Emma Darlington

At what point does the human race say enough?

Enough to the exploitation of natural resources fuelling our greedy lifestyles. Enough to the millions of people being affected by wars, conflict, hunger, and migration brought about by climate change. According to UNICEF, 33 million people have been affected by the heavy monsoon rains in Pakistan brought about by devastating rain and floods. The Horn of Africa is experiencing its worst drought in more than 40 years. More than 18 million people are facing severe hunger in Ethiopia, Somalia, and Kenya. Let’s not forget the islands which have been inundated by rising sea levels, destroying whole communities. These were among the direst cases of climate crisis when world leaders headed to Cairo.

Ecuador is one of the most biodiverse countries in the world, with high levels of primary rainforest and endemic species. According to the Convention on Biological Diversity, the main driver leading to biodiversity loss is deforestation through urban expansion, agricultural expansion, mining, and petroleum exploration. Not only are species highly endangered, but the quality of air, soil, and water are also vastly deteriorating, threatening the lives of thousands of communities directly dependent on natural resources.

Biodiversity is crucial for humans as it enables the earth’s systems to be resilient and enables natural services to continue thriving. However, there is a valid argument that nature should not be protected solely because it benefits us. Nature ought to have its own intrinsic value and possess the right to be respected. This principle is deeply embedded in the Andean thought of “Buen Vivir” and ecocentrism in contrast to Western narratives of anthropocentrism, which is based on the notion of property- owning, legitimizing, and justifying the human species over all others on earth. Not only does anthropocentrism promote ecological degradation but also justifies the dispossession of land over indigenous communities, to gain financial benefits and resources by a small proportion of the elite. Subscribing to this school of thought indefinitely life may ultimately result in the sixth mass extinction of our planet.

Ecuador’s constitutional reform in 2008, was one of the first constitutions in the world to include the “Rights of Nature”. President Rafael Correa was part of initiating this transformative process. The constitution’s main aim was to build a “participatory democracy, to harmonize the relationship between state, economy, people and resources”. The constitution hoped to halt multinational companies from exploiting the land, in which most of the profits failed to trickle down to the local population. Many countries have been inspired worldwide such as New Zealand, Australia, Chile, Panama, Canada, and even the UK, and have started making changes in not only their way of thinking but in their drafted
legal systems.

The Rights of Nature permit any citizen within Ecuador, to sue any person or corporation, on behalf of an ecosystem even if it is not harming them directly. Chapter 7 is specifically dedicated to the Rights of Nature. The most prominent sections consist of: Restoration of nature- “In the most severe case of environmental impact, including those of exploitation of non- renewable natural resources, the state shall establish the most effective mechanisms to achieve restoration... and measures to eliminate or mitigate harmful environmental consequences” (Kotze, 2017).

Preventative and restrictive measures- “activities that might lead to the extinction of species, the destruction of ecosystems and the permanent alteration of natural cycles” (Kotze, 2017). This is a huge step forward, towards a movement in sustainable development and environmental protection. However, 14 years after this constitution was implemented it’s vital to track its effectiveness and understand whether this is constitutional rhetoric or a reality.

Up until 2021, the only case which was deemed a “success”, was in 2011, in front of the Provincial Court of Justice in Loja with the creation of a new road. The government didn’t conduct an environmental impact assessment nor consult with inhabitants living in proximity to the construction. The road was going to alter the flow of the river causing serious harm to nature. With the case being won, the government took public responsibility and apologized, although the road was still constructed but with “minimized impacts” (Greenie, 2011). Frustratingly, it is government officials and politicians who are at the forefront of deciding what is deemed harmful to nature, rather than environmental conservationists or experts which threatens to blunt any attempt to enforce the constitution.

On the first of December 2021, Los Cedros, was saved (for the time being) from the continuation of mining by several multinational companies. Despite enormous biodiversity threats, there are also threats to indigenous communities, eco-tourism, and ecological services. This constitutional action was filed by the city of Cotacachi against the Ministry of Environment and Ecuador’s state-owned mining company, specifically with the Rio Magdalena mining project carried out with the Partnership of a Canadian mining company (Herbet Smith Freehills, 2022). After three years, the Ecuadorian High Court ruled that the rights of the forest had been violated by mining activities, there had been no environmental assessments to discern the impact of the mining activities on local communities’ health and as a precautionary principle the mining concessions were withheld. The court further ordered the Ministry of Environment to create a new draft of regulations imposing harsher environmental standards and permits.

This favorable ruling is both powerful and comprehensive, and a historic moment in the protection of endangered ecosystems. Not only is this a prime example of the effectiveness of civic action to halt environmental degradation, but also a message to the rest of Latin America and the international community.

However, the mining concessions overlap a huge proportion of the protected areas. It is vital more communities and citizens stand up to these multinational corporations putting pressure on not only the government but the world’s demand for these resources. There are still many challenges facing the Rights of Nature: Ecuador has an extremely high level of inequality, and it will be a long and difficult road to emerge from this phase without petroleum exports. More than half of export earnings and approximately 25% of public sector revenues come from petroleum. Lack of enforcement, political will, and contradictions within the constitution has prevented it from being fully effective in its role of protecting nature. On the one hand, the constitution is trying to promote a state-led alternative modernization but conversely is still caught up in the exploitative fossil fuel sector.

The Rights of Nature are a significant revolutionary step rethinking the dominance of humans within the Earth’s ecosystem. Despite the governmental concessions and environmental degradation occurring the dialogue has finally moved forward. People are finally having an opportunity to defend the voiceless. With countries following in the footsteps of this Ecuadorian constitution there is finally hope that nature will one day be respected.

“FIFA is committed to respecting all internationally recognized human rights and shall strive to promote the protection of these rights”. Yet according to Amnesty International, 6,500 migrant workers died during the construction of the World Cup stadium - where was their protection? Who is taking responsibility for this atrocity? Migrant workers are among the most vulnerable groups on the international stage and are therefore easily exploited by employers. With families relying on them for remittances for a variety of reasons including education, healthcare, rent and basic survival they are often left with no choice but to accept a very low pay and dangerous working conditions.

Effective climate change policies should theoretically take fossil fuel companies to their graves.

The not well-known "Energy Charter Treaty" (ECT) is a major factor preventing countries from swiftly phasing out fossil fuels. The ECT was adopted into law in 1998, and signed by 53 European and Asian countries. It is an "international agreement that established a multilateral framework for cross-border cooperation in the energy industry", heavily focusing on the fossil fuel industry. Its initial purpose was to reinforce the relationship on energy matters between the USSR, the countries of Central and Eastern Europe, and the West (United Nations).

On December 6th, 2022, the EU launched an agreement for an ambitious law which prevents companies from placing commodities which are related to deforestation on the EU market. Deforestation is pushing biodiverse lands towards an irreversible tipping point, inevitably leading to the destruction of environmental habits, biodiversity loss, the destabilization of forest services and the loss of homes for indigenous communities. According to the FAO, 420 million hectares an area large than the EU was lost from deforestation from 1990 to 2020. Global Witness estimates that the EU contributes to 16% of deforestation associated with international trade, it is about time some form of responsibility is taken.