Becky Watson

Ecuadors Environmental Revolutions

Chapter 8 Summary

Hypotheses from Ecuador

From 1978 to 2015, the Ecuadorian environmental movement has changed immensely as

it has grown, diversified, struggled, and radicalized. During this same timeline, the state

expanded its conception of development with the driving force of these shifts coming from social

actors working within Ecuador but with heavy influence by international funders. Ecuador has

four main eras of historical significance in terms of the environmental movement: Origins (1978-

1987), Neoliberal Boom (1987-2000), Neoliberal Bust (2000-2006), and Citizens Revolution

(2006-2015). Each era is highlighted within Lewis work to emphasize the relationship among

the actors transformational funders, movement actors, and the state. Within the Origins era, the

state was weak, indebted, and resource dependent but with transitional funding, seed funds were

created and used for new organizations and projects. During this era, environmental policies

were not implemented nor were the existing ones enforced and petroleum was the basis of

export-led development. The environmental movement was able to pass some laws and expand

protected areas which made the appearance of a pro-environmental state when in reality the laws

were not implemented. The Neoliberal Boom era saw an increase in transitional funding as debt-

for-nature swaps became favored. Foreign influence was heightened due to the Earth Summit

and Ecuador prepared for, participated in, and used the summit to garner resources. Two distinct

types of environmentalism grew during this time: ambientalistas and ecologistas. The former

took the side of compromise while the latter took the path of resistance. Transitional funding
from multiple funders came in large amounts and was given to NGOs for projects. The state was

still weak and indebted but was following a neoliberal model. During this era, a new

environmental ministry was established as well as new environmental laws but the country was

still resource dependent.

The Neoliberal Bust era saw a shrinkage in transitional funding and with that came the

ecodependents loss of the symbolic fight against the construction of the OCP pipeline through

fragile environments. Ecodependents during this time were not able to respond independently or

collectively to the states moves to expand the infrastructure for resource extraction. Ecoresisters,

on the other hand, were independent from foreign funding and were therefore able to maintain

themselves. They were able to hold local campaigns against extraction that brought awareness

and led communities to seek alternatives to extraction. During this era, transitional funding from

public and private resources dwindled and because of this, ecodependents lose their influence

allowing ecoresisters to gain their ground. The state is back to being weak, indebted, and

resource dependent but they are also unstable. On the environmental end, institutions and

enforcement is weak and with continued resource dependence, there is an exploration of new

resources to mine. The Citizens Revolution began with President Correas election and under

his subsequent re-elections, Ecuador enjoyed a period of political stability. He was elected with a

motto of for the people and with a promise of breaking international economic relationships

that were believed to weaken Ecuador, the states role was strengthened. A global recession

caused transitional funders to restrict funding for the environment further limiting

ecodependents influence and allowing ecoresisters to gain more ground. Buen vivir/sumak

kawsay became the cornerstone for the states plan of Ecuadors future. During this era,

transitional funding was limited to public funds and private funds were directed to the state.
Ecoresisters are active and vocal while ecodependents are weakened. The state is strong,

populist, and socialist which is a stark contrast to the state in previous eras. The environmental

movement had big alternatives proposed but were not executed.

The hypotheses proposed in this chapter bring about ideas of how certain factors can

influence the entire state. Out of all the hypotheses proposed, I agree with the ones made for the

more current era, the Citizens Revolution. In the more recent era, Ecuador is a nation that is

taking a turn to the left and emphasizing populism and socialist redistribution. Even with

transitional funding being limited, many environmental organizations have persisted. The

configuration of power is focused on the state rather than international influences. The first

hypothesis is that strong socialist and populist states will increase resource extraction to fund

socioeconomic goals. The second is that the moment of radical transition will create an opening

for ecoresisters ideas to be incorporated into the new state ideology. The third and fourth go

hand-in-hand: increased resource extraction will lead to increased environmental disruptions

which will lead to increased environmental movement resistance by ecoresisters. The next is that

the state will limit environmental movement activities of both ecoresisters and ecodependent.

Stemming from that the following two are in conjunction: the state will make it more difficult for

transitional funders such as ecoimperialists to affect the environmental movement and the state

and therefore the ecoresisters will seek transitional networks not for funding but for information

sharing and to shine a light on the states repressive actions. In response to those hypotheses,

ecoresisters will then have the potential to shift the state towards and alternative trajectory. The

possibility, however, depends on the degree to which the state limits or empowers them but

without any limits, ecoresisters have the greatest likelihood of alternatives being expressed and

enacted.
 With these hypotheses in mind, other Latin American countries in the Pink Tide can

follow suit after Ecuador. Rightwing governments are taking power in Argentina, Brazil, and

others across the region but Ecuador and Bolivias leftwing governments have been able to hold

power. The left wing in both countries has faltered in recent years since the end of the

commodity boom and economic downturn has led to decreased social spending and services

among popular classes. Reliance on extractive resources continues to drive a wedge between

social and indigenous movements. According to Thea Riofrancos, Alianza Pais no longer

enjoys a legislative supermajority and has lost several important elections at the municipal and

provincial levels (2017). Riofrancos goes on to say that although the Left was actually able to

follow through on campaign promises, there comes a time when there is no room to maneuver

fiscally even with having the resources at the nations disposal.

After finishing this chapter, I realized that there is more to a small nation than just

ecotourism and being a biodiversity hotspot. Ecuador has gone through drastic changes within

the past 40 years and they still have a long way to come in terms of financial stability and finding

ways to incorporate environmental measures that can still help with the economy. Ecuador is

similar to the US currently in the sense that there are groups that seek to better the nation

financially and there are groups that seek to better the nation environmentally and neither wants

to work together. This book has really opened my eyes to the fact that a nation that is so

biodiverse can only think to extract resource for export and, for the longest time, didnt care

about the natural environment. Tammy Lewis does an excellent job giving the reader an insight

into the environmental movement occurring in Ecuador and how the government and funding

has influenced what happens over time.

 References

Farthing, L. and Riofrancos T.N. (2017). The State of the Left in Latin America: Ecuador and

Bolivia After the Pink Tide. Available from: https://nacla.org/news/2017/07/20/state-left-

latin-america-ecuador-and-bolivia-after-pink-tide