9eyon! the nee! to un!erstan! the epistemological foun!ations, the colonial regimes an! the power1 nowle!ge strategies that !ominate! peoples an! !espoile! their territories, the construction of sustainable societies roote! in the ecological potentialities an! cultural i!entities of the $hir! Eorl! peoples requires a strategy for !ecoloni"ation of nowle!ge to liberate from e:ploitation, inequality an! subIugation. 9eyon! an hermeneutic !econstruction of !omineering nowle!ge, !ecoloni"ation of nowle!ge implies the recognition an! revaluation of tra!itional an! AotherB nowle!ge DAlocal nowle!geB, Apopular wis!omB or Afol scienceBD un nown an! negate! by !omineering para!igms an! nown to the etno1sciences as Ain!igenous scienceB ?(e 7ortari, #2.+@; Amacro1 systemsB ?LPpe"1LuINn L LPpe"1Austin, #22.@; Anative sciencesB ?3ar!ona, #20.@; Apopular nowle!ge or people<s scienceB ?Cals 9or!a, #20#, #20/@; Asystems of in!igenous nowle!geB ?Argueta et al(, #22,@. $his Anon1westernB un!erstan!ing of the worl!, this A nowle!ge from the 8outhB, is fun!amental for the construction of an alternative rationality capable of !econstructing the globali"e! worl!1system an! buil!ing other possible life1worl!s. $he construction of a global worl! or!er foun!e! in !ifferences an! specificities of !iverse territories emerges from peoples< nowle!ge embe!!e! in their ecological con!itions an! embo!ie! in their cultural being. "raditional ecological &no'ledge an! cultural imaginaries of sustainability ?Leff, &5#5@ are the roots an! sources from where Latin American thin ing offers new perspectives for sustainability. 3oloni"ation of nowle!ge has been a fun!amental instrument for cultural submission an! appropriation of nature, from the conquest of original peoples an! their territories, to the present strategies within the geopolitics of sustainable !evelopment. $hir! Eorl! territories are being revalue! as areas for unrestraine! e:ploitation of non1renewable resources ?oil, coal, minerals@, for bio!iversity conservation to absorb greenhouse gases an! biotechnological prospection, or as

natural resources Dcellulose, transgenic crops, foo!stuffD to be e:ploite! an! e:change! to fuel the continuing growth of !evelope! an! emerging economies. 'esisting the reinforcement an! e:tension of this e:ploitative conquer of nature, $hir! Eorl! an! Latin American peoples are claiming their rights to !ecoloni"e nowle!ge an! emancipate from the global economic or!er. (ecoloni"ation of nowle!ge implies the !econstruction of theories embe!!e! in the worl! or!er an! embo!ie! in the life1worl!s of the people to !isarm the institutionali"e! structures that constrain the worl! to an unsustainable rationality. (econstructionism unveils the ways that nowle!ge was constructe! an! inscribe! in the worl!. (econstructionist political ecology inquires the point in which ontological !ifference turne! into social inequality by the ways in which 9eing in the worl! turne! into worl! thingness, when the abstraction of things Dnature an! human laborD turne! into abstract i!eas an! generali"e! monetary value. $hus, !ecoloni"ing nowle!ge is an epistemological con!ition for !econstructing the e:ploitative tren!s of the global economy an! reviving the ecological an! cultural potentials of the people to give life to alternative mo!es of pro!uction, of thin ing, of being. (ecoloni"ation of nowle!ge as a con!ition an! process towar!s the reappropriation of nature an! the reinvention of sustainable territories becomes a comple: an! challenging tas . 9eyon! the stu!y of the coloni"ation process, the environmental history of cultural subIugation an! e:ploitation of nature, the emancipation from subIection to central an! e:ternal powers an! the imposition of mo!ern thin ing over tra!itional worl!views an! practices !eman!s new ways of thin ing arising from these subIecte! places. 6n a globali"e! worl!, the social reappropriation of nature is roote! in the reinvention of cultural i!entities. $he rescuing an! reconstruction of tra!itional nowle!ge occurs in the encounter of confronting an! conflictive rationalities, intercultural hybri!i"ation an! !ialogue of nowle!ge; in the clash of thoughts an! actions, of rei!entifications an! negotiations, in the social construction of sustainability. An alternative environmental rationality for sustainability ?Leff, &55,@ is configure! in the fiel! of political ecology by rooting !econstructive thin ing in the ecological an! cultural territories. $his is not simply the application of !econstructive theories, comple: sciences an! sustainability blueprints to the !esign of new cultural territories; it goes beyon! the purpose of a!apting technologies to the ecological an! social con!itions of the 8outh, buil!ing a new !ominion of nowle!ge subIect to the comparative a!vantages of the ecological con!itions an! en!owments of $hir! Eorl! countries in the globalise! worl!. (econstructing theory an! !ecoloni"ing nowle!ge in the perspective of political ecology implies politici"ing the concepts of !iversity, !ifference an! otherness to construct sustainability roote! in specific cultural territories. $his requires establishing an! enforcing rights for cultural !iversity, for the construction of territories of difference ?Escobar, &550@, an! for the !eployment of a political ethics of otherness. $his process opens new perspectives in the !econstruction of the unitary hegemonic global worl!, to construct a worl! foun!e! on !ifferent ecological potentials an! cultural beings. 9eyon! the tolerance of cultural !iversity an! a!aptation to !ifferent ecological conte:ts of a unitary worl! or!er, it reorients the !estiny of humanity gui!e! by the heterogenesis of natural an! cultural !iversity arising from eco1cultural co1evolution in the construction of a future global worl! integrate! by !ifferent cultural proIects of sustainability.

7eography has provi!e! insightful spatial metaphors for the analysis of power strategies in nowle!ge. A4nce nowle!ge can be analy"e! in terms of region, !omain, implantation, !isplacement, transposition, one is able to capture the process by which nowle!ge functions as a form of power an! !isseminates the effects of powerB ?Coucault, #205: .2@. $erritoriali"ing nowle!ge goes beyon! the epistemic1psycho1ecological question of a new cartography of nowle!ge to that of the embo!iment/embe!!ing of nowle!ge ?(eleu"e L 7uattari, #20/@. $he power strategies to re1appropriate nature an! re1territoriali"e nowle!ge imply the restoration of subIugate!/subaltern nowle!ge to generate an alternative environmental rationality construe! by the encounter of !ifferent cultural meanings: a critical resignification an! reappropriation of Auniversal nowle!geB from local cultural i!entities an! the pro!uction of nowle!ge from !ifferent cultural beings. $he political philosophy that gui!es cultural emancipation an! social actions towar!s sustainability emerges from the ra!ical epistemological concept of environment, conceive! as the limit of hegemonic mo!ern rationality that has lea! to the environmental crisis of civili"ation an! the source of an alternative sustainable worl!. Environmental nowle!ge emerges in the margins of logocentric science, from the periphery of central powers, in the e:ternalities of hegemonic scientific an! economic rationality. 6t is nowle!ge forge! an! roote! in the ecological potentials an! cultural creativity of the peoples that inhabit the territories in the 8outh ?Leff, #220/&55&@. 3ounter1hegemonic globali"ation D!econstruction of the one1!imensional oppressive force over !iversity, !ifference an! otherness globali"e! un!er the !ominium of economic rationalityD, !eman!s an epistemological !e1centering from mo!ern rationality. $he concept of environment is the point of anchorage outsi!e the global economic or!er that !econstructs unsustainable nowle!ge. >owever, environmental rationality is not foun!e! in a virgin territory untouche! by the institutionali"e! global rationality that has negate! other possible worl!s. Environmental rationality is forge! in the crossroa!s of the !econstruction of metaphysical an! scientific thin ing an! in the territoriali"ation of !iversity/!ifference/otherness. $his critical concept of environment is the i!entity of Latin American Environmental $hin ing ?Leff, &55#, &5#&@. (ecoloni"ing from !omineering nowle!ge involves the responsibility for the future of humanity an! of the planet. 9eyon! prospective sciences that preten!e! to foresee the future in or!er to reorient present ten!encies, political ecology constructs the future from the un!erstan!ing of present unsustainable processes an! the proIection of social actions base! on an environmental rationality to harness unsustainable ten!encies an! trigger new sustainable potentials. %olitical ecology challenges the metaphysical !uality of immutable space an! transcen!ental time. 6n this perspective, historical time is not a homogeneous flow of events. 8ustainability will not be attaine! through the optimi"ation of present means oriente! towar!s a prefi:e! en!, but the outcome of !iverse processes with their own timings; with their uncertainties, encounters, convergences an! alliances. $he paths opene! by this purpose are !efine! by une:pecte! events that might trigger, accelerate, or hin!er an! bloc the paths towar!s sustainability. $he construction of a negentropic sustainable future runs against historical entropic tren!s. 8ustainability is built in the encountering of these conflictive processes; in the confluence of synergies of !ifferentiate! natural an! social forces; in the negotiation of !iverse interests an!

meanings that trigger counteractive economic, ecological an! technological processes that in the coalescence of their timings, will !etermine the future to come. (ecoloni"ing the rich !iversity of peoples/cultures an! their !ifferent territorialities ma!e visible a new theoretical perspective of historical time an! space as the manifestation of the Aunequal accumulation of timesB ?8antos, #22.@. $hus, =ilton 8antos argue! that !ifferent temporalities cohabite! in geographical space challenging the coloniality of nowle!ge impose! by mo!ern culture that overvalues time in the !etriment of space. $he Eurocentric vision of cultural evolution was impose! to the worl! as the only possible universality. $hus, tra!itional peoples became bac war! societies, as if they were only a stage in the way of human !evelopment an! economic growth. $hus tra!itional cultures were quiete! an! remaine! invisible. 8imultaneity of !ifferent temporalities that forge cultural territories was occlu!e! by the hegemonic temporality that or!ers the worl!, seclu!ing other cultures ?7on"Nle" 3asanova, &55.@. $hus, both the )antian conception of universal aprioristic categories of reason an! geographic !eterminism have been conteste!, aban!oning the Eurocentric linear an! progressive conception of time Dof civili"ation stagesD incorporating the incommensurability of time of !ifferent processes involve! in the construction of cultural territories. $his conception of historical time an! space has important political implications for social movements, such as the actuality of ancestry invo e! by in!igenous peoples, the reversal of internal colonialism through the political construction of plurinationality, the co1evolution of peoples/cultures an! nature/territories, an! the social imaginaries of sustainability ?Leff, &5#5@. %olitical ecology is the geography Dthe historical inscription of conflicts of territoriality ?=aier, &55.; >aesbaert, &55,@. 3oloniality of nowle!ge has also been conteste! from the stan!point of ecofeminism, claiming that nowle!ge has been co!e! an! mol!e! as a masculine inscription in Eestern culture by hierarchical !ualisms Dparticularly 3artesian !ualismD ?=erchant, #22&@, by Atranscen!ent obIectivity of male1!ominate! scienceB ?>araway, #22#@ an! Amonocultures of the min!B ?8hiva, #22+@, in their intent to control nature an! !ominate women. (ecoloni"ation from the 8outh Demancipation of subIugate! nowle!ge embo!ie! in cultural beings an! embe!!e! in their life territoriesD !eman!s the !econstruction of nowle!ge establishe! from the *orth to release alternative D!ifferent, otherD epistemological perspectives to gui!e the construction of sustainable societies. (. Precursors o Political Ecology in Latin America %olitical ecology a!!resses the social struggles an! power strategies to reappropriate nature. 6ts social sources emerge from resistance to !e1territoriali"ation of habitats, the pillage of the natural resources an! the subIugation of the original cultures by !omineering colonial1mo!ern powers. Ee can trace these processes -55 years ago, from the conquest an! coloni"ation of the A$hir! Eorl!B regions, to the present strategies of the global economy an! the geopolitics of sustainable !evelopment. %olitical ecology is inscribe! in the history of submission an! emancipation of original peoples from the global economic system: from the !isruption of the livelihoo!s an! the ecological catastrophe pro!uce! by conquest, coloni"ation an! imperial !omination ?3osby, #20.@ to present struggles to re1territoriali"e their cultural beings an! to construct their own paths to sustainability.

6n this perspective, political thin ers an! activists such as QosF =artR ?#2.+@, QosF 3arlos =ariNtegui ?#2/#@, Cran" Canon ?&55,@ an! AimF 3Fsaire ?#2--@ are precursors of Latin American political ecology. 6n =arti<s affirmations, A$here is no battle between civili"ation an! barbarism but between false eru!ition an! natureB, or A$he trenches of i!eas are more fruitful than those of stoneB ?=artR, #2.+@ we fin! a critical response to European epistemological1 political coloni"ation. Crom =ariNtegui<s Latin American =ar:ism Dinten!e! to root socialism in the tra!itions of in!igenous peoples, in the restoration of their community life an! their pro!uctive organi"ationD ?=ariNtegui, #2/#@, to the liberation pe!agogy of %aulo Creire an! the eco1pe!agogy of Leonar!o 9off, we can trace a linage of critical thin ers that have forge! Latin American political ecology. $he writer E!uar!o 7aleano ?#2/#@ has up!ate! this history of e:ploitative colonialism in his boo "he open veins of Latin )merica. 7aleano has brought to light the pro!uction of poverty generate! through the e:ploitation of the earth<s wealth, with the fever of gol! an! silver that seeme! to have e:hauste! the abun!ance of metals in the crust of the territories of Latin America, until the reinstatement of this e:ploitative colonialism in the recent years. Li ewise, poverty was pro!uce! in the ol! agricultural latifun!ia Das that of sugar cane in 3uba, rubber in 9rasil, banana in Ecua!or an! 3olombiaD that reappear to!ay with transgenic crops. %olitical ecology in Latin America was nourishe! by a rich tra!ition of anthropological an! ethnoecological research, such as the stu!ies on the 6ncas< ecological floors ?=urra, #2-.@, the cultural an! ecological potentialities of =esoamerica ?Eolf L %alerm, #2/&@, or the roots of Aprofoun! =e:icoB ?9onfil 9atalla, #20/@. $he !eography of hunger ?!e 3astro, #2,.@ was a precursor of a legion of political ecologists that a!!ress the critical problems of Latin American populations generate! by ecological !egra!ation of their territories. *ew approaches in cultural anthropology an! environmental geography are emerging together with the forging of a politics of territoriality an! !ifference that is !eveloping from socio1environmental movements gui!e! by principles of political autonomy an! cultural i!entity for the re1appropriation of nature. $he fiel! of political ecology is being forge! by wel!ing theoretical thin ing, research stu!ies an! political action. $his !ialogue of theory an! practice is e:emplifie! by the !efense of the subsistence ecology of the =is ito 6n!ians in *icaragua ?*ietschmann, #2/+@, the e:tractive reserves of the seringueiros ?rubber tappers@ in 9ra"il ?%orto 7onMalves, &55#@ an! the #rocess of *lac& %ommunities in 3olombia for the appropriation of their territories of bio!iversity ?Escobar, &550@. A wor ing group in political ecology was establishe! in &555 within the Latin American 3ouncil of 8ocial 8ciences ?3LA384@ to !evelop this fiel! of critical inquiry ?Alimon!a, &55&, &55.@. 4ne !ecisive question for political ecology in Latin America is the clash of strategies between the techno1capitalistic e:ploitation of nature an! the cultural re1appropriation of the ecological patrimony an! ethnic territories of the peoples. $o!ay, this confrontation is e:emplifie! by the invasion of transgenic crops through the etno1bio1prospection an! intellectual property rights of transnational enterprises transgressing the common property rights an! the natural resources of nations an! peoples in the 8outh. 6n the view of in!igenous peoples, bio!iversity represents their patrimony of natural an! cultural resources, with which they have co1evolve! throughout history, the habitat where their cultural practices are forge! an! embe!!e!. $heir ecological potentials an! cultural meanings are incommensurable with economic values. $hese criteria !ifferentiate

what is negotiable an! interchangeable in the !ebt for nature equation, an! the ethical1political principle that questions settling the conflicts of ecological !amage an! !istribution through economic compensations, establishing the threshol! that separates ecological economics from political ecology. ). Ecological Episteme and Political Ecology Environmental crisis is the manifestation of a crisis of nowle!ge. Environmental !egra!ation is the result of the forms of nowing the worl! that grew in the oblivion of being an! nature, away from the con!itions of life an! of human e:istence. 6t is a crisis of civili"ation that results from the ignorance of &no'ledge ?Leff, &555@. 6n this perspective, political ecology e:plores the power strategies in nowle!ge that traverse in!ivi!ual interests, social imaginaries an! collective proIects that weave the life1worl!s of the people in the globalise! worl!, an! envision new power strategies capable of !econstructing the unsustainable mo!ern rationality an! mobili"ing social action for the construction of a sustainable future. %olitical ecology constructs its territory of nowle!ge in the encounter of !ifferent systems of thought, ethics, practices an! social action. 6t !ebates with ecosophies that respon!e! to the first signs of ecological brea !own offering an ecological un!erstan!ing of the worl! Dthe Ecology of the mind ?9ateson, #2/&, #2/2@, !aia theory ?Loveloc , #2/2@, +eep ecology ?*aess L 'othenberg, #202@, the ,eb of life ?3apra, #22.@ an! comple- thin&ing ?=orin, #225@D, with their e:plicit an! uninten!e! political consequences. %olitical ecology respon!s to !ifferent ecological problems: population growth, human health, resource<s scarcity, !eforestation, loss of bio!iversity, pollution, climate change; it argues with !ifferent theories, !iscourses an! policies an! socio1environmental conflicts: ecological !istribution, !emateriali"ation of pro!uction, geopolitics of sustainable !evelopment; it is the place of confrontation of !ifferent approaches to sustainability: ecologism1environmentalism; economic1environmental rationality; !e1growth1 sustainable !evelopment; strong1wea sustainability. %olitical ecology intermingles with other emergent ecological !isciplines: cultural ecology, ecological economics an! bioethics; environmental anthropology, sociology, geography, history, law. (istinctive approaches within ra!ical ecology D!eep ecology, social ecology, ecofeminisn, eco=ar:ism, ecosocialism ?with their internal polemical controversies@D, converge an! colli!e in the fiel! of political ecology. *otwithstan!ing its alliances an! resonances with other eco1!isciplines, political ecology is not an inter!isciplinary para!igm that embraces them all. Ehat is common to these new inquires is the fact that they all are Apost1normalB !isciplines that !o not have an establishe! place within tra!itional an! mainstream of science. 6ts post1normal character !oes not !erive only from being applie! !omains of an ecological para!igm or approach base! on the interrelate!ness, fee!bac s an! comple:ity of processes. %ost1normal sciences contest the principles of epistemological representation Dthe i!entity of theory an! realityD, to incorporate Aquality of nowle!geB from Aemergent comple: systemsB ?Cuntowic" L 'avets, #22+, #22,@. >owever, the specific trait of political ecology is the power relations that tense an! cut across bio1cultural, socio1 environmental an! techno1economic processes, where it is !efining its proper i!entity, by borrowing conceptual metaphors from other !isciplines to !escribe the socio1environmental conflicts !erive! from the unequal ecological !istribution an! the appropriation strategies of ecological resources, natural goo!s an! environmental services.

%olitical ecology as well as other ecological !isciplines is forge! within the emergent ecological episteme !iffuse! to the social sciences in the transition from structuralism to post1structuralism. Although some authors assign an intrinsic political character to ecological inquiry Di.e. 9oo chin<s ecological !ialectics of natureD, power relations are not immanent to an ecological approach to reality. %olitical ecology is not a AnormalB emergence within the realm of science resulting from the transition from the structural episteme Dprevalent through the #2/5s an! #205sD to a post1structural approach to the Apolitics of ecologyB ?Eal er &55-: /,1/-@. %olitical ecology informs environmental policies but focuses on social conflict regar!ing the !istribution of environmental potentials an! ecological costs, rather than in policy1ma ing for ecological planning. $he politici"ation of ecology is the e:pression of power struggles an! strategies for the reappropriation of nature. %olitical ecology is not the amalgam or synthesis of !ifferentiate! stan!s an! social responses to the environmental problems. 3onversely, it is the fiel! of !ispute of !ifferent visions an! un!erstan!ings of the environmental crises: pollution, resource scarcity, limits to growth. 6n the inception these !iscussions, the primal causes of ecological brea !own were !ebate! between population growth ?Erlich, #2.0@ an! in!ustrial !evelopment in capitalism ?3ommoner, #2/#, #2/.@ as the main triggering causes. =ultivariable mo!eling proIecte! ongoing tren!s in population growth, economic !evelopment, technology an! pollution forecasting an ecological collapse. Cor the first time in mo!ern history the i!eology of progress was conteste!, stating the limits to economic growth ?=ea!ows et al(, #2/&@. $his scenario was reinforce! by theoretical inquiries on the relations between the entropy law an! the economic process ?7eorgescu1 'oegen, #2/#@ an! research on !issipative thermo!ynamic processes ?%rigogine, #2.#, #2//@. 6t surface! then that economic growth ha! become the main cause of ecological !ecay an! environmental pollution lea!ing to the Aentropic !eath of the planetB. Crom the first moment that the environmental crisis gaine! worl!wi!e awareness in the /5, a critical movement in Latin America got involve! in these !ebates. 'egar!ing the !isputes on the Apopulation bombB an! the Alimits to growthB, a seminal stu!y con!ucte! by AmRlcar >errera ?#2/.@ questione!: S%atastrophe or .e' Society/ 6n a similar vein as the critical economic an! sociological thin ing in Latin America Dtheories of economic !epen!ency, un!er!evelopment an! internal colonialismD they state! that environmental !egra!ation was not fun!amentally !etermine! by population growth, nor in a !irect way by economic growth; rather, ecological !ecay was associate! with poverty an! unequal wealth !istribution resulting from an impose! an! a!opte! !evelopment mo!el. Crom this conception, eco1!evelopment strategies ?8achs, #205@ foun! fertile soil in Latin America. $he environmental crisis was associate! with the fragmentation of nowle!ge in mo!ern science that impe!e! the analysis of comple: socio1environmental processes. $hus, a problem1solving approach to applie! sciences emerge!, positing inter!isciplinary metho!s an! comple: thin ing as basic tools for environmental management. Crom being the obIect of scientific research an! economic !omination, nature became an obIect of theoretical inquiry, political !ispute an! social appropriation. 4utsi!e the fiel! of science, !iverse interpretative currents !evelope! where nature was no longer an obIect to be !ominate! an! fragmente!, but rather an entity to be re1 !efine!, re1embo!ie! an! re1embe!!e!. $his gave birth to a myria! of ecosophies Dfrom !eep ecology to eco1socialism; from eco1feminism to eco1anarchismD that nurture! the cra!le of

political ecology. Ecology became an encompassing para!igm that base! in a holistic vision of reality as systems of interrelations orients thin ing an! action in a reconstructive path. $hus a Ametho!B base! on Agenerali"e! ecologyB ?=orin, #205@ was promote!, where systems theories an! inter!isciplinary metho!s, comple: thin ing an! the new sciences of comple:ity converge! for the reor!ering an! reintegration of nowle!ge. $hus a shift of epistemological an! social para!igm was operate!, from a mechanistic to a more organic an! comple: un!erstan!ing of processes, that confronte! the fragmentation of reality an! nowle!ge in classical science with a holistic view of the Eorl!, un!erstoo! as an interrelate! an! inter!epen!ent system that evolves through fee!bac s as a cybernetic system, opening nowle!ge to novelty, chaos an! uncertainty; to consciousness an! creativity. *otwithstan!ing these para!igmatic changes in the un!erstan!ing of things, ecological episteme !i! not renounce to its quest for obIectivity an! its !rive for totality. Eith ecology, a new theoretical centralism emerge!: ecological thin ing confronte! the fragmentation of nowle!ge an! the autonomy of self1centere! para!igms; but it !i!n<t challenge the logocentrism of sciences or the totalitarian purpose to reintegrate nowle!ge in an all1encompassing para!igm. Ecological episteme !i! not !issolve the power structures of one1!imensional thin ing installe! in the unitary law an! the globali"ing will of the mar et. *otwithstan!ing the usefulness of systems theories an! the nee! of integrate! approaches, environmental epistemology emerge! as a critical un!erstan!ing of the epistemological obstacles to construct new environmental para!igms ?Leff E!., #20.@. Environmental epistemology reveale! that what is at sta e in the construction of nowle!ge for sustainability is not a neutral articulation of sciences but a reconstruction of nowle!ge from the critical e:teriority of the environment Dthe concept of environmentD that challenges normal sciences an! its ecological approaches. 8ustainability is constructe! in the interplay an! encountering of !iverse an! often incommensurable an! non1integrable para!igms. =oreover, environmental nowle!ge mobili"es social actors for the social construction of sustainability. %olitical ecology is the fiel! of an environmental political epistemology, of power1 nowle!ge strategies that open alternative paths towar!s sustainability ?Leff, &55#@. $hus, environmentalism comes to challenge ecologism in the foun!ation of political ecology as a critical politics of !ifference. $he struggles for sustainability are epistemological an! political. Ecology is politici"e! by opening the systemic vision of reality, an! the symbolic an! cultural or!ering of nature, towar!s the !omains of ethics an! social Iustice. Ehat is at sta e in the fiel! of political ecology is not so much ecologi"ing the social or!er as the encounter of alternative an! conflicting cultural an! economic rationalities over the appropriation of nature. $he i!entity of political ecology in Latin America arises from the political1epistemological !efinition of the environment, !ifferentiating ecology in affluent societies from environmentalism of the poor ?7uha L =artRne"1Alier, #2//@. 4ne ra!ical trait of this epistemological !ifference is the conception of the environment as a potential for alternative sustainable !evelopments. $hus a para!igm of eco1technological1cultural pro!uctivity can be constructe!. $he concept of environmental comple-ity Dbeyon! comple: thin ing, the sciences of comple:ity, systems theory an! inter!isciplinary metho!sD an! the category of environmental rationality emerge from a ra!ical epistemological perspective ?Leff, #22-, &55#, &55,, &55.@.

*. Political Ecology $ Environmental Epistemology %olitical ecology is the politics of the social reappropriation of nature. Ket, as in all politics, its practice is not Iust me!iate! by !iscursive strategies, but is basically a struggle for the pro!uction an! appropriation of concepts that orient social actions. $his hol!s, not only because critical environmentalism confronts the i!eologies that support an unsustainable mo!ernity ?Leis, &55#@, but because the efficacy of any strategy for social reconstruction lea!ing towar!s a sustainable future implies the !econstruction of theories an! i!eologies that have institutionali"e! the social rationality that generate! the present environmental crisis. $he strategies for the construction of sustainable societies are configure! by theoretical struggles an! the politici"ation of concepts. 3oncepts such as nature, bio!iversity, territory, autonomy, i!entity, self1management, !evelopment an! sustainability are re!efining their meaning in the conflictive fiel! of political ecology, where !ifferent strategies for the appropriation of nature are confronte!. $hus, the concept of territory in the fiel! of political ecology !ifferentiates from anthropological concepts relate! to the cultural construction of space. $erritoriality or territoriali"ation are processes arising from the encounter of conflictive rationalities in the social construction of space; li ewise, the !iscourse an! the geopolitics of sustainable !evelopment is confronte! by the concept of sustainability !rawn from environmental rationality ?Leff, &55,@. 9eyon! these theoretical !ebates, ecological emancipation in the globalise! worl! is mobili"e! by concepts that gain significance, legitimacy an! power within peoples< imaginaries. $hus, the quest for sustainability is fuse! with cultural rights an! civil society !eman!s for !ecoloni"ation, autonomy, !iversity an! !ignity. %olitics of !ifference opens to the proliferation of e:istential meanings an! civili"atory paths that are nurture! by political epistemology( 7oing beyon! the epistemology of normal science, environmental epistemology transcen!s comple: thin ing, system theories an! inter!isciplinary metho!ology in their will to reintegrate, complement an! reunify nowle!ge ?Leff, &55#@. $he construction of sustainability is crosse! by po'er strategies in &no'ledge ?Coucault, #205@, re!irecting environmental conflict an! the fragmentation of nowle!ge to a new political ethics: the !ialogue of nowle!ge an! wis!oms ? savoirs@. $his implies the !econstruction of the epistemology of representation Dthe i!entity between the real an! the concept, an! of obIective truthD, in or!er to rethin the relation among the real, the symbolic an! the imaginary. (econstruction of mo!ern rationality goes beyon! a para!igmatic shift from mechanistic an! structural science to a new episteme of generali"e! ecology an! comple: thin ing. *ormal epistemology is !ecentere! by environmental rationality. $he environment is not the milieu that surroun!s material an! symbolic processes centere! on their internal organi"ing principles: it is not only an Ae:ternalityB of the economic system an! logocentric sciences that can be internali"e! by a holistic view, a systemic approach or an inter!isciplinary metho! ?3anguilhem, #2/#, #2//; Leff, #22,@. $he environment as an epistemological category emerges as the e:teriority of scientific an! economic rationalities, as the AotherB of totalitarian nowle!ge; it calls to rethin the relations between the 'eal an! the 8ymbolic in or!er to create power strategies to construct sustainable futures. Environmental epistemology goes beyon! an hermeneutics of nature<s meanings in or!er to resignify nature through language, symbolic co!es an! power strategies, involving visions, feelings, reasons an! interests that are !ebate! in the

political arena. $hus, environmental epistemology gui!es socio1environmental movements for the social reappropriation of nature. $hus, the concepts of territory1region function as places1support for the reconstruction of i!entities roote! in cultural an! pro!uctive practices, as those propose! by the blac communities of the 3olombian %acific. 6n this scenario,
$he territory is conceive! as a multi!imensional space, fun!amental for the creation an! recreation of communities< ecological, economic an! cultural practices [...] in this articulation of cultural i!entity an! appropriation of the territory un!erlies the political ecology of the social movement of the blac communities. $he !emarcation of collective territories has le! activists to !evelop a conception of territory that emphasi"es articulations between settlement patterns, space use an! use1meaning practices of resources ?Escobar, #220@.

$he epistemology of political ecology is sustaine! in the !econstruction of the i!eological1 scientific1!iscursive notion of nature, in or!er to rearticulate the ontology of the real in the bio1 physical or!er with the symbolic or!er that signifies nature, where cultural worl!views an! social imaginaries are embo!ie! in practices of sustainability. Environmental epistemology renews the !ebates over monism/!ualism that confront ra!ical ecologism D!eep ecology, social ecology an! ecofeminismD in the perspectives of e:istential ontology, environmental rationality an! the ethics of otherness; in the reconstruction / reintegration of the natural an! the social, of ecology an! culture, of the material an! the symbolic. $his is the core of algi! !isputes in environmental thin ing an! its political strategies, the point of confrontation of the theoretical !ichotomy between the naturalism of physical1biological1mathematical sciences, an! the anthropomorphism of cultural1social1human nowle!ge: the first attracte! by positivistic logic an! empiricism; the other by relativism, constructivism an! hermeneutics. 6n the wrec of thought an! the crisis of reason of the present Asociety of nowle!geB, many scientists have Iumpe! unto the safe1boar! offere! by ecology as the science Apar e:cellenceB for the stu!y of comple: thin ing an! the interrelations of living beings an! its environments, lea!ing to generali"e! ecological thin ing that maintains the will to embrace the wholeness of nowle!ge an! reality in a metho! of comple: thin ing ?=orin, #225@. $his holistic view inten!s to reunite all entities !ivi!e! by metaphysical thin ing Dbo!y1min!; nature1culture; reason1 feelingD not by !ialectical synthesis but by evolutionist creationism: by the emergence of an ecological consciousness that woul! reconcile an! solve the metaphysical !ebts of an anti1 ecological rationality. $o !issolve 3artesian !ualism that is in the basis of scientific an! mo!ern rationality, a philosophy of social ecology, base! on principles of ontological monism an! ecological !ialectics an! following the i!ea of the generativity of physis to the emergence of the noosphere ?3har!in, #2.#@ throughout the history of metaphysics, proposes the reunification of nature an! culture ?9oo chin, #225@. $his philosophy !oes not offer soli! epistemological basis for a politics of difference Dthat recogni"es the !ifference between the 'eal an! the 8ymbolicD in the social construction of sustainability ?Leff, #220a, &555, &55#, &55,@. Efforts to reunify nature an! culture arise as well from recent phenomenological perspectives in anthropology that claim that worl!views of tra!itional societies !o not recogni"e a !istinction between the human, the natural an! the supernatural. Ket, these Amatri:es of rationalityB Dto be un!erstoo! in a metaphorical sense as the maternal womb where new rationalities an! forms of

being are conceive! an! fertili"e! from new ways of thin ingD are not commensurable with, an! translatable to, the epistemology of mo!ernity. %olitics of !ifference within environmental epistemology brings into new light the controversies of ra!ical ecologism with !ualist thin ing as the source of hierarchical, !omineering, e:ploitative an! unsustainable societies. $he i!ea of a refle-ive moderni0ation ?7i!!ens, 9ec L Lash, #22,@ cannot !issolve at will the foun!ations of !ualism of mo!ern rationality. 6f !ualist thin ing is responsible for the !estruction of nature, the solution !oes not lye in an epistemological reform of mo!ern rationality but in opening scientific rationality to a !ialogue of nowle!ge with other cultural rationalities an! tra!itional nowle!ge, un!er a politics of !ifference. Epistemology that sustains the geopolitics of economic1ecological globali"ation must not only coe:ist with other nowle!ge systems, but must be !econstructe! from its foun!ations to buil! sustainability on an environmental rationality, where !iverse cultural beings an! !ifferent territorialities can coe:ist in a globalise! worl! ?Leff, &5#5@. %ostmo!ern philosophy has come to question universalism an! essentialism in theory as well as autonomous ontological an! !iscrete epistemological or!ers. )nowle!ge !oes no longer have the sole function of nowing the real. $here is no longer an ontological principle of the real that governs reality: nowle!ge !enaturali"es nature to generate hyperreality ?9au!rillar!, #20.@. )nowle!ge has pro!uce! a trans1ontological or!er where new hybri! entities emerge D cyborgsD ma!e of organisms, symbols an! technology ?>araway, #22#@, in the encounter an! blen!ing of the tra!itional an! the mo!ern. Ket, it is necessary to !ifferentiate this Ahybri!i"ingB of nature, culture an! technology brought about by environmental comple-ity ?Leff, &555@ with the intervention of nowle!ge in the real from the life1worl!s of tra!itional peoples living Awithin natureB, where the separation between soul an! bo!y, life an! !eath, nature an! culture, is absent from their imaginaries. $he continuity an! blen!ing of the material an! the symbolic in tra!itional people worl!views, cognition an! practices belongs to a !ifferent register from that of the relation between the real, the symbolic an! the imaginary in mo!ern culture. %olitical ecology faces the essentialism of western ontology an! the principle of universality of mo!ern science, that through metaphysical thin ing generate! the a priori Iu!gments of pure reason as well as a generic concept of man an! the in!ivi!ual that constructe! humanism an! gave i!eological support for cultural !omination of the other ?>ei!egger, #2,.@. $hus, universal human rights unify the rights of in!ivi!uals while segregating, ignoring an! !iscriminating the common rights of other !ifferent cultures. %olitical ecology !econstructs the universal concepts of man, nature, i!entity, in!ivi!ual an! subIect Dof power an! nowle!geD, not to plurali"e them as AmenB, AnaturesB an! AculturesB with !ifferentiate! AontologiesB an! AepistemologiesB, but in or!er to construct the concepts of their !ifferences. Environmental epistemology thus transcen!s the interrelations an! inter!epen!encies of comple: thin ing an! generali"e! ecology ?=orin, #205@ going beyon! !ialectical naturalism ?9oo chin, #225@. 6t emerges from the symbolic or!er an! the pro!uction of meaning inaugurate! by language; it is roote! in cultural significations, imaginaries, practices an! habitus, an! is e:presse! in the confrontation of power strategies an! of power strategies in nowle!ge. 6n this perspective, political ecology is not inscribe! in an ecological or!ering of the worl! that woul! bring about a new consciousness1truth capable of overcoming anti1ecological interests; it is rather a new political space where the !estiny of nature an! humanity are forge! by the creation

of new meanings an! the construction of AtruthsB through power strategies in the interrelation culture1nature an! the interplay of a !ialogue of nowle!ge. %olitical ecology becomes a fiel! where the real, the symbolic an! the imaginary converge an! hybri!i"e in environmental comple:ity. Entropy as the limit1law of nature encounters the theories that support scientific1technological1economic rationality an! the imaginaries of tra!itional cultures e:presse! in the controversial !iscursive fiel! of sustainability. $his epistemological question is not settle! by scientific nowle!ge but is !ebate! in the political arena, where other or!ers of the real, other symbols an! other imaginaries, assign !ifferent meanings to nature. *ature is Areconstructe!B from the power effects of symbolic an! !iscursive strategies that are confronte! in the geopolitics of sustainable !evelopment. +. Em,odied $ Em,edded Knowledge $he epistemological proIect of mo!ernity stan!s on an imaginary of representation, on a !ualist separation of obIect an! subIect, bo!y an! min!, nature an! culture, reason an! feeling, logos an! writing. )nowle!ge is a relation with the real that remains outsi!e the nowing subIect; it is nowle!ge Ae:tracte!B from nature that !oes not belong to nature. After four centuries of mo!ern philosophy an! science foun!e! in this !ualist principle Dfrom (escartes, 9acon, Loc e an! 8pino"a, )ant, >egel an! =ar:, to *iet"sche, Eittgenstein, >ei!egger, Levinas an! (erri!aD, the environmental crisis has questione! the ontological an! epistemological basis of a res cogitans outsi!e space, an! a res e-tensa e:isting outsi!e thin ing. >ermeneutics an! constructivism problemati"e the e:istence of am intrinsic or!er of the real. %sychoanalysis has uncovere! the effects of the unconscious in the somati"ation of !esire an! showe! that mental processes are symbolic an! not mere organic manifestations. 6n reality, there is no pure thin ing floating above the bo!ies of in!ivi!uals an! society: philosophies, i!eologies an! theories are embo!ie! in beliefs an! imaginaries, in worl!views an! e:istential meanings that !etermine an! orient gestures, postures, practices an! actions. >olistic views of ecology an! phenomenological approaches have stresse! the close relations of culture an! nature an! un!erline! the positioning of Aliving within natureB. >owever, what brings political ecology to question the epistemology of mo!ernity is not primarily the !isembo!iment of nowle!ge, but the fact that nowle!ge has penetrate! life: the genetic structure of organisms an! the biosphere<s an! ecosystems< organi"ation, acceleration the entropic !ecay of the planet. $he monist1!ualist ontological1epistemological !ebate is transpose! to the relations between life an! nowle!ge in terms of the embo!iment an! embe!!ing of nowle!ge. Crom Eittgenstein to Coucault an! (erri!a, research has shown how the structure an! forms of language, speech an! !iscursive formations mol! thin ing an! thus open !ifferent meanings that con!ense in social organi"ation, are roote! in territories an! orient political actions. Cor 3astoria!is ?#220@, social imaginaries are embo!ie! significations that have the potency to institute an! alter; as habitus ?9our!ieu@, they are not always e:presse! as e:plicit representations that assign meaning to phenomena a posteriori, but constitute implicitly Asense in actB. )nowle!ge is e:presse! through the bo!y. Levinas pointe! out that
=erleau1%onty [...] showe! that !isembo!ie! thin ing that thin s the wor! before spea ing, thin ing that forms the worl! of wor!s an! then a!here it to the worl! Dpreviously ma!e of

significances, in a transcen!ental operationD, was a myth. $hin ing consists in elaborating the system of signs, in the language of a people or a civili"ation, to receive the signification from this same operation. $hin ing goes to the a!venture, in the sense that it !oesn<t start from a previous representation, neither from those significations, nor from phrases to articulate. $hin ing almost operates in the A6 canB of the bo!y. 6t operates in it before representing or forming this bo!y. 8ignification surprises thin ing [...] 6t is not the me!iation of the sign that ma es signification, but signification ?whose original event is the face1to1face@ which ma es the function of the sign possible [...$his] AsomethingB that is calle! signification emerges in being with language, because the essence of language is the relation with the 4ther ?Levinas, #2///#22/: &#01&&5@.

$o!ay, theory an! nowle!ge have intervene! nature an! are constructing new beings, entities, bo!ies an! organisms. 8cience is Aembo!ie!B in technology, an! through technology in living beings. 8cience !oes not only A nowB reality; it penetrates the real !enaturali"ing nature, !e1 essentiali"ing ontological or!ers, technologi"ing life. $he i!entity between the concept an! the real in the !ualist relation of nowle!ge Das the correspon!ence between signifier an! realityD, turns into an instrument of nowle!ge that !issects, clones an! bursts the essence of being, from sameness to !ifference. >or heimer an! A!orno ha! rightly pointe! out the para!o: that
$here is no being in the Eorl! that can avoi! being penetrate! by science, but that which is penetrate! with science is not being [...] with this operation the step from mimetic reflection to controlle! reflection is accomplishe!. 6n place of the physical a!equacy to nature stan!s the Trecognition through the concept<, the assumption of the !iverse un!er the i!entical. [...] 6n the impartiality of scientific language, impotence has lost completely its e:pression force, an! only the e:istent fin!s there its neutral sign. $his neutrality is more metaphysical than metaphysics. Jltimately, the Enlightenment has !evoure! not only all symbols, but also [...] the universal concepts, an! from metaphysics it has left nothing but the fear to the collective of which it was born ?>or heimer an! A!orno, #2,,/#2.2:,#, &#,, +/1+0@

$he epistemological inquiry on nowle!ge about the con!itions of truth shifts to the problem of the effects of nowle!ge in the construction of reality; from the theoretical relation between nowle!ge an! the real, the relation between being an! nowle!ge/wis!om is !isclose! as the effects of alternative truths in the social process of reappropriation of the worl!: of truth as cause ?Lacan@. 6n this new conte:t emerges the question of the embo!iment an! embe!!ing of nowle!ge in the biosphere, in new life1territories, in human bo!ies. %olitical ecology a!!resses the Amechanisms of power which have investe! human bo!ies, acts an! forms of behavior [H] as a pro!uctive networ which runs through the whole social bo!y, much more than as a negative instance whose function is repressionB ?Coucault, #205:.#, ##2@. )nowle!ge an! wis!om are roote! in the living organism of the biosphere an! in the vital soil of human e:istence. 6nstrumental an! technological nowle!ge Dnuclear, me!ical an! agricultural technologies, agrochemicals an! to:ic wastesD pollute the earth, air, an! water, as well as the bo!ies of living beings through transgenic pro!ucts an! greenhouse effect gases; they inva!e human e:istence, rationali"e thin ing, reshape bo!ies an! configure institutions; they co!ify the self through i!eologies that mol! feelings, orient behaviors an! !rive motivations through a process of rationali"ation that yiel!s socio1environmental !egra!ation an! fuels the entropic !eath of the planet. 3ountering these ten!encies environmental nowle!ge ?savoirs@ is embo!ie! in new ethics an! embe!!e! in ecosystems through new social an! pro!uctive practices oriente!

by environmental rationality; new i!entities are being reconfigure! an! embo!ie! in cultural beings, unfol!ing in ecological practices embe!!e! in new life territories. %olitical ecology embraces the purpose of reconstructing the worl! Afrom the perspective of multiple cultural, ecological an! social practices embo!ie! in local mo!els an! placesB ?Escobar, #222@. $his obIective poses a ra!ical question: S3an the theory an! practice of political ecology !econstruct the unsustainable worl! or!er an! mobili"e thin ing an! social action towar!s the construction of a new global cosmopolitanism, con!ucting the !estiny of human in! ?an! of the planet Earth@ on the basis of a politics of !ifference an! a strategy for the coe:istence of !iverse local environmental rationalities, where ecological potentials an! cultural !iversity become the basis of a new sustainable economyU %olitical ecology opens a new theoretical1practical fiel! to embo!y environmental wis!om in cultural beings fertili"ing new life territories. 8ocial imaginaries register the encounter of the real an! the symbolic recor!e! in human e:istence throughout history. $hey are footprints of the con!itions of life embo!ie! in social beings in a live! worl!. 6maginaries of sustainability confront the rationali"ation of the worl!, specially the practices in!uce! by the theoretical an! instrumental rationality of mo!ernity. $hus, social imaginaries become power strategies for emancipation ?Leff, &5#5@. $hey are not only trenches of resistance to the rationali"ation of life, but potentials of creativity for the construction of alternative sustainable worl!s. -. Ecological Economics $ Political Ecology %olitical ecology opens new hori"ons of social action an! historical construction that go beyon! the intention of ecological economics to internali"e environmental e:ternalities, to constrain economic performance or a!apt economic mechanisms to ecological con!itions of sustainability. %olitical ecology establishes its territory in the environmental hinterlan!, beyon! the enclosure of economic rationality, of that which can be reco!e! an! internali"e! in the realm of economics to value natural resources an! environmental services. %olitical ecology is roote! in a space where the social conflicts for the appropriation of nature an! culture manifest their power strategies, where nature an! culture resist the homologation of !ifferent ontological or!ers an! the re!uction of symbolic, ecological, epistemological an! political processes to mar et values. $his is the polis where cultural !iversity acquires Aciti"enship rightsB within a politics of difference: a ra!ical !ifference, as what is at sta e is beyon! the equitable !istribution of costs an! benefits !erive! from the economic value of nature. $he questioning of the Alimits to growthB triggere! a fierce !ebate worl!wi!e, that lea! to a confrontation of !iagnosis an! perspectives, an! yiel!e! into a politics of !iscursive strategies to respon! to the environmental crisis. %olitical ecology emerge! in the margins of ecological economics to analy"e the non chrematistic value, the cultural meanings an! the power struggles in the social appropriation of nature that cannot be un!erstoo!, nor solve!, through the economic value of nature nor by ecological norms impose! on the economy. $hese socio1environmental conflicts are e:presse! as controversies !erive! from !iverse Dan! often antagonisticD meanings of nature, where ethical, political an! cultural values overflow the fiel! of political economics, inclu!ing the political economy of natural resources an! environmental services. %olitical ecology emerges in the e:teriority of ecological economics.

6n the interplay of concepts that !efine the !ifference of these neighboring fiel!s of inquiry, the notion of Aecological !istributionB has gaine! significance. Ecological !istribution e:presses
the unequal !istribution of ecological costs an! its effects in the variety of ecological movements, inclu!ing movements of resistance to neoliberal policies, compensation for ecological !amage an! environmental Iustice [... Ecological !istribution !esignates] the social, spatial an! temporal asymmetries or inequalities in the human use of environmental resources an! services, commercial or not, an! in the !ecrease of natural resources ?inclu!ing the loss of bio!iversity@ an! pollution loa!s ?=artRne"1Alier, #22-@.

Ecological !istribution inclu!es the e:traeconomic Decological, cultural an! politicalD processes that lin ecological economics with political ecology, in analogy with the concept of economic !istribution that turns economics into political economics. Ecological !istribution thus refers to power conflicts involve! in the social strategies for survival an! for sustainable pro!uction alternatives in the political economy of the environment, as well as to struggles for the social appropriation of nature an! for the !istribution of the costs an! !amages from !ifferent forms of ecological !estruction an! environmental pollution. Ecological !istribution embraces criteria an! values that overflow economic rationality an! contest the intention of re!ucing such values to chrematistic costs an! mar et prices, mobili"ing social actors for material an! symbolic interests Di!entity, autonomy, territory, quality of life, survivalD that are beyon! strict economic !eman!s for lan! property, the means of pro!uction, employment, income !istribution an! !evelopment. Ecological !istribution refers to the unequal repartition of the environmental costs an! potentials, of those Aeconomic e:ternalitiesB incommensurable with mar et values, but that appear as new costs to be internali"e! through economic instruments an! ecological norms, if not by the effect of social movements that emerge an! multiply in response to ecological !amage an! the struggle for the social appropriation of nature. 6n this conte:t, the notion of ecological debt has permeate! the political !iscourse, as a strategic concept that mobili"es resistance against globali"ation of the mar et an! its coercive financial instruments, questioning the legitimacy of the economic !ebt of the poor countries, as well as the capitalistic appropriation of their natural resources an! the historical !ispossession of their patrimony of natural resources. $he ecological !ebt surfaces the largest Dan! until now submerge!D part of the AicebergB of the unequal e:change between rich an! poor countries, that is to say, the appropriation an! !estruction of the natural resource base of the Aun!er!evelope!B countries. $he state of poverty of their peoples !oes not !erive from their cultural con!ition or natural limitations Dfrom a geographical !etermination an! ecological en!owmentsD but rather from its !ominate! insertion in a global economic rationality an! internal coloni"ation processes that has overe:ploite! their natural resources an! !egra!e! their environments. *otwithstan!ing the environmental ethic an! political value of these historic inequalities, this historic ecological !ebt is incommensurable an! unquantifiable in economic terms, as there are no stan!ar!s to measure it, nor !iscount rates to up!ate the historical processes of e:ploitation of nature an! cultural coloni"ation. $he ecological !ebt uncovers the history of !ispossession, the pillage of nature an! cultural subIugation that has been mas e! by the economic principles of the

en!owment of natural resources, comparative a!vantages an! efficient use of pro!uctive factors lea!ing to Dan! preten!ing to IustifyD unequal e:change in the free mar et global economy. %olitical ecology as a theoretical !iscipline an! fiel! of inquiry has the obIective of analy"ing the historical power struggles an! appropriation strategies over nature among nations an! peoples, as well as present !istributive conflicts of ecological resources. $hese inquiries are triggere! by the pressing imperatives of the environmental crisis: scarcity of natural resources, climate change, environmental !egra!ation, emancipation nee!s, !esire of survival an! the quest of a sustainable future. %olitical ecology becomes a fiel! of political ethics, of !eployment of power strategies ?in nowle!ge, economy, politics, social relations, common property an! cultural rights@ that have !e1naturali"e! nature an! !e1territoriali"e! cultures, mobili"ing social actions towar!s the construction of a sustainable worl!. .. #e/naturali%ation and "e/construction o 'ature 6n the course of history, nature was Aconstructe!B as an ontological or!er. *ature as physis, embrace! the 'eal. Curther on, the naturalness of reality became a fun!amental argument to legitimate the Areal e:isting or!erB. A*aturalB were the entities that ha! the Aright of beingB. $his naturalness of the or!er of things Dthat of the ontology an! the epistemology of natureD was the metaphysical foun!ation of an anti1nature rationality, base! in the unassailable, ineluctable an! immovable laws of nature. 6n mo!ernity, nature was converte! into the obIect of inquiry of science, the obIect of labor an! the raw material for pro!uction; economic theory ignore! the comple: or!ering an! the ecosystem organi"ation of nature. Crom classic economics on, capital an! labor became the fun!amental pro!uction factors; nature was an input for pro!uction, but !i! not !etermine the value of commo!ities. *ature affecte! !ecreasing yiel!s, but was ignore! as a con!ition an! potential for sustainable pro!uction. Curthermore, nature was e:ternali"e! from the economic system. *ature was de naturali0ed; it became a AresourceB that was consume! in the flow of value an! economic pro!uctivity. 6n the early si:ties nature regaine! its status as a political referent, a subIect of philosophical an! ethical inquiry, an! soon after a stan!point for criticism of the establishe! economic or!er. $he first signs of concern for nature appeare! somehow before, lea!ing to the establishing of the 6nternational Jnion for the 3onservation of *ature in #2,0. >owever, the seminal wor s of authors li e 'achel 3arlson ?#2.&@, %aul Erlich ?#2.0@, 9arry 3ommoner ?#2/#@ an! Arne *aess ?#202@ raise! the ecological alarm. $he stu!y of the 3lub of 'ome, "he Limits of !ro'th ?=ea!ows, #2/&@ !isseminate! worl!wi!e the questioning of the economic system an! its catastrophic effects in the !estruction of nature an! pollution of the environment. $his gave way to the raise of consciousness of the environmental crisis an! !estruction of the ecological bases an! con!itions for sustainability of the planet, lea!ing governments to !esign policies for the conservation of nature. $o be sure, the mainstream thin ing that gui!es ecological actions Dfrom critical ecosophies to comple: thin ing, as well as the !omineering ecological schemes an! economic instruments that gui!e the geopolitics of sustainable !evelopmentD have comple:ifie! the social un!erstan!ing an! interventions on nature. >owever, they haven<t yet !econstructe! a naturalist view that, from biosociology to system<s approaches an! generali"e! ecology, have been unable to !issolve the

techno1economic siege of the worl!, where natural law becomes the support of power strategies that !e1naturali"e nature. 6f nature was !enaturali"e! by metaphysical thin ing that separate! nature an! culture, the reconstruction of nature !oes not imply the restoration of essentialist ontology. %olitical ecology is not only the hermeneutic an! !econstructive inquiry on the history of !e1naturali"ation or a constructivist approach to resignify nature, but rather the politics of cultural appropriation an! territoriali"ation of nature. $he reevaluation of nature involves the reconstruction of the concept of nature: from resignification of the AnaturalB con!itions of e:istence an! !emystification of AnaturalB !isasters, to ecologi"ation of cultural, social an! political relations. $his !econstruction of nature goes beyon! the hermeneutics of nature, environmental history an! postmo!ern constructivism. Against ontological realism, political ecology stresses the power relations that tense all social relations: relations of human beings with nature; power relations in nowle!ge, in pro!uction an! in the appropriation of nature; it is the fiel! where !iscourses, behaviors an! actions embe!!e! in the concept of nature are conteste!. 9eyon! the ecological approaches that !ominate environmental thin ing, new constructivist an! phenomenological insights are contributing to !econstruct the concept of nature ?'orty, #2/2@, stressing the fact nature is not simply an obIective entity in the realm of the real, but is always meaningful: a signifie!, geo1graphe!, territoriali"e!, politici"e! entity. $his is being supporte! by recent stu!ies in environmental anthropology ?(escola L %Nlsson, #22.@ an! environmental geography ?8antos, &555; %orto 7onMalves, &55#@. 6ts approaches an! fin!ings !emonstrate that nature is not the pro!uct of biological evolution, but rather of the co1evolution of nature gui!e! by cultures that have inhabite! nature. 6n the fiel! of political ecology, Aorganic/cultural naturesB encounter Acapitali"e! naturesB, intervene! by the globali"e! techno1economy, that impose its hegemonic an! homogeni"ing !ominium through technologic bree!ing an! mar et mechanisms. *ature is being re1constructe! in the hybri!i"ation of !ifferent ontological an! epistemological or!ers: physical, organic, symbolic, techno1economic; in the encounter an! confrontation of heterogeneous rationalities that re!esign nature through social nowle!ge an! practical appropriation strategies. Collowing a long historical process of resistance, which origins can be trace! bac in the colonial an! imperialistic !omination of the original Apeoples of ecosystemsB, their cultural i!entities are being reinvente! an! reaffirme! in their present struggles to !efen!, revalue, construct collective rights an! assign new cultural meanings to nature: to !esign an! legitimi"e new pro!uctive strategies for the conservative an! sustainable use of their cultural patrimony of natural resources. An emblematic e:ample of these cultural innovations of nature is the i!entity invention of the seringueiros an! the construction of their e:tractive reserves in the 9ra"ilian Ama"onia ?%orto 7onMalves, &55#@, as well as the more recent Aprocess of blac communitiesB in the 3olombian %acific ?Escobar, &550@. 6!entities are being configure! through struggles for the affirmation of cultural beings that confront the !omination/appropriation strategies promote! an! impose! by economic globali"ation. $hese political actions are more than processes of resistance: they are movements for re e-istence of peoples an! nature ?%orto 7onMalves, &55&@.

0. Cultural Politics$Politics o Cultural #i erence and 1therness %olitics of !ifference is foun!e! in ontological an! symbolic roots Dthe continuing !ifferentiation of physis; the infinite signification of beingD which !estiny is to !iversify, to ramify, to re!efine ?(erri!a, #2/0, #20&; Vattimo, #20-; (eleu"e L 7uattari, #20/@: to manifest in distinction ?9our!ieu, #20,@; to ra!icali"e in otherness ?Levinas, #2.2@. %ostmo!ern thin ing on !ifference DdifferanceD ?(erri!a@ is the proIect to !econstruct the unitary thin ing of metaphysics an! logocentrism of science, with their will to subsume !iversity in universality, to subIect heterogeneous being to the measure of a universal equivalent, to close the circle of science in a unifying system of nowle!ge, to re!uce ontological !iversity to the structural homologies of system theory an! to pigeonhole i!eas in one1!imensional thin ing. %olitical ecology roots theoretical !econstruction in the political arena; beyon! recogni"ing cultural !iversity, tra!itional nowle!ge an! in!igenous peoples< rights, environmentalism contests the overwhelming unification power of the mar et as the fate of human history. %olitical ecology contests the essentialist ontological conception of nature while ac nowle!ging that there is nothing intrinsically political in original nature or in ecological organi"ation. $he relations between living beings an! its environing nature an! foo! chains Deven !epre!ation an! !omination among them an! the territoriality struggle of speciesD, are not political in any sense. %olitics is !rawn into nature not only in response to the fact that the ecosystemic organi"ation of nature has been negate! by economic rationality an! the social sciences. *ature becomes political by the fact that power relations are establishe! in the symbolic or!er of human beings in their ra!ical !ifference with all other living creatures. $he political engages nature in power relations through human, cultural, economic an! technological interventions of nature. Crom this perspective, Arturo Escobar refers to Aecologies of !ifferenceB, un!erlining the notion of Acultural !istributionB, to a!!ress the conflicts that emerge from !ifferent cultural meanings assigne! to nature as Apower that inhabit meanings is a source of powerB ?Escobar, &55.@. As cultural meanings become means to legitimi"e human rights, they mobili"e !iscursive strategies for the claim of cultural values; it is as such human rights that cultural values enter the power fiel! of political ecology to confront intellectual property rights an! the Arights of the mar etB in the social struggle for the appropriation of nature. >owever, the notion of cultural !istribution can become as fallacious as that of ecological !istribution if submitte! to homologation an! homogeni"ation. 6ncommensurability !oes not only apply to the !ifference between economy, ecology an! culture, but within cultural or!ers, where there are no equivalencies, no possible translation between !ifferent cultural meanings. (istribution always appeals to a homogeneous obIect: income, wealth, employment, matter, energy, nature, power. 9ut being, as the subIect of rights, is essentially heterogeneous. %olitical ecology is forge! in the realm of otherness. 3ultural !ifference implies shifting from the generic an! abstract concept of being conceive! by an essentialist an! universal ontology to the politics of !ifference, as specific an! locali"e! rights of cultural beings. %olitical ecology in Latin America is operating a similar proce!ure as the one achieve! by =ar: with >egelian i!ealism, turning the philosophy of post1mo!ernity ?>ei!egger, Levinas, (erri!a@ on its own feet, territoriali"ing thin ing on being, !ifference an! otherness in environmental

rationality, roote! on the politics of cultural diversity, territories of difference and ethics of otherness ?Leff, &55,@. 3ultural !iversity an! ontological !ifference neste! in the symbolic or!er becomes the core of a politics of difference. 4therness becomes the ra!ical root of !iversity an! !ifference that !issolves the unitary an! universal ontological / epistemological conception of being, reality, worl! an! nowle!ge. %olitical !ifference is the right to be !ifferent, the right to !iffer: to contest the alrea!y e:istent reality. 4therness ra!icali"es !ifference beyon! !ialectic contra!iction Dthe alter ego that mirrors i!entity; the alternation of powersD, as the manifestation of an Aabsolute 4therB: the Other as something else than the new an! un nown that emerges from the Agenerativity of physisB an! transcen!ent !ialectics. $he Other is incommensurate an! untranslatable; it !oes not assimilate to a consensus of conflictive !ifferences or to common nowle!ge through communicative rationality ?>abermas, #20,@. 9eyon! !iverse an! !ifferent para!igms of nowle!ge that can be integrate! in a holistic view an! an inter!isciplinary para!igm, the political ethics of otherness opens !ifferent mo!es of cognition, intelligibility an! nowle!ge. $he !ialogue of nowle!ge is the encounter of !ifferent cultural beings in their non synthetic, untranslatable ways of being ?Leff, &55,@. 6f the ethical politics of otherness searches the pacific coe:istence of !ifferent ways of being in the worl!, the varieties of ways in which human cultures construct nature open political ecology to conflicts of Aequality in !ifferenceB arising from !ifferent cultural visions an! valuations of nature, as well as the confrontation of cultural/economic rights to appropriate nature an! to territoriali"e cultural !iversity. 3ultural ecology, etno1ecological stu!ies an! environmental anthropology blen! into political ecology to un!erstan! the !ifferent ways of constructing nature, involving !ifferent ways of nowing, attracting the Arationality !ebatesB in anthropology an! philosophy, calling tra!itional ecological nowle!ge an! ethno1sciences ?Cals 9or!a, #20#, #20/; LPpe"1LuINn L LPpe"1Austin, #22.@ an! inviting non1Eestern science ?*ee!ham, #2-,1 ; Qeff $iton, personal communication@ to a !ialogue of nowle!ge, the encounter an! amalgam of the !ifferent forms of being1savoir as the creative source of a sustainable cosmopolitan worl!. >owever, !ifference of cultural values an! visions !oes not become a political force by virtue of their ontological an! ethical principles. $he legitimi"ation of !ifference that co!es new values an! empower cultural beings an! their subIugate! principles of life an! e:istence Di.e. the Aliving wellB of An!ean in!igenous peoples ?>uanacuni, &5#5@D, emerges from the saturation effects of the force! homogeni"ation of life in!uce! by metaphysical thin ing an! mo!ern rationality. %olitics of !ifference emerges as the resistance of cultural beings to the !ominium of global hegemonic homogeneity, to the obIectifying of beings an! to unequal equality. $he strife for equality within the scope of human rights an! its Iuri!ical proce!ures base! on in!ivi!ual rights ignores the political principle of equality in !ifference that claims its rights in a culture of !iversity an! otherness. As state! by Escobar,
6t is no longer the case when one can contest !ispossession an! give arguments in favor of equality from the perspective of inclusion in the !omineering culture an! economy. 6n fact, the opposite is happening: the position of !ifference an! autonomy is becoming so vali!, or more, in this contestation. Appealing to the moral sensibility of the powerful is no longer effective [H] $his is the moment to test [H] the power strategies of cultures connecte! by networ s an! glocalities in or!er to be able to negotiate contrasting conceptions of the goo!, to value !ifferent forms of life an! to reaffirm the pen!ing pre!icament of !ifference1in1equality ?Escobar, &55.@.

$he rights to !ifference are forge! in the encounter with otherness, in the confrontation of the !omineering rationality with everything that is e:ternal, that has been e:clu!e!, brea ing the metaphysical i!entity of equality an! the unity of the universal. 6n this tension, political ecology transgresses one1trac thin ing an! one1!imensional reason, to open history to !ifference of being immerse! in a fiel! of power relations an! political forces. $o be sure, Athe struggles for cultural !ifference, ethnic i!entities an! local autonomies over the territory an! resources are contributing to !efine the agen!a of environmental conflicts beyon! the economic an! ecological fiel!B, valuing an! claiming the rights of Aethnic forms of otherness committe! to social Iustice an! equality in !ifferenceB ?Escobar, &55.@. $his is not a claim for ethnical essence or for universal rights of the in!ivi!ual, but for the collective rights of cultural beings Dinclu!ing the intrinsic values of nature as cultural rightsD, together with the rights to !issent from preset meanings an! present hegemonic power structures, an! to construct alternative futures. $hus in!igenous peoples are offering alternative views to the environmental crisis, to solve climate change an! to construct AotherB possible worl!s base! on their own worl!views. %olitics of !ifference goes beyon! the recognition of !ifferent views, interests an! political positions in a plural worl!. (ifference is un!erstoo! in the sense that (erri!a ?#202@ assigns to his concept of differance, which not only establishes !ifference here an! now, but opens being to time, to becoming, to the events an! the a!vent of the une:pecte!, the eventuality of the yet unthought an! ine:istent, of the yet to come into being: to a sustainable future. Cacing the Aen! of historyB Dconceive! as the siege an! sealing of cultural evolution by the ineluctable !omination of technology an! the globali"e! mar etD, politics of !ifference reopens history to utopia, to the construction of !ifferentiate! an! !iverse sustainable societies. $he right to !iffer in time opens the meanings an! the senses of being that construct in time that which is possible from the potentialities of the real an! the !rive of !esire for life, to the becoming of Athat which yet is notB ?Levinas, #2.2@. %olitical ecology embraces the power struggles for the pro!uction / !istribution of use values; but above all, to meaning1values assigne! to nee!s, i!eals, !esires an! forms of e:istence that !rive the transformation of culture an! nature. Crom the incommensurability of cultural rationalities, the politics of cultural !ifference stresses the rights of e:istence of !ifferent values an! meanings assigne! to nature that configure !iverse i!entities an! life1worl!s. $hus, politics of !ifference lea!s sociological imagination to construct power strategies capable of buil!ing a cosmopolitan worl! base! on cultural !iversity an! political plurality as the conviviality of !ifferent cultural rationalities. $his is the quest of Aother possible worl!sB claime! by the Eorl! 8ocial Corum: a worl! that embraces many worl!s ?8ub1coman!ante =arcos@; a *ew Eorl! constructe! by the encounter of !ifferent rationalities an! !ialogue of nowle!ge. 12. 3n/di erence o Ecological Consciousness. %olitical ecology is not politics merely informe! by ecology. Ecological awareness that emanates from the narratives of !ifferent ecosophies or from the !iscourse of sustainable !evelopment is not a homogeneous un!erstan!ing share! by !ifferent cultural worl!views, social imaginaries an! interest groups. $hus, ecological consciousness has not gaine! in clarity, consistence, legitimacy an! force to reorient criteria towar!s the construction of sustainability. (ecision ma ing regar!ing the environment continues to be geare! by economic interests rather than

prioriti"ing ecological balance an! human survival, to the point of negating scientific evi!ence on the ris s of climate change. $he principles of Asustainable !evelopmentB ?polluter pays, previous an! informe! consent, common but !ifferentiate! responsibilities@ have become slogans with limite! effect in !ecision ma ing criteria, in changing the tren!s of ecological !egra!ation an! in the construction of a sustainable worl!. $he environmental movement is a !isperse fiel! where various social actors intervene, often confronte! by their !ifferent views, interests, claims an! political strategies, rather than a space for consensus an! soli!arity of common obIectives. $he i!ea of an emergent Aspecies consciousnessB that woul! safeguar! humanity from ecological catastrophe is a problematic illusion. $he i!eology of the economics of Spaceship Earth ?Ear!, #2.., 9oul!ing, #2..@ veils the social !ifferences of the fellow passengers; Iust as that of Our %ommon 1uture ?E3E(, #2/2@ that with the principle Athin ing globally an! acting locallyB reinforces the tren!s an! strategies establishe! by the !omineering global thin ing Dthe views on Asustainable !evelopmentB within the hegemonic economic or!erD, blurring other approaches to construct a sustainable future. Environmental consciousness woul! seemingly emerge from the !eep sources of being an! in the realm of the noosphere to restore the con!itions of life in our unsustainable worl!. >owever, for such generali"e! an! unifie! consciousness to emerge as an e:istential con!ition it woul! be necessary for humanity as a whole to share the e:perience of a common threat or a share! !estiny in equal terms; as when the generali"ation of plagues ?sent by the go!s@ turne! the symbolism of the Aristotelian syllogism on the mortality of all men into self1consciousness of humanity through a live! e:perience, transforming the a:iom of logics into the pro!uction of meaning in the social imaginary. Crom the Aristotelian statement Aall men are mortalB !oes not follow a generali"e! meaning that neste! in consciousness. 4nly once the pest sprea! in $hebes an! society as a whole felt concerne! by the threat of real !eath, pure symbolic form turne! into a social imaginary ?Lacan, #2/,1/-@. $he same applies in a more ample scale to the generali"e! e:perience that since the origins of humanity establishe! the imaginary of the prohibition of incest. $he symbolism of the 4e!ipus comple: an! the meaning of the 7ree trage!y ha! been alrea!y internali"e! as a live! Acultural lawB; it was not institute! by 8ophocles nor by Creu!, but by live! e:perience. Environmental consciousness is not a unifying imaginary of !ifferent in!ivi!uals an! cultures that integrate humanity. $he !econstruction of the mo!ern i!ea of the subIect, from *iet"sche an! Creu! to >ei!egger an! Levinas, has surface! that the subIect fails to establish himself as the source an! foun!ation of his thoughts an! acts. $he interiority of the subIect is e:pose! to the infinity of otherness previous to any consciousness of his being. 6f otherness in the fiel! of political ecology implies a ra!ical !ifference in cultural beings, it follows that there are no foun!ations to postulate a unifie! trans1in!ivi!ual an! trans1cultural ecological consciousness of the human species. 6n the Aris societyB that we presently live, the imaginary of insecurity an! terror is !rawn to the threats of war an! generali"e! violence rather than to the imminent !angers of climate change an! ecologic collapse. Even traumatic human e:periences li e the holocaust an! genoci!es along history have been unable to give preeminence to an ethic of life over will to power. 6t seems vain to posit a certain consciousness that coul! respon! effectively to ecological ris an! gui!e social actions towar!s sustainability when environmental crisis that looms the Eorl! is still perceive!

as false consciousness, as a misgui!ing uncertain premonition by science an! by the prevailing economic an! political interests that !ominate nature an! society. $he threat that has penetrate! the collective imaginary is that of Aontological insecurityB Dthe fear of war an! terrorism; the collapse of basic social rules of human coe:istenceD, rather than consciousness of the revenge of sub!ue! an! overe:ploite! nature an! to orient actions towar!s an ecological reor!ering of the worl!. *o !oubt, to!ay everybo!y has a certain awareness of the environmental problems that affect their quality of life; but this consciousness appears as fragmente! an! !iverse perceptions !epen!ing on the specificity of !iverse ecological, geographic, economic, social an! cultural conte:ts an! con!itions that configure a variety of environmentalisms ?7uha L =artRne" Alier, #22/@. *ot all forms of awareness an! consciousness become Aecological casesB that generate social movements. =oreover, the more worl!wi!e in their manifestations Dli e global warmingD, the less clear an! general is the perception of ecological ris s: not only because their occurrence vary in !ifferent latitu!es, but because they are sense! through !ifferent visions an! conceptions: from 7o!<s will an! the fatality of natural phenomena, to the e:pression of the law of entropy an! the effects of the global economy. Environmentalism is thus a alei!oscope of theories, i!eologies, strategies an! actions that are not typifie! as class consciousness nor unifie! by a species consciousness, lest for the fact that ecological narratives have alrea!y penetrate! all languages, !iscourses, theories an! imaginaries of our globalise! worl!. $he entropy law Dwhich gives scientific support to such previsionsD an! the evi!ence of AnaturalB !isasters that have !evelope! an! proliferate! in the last years, have not yet !issolve! the certainties of the economy with the uncertainties an! probabilities of climatic events. Ehat prevails is a !ispersion of visions an! previsions on the con!itions of human survival an! e:istence an! their relation to the environmental crisis, where class consciousness boun!aries become !iffuse but not erase!, !ivi!e! by !ifferentiate! values an! interests. At the same time, the political rights for cultural !iversity are generating new ways of thin ing an! positioning of social groups that impe!e the conformation of a unitary vision to save the planet, bio!iversity an! the human species. $hese emergent cultural an! environmental common rights confront the prevailing Iuri!ical framewor constructe! aroun! the principle of in!ivi!uality an! private law, in a similar way as economic rationality is being questione! by the environmental crisis. 3hanging our min!s about life, survival an! e:istence is not primarily a matter of consciousness, but rather of constructing an alternative rationality through a politics of nowle!ge. As viewe! by Coucault, Athe genealogy of nowle!ge nee!s to be analy"e!, not in terms of types of consciousness, mo!es of perception an! forms of i!eology, but in terms of tactics an! strategies of power [H] !eploye! through implantations, !istributions, !emarcations, control of territories an! organi"ation of !omains which coul! well ma e a sort of geopoliticsB. $he geopolitics of sustainability involves a Anew politics of truth [H] the political, economic, institutional regime of the pro!uction of truthB ?Coucault, #205: //, #++@. 6f environmental consciousness arises from human awareness on the limits of e:istence that to!ay face the entropic !eath of the planet, environmental rationality is built by the relation of being with infinity, of the real with its limits, in the encounter with the obIectifie! worl!, in the interconnection of the real, the imaginary an! the symbolic that obliterates the subIect in the

Alac of beingB of human e:istence. $he AsubIectB of political ecology is not the man of humanism constructe! by metaphysics, phenomenology an! anthropology, nor the generic +asein of e:istential ontology ?>ei!egger, &5#5@. (iverse human beings forge! by their wis!oms an! practices construct their life1worl!s as Apro!uction of e:istenceB ?Lacan, #2/,//-@. =obili"e! by the !esire for life, they construct their future by forging the relation of being with savoir through history, with the present an! with the becoming of other possible worl!s: with a sustainable future beyon! any transcen!ence prescribe! by ecological evolution, historical !ialectics, economic rationality or the intentionality of an enlightene! subIect. Environmental rationality is configure! in a politics of !ifference, in the construction of the rights of being an! the reinvention of i!entities constitute! through power relations. 11. Eco eminism and 4ender: Phallocracy& #i erence and 1therness 6n recent years, the upsurge of gen!er issues an! the legitimi"ation of women<s rights have converge! with environmental concerns an! struggles. Crom ra!ical feminism to ecofeminism, the !omination of women an! the e:ploitation of nature appear as the result of hierarchical social structures establishe! since patriarchy an! gerontocracy in tra!itional cultural formations, to class !ivision an! !omination processes in mo!ern societies. Ecofeminism has become a !iverse an! polemic fiel! of inquiry an! social action. $he first manifestations arose from women<s responses to the effects of environmental !egra!ation on their labor place an! living con!itions. Eomen appeare! as one of the most vulnerable social groups as a result of the social functions inherite! by patriarchy an! the mo!ern social/gen!er !ivision of labor. 6n a first approach, ecofeminism associate! the life1giving, caring an! nurturing sensibility of women with nature conservation, lin ing feminist an! environmental struggles. $he 3hip o movement became one of the most emblematic ecofeminist movements in the 8outh ?Anan!, #20+; 8hiva, #202@. $ranscen!ing a naturalist an! essentialist vision, ecofeminism !evelope! an! contraste! its own stan!s from !eep ecology an! social ecology within ra!ical ecology ?Wimmerman, #22,@. Collowing ra!ical feminism, ecofeminism viewe! in patriarchal social hierarchy an! ontological !ualism the main sources of ecological !estruction an! women<s !omination through male social formations that organi"es thin ing, culture an! gen!er relations. %olitical ecology inclu!es ecofeminist inquiries an! struggles within its broa! scope of politics of !ifference. $his is not only a claim for !istributing roles to women in environmental matters or granting new civil an! gen!er rights opene! by a !emocratic culture in the perspectives of sustainable !evelopment. 6t further implies the inquiry of the specific !ifference from which new perspectives can be opene! for sustainability. 9eyon! emancipation from all masculine forms of !omination, feminism faces the challenge of !eciphering the enigma of the difference opened by the division of se-es within the multiple !ualisms that cross an! tense the ontology of !ifference. Ceminism entails the inquiry of the socially constructe! !ifference that has !ivi!e! humanity between man&ind an! 'oman being; ecofeminism enlarges the political perspectives opene! by a feminist an! gen!ere! vision of power, culture an! social organi"ation, to the relations to nature an! sustainability. $his inquiry goes beyon! establishing the place an! roles of women in a social structure an! their claims for equal rights un!er the privilege! status of men that govern the establishe! social or!er.

Eithin the comple: scope of feminism, ecofeminism embraces the i!eas, theories an! practices that in a !ifferent perspective an! from other stran!s of ra!ical ecologism search to i!entify the specificity of se:ual an! gen!er relations in the genesis of the environmental crisis, as well as the status of se:ual !ifference within power structures in the present social, economic an! political or!er, that offsets environmental !egra!ation ?=ellor, #22/@. 6n this perspective, the ecofeminist movement inquiries from se:ual !ivision an! gen!er !ifference, the specific stan!point from where women Dfrom their own being an! con!itionD un!erstan! the environmental crisis an! offer a specific feminine vision for the construction of sustainable societies. 9esi!es inclu!ing gen!er !ifferences an! se:ual rights in the progress of !emocratic societies new questions arise from ecofeminism: S6s there a natural affinity of women to nature that woul! legitimi"e their social claims an! turn them into privilege! spo espersons of the rights of natureU S>ow cognition an! sensibility varies with se:ual !ifference an! gen!er i!entitiesU S>ow this !ifference comple:ifies the approaches to the !econstruction of the logics of !ominationU S>ow !ifferent gen!er visions open alternative cognitive/sensitive/epistemological/ethical perspectives on sustainabilityU After 8imone !e 9eauvoir ?#2.0@ state! that no revolution can !issolve social structure in the way that social revolution changes class !ifferences, ecofeminism has opene! a !ebate on the place of gen!er !ifference an! social hierarchy in phallocentric societies in the historic !ivision of labor an! its environmental effects. 6n the beginning, much of the !ebate turne! aroun! the biological an! physiological con!ition of women in the se:ual1social !ivision of labor, within the relations of !omination of patriarchal hierarchical structures. >owever, a !eeper quest lea! to inquiry the Acrac in beingB set off by the difference of se-es: the original !ifference pro!uce! by se:ual otherness, not as biological an! physiological !ifference, but as that constructe! through symbolic structures an! signification by language. Ecofeminist thin ing ta es a similar stan! as other ra!ical ecologies in assigning ontological !ualism one of the primal causes of nature<s obIectification an! women<s !omination that have lea! to environmental crisis, e:ten!ing gen!er !ifference from its biological an! symbolic origin, up to its socio1historical construction ?=erchant, #22#; >araway, #22&@. $he gen!er !ebate in ecofeminism goes beyon! any natural causes !erive! from se:ual !ifference, to e:plain the inequalities an! !omination of women. 6t opens the inquiry about the processes of signification in the symbolic or!er an! its effects in the forms of i!entification of subIects, in social hierarchies an! !omination relations arising from gen!er !ifference as a social1symbolic construction. 9eyon! essentialist an! naturalist approaches,
(ifference is always in the or!er of the signifier, in the symbolic or!er, from where it !istributes gen!er emblems an! attributes. $hese attributes will be resignifie! as se:ual !ifference in the way of i!entifications that will lea! the subIect to be a man or a woman, or any combination of both [...], because the content of what can be masculine or feminine has no natural essentiality; it acquires !ifferent mo!alities !epen!ing on a socially !etermine! historicity [...] phallocracy emanates from a totally !ifferent or!er: it is the way in which !ifference is organi"e! as the !ifferentiate! appropriation of privileges an! powers. Crom this !ifference !erives a hierarchical or!ering of !omination an! submission ?8aal, #220:&,, ++@.

$hus, nor biology, nor the symbolic or!er Dthe oe!ipal structure an! castration comple:D can fully !etermine se:ual !ifference an! e:plain the places that men an! women occupy in a social or!er. 6t is not a !ifference of constitutive essences that woul! !etermine man to be the congener of culture an! woman of nature: man<s subIectivity !eriving from its place in pro!uction an! women in repro!uction. Ecofeminism lea!s to inquire the role playe! by the inter!iction of incest in a particular oe!ipal structure, in establishing certain relations of !omination between men an! women an! the ways in which phallocracy organi"es power relations. $he fact that always an! in every culture there are laws that allow the access to certain women while prohibiting others, an! that men have always occupie! the higher ran s in social structure, woul! seem to confirm the universality of 4e!ipus. >owever, as 8afouan ?#20#@ has propose!, the 4e!ipus is not universal. 6f phallic !omination is in no way natural, it isn<t !etermine! either by a universal symbolic or!er. $he social rules for the e:change of women have varie! with the evolution of the economic process ?=eillassou:, #2//@. As 9ataille e:plaine!,
9y being se:ual in nature, prohibition un!erline! the se:ual value of its obIect [...] Erotic life coul! only be regulated for a certain time. At the en!, these rules e:pelle! eroticism outsi!e the rules. 4nce eroticism was !issociate! from marriage, it acquire! a more material meaning [...]: rules pointing to the !istribution of women1obIect of gree! were those that secure! the !istribution of women1labor force ?9ataille, #2-//#22/:&#01&#2@.

Crom the lac in being ?Lacan@ that results from being inscribe! in the symbolic or!er, an! in its search for completeness, human !esire opens its way to will to power ?*iet"sche@. $hus, man ta es resources form his physical strength to gain supremacy in the social or!er, !eveloping power strategies Dphysical, gestural, Iuri!ical, !iscursiveD as instruments of !omination. Crom a position of power in his relation to women, man has constructe! !iscursive strategies that operate as power !evices. >owever, nothing legitimi"es such claims of superiority. Ceminist politics emerges from those pre1establishe! places set in the symbolic an! economic structures that fin! their origins in the gift1e:change of women: in their functions of pro!uction an! repro!uction. Cor =oscovici ?#2/&@, !omination of men un!erpinne! in his use of the law of prohibition of incest, clinging to it as a transhistoric symbolic law establishe! for any social or!er. Crom a Creu!ian1=ar:ist feminist vision, women fin! their way to emancipation by moving away from their repro!uction function an! the places assigne! to them by the economic !ivision of labor. Curthermore, women have to !econstruct the imageries built by psychoanalytic theory Dthe 4e!ipus comple: an! the law of prohibition of incestD, to !elin from economic rationality an! from Arationali"ations of the unconsciousB ?(eleu"e L 7uattari, #20+@. $ogether with !eep an! social ecology, ecofeminism agrees that cosmogonies an! use1practices of nature in tra!itional cultures are more AecologicalB than in mo!ern societies. >owever, women haven<t been less submitte! by gerontocracy an! patriarchy in tra!itional societies. Actually feminist claims are in!uce! to tra!itional cultures from mo!ern !emocratic culture. 7en!er i!entities an! emancipation arise in the encounter of cultural !ifferences. 7en!er politics poses the question of a ra!ical but non essential se:ual !ifference where the symbolic or!er constructs the i!entities of human beings ?men, women or any gen!er construction@ an! assigns their places in social structures, attributing forms of being, thin ing an! feeling in1the1 worl!. Crom original se:ual !ivision, cultural gen!er !ifferences are constructe!: the !omineering reasoning an! obIectifying will of men; the caring sensibility of women in Eestern mo!ern

culture; their contrast with more spiritual, holistic, ecological an! non1possessive oriental an! tra!itional cultures. Jltimately, culture !istributes social roles an! configures !ifferent forms of gen!er1beings in their relations to nature. 7en!er/culture i!entity in the or!er of being an! meaning !enaturali"es the se:ual question to view the conflicting interests that arise from the !isIunction of se:ual !ifference in the symbolic or!er, within power relations an! social hierarchies. %olitics of !ifference inquires gen!er i!entity an! se:ual !ivision in their relations with thin ing an! the construction of reality; it searches to un!erstan! the relation of se:ual !ifference with the ontological !isIunction of being an! entity ?>ei!egger, &55&@, that !evelope! in the history of metaphysics in the 3artesian !ualisms of obIect an! subIect, min! an! bo!y, nature an! culture, man an! woman, that lea! to the obIectification of the Eorl!, to the construction of hierarchies an! institutionali"ation of relations of !omination of women an! nature in mo!ern societies. Ecofeminism comple:ifies power relations in the fiel! of political ecology by inquiring the lin s between nature, language, thought, the unconscious, se:ual !ifference an! social structure as conIugate! agencies in the construction of nature1culture1gen!er relations. 6n this perspective, what !istinguishes women from men is not their affinity with nature or the organic functions of women ?pregnancy, progeny, maternity, care@, buy their resistance to submit their being in a totalitarian rational or!er. 7en!er equity !eman!s human rights beyon! claims for a better !istribution of functions, privileges an! rights establishe! by mo!ern society. 9y forging new meanings, ecofeminism claims gen!er rights as Arights to othernessB. 7en!er !ifference emerges from the sources of !esire that !isIoints the metaphysics of the 4ne into the ontology of !ifference an! an ethics of otherness, where masculine/feminine positions colli!e. Eithin a politics of !ifference, ecofeminist an! gen!er claims overflow the scheme of economic or ecologic !istribution as a way of reassigning property an! appropriation rights to women in their socio1ecological roles, functions an! relations with nature; ecofeminism opens new ways to !issolve hierarchy, oppression an! !omination arising from power relations originate! by the !ivision of se:es an! constructe! by masculine power strategies. 6f ecofeminism is calle! to thin the !econstruction of the theoretical an! social structures in which !omination powers were forge! by men, it must arm itself with strategies that, without being e:clusive of women, are more AfeminineB in face of AmachoB forms of !omination. $he power of se!uction is wiser than imposition of power through nowle!ge ?9au!rillar!, #225@. 8e!uction reorients the power of !esire Dthe *iet"schean will to powerD to the 'ill of po'er to desire life, opening history into forging a new rationality through relations of otherness in an emancipatory process where men an! women will reconstruct their rights of being. >owever, political ecology inquires: Sis there a specific speech of women; !o !ifferent ways of reasoning an! feeling in relation to nature arise from gen!er variances that far from Iustifying any !ualism foun!e! in se:ual or gen!er !ifference coul! open new ways of buil!ing a sustainable worl!U S3an ecofeminism offer to political ecology new thin ing, new grammars for culture1nature relations: a strategy of se!uction, soli!arity, reciprocity, emancipation of being as an alternative to strategies of !ominationU

$hese questions lea! to a more ra!ical inquiry on the !ifference of se:es. 9eyon! biological an! symbolic ?phallic@ !eterminations, an inquiry arises on the !ifference in gen!er positions in face of !ifferent modes of 2ouissance ?Lacan, #220@. $his implies thin ing the relation savoir/being within the structure of Iouissance, searching the possibility of being in Aother nowle!geB, or in a savoir Other, nowing that it is impossible to &no' the other. 6n the incompleteness of being, in the un nowing of the other, in the voi! that organi"es the mo!es of Iouissance, !ifferent positions an! perspectives of savoir/being can come to e:istence. >ere a womanly mo!e of Iouissance is speculate! beyon! the frontiers of language, symbolic law an! phallic legislation. At sta e are the !ifferent mo!alities of relation of gen!er i!entities with Iouissance. 6n waiting for these varieties of relations of Iouissance an! nowle!ge to be !is1covere! an! to surface to e:istence, what is speculate! is a manly way of nowing, in close relation to positive nowle!ge, to presence, to reality, to truth as i!entity of thought an! reality. 3onversely, a womanly savoir, in her relation to Iouissance, convenes Other &no'ledge, a no1 nowle!ge, in her Aletting beB into the realm of the un nown, in the hori"on of what is not, in the obscurity of nothingness. Eoman woul! be mol!e! by a Iouissance 4ther beyon! nowle!ge organi"e! by signifiers Dby the %hallus as signifierD, beyon! consciousness an! will:
Eoman inaugurates a new time by presenting her Iouissance in the fiel! of nowle!ge, not a nowle!ge that !oesn<t nows itself, but a no1 nowle!ge, nowle!ge that obliterates the 4ther. 6t is not an un nown nowle!ge that refers to the place of the 4ther, but the new face that woman presents of this 4ther as no1 nowle!ge [H] a metamorphosis un&no'n for normal path'ays of understanding.B ?=orales, &5##:&#5, -5@.

6n this perspective, se:ual !ifference opens a new inquiry in the ways of nowing, very much in the vein of Emmanuel Levinas who state!: A$he caress !oesn<t now what it see sB ?Levinas, #22+:#++@. 6n their relation of Iouissance an! nowle!ge, man comes, 'hile 'oman goesX Eomen woul! be prone to being more AcosmicB an! AoceanicB in character, more !ispose! to letting themselves be within the un nown, to restrain from totality, to float over the uncertainties of life an! to fly towar!s the future; while men woul! be more pre!ispose! to obIectify being in present entities, to be !riven by the ambition of totality an! will to power to grasp reality an! control the worl!. $he above speculation opens an ontological1anthropological inquiry into the relation of 9eing with se:ual !ifference. 6f there is an original split in the se:ual con!ition of human beings Dan otherness more original than the !ifference between 9eing an! entities !erive! by Ancient 7ree thin ing ?>ei!egger, &55&@D, it opens the question about the masculine character of metaphysical thin ing that !erive! in mo!ern societies governe! by men. 9ut things are more comple:: if the 4e!ipus is not universal an! tra!itional cultures are not cut by homogeneous patriarchal social structures, anthropological stu!ies shoul! provi!e evi!ence of !ifferent ways of un!erstan!ing the worl! an! organi"ing the worl!1lives of tra!itional cultures governe! by !ifferent patriarchal / matriarchal social relations emerging from !ifferent Amo!es of IouissanceB, by !ifferent cultural/oe!ipic forms/ways of being in the worl!. Eomanly an! gen!ere! savoir arise from their seclu!e! unreali"e! potentialities an! encounter/blen! with other constellations of Asaviors without nowle!geB that call the yet un nown sustainable future into being. Eomen Dan! menD will not regain their rights to being from an equali"ation of power in the or!er of rationality that has !ominate! an! subIecte! them. $o emancipate from that oppressive

or!er, men an! women are forging new gen!er i!entities, restoring their being through 4ther power1 nowle!ge strategies, merging the realm of !esire for life with new forms of cognition an! thin ing, of meaning an! feeling; reweaving an! fertili"ing the social fabric with new forms of being1in1the1worl!. $hus, ecofeminism claims its transcen!ent otherness to emancipate from establishe! power relations. 6n this sense, ecofeminism is not only a stan!point to critici"e the places assigne! to women in the economy, in politics an! in the family. 6ts substantive !ifference is not only establishe! by the !ifferent an! subIugate! roles !etermine! by a hierarchical, patriarchal an! phallocentric culture, but in stating se:ual an! gen!er !ifference in new languages, concepts an! sensibilities, other to male construe! rationality. 6n this perspective, political ecology opens an inquiry on the ways gen!er !ifference generates other forms of i!entification, !istinct forms of nowing an! feeling in which being comes to life in the mi!st of savoir emerging from nothingness. 1!. Ethics& Emancipation& Sustaina,ility. Towards a #ialogue o Knowledge %olitical ecology constructs its theoretical an! political i!entity in a worl! in mutation, !riven by an environmental crisis: a crisis in being in the living 'orld. $he concepts an! conceptions that gui!e! until now our intelligibility of the worl!, the meaning of our worl!1lives an! the intentions of out practical actions, seem to vanish from our every!ay language. Ket, the establishe! worl! or!er hol!s unto a !ictionary of signifiers an! !iscursive practices that have lost their capacity to sustain life: !ialectic logic, universal principles, unity of sciences, essence of things, eternal truths, transcen!ence of thought, an! intentionality of actions or !ee!s, resonate an! echo the nostalgic remain!er of a worl! forever gone. Something new is emerging in this worl! of uncertainty, chaos an! unsustainability. $hrough the interstices opene! by the crac ing of monolithic rationality an! totalitarian thin ing, environmental comple:ity she!s new lights on the future to come. $his AsomethingB is e:presse! as a nee! of emancipation an! a will to live. Ehile language games eep proliferating an! revolving aroun! this fictitious an! unsustainable worl!, they also serve to envision alternative possible futures, to construct utopias an! to re!irect the course of life. 6f this process is not to succumb to the Afatal strategies of hiperrealityB ?9au!rillar!, #20+@ generate! by the Asimulacra an! simulationB of sustainable !evelopment, an! gui!e! by the power strategies of an unsustainable rationality that !rifts the worl! into the entropic !eath of the planet, one basic principle must continue giving support in reason to human e:istence: the coherence of thin ing, nowing that the worl! will never be totally nown nor controlle! by thought. Environmental crisis e:presses the limits of growth, the unsustainability of economic rationality an! technological reason. $hese are the effects of the history of metaphysics an! western nowle!ge: of logocentrism of theory, universality of science an! one1!imensional thin ing; of instrumental rationality between means an! en!s; of the law of economic value as universal equivalent to measure all things, that un!er the sign of money an! the laws of the mar et have reco!e! all things an! ontological or!ers in terms of e:changeable an! tra!able mar et values. >uman emancipation arises from the !econstruction of nowle!ge an! !e1clamping from the iron cage of mo!ern rationality. 6t implies giving new meanings to the emancipatory concepts of mo!ernity Dliberty, equality an! fraternityD as principles of a political ethics that en!e! up being

co1opte! an! corrupte! by economic an! Iuri!ical liberalism Dby the privati"ation of in!ivi!ual rights an! the coercion of economic interests over other human valuesD, in or!er to legitimi"e the values of a politics of !ifference an! an ethics of otherness: of conviviality in !iversity an! soli!arity among human beings with !ifferent cultures an! collective rights. %olitical ecology is a politics for cultural !iversification. 3ultural !iversity is the stan!point to !econstruct the unitary logic an! universal equivalence of the mar et, an! to reorient being through the !iversification of ethno1eco1cultural paths for the construction of sustainable societies. %olitical ecology roots the !econstructionist spirit of postmo!ern thin ing in a politics of !ifference activating an abolitionist agen!a for !irect !emocracy an! sustainability:
$he abolitionist agen!a proposes self1managing communities establishe! accor!ing to the i!eal of a spontaneous organi0ation: personal lin s, creative wor relations, affinity groups; community an! neighborhoo! councils base! in respect an! sovereignty of human persons, environmental responsibility an! the e:ercise of !irect !emocracy Aface to faceB for !ecision ma ing in matters of collective interest. "his agenda intended to change our course to'ards a civili0ation of diversity, an ethics of frugality and a culture of lo' entropy, reinventing values, untying the &nots of the mind, avoiding cultural homogeneity 'ith the force of a planet of diverse peoples, villages and cities ?9orrero, &55&:#+.@.

%olitical ecology is a conceptual te:ture that weaves material nature, symbolic meaning an! social action with emancipatory thin ing an! political ethics to renew the sources an! potentials for the sustainability of life ?Leff E!. &55&; %*J=A &55&@. $his constitutes its theoretical core an! its strategic actions. 6t entails the !econstruction of totali"ing nowle!ge Dof establishe! para!igms an! institute! rationalitiesD to open up new paths for an environmental rationality built on the potentials of nature, cultural creativity an! the actuali"ation of i!entities that open being to becoming of that which still1is1not. Crom a !rive for life, from the intimacy of e:istence that was re!uce! by totalitarian theories, emerges the emancipatory power for the sustainability of life:
A certain fragility has been !iscovere! in the very be!roc of e:istence Deven, an! perhaps above all, in those aspects of it that are more familiar, more soli! an! more intimately relate! to our bo!ies an! to our every!ay behavior. 9ut together with this sense of instability an! this ama"ing efficacy of !iscontinuous, particular an! local criticism, one in fact also !iscovers [H] something one might !escribe as precisely the inhibiting effect of global, totalitarian theories.B ?Coucault, #205:05@

6n !econstructing totalitarian theories Coucault foresaw Aa return of nowle!geB where Ait is not theory but life that mattersB; the genealogies an! Ainsurrection of sub2ugated &no'ledgesB; the re1emergence of !isqualifie! nowle!ge in the struggle for truth an! legitimacy of Aparticular, local, regional nowle!ge, of !ifferential nowle!ge incapable of unanimity an! which owes its force only to the harshness with which it is oppose! by everything surroun!ing it [...] by the effects of the centrali"ing powers which are lin e! to the institution an! functioning of an organi"e! scientific !iscourse within a society such as ours.B ?6bi!.: 0#, 0-, 0&, 0,@. $he insurrection of subIugate! nowle!ge !rives emancipation from the !ominant regime of mo!ern rationality that has marginali"e! an! e:terminate! other cultures; that has occlu!e! other nowle!ge an! impe!e! other possible worl!s to come into being. 9eyon! the !econstructive

intentionality of postmo!ern thin ing that has mobili"e! epistemological !ebates over scientific nowle!ge, !ecoloni"ing nowle!ge encompasses a wi!er historical struggle for legitimi"ing other nowle!ge/savoir/wis!om, alternative ways of un!erstan!ing reality, nature, human life an! social relations; !ifferent ways of constructing human life in the planet. Ehat is at sta e in the emancipatory ethics of environmentalism is the legitimi"ation of the !ifferent popular an! tra!itional nowle!ges in their encounter with eru!ite an! formal nowle!ge. %olitical ecology encompasses such historical struggles an! their present power strategies; it embraces the genealogy of environmental nowle!ge an! e:ten!s it to consi!er not only present clashes of nowle!ge involve! in the geopolitics of sustainable !evelopment, but also in the power strategies involve! in the present processes of hybri!i"ation of scientific nowle!ge an! renewe! tra!itional practices; in the construction of new cultural i!entities through the embo!iment of nowle!ge an! its embe!!ing in new territories an! territorialities, in present struggles for the appropriation of nature. Environmental ethics in the perspective of the social construction of sustainability proIects genealogy of nowle!ge to a prospective hori"on. $he ethics of otherness ?Levinas@ is roote! in the fiel! of political ecology as a dialogue of &no'ledges. 8ustainability is envisione! as the historical outcome of the emancipation of subIugate! nowle!ge, of new un!erstan!ings of life in the planet an! of life human life, for the construction of negentropic societies that internali"e the entropic con!itions of living. $his entails the construction of a !ifferent economic rationality: other mo!es of sustainable pro!uction an! consumption. %olitical ecology a!!resses the power relations involve! in the para!igm shifts an! social changes in the construction of an environmental rationality an! along the construction of a sustainable worl!. %olitical ecology renews the reflection on ethics for emancipation. Emancipatory nee!s are not limite! to Are!ucing alienate! laborB, generating Aautonomous free timeB, Aen!ing role playingB an! promoting receptivity, tranquility an! aboun!ing Ioy instea! of the Anoise of pro!uctionB ?=arcuse, #22&:+-@. Emancipation from our convulse! globalise! worl! an! ris society goes beyon! the search for the Aontological securityB of the ego. Emancipation of life implies the affirmation of new i!entities, the rights of cultural beings an! new forms of nowle!ge/savoir to !elin from constrictive hegemonic rationality. %olitical ecology opens new pathways to sustainability through a !ialogue of nowle!ge, to construct a global worl! where !iverse forms of being an! living can coe:ist supporte! by a politics of !ifference an! an ethics of otherness. $his emancipation process from the subIection of being by the hegemonic rationality impose! on the worl! cannot be the agency of the in!ivi!ual, a rational choice among the alternatives set up by the rationali"e! worl!. Emancipation from the present unsustainable worl! !eman!s the !econstruction of mo!ern techno1economic rationality. 6t implies re1thin ing, re1 nowing an! re1 apprehen!ing the con!itions of living, the ecological organi"ation of life in the planet an! the con!itions of human e:istence. $his is not a tas that can be achieve! by in!ivi!ual subIects in a process of Arefle:ive mo!erni"ationB ?7i!!ens, 9ec L Lash, #22,@. $he construction of a sustainable worl! !eman!s the social control of environmental !egra!ation: slowing !own the tren!s towar!s the entropic !eath of the planet an! enhancing the principles of life. 6t implies the reinvention of common i!entities, collective forms of being an! cultural worl!1lives to empower he negentropic processes that sustain life in the planet.

8ustainability is the hori"on of such purposive living, an obIective not attainable by the restoration of the hegemonic unsustainable rationality, the enlightenment of reason an! scientific truth. $ravelling towar!s the hori"on of sustainable life gui!e! by environmental rationality, opens the worl! to the reconstruction of !iverse cultural beings, of beings reconstitute! by AotherB nowle!ge, by their environmental savoirs an! social imaginaries of sustainability ?Leff, &5#5@. 8ustainability will be the outcome of a !ialogue of nowle!ges: of the encountering of cultural beings institute! by their saviors with techno1scientific1economic powers an! their strategies for the capitalistic appropriation of the planet; of the alliances with other beings / savoirs, with their !ifferences an! their un nowns. %olitical ecology is the fiel! for the !eployment of this o!yssey towar!s a sustainable future, crosse! by power strategies for survival an! sustainability, for the human reinvention of life in our living planet. 1(. Conclusions and Perspectives $here are !ifferent !oors to enter into the fiel! of political ecology. Crom an epistemological stan!point 6 have chosen to e:plore it as a space of inquiry an! social action arising from the ontology to a politics of !ifference; from a AregionalB perspective, as the critical encounter of mo!ern tecno1economic rationality the organi"es the worl! system with an environmental rationality being constructe! from the 8outh, an! in particular from Latin America: from the roots of its ecological potentials an! cultural i!entities; from !econstruction an! !ecoloni"ation of nowle!ge an! the social struggles for the social reappropriation of nature. $hese conflicts will continue to e:pan! worl!wi!e with multiple local e:pressions as an intensifie! clash of rationalities in !ifferent conflictive mo!es of appropriation an! construction of territories facing the limits of space an! time through an accelerate! entropic !ecay of the planet. $he perspectives of political ecology are not only un!erstan! the ontological an! political nature of socio1environmental conflicts an! the power strategies involve! in social struggles over ecological !istribution, but to envision new potentials arising from AotherB nowle!ge Dfrom social imaginaries, the reinvention of i!entities an! renewal of tra!itional pro!uctive practicesD through the rights of being of cultural !iversity, a politics of !ifference an! a !ialogue of nowle!ge, to open new paths towar!s sustainability; to analy"e the organi"ation of emergent social movements for the reappropriation of nature an! to construct a political ethics an! Iuri!ical proce!ures for the pacific solution of such conflicts.

1). 4lossary Coloni%ation o 5nowledge: the inquiry of political coloni"ation through power strategies of nowle!ge, subIugation of tra!itional nowle!ge an! emancipation from !omineering nowle!ge. #ialogue o 5nowledge: the !ebate an! encountering of !ifferent ways of nowing, forms of cognition an! savoirs embe!!e! in cultural rationalities. (ialogue of nowle!ge is a political ethics where otherness triggers the fecun!ity of cultural innovation in the social construction of sustainability. Emancipation: the process of political liberation from hegemonic power relations institute! in the global or!er an! local societies. Em,edding: $he process whereas nowle!ge, rationalities an! imaginaries are territoriali"e! D roote! in lan!, ecosystems an! geographical spacesD through social1pro!uctive practices. Em,odiment: $he process whereas nowle!ge an! rationalities are incorporate! in gestures, practices, behaviors an! imaginaries of in!ivi!uals an! social groups. Entropy: a universal limit1law of nature referring to the ineluctable an! irreversible process of !isorgani"ation, !ispersion an! !egra!ation of matter an! energy, lea!ing to the Aentropic !eathB of the Jniverse. 4n Earth ?the living planet@, entropic !ecay is triggere! an! e:acerbate! by the economic process that increasingly transforms !egra!es matter an! energy into non1recyclable an! irreversible forms, from low to high entropy. 7lobal warming is a sign of entropic !egra!ation that can only be counterbalance! by enhancing negentropic processes. Environmental epistemology: A critique to mo!ern epistemology an! logocentric science emerging from the e:teriority of the concept of environment an! alternative mo!es of cognition an! nowing to construct an alternative ?sustainable@ environmental rationality. Environmental rationality: a reconfiguration of rationality arising from the con!itions of sustainability of life an! counter to the !omineering unsustainable rationality of mo!ernity. Episteme: a constellation of nowle!ge, inclu!ing !ifferent para!igms an! !isciplines mol!e! in a fun!amental epistemological or!er, i.e. structural thin ing, systems theories, ecological holism. Knowledge: the pro!uct of cognitive processes ?to be !istinguishe! from other forms of wis!om an! savoir@, the result of a preten!e! obIective apprehension of the real by the scientific metho!. 'ature: in a non1essentialist epistemology an! ontological perspective, AnatureB is an or!er of the real that encompasses cosmic, physical an! biological entities an! processes; while being symbolically, economically an! technologically hybridi0ed, the real in nature shoul! be !istinguishe! from the symbolic an! cultural or!er.

'egentropy: the principle of life in the Aliving planetB, the transformation of solar energy into organic matter through photosynthesis. $his principle is e:ten!e! into ecological pro!uctivity to conceive a sustainable society balancing the entropic !egra!ation of energy in all metabolic an! technological transformation of matter an! energy. Phallocracy: A social that roote! in the 4e!ipus comple: structures male power !omination strategies. Political ecology: fiel! of struggles in theoretical, !iscursive, pro!uctive an! power strategies an! practices for the social appropriation of nature, for the !istribution of ecological costs, ris s an! potentialities, an! for the construction of sustainability. Politics o di erence: the groun!ing of the ontology of !ifference in the fiel! of political ecology, where environmental conflicts are e:presse! in terms of !ifferent an! antagonistic views, interests, positions an! rights facing the social construction of sustainability by !ifferent social groups an! cultural beings. Politics o otherness: the ethics of otherness !rawn to the political arena. A political ethic that recogni"es the other not re!ucible to sameness, the rights of e:istence of !ifferent ways of being Da plurality of cultural beingsD an! alternative paths towar!s sustainability. Savoir: !ifferent from scientific obIective nowle!ge, savoirs are forms of un!erstan!ing an! ways of cognition that establish the i!entity of cultural beings an! their norms for appropriating nature. Savoirs are signifie! realities embo!ie! in !iscursive an! pro!uctive practices, in habitus an! social imaginaries. Sustaina,ility: the purpose to reconstruct pro!uction an! consumption practices as well as nature1society relations to harmoni"e them with the ecological/cultural entropic/negentropic con!itions of life in the planet an! the meanings of human e:istence. Territory: a socially constructe! space for !welling an! !eploying cultural ways of being in the worl!.

1*. 6i,liography Alimon!a, >. ?E!.@, Ecolog3a pol3tica( .aturale0a, sociedad y utop3a , 9uenos Aires: 3LA384 [3ollection of contributions from Latin American scholars to political ecology]. YYYYYY ?E!.@, Los tormentos de la materia( )portes para una ecolog3a pol3tica latinoamericana , 9uenos Aires: 3LA384 [3ollection of contributions from Latin American scholars to political ecology]. Amin 8. ?#2/.@, 4nequal development$ an essay on the social formations of peripheral capitalism, *ew Kor : =onthly 'eview %ress [a pioneering contribution to !epen!ency theory]. Anan!, A. ?#20+@, Asaving trees, saving lives: $hir! worl! women an! the issue of survivalB, in L. 3al!ecott L 8. Lelan! ?E!s.@, 5eclaim the Earth, Lon!on: $he Eomen<s %ress [8tu!y of the 3hip o ?hugging@ movement women to preserve the forest for their tra!itional subsistence nee!s !evelope! from 7an!hian organi"ations in the 7arhwal region of Jttar %ra!esh state in the 6n!ian >imalayas]. Argueta, A. et al( ?#22,@, )tlas de las plantas de la medicina tradicional me-icana , + Vols., =F:ico: 6nstituto *acional 6n!igenista [a cartography of plants use! in tra!itional me!icine in =e:ico]. 9ataille, 7. ?#2-//#22/@, El erotismo, =F:ico: $usquets. ?#2.&. +eath and sensuality6 a study of eroticism and the taboo, *ew Kor : Eal er an! 3ompany@. [A stu!y of eroticism in mysticism]. 9ateson, 7. ?#2/&@, Steps to an ecology of mind$ collected essays in anthropology, psychiatry, evolution, and epistemology, 3hicago: Jniversity 4f 3hicago %ress. [a contribution to an ecological episteme in the un!erstan!ing of mental processes an! cybernetics applie! to ecological anthropology ]. YYYYYY ?#2/2@, 7ind and nature$ a necessary unity (advances in systems theory, comple-ity, and the human sciences), >ampton %ress [$he min! as interactive processes triggere! by !ifference]. 9au!rillar!, Q. ?#2/.@, L8change symbolique et la mort, %aris: 7allimar!. YYYYYY ?#225@, Seduction, *ew Kor : 8t. =artin<s %ress. YYYYYY ?#20+@, Les stratgies fatales, %aris: Z!itions 7rasset L Crasquelle [three important contributions by a lea!ing thin er of postmo!ern philosophy]. !e 9eauvoir, 8. ?#2.0@, "he second se-, Lon!on: Qonathan 3ape [A pioneering boo that opene! the feminist !ebate].

9ellamy Coster, Q. ?&555@, 7ar-9s ecology( 7aterialism and nature, *ew Kor : =onthly 'eview %ress [An influential hermeneutic on the ecological assumptions in =ar:<s thin ing]. 9enIamin, E. ?#2+.@, A$he wor of art in the age of mechanical repro!uctionB, an! ?#2,5@, A$heses on the philosophy of historyB, in Aren!t, >. ?e!. an! tr.@ ?#2.0@, :lluminations, Lon!on: Contana [a critique of technology from this maIor =ar:ist literary an! esthetics thin er]. 9enton, $. ?E!.@ ?#22.@, "he greening of 7ar-ism, *ew Kor : 7uilfor! %ress [A comprehensive rea!er on eco=ar:ist thin ing]. 9iersac , A. L 7reenberg, Q.9. ?E!s.@ ?&55.@, 5eimagining political ecology, (urham/Lon!on, (u e Jniversity %ress [a comprehensive appraisal of Anglo18a:on political ecology]. 9onfil 9atalla, 7. ?#20/@, El 7-ico profundo, una civili0aci;n negada, =F:ico: 7riIalbo [An ethnological an! socio1political appraisal of the !eep roots of in!igenous peoples]. 9oo chin, =. ?#2.,@, AEcology an! revolutionary thoughtB, %omment ?republishe! in the 9ritish monthly )narchy in #2.-@ [A pioneering te:t on the Aecology of liberationB in political ecology]. YYYYYY ?#20&/#22#@, "he ecology of freedom( "he emergence and dissolution of hierarchy , =ontreal/*ew Kor : 9lac 'ose 9oo s [9oo chin<s fun!amental i!eas on the emancipatory power of social ecology]. YYYYYY ?#225/#22.@, "he philosophy of social ecology( Essays on dialectical naturalism , =ontreal/*ew Kor : 9lac 'ose 9oo s [an ecological reformulation of the !ialectics of nature as the philosophical foun!ation of social ecology]. 9orrero, Q.=. ?&55&@, La imaginaci;n abolicionista( Ensayos de ecolog3a pol3tica , 3ali: %*J=A/3ELA/>ivos [a Latin American contribution to emancipation thin ing]. 9oul!ing, ).E. ?#2..@, A$he economics of the coming spaceship earthB, in Qarrett, >. ?e!.@, Environmental quality in a gro'ing economy, 9altimore: Qohns >op ins Jniversity %ress, #2..: +1#, [a pioneering an! influential reflection of ecological economics]. 9our!ieu, %. ?#20,@, +istinction$ social critique of the 2udgment of taste, 9oston: >arvar! Jniversity %ress [a fun!amental contribution from the lea!ing critical structural sociology to the ontology of !ifference]. 3anguilhem, 7. ?#2/#@, La connaissance de la vie, %aris: Q. Vrin [a maIor contribution to the critical epistemology of life sciences]. YYYYYY ?#2//@, :dologie et rationalit dans l9histoire des sciences de la vie( %aris: Q. Vrin [a maIor contribution to the epistemological history of life sciences].

3apra, C. ?#22.@, "he web of life, *ew Kor : Anchor 9oo s [a shift from linear thin ing to systems thin ing in evolutionary biology, chaos theory, quantum physics an! computer science]. 3ar!ona, 7.'. ?#20.@, La floresta di piume( 7anuale di etnoscien0ia, 'oma: E!itore Later"a. 3ar!oso, C.>. L Caletto, E. ?#2/2@, +ependency and development in Latin )merica, Jniversity of 3alifornia %ress [a pioneering contribution to !epen!ency theory]. 3arlson, '. ?#2.&@, "he silent Spring, [an influential boo on the effects of to:ic waste that launche! environmental consciousness]. 3astoria!is, 3. ?#220@, "he imaginary institution of society, 3ambri!ge, =6$ %ress [a fun!amental contribution to the theory of social imaginaries]. !e 3astro, Q. ?#2,.@, !eografia da fome, 'io !e Qaneiro: 4 3ru"eiro. [a pioneering an! influential boo on the political ecology of hunger]. 3Fsaire, A. ?#2--@, +iscourse on colonialism, *ew Kor : =onthly 'eview [a primal contribution to !ecoloni"ation thin ing in the Americas]. 3lar , Q. ?&550@, A(omesticating the !ialectic: a critique of 9oo chin<s neo1Aristotelian metaphysicsB, %.S, Vol. #2, *o. #, =arch, &550, p. 2- [a critique of 9oo chin<s ecological !ialectics]. 3ommoner, 9. ?#2/#@, "he closing circle$ nature, man, and technology. *ew Kor : )nopf [an eco1socialist response to the thesis of Athe limits of growthB an! Apopulation growthB as main cause of the environmental crisis]. YYYYYY ?#2/.@, "he poverty of po'er$ energy and the economic crisis . *ew Kor : 'an!om >ouse [a stu!y on the effects of the capitalist system an! technologies on environmental !egra!ation an! shortage of energy]. 3osby, A.E. ?#20.@, Ecological imperialism( "he biological e-pansion of Europe, <== ><==, *ew Kor : 3ambri!ge Jniversity %ress [a pioneering analysis of the ecological impacts of European coloni"ation]. 3har!in, %. $eilhar! !e ?#2.#@, "he phenomenon of man, 8an Crancisco: >arper L 'ow %ublishers [an influential theory on the emergence of the noosphere]. (ebeir, Q.3., (elFage, Q.%. L (. >Fmery ?#20.@, Les servitudes de la puissance( 4ne histoire de l9nergie, %aris: Clammarion. (eleu"e, 7. ?#22,@, +ifference and repetition, *ew Kor : 3olumbia Jniversity %ress [a fun!amental contribution to the ontology of !ifference from one of the maIor postmo!ern philosophers].

(eleu"e, 7. L 7uattari, C. ?#20+@, )nti Oedipus, =inneapolis: Jniversity of =innesota %ress [a postmo!ern critique an! !econstruction of psychoanalytical theory]. YYYYYY?#20/@, ) thousand plateaus, =inneapolis: Jniversity of =innesota %ress [!evelops the concept of rhi"ome in semiotic co!ing chains, networ ing an! comple: thin ing]. (erri!a, Q. ?#2/0@, ,riting and difference, 3hicago: $he Jniversity of 3hicago %ress [a fun!amental contribution to the ontology of !ifference from one of the maIor postmo!ern philosophers]. YYYYYY?#20&@, 7argins of #hilosophy, 3hicago: 3hicago Jniversity %ress [a fun!amental contribution to !econstructionism an! the ontology of !ifference]. (escola, %h. y 7. %Nlsson ?E!s.@ ?#22.@, .ature and society( )nthropological perspectives, Lon!on: 'outle!ge [contributions from various authors to a phenomenological approach in environmental anthropology]. (os 8antos, $h. ?#2/0@, :mperialismo y dependencia, =F:ico, E!. Era [a pioneering contribution to !epen!ency theory]. En"ensberger, >.=. ?#2/,@, AA critique of political ecologyB, .e' left revie', 0,?+1+#@ [a pioneering an! critical contribution to political ecology]. Erlich, %. ?#2.0@, "he population bomb, *ew Kor : 9allantine 9oo s [an influential boo on population growth as primal cause of environmental crisis an! resource scarcity]. Escobar, A. ?#220@, ASEhose nowle!ge, whose natureU 9io!iversity conservation an! the political ecology of social movementsB, ?ournal of political ecology, Vol -: -+10&. YYYYYY#222, A7en!er, place an! networ s. A political ecology of cybercultureB, in >arcourt, E. ?e!.@, ,omen@:nternet( %reating ne' cultures in cyberspace, Lon!on: We! 9oo s, pp. +#1-,. YYYYYY ?&55.@, AAn ecology of !ifference: equality an! conflict in a glocali"e! worl!B, in 1ocaal, European ?ournal of )nthropology )-: 1!2/1)2. YYYYYY ?&550@, "erritories of difference( #lace, movements, life, redes, (urham/Lon!on: (u e Jniversity %ress [a fun!amental contribution to a politics of !ifference from one of the main authors of political ecology in Latin America]. YYYYYY ?&5#5@, A%ostconstructivist political ecologiesB, in 'e!clift, =. L Eoo!gate 7., :nternational handboo& of environmental sociology, &n! e!ition, 3heltenham/ *orthampton: E!war! Elgar %ublishing Limite!.

Escobar, A., L. 7rueso y 3. 'osero ?#220@, A$he process of blac community organi"ing in the %acific coast of 3olombiaB, in [lvare", 8., E. (agnino e A. Escobar ?E!s@ %ultures of politicsApolitics of cultures$ revisioning Latin )merican social movements , 9oul!er, 3olora!o: Eestview %ress, pp. #2.1&#2 [a narrative of the organi"ation of the %rocess of 9lac 3ommunities by the lea!ers of this social movement]. Cals 9or!a, 4. ?#20#@, ALa 3iencia !el %uebloB, :nvestigaci;n #articipativa y #ra-is 5ural( .uevos conceptos en educaci;n y desarrollo communal, Lima, %er\ E!itorial =osca A"ul. ]]] ?#20/@, %iencia propia y colonialismo intelectual( Los nuevos rumbos. +a. e!iciPn, 9ogotN: 3arlos Valencia E!itores. Canon, C. ?&55,@, "he 'retched of the earth, *ew Kor : 7rove [a pioneering critique of colonialism]. Cerry, L. ?#22-@, "he ne' ecological order, 3hicago: $he Jniversity of 3hicago %ress [a critical contribution to Crench political ecology]. Cuntowic", 8. L Q. 'avet" ?#22+@, Epistemologia pol3tica( %iencia con la gente, 9uenos Aires, 3entro E!itor !e AmFrica Latina [a pioneering contribution to Latin American political epistemology]. YYYYYY ?#22,@, AEmergent comple: systemsB, 1utures, &.?.@:-.01-0& [a pioneering contribution to post1normal epistemology]. Coucault, =. ?#205@, #o'erA&no'ledge, *ew Kor : %antheon [a fun!amental contribution to the analysis of the power strategies weave! in theoretical nowle!ge an! embe!!e! in institutional practices]. 7aleano, E. ?#2/#@, Open veins of Latin )merica$ five centuries of the pillage of a continent , *ew Kor : =onthly 'eview %ress [a fun!amental an! influential stu!y on the overe:ploitation of nature by the colonial regime in Latin America]. 7eorgescu1'oegen, *. ?#2/#@, "he entropy la' and the economic process , 3ambri!ge, =ass.: >arvar! Jniversity %ress [a fun!amental contribution to a critical ecological economy from the stan!s of the secon! law of thermo!ynamics]. 7i!!ens, A., 9ec , J. L 8. Lash ?#22,@, 5efle-ive moderni0ation( #olitics, tradition and aesthetics in the modern social order, 8tanfor!: 8tanfor! Jniversity %ress [a sociological !ebate on the con!ition of mo!ernity by lea!ing sociological theorists]. 7on"Nle" 3asanova, %. ?#2.-@, A6nternal colonialism an! national !evelopmentB, in Studies in comparative international development, Vol. #, *um. ,:&/1+/ [a pioneering contribution to the sociology of internal colonialism].

(e 7ortari, E. ?#2.+@, La ciencia en la historia de 7-ico, =F:ico: Con!o !e 3ultura EconPmica. 7or", A. ?#2//@, cologie et libert, %aris: 7alilFe YYYYYY ?#202@, %ritique of economic reason, Lon!on/*ew Kor : Verso. YYYYYY ?&55.@, A7or". Ecologie une Fthique !e la libFrationB, interview in Eco5ev, Qanuary. YYYYYY ?&550@, Ecologica, %aris: 7alilFe [pioneering contributions of political ecology]. 7uha, '. L =artRne" Alier, Q. ?#2//@, Barieties of environmentalism( Essays .orth and South , Lon!on: Earthscan [a contribution to the ecological !istribution an! !ifference between rich an! poor countries]. 7un!er1Cran , A. ?#2..@, "he development of underdevelopment, *ew Kor : =onthly 'eview %ress [a pioneering contribution to un!er!evelopment an! !epen!ency theory]. >araway, (. ?#22#@, Simians, cyborgs and 'omen, *ew Kor : 'outle!ge [original contribution from ecofeminism to ontological an! epistemological thin ing]. >abermas, Q. ?#20,@, "heory of communicative action, 9oston: 9eacon %ress [>abermas e:poses his theory of communicative rationality]. >aesbaert, '. ?&55,@, 4 mito !a !esterritoriali"aM^o: !o _fim !os territPrios_ ` multiterritoriali!a!e, 'io !e Qaneiro: 9ertran! 9rasil [an i!eological / epistemological / political !ebate on territoriality]. >ei!egger, =. ?#2,.@, ALetter on humanismB, in Carrel )rell, (., 7artin Ceidegger( *asic 'ritings, *ew Kor : >arper3ollins. YYYYYY ?#2-//&55&@, :dentity and difference, 3hicago: 3hicago Jniversity %ress [>ei!egger !evelops his concept of ontological !ifference between beings an! entities]. YYYYYY ?#2&//&5#5@, *eing and time, trans. by Qoan 8tambaugh, revise! by (ennis Q. 8chmi!t, Albany: 8tate Jniversity of *ew Kor %ress [a fun!amental brea through in metaphysical thin ing]. >errera, A.4. et al( ?#2/.@, %atastrophe or ne' society$ a Latin )merican model . 4ttawa: 6('3 [a critical responses to the Alimits to growthB from a group of Latin American theorists]. >etman, C. ?#2/+@, Society and the assessment of technology , %aris: 43(E [a plea for the social harnessing of technology].

>or heimer, =. L $h. A!orno ?#2,,/&55&@, +ialectics of Enlightenment, 8tanfor!: 8tanfor! Jniversity %ress [a fun!amental critique on the Enlightenment an! mo!ernity from these lea!ing authors of the Cran fort school]. >uanacuni, C. ?&5#5@, Bivir bienA*uen vivir$ 1ilosof3a, pol3ticas, estrategias y e-periencias regionales, La %a": 3onvenio An!rFs 9ello/6nstituto 6nternacional !e 6ntegraciPn [the concept an! practice of Aliving1wellB by a Aymara lea!er]. 6llich, 6. ?#2/+@, "ools for conviviality, *ew Kor : >arper L 'ow [a critique of technology from one of the most influential thin ers in Latin America]. )ropot in, %. ?#25&/&55-@, 7utual aid$ a factor of evolution, 9oston: E:ten!ing >ori"ons 9oo s [an emblematic anti1(arwinian claim for social cooperation against competition for human evolution an! survival]. Lacan, Q. ?#2/,1/-@, Sminaire DD:: 5S: (5el, Symbolique, :maginaire), mimeo [!evelopment of these fun!amental Lacanian concepts]. YYYYYY ?#220@, On feminine se-uality the limits of love and &no'ledge : $he 8eminar of Qacques Lacan, 9oo aa Encore ?e!ite! by Qacques1Alain =iller@, *ew Kor : *orton [Lacan thesis on se:ual !ifference as !ifferent 2uissance positions relate! to forms of nowing]. Lan!er, E. ?e!.@ ?&555@, La colonialidad del saber, 9uenos Aires: 3LA384/J*E834 [a compilation of the principal Latin American thin ers on the coloniality of nowle!ge]. Latour, 9. ?&55,@, #olitics of nature( Co' to bring the sciences into democracy , 3ambri!ge, =ass.: >arvar! Jniversity %ress [a political philosophy enquiry into the limits of political ecology]. Leff, E. ?#20.@, AEcotechnological pro!uctivity: a conceptual basis for the integrate! management of natural resourcesB, Social science information, Vol. &-?+@: .0#1/5& [a theoretical proposal for a sustainable pro!uction process base! on ecological potentials, cultural creativity an! technological innovation]. YYYYYY ?#22+@, A=ar:ism an! the environmental question: from critical theory of pro!uction to an environmental rationality for sustainable !evelopmentB, %apitalism, nature, socialism, Vol. , ?#@, 8anta 3ru", 3alifornia [a !iscussion on the shift from critical eco=ar:ism to an alternative pro!uctive rationality]. YYYYYY ?#22-@, !reen production( "o'ards an environmental rationality , 7uilfor! %ublications: *ew Kor [an eco=ar:ist critique on then unsustainability of capitalism an! a proposal of a sustainable pro!uctive rationality]. YYYYYY ?#220/&55&@ Saber ambiental( 5acionalidad, sustentabilidad, comple2idad, poder, =F:ico: 8iglo aa6 E!itores [the configuration of environmental savoir in the environmental epistemology an! in the !iscourse of sustainability].

YYYYYY ?#220a@, A=urray 9oo chin an! the en! of !ialectical naturalismB, %apitalism, nature, socialism, Vol. 2?,@:./12+ [a critique of 9oo chin<s ontological monism an! !ialectical naturalism]. YYYYYY ?&555@, A%ensar la compleIi!a! ambientalB, in Leff, E. ?3oor!.@, La comple2idad ambiental, =F:ico: 8iglo aa6 [environmental comple:ity as the rooting the ontology of being, !ifference an! otherness in the fiel! of political ecology]. YYYYYY ?&55#@, Epistemologia ambiental, 8^o %aulo: 3orte" E!itora [!evelopment of environmental epistemology from the critique of structuralism to postmo!ern thin ing]. YYYYYY ?&55,@, 5acionalidad ambiental( La apropiaci;n social de la naturale0a , =F:ico: 8iglo aa6 E!itores [construction of the category of environmental rationality]. YYYYYY ?&55.@, )venturas de la epistemolog3a ambiental( +e la articulaci;n de las ciencias al diElogo de saberes, =F:ico: 8iglo aa6 E!itores [a self1critique of the brea throughs in the configuration of environmental epistemology]. YYYYYY ?&5#5@, A6maginarios sociales y sustentabili!a!B, %ultura y representaciones sociales, *um. 2, =F:ico, pp. ,&1#&# [an inquiry into the cultural embo!iment of the con!itions of life an! sustainability in social imaginaries]. YYYYYY ?&5#&@, ALatin American environmental thin ing: a heritage of nowle!ge for sustainabilityB, Environmental Ethics, Volume +,:,, Einter [a personal appraisal of Latin American environmental thin ing]. Leff, E. ?E!.@ ?#20.@, Los problemas del conocimiento y la perspectiva ambiental del desarrollo , =F:ico, 8iglo aa6 E!itores [a questioning of normal scientific !isciplines from the emergence of environmental nowle!ge by a group of precursors of Latin American $hin ing]. YYYYYY ?&55&@, tica, vida, sustentabilidad, =F:ico: %*J=A, 8erie %ensamiento Ambiental Latinoamericano *o. - [contributions to an ethics of sustainability from a group of Latin American environmental thin ers an! activists]. Leis, >. ?&55#@, La modernidad insustentable( Las cr3ticas del ambientalismo a la sociedad contemporEnea, =ontevi!eo %*J=A/*or!an [a Latin American environmental critique to mo!ern society]. LFvi18trauss, 3. ?#2--@, "ristes tropiques, %aris, Librairie %lon [a fun!amental contribution from structural anthropology on the ecology of the peoples in the tropical regions]. Levinas, E. ?#2///#22/@, "otalidad e infinito. Ensayo sobre la e-terioridad, 8alamanca: E!iciones 8Rgueme ?"otality and infinity$ an essay on e-teriority, %ittsburgh: (uquesne Jniversity %ress, #2.2@ [Levinas< fun!amental contribution to the ethics of otherness].

YYYYYY ?#22+@, El tiempo y el otro, 9arcelona: %ai!Ps ?"ime and the Other, %ittsburgh: (uquesne Jniversity %ress, #20/ [Levinas< primal formulation of time as Abeyon! beingB in the relation of thin ing with otherness]. Light, A. ?E!.@ ?#220@, Social ecology after *oo&chin, *ew Kor /Lon!on: $he 7uilfor! %ress [a critical appraisal of 9oo chin<s social ecology from various authors] Lipiet", A. ?#222@, Ou<est1ce que l<Fcologie politique. La gran!e transformation !u aa 8ibcle, %aris: La (Fcouverte [an appraisal of political ecology in contemporary politics]. LPpe"1Austin, A. L LPpe"1LuINn, L. ?&55#@, 7e-ico9s indigenous past, *orman: Jniversity of 4 lahoma %ress [a comprehensive historical review of pre1conquest =e:ico relate! to the history, archaeology, an! art history of the in!igenous peoples]. Loveloc , Q. ?#2/2@, !aia( ) ne' loo& at life on Earth, 4:for!: 4:for! Jniversity %ress [a fun!amental contribution to holistic thin ing]. =aier, 3. ?&55.@, A$ransformations of $erritoriality #.551&555B, in 7. 9u!!e, 8. 3onra! L 4. Qan", E!s., "ransnationale !eschichte$ "hemen, "enden0en und "heorien , 7cttingen: Van!enhoec L 'uprecht [a historical account of territoriality transformations]. =arcuse, >. ?#2.,@, One dimensional man, 9oston: beacon %ress [a classic critique of technological reason by one of the more influential =ar:ian authors]. YYYYYY?#2/&@, %ounterrevolution and revolt, 9oston: 9acon %ress [=arcuse<s reflections on nature in the emergence of the environmental question]. YYYYYY ?#22&@, AEcology an! the critique of mo!ern societyB, %apitalism, nature, socialism, Vol. +, *o. + [=arcuse<s late reflection on the ecological question]. =ariNtegui, Q.3. ?#2/#@, Seven interpretive essays on #eruvian reality . $e:as %an American 8eries, Austin: Jniversity of $e:as %ress [a critical appraisal on the coloni"ation of %eruvian peoples from this precursor to Latin American political ecology]. =arini, '.=. L !os 8antos, $. ?3oor!s.@ ?#222@, El pensamiento social latinoamericano en el siglo DD, 3aracas: J*E834, & Vols. [a compen!ium of Latin American critical social thin ing]. =artR, Q. ?#2.+@, Obras completas, La >abana: E!itorial *acional !e 3uba [$he thin ing of the political liberator of Latin America]. =artRne" Alier, Q. ?#22-@, A%olitical ecology, !istributional conflicts an! economic incommensurabilityB, .e' left revie' 6/&## [an important contribution from ecological economics to political ecology].

=ar:, ). L C. Engels ?#2/-1&55-@, 7ar- and Engels collected 'or&s, *ew Kor : 6nternational %ublishers [=ar:ism as a fun!amental source of political ecology]. =ea!ows, (.>., (.L. =ea!ows, Q. 'an!ers L E.E. 9ehrens 666 ?#2/&@, "he limits to gro'th, *ew Kor : [4ne of the most influential boo s at the outburst of the environmental crisis on the ecological limits to ongoing growth processes]. =eillassou:, 3. ?#2//@, 7u2eres, graneros y capitales, =F:ico: 8iglo aa6 E!itores [a fun!amental stu!y of non1capitalistic mo!es of pro!uction]. =ellor, =. ?#22/@, 1eminism F ecology, 3ambri!ge: %olito [a comprehensive stu!y of the evolution an! contesting positions of ecofeminist thin ing]. =erchant, 3. ?#22&@, 5adical ecology, Lon!on: 'oultle!ge [a pioneering contribution to ra!ical ecofeminism]. =ignolo, E. ?&555@, Local historiesAglobal designs$ coloniality, subaltern &no'ledges, and border thin&ing, %rinceton: %rinceton Jniversity %ress [a maIor contribution from a lea!ing voice of !ecolonial thin ing]. YYYYYY ?&5##@, 7odernity and decoloniality, 4:for! bibliographies [a comprehensive annotate! bibliography on !ecolonial thin ing]. =ignolo, E. L A. Escobar, e!s. ?&552@, !lobali0ation and the decolonial option, Lon!on: 'outle!ge, &552 [a compilation of stu!ies by a group of Latin American thin ers on !ecoloni"ation of nowle!ge]. =orales, >. ?&5##@, Otra historia de la se-ualidad, =F:ico: %alabra en Vuelo [a !evelopment of the lacanian thesis of se:ual !ifference as !ifference of Iuissance]. =orin, E. ?#205@, La 7thode( La vie de la vie , %aris: Z!itions !u 8euil [a fun!amental contribution to ecological comple: thin ing]. YYYYYY ?#225@, :ntroduction G la pense comple-e, %aris: Z!itions !u 8euil [=orin<s basic principles an! i!eas on comple: thin ing]. =oscovici, 8. ?#2/&@, La socit contre nature, %aris: Jnion gFnFrale !<F!ition 3ollection #5/#0 [a pioneering stu!y on the anti1nature character of mo!ern civili"ation]. =umfor!, L. ?#2/5@, #entagon of po'er$ "he myth of the machine , Vol. 66, *ew Kor : >arcourt [a fun!amental contribution to the critique of mo!ern technological society]. =urra, Q. ?#2-.@, "he economic organi0ation of the :nca state, 3hicago: Jniversity of 3hicago [stu!y of the cultural construction of space Decological floorsD of the 6nca civili"ation].

*aess, A. L 'othenberg, (. ?#202@, Ecology, community and lifestyle, 3ambri!ge: 3ambri!ge Jniversity %ress [the fun!amental principles, i!eas an! proposals of !eep ecology]. *ee!ham, Q. ?#2-,1 @, Science and civili0ation in %hina, 3ambri!ge, J): 3ambri!ge Jniversity %ress [a monumental stu!y on 3hinese science through history]. *ietschmann, 9. ?#2/+@, *et'een land and 'ater$ the subsistence ecology of the 7is&ito indians, Eastern .icaragua, *ew Kor : 8eminar %ress, &/2 pp. [an e:emplary stu!y on the political ecology of in!igenous peoples !efense of their subsistence ecology]. 4<3onnor, Q. ?#220@, .atural causes( Essays on ecological 7ar-ism , *ew Kor : 7uilfor! %ress [4<3onnor<s principal writings an! contributions to eco=ar:ism]. %eet, '. L Eatts, =. E!s. ?&55,@, Liberation ecologies$ environment, development, social movements, Lon!on: 'outle!ge, 8econ! e!ition [an appraisal of political ecology in the analysis of critical environmental issues]. %eet, '., 'obbins, %. L Eatts, =. E!s. ?&5#5@, !lobal political ecology, Lon!on: 'outle!ge [a global overview of critical ecological worl! issues]. %*J=A ?&55&@, 7anifesto for life( 1or an ethic for sustainability , www.rolac.unep.m: [a synthesis of political ethics in Latin American thin ing]. %olanyi, ). ?#2,,@, "he great transformation$ the political and economic origins of our time , 9oston: 9eacon %ress [a classical post=ar:ian critique of economic rationality]. %orto 7onMalves, 3.E. ?&55#@, !eo graf3as( 7ovimientos sociales, nuevas territorialidades y sustentabilidad, =F:ico: 8iglo aa6 [stu!y on the reappropriation of nature an! the reinvention of territories by the Seringueiros in a 9ra"ilian Ama"on region]. YYYYYY ?&55&@, A4 latif\n!io genFtico e a r1e:istdncia in!Rgeno1camponesaB, !eographia, aeo ,, *o. 0, *iterPi: Jniversi!a!e Ce!eral Cluminense, pp. /1+5 [a critical argumentation of transgenic cropping an! the resistance of in!igenous1peasant peoples]. %orto17onMalves, 3.E. L E. Leff, ?&5#&@, A%olitical Ecology in Latin America: the social reappropriation of nature, the reinvention of territories an! the construction of an environmental rationalityB, E4L88. %rigogine, 6. ?#2.#@, :ntroduction to thermodynamics of irreversible processes ?8econ! e!.@. *ew Kor : 6nterscience [a classic brea through in the science on entropic processes]. %rigogine, 6. L *icolis, 7. ?#2//@, Self organi0ation in non equilibrium systems, *ew Kor : Qohn Eiley L 8ons [a fun!amental contribution to !issipative processes]. OuiIano, A. ?&550@, A3oloniality of power, eurocentrism, an! social classificationB, in =oraea, =., (ussel, E. an! QNuregui, 3.A. ?E!s.@, %oloniality at large( Latin )merica and the

postcolonial debate, (urham, *3: (u e Jniversity %ress, pp. #0#D&&, [a pioneering contribution to the critique of coloniality in Latin America]. 'obbins, %. ?&5#&@, #olitical ecology$ a critical introduction, &n! e!ition, 3hichester, J): Qohn Eiley L 8ons [a stu!y on the Anglo1American sources an! forging of political ecology]. 'orty, '. ?#2/2@, #hilosophy and the mirror of nature, %rinceton: %rinceton Jniversity %ress [a fun!amental critique to normal epistemology an! the theory of representation]. 8afouan, =. ?#20#@, A6s the 4e!ipus comple: universalUB, in 7A1, *o. -/., pp. 0+125 [a contribution to psychoanalytic theory from the stan!point of cultural !iversity]. 8antos, =. ?#22.@, ) nature0a do espaHo$ tcnica e tempo6 ra0Io e emoHIo , 8^o %aulo: >ucitec [a fun!amental contribution to Latin American political ecology]. 8chmi!t, A. ?#2/#@, "he concept of nature in 7ar-, Lon!on: *L9 [a classic hermeneutics of the concept of nature in =ar: through the notion of social metabolism]. 8chumacher, E.C. ?#2/+@, Small is beautiful( Economics as if people mattered , Lon!on: 9lon! L 9riggs [An influential boo on the ethics of sustainability an! precursor of present !ebates on economic !e1growth]. 8hiva, V. ?#202@, Staying alive, Lon!on: We! %ress [an e:pression of ecofeminism from the 8outh]. YYYYYY ?#22+@, 7onocultures of the mind, Lon!on: We! %ress [an ecofeminist critique on monoculture an! one1!imensional !omineering thin ing]. 8ousa 8antos, 9. ?&550@, %onocer desde el Sur( #ara una cultura pol3tica emancipatoria, 9uenos Aires: 3LA384/36(E81J=8A/%lural E!itores. ?Epistemologies of the South$ 5einventing Social Emancipations, forthcoming@ [an influential contribution to !ecolonial an! emancipatory thin ing]. 8tavenhagen, '. ?#2.-@, A3lasses, colonialism, an! acculturation. Essay on the system of inter1 ethnic relations in =esoamericaB, Studies in %omparative :nternational +evelopment, #?.@:-+1// [a pioneering contribution to the sociology of internal colonialism]. $hrone, C. ?#2+-@, A*ature rambling: Ee fight for grassB, "he science ne'sletter &/, /#/, Qan. -: #,@ [a pioneering contribution to political ecology]. Vattimo, 7. ?#22+@ "he adventure of difference$ philosophy after .iet0sche and Ceidegger , Qohns >op ins Jniversity %ress [a contribution to the philosophy of !ifference]. Eal er, %.A. ?&55-@, A%olitical ecology: where is the ecologyUB, #rogress in human geography &2?#@:/+D0& [a pioneering contribution to political ecology].

Eallerstein, 6. ?#2/,@, "he modern 'orld system, vol( :$ capitalist agriculture and the origins of the European 'orld economy in the si-teenth century, *ew Kor /Lon!on: Aca!emic %ress. YYYYYY ?#205@, "he modern 'orld system, vol( ::$ mercantilism and the consolidation of the European 'orld economy, >J== >KL=, *ew Kor : Aca!emic %ress. YYYYYY ?#202@, "he modern 'orld system, vol( :::$ the second great e-pansion of the capitalist 'orld economy, >KM= >NO=Ps, 8an (iego: Aca!emic %ress. YYYYYY ?&5##@, "he modern 'orld system, vol( :B$ centrist liberalism triumphant, >KN<Q><>O , 9er eley: Jniversity of 3alifornia %ress [a stu!y on the historic conformation of the capitalist worl! system]. Ear!, 9. ?#2..@, Spaceship earth, *ew Kor : 3olumbia Jniversity %ress [a pioneering an! influential statement that shape! environmental consciousness]. E3E( ?#20/@, Our common future, 4:for!: 4:for! Jniversity %ress ['eport by the Eorl! 3ommission on Environment an! (evelopment that !iffuse! the mainstream concept of sustainable !evelopment]. Ehitesi!e, ), ?&55&@, +ivided natures, 3ambri!ge: =assachusetts 6nstitute of $echnology [a survey of contributions to Crench political ecology]. Eolf, E. ?#2/&@, A4wnership an! political ecologyB, )nthropological quarterly ,-?+@:&5#D&5- [a pioneering contribution to neo1=ar:ist political ecology from a critical stu!y of forms of ownership in agriculture]. Eolf, E. L A. %alerm ?#2/&@, A%otencial ecolPgico y !esarrollo cultural en =esoamFricaB, in )gricultura y civili0aci;n en 7esoamrica, *o. +&, =F:ico: 8ep8etentas [a pioneering contribution to political ecology from the stu!y of tra!itional forms of appropriation of nature]. Wimmerman, =.E. ?#22,@, %ontesting earth9s future( 5adical ecology and postmodernity, 9er eley: Jniversity of 3alifornia %ress [a critical stu!y on !ifferent approaches an! theories of social ecology an! ecofeminism to environmental !egra!ation an! its political perspectives].

6iographical S5etch Enrique Leff is a =e:ican environmental sociologist. >e receive! his !octorat !e troisibme cycle in !evelopment economics %aris 618orbonne in #2/-. At present he is a full1time researcher at the 6nstituto !e 6nvestigaciones 8ociales ?6nstitute of 8ocial 'esearch@ an! professor of political ecology an! environmental sociology at the *ational Autonomous Jniversity of =e:ico. >e wor s in the fiel!s of environmental epistemology an! philosophy, ecological economics, environmental sociology an! political ecology, an! environmental e!ucation. >e was coor!inator of the Environmental $raining *etwor for Latin America an! the 3aribbean ?#20.1&550@ an! coor!inator of the =e:ico 3ity office of the 'egional 4ffice of Latin America an! the 3aribbean of the Jnite! *ations Environment %rogramme ?&55/1&550@. >e has written e:tensively ?over &5 boo s an! #-5 articles@ on these subIect matters, publishe! mostly in 8panish an! %ortuguese. >e is currently involve! in writing two boo s on critical environmental sociology to be followe! by a boo on environmental philosophy: Ceidegger and environmentalism. Ac5nowledgement $he original i!eas in this article were lai! !own an! presente! in a meeting of the Latin American 3ommission of 8ocial 8ciences ?3LA384@ 1 7roup on %olitical Ecology in %anama 3ity on =arch #/1#2, &55+, an! publishe! by #olis, Vol. 66, *o. -, pp. #&-1#,-, 8antiago !e 3hile, &55+. 6t was then revise! an! inclu!e! in chapter . of my boo 5acionalidad )mbiental. 6 want to than Arturo Escobar an! Qeff $iton for their valuable critical comments to this revise! an! e:ten!e! English version.