Features of ecological discourse in the policy of the Latin American states
https://doi.org/10.46272/2409-3416-2019-3-42-45
Abstract
At the beginning of XXI century, there was a tendency towards the active implementation of the neoextractive paradigm in the economy of Latin American states, which was due to the existing“consensus of the commodities”. This term is interpreted by researchers as an economic, political and ideological order, which is based on the high demand for commodities in international markets. Despite impressive successes in filling up national reserves with funds received from the extractive industries, new forms of inequality and potential conflicts began to arise in Latin American society. The costs of the current model predetermined not only appeal to environmental discourse, but also to increasing of its supporters that allows them to outline their demands on the political landscape.
About the Author
A. A. Shinkarenko
Institute for Latin American Studies, Russian Academy of Sciences
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Alexander Shinkarenko
References
1. Mapa de conflictos mineros, proyectos y empresas mineras en América Latina. – Available at: https://mapa. conflictosmineros.net/ocmal-db/ (accessed: 02.11.2019).
2. Svampa M. Modelo de Desarrollo y cuestión ambiental en América Latina: categorías escenarios en disputa / El desarrollo en cuestión: reflexiones desde América Latina. – La Paz: CIDES / UMSA, 2011.
3. Свампа М. Бросая вызов нео-экстрактивизму в Латинской Америке // Глобальный диалог. – 2016. – № 1. – Том 6. – С. 24–25.
4. Fuentes F.South America: How “Anti-extractivism” Misses the Forest for the Trees.–Mode of access: http://links.org.au/node/3859 (date of reference: 03.11.2019).
5. Хестанов Р. Географический марксизм (интервью с Дэвидом Харви) // Русский репортер. – Режим доступа: http://www.rusrep.ru/2008/18/interview_harv/ (дата обращения: 30.10.2019).
6. Routledge P. Anti-geopolitics. Introduction / The Geopolitics Reader. London, New York: Taylor & Francis e-Library, 2003. P. 245.
7. Субкоманданте Маркос. Четвертая мировая война. – Екатеринбург: Ультра. Культура, 2005. – 495 с.
8. Захер У., Баэс М. Экстрактивизм и BuenVivir в Эквадоре // Глобальный диалог. – 2016. – № 1. – Том 6. – С. 26–27.
9. Gudynas E. Ecuador. Los derechos de la naturaleza después de la caída de la moratoria petrolera en la Amazonia. – Available at: alainet.org/active/66547 (accessed 02.03.2018).
10. Воротникова Т. А. Десять лет спустя: как изменилась Боливия при Эво Моралесе // Свободная мысль. – 2016. – № 6. – С. 125–136.
11. Belinda Fontana L. Evo Morales at the Crossroad: Problematizing the Relationship between the State and Indigenous Movements in Bolivia // Iberoamericana. Nordic Journal of Latin American and Caribbean Studies. – 2013. – Vol. XLIII. – № 1–2. – P. 19–45.
Review
For citations:
Shinkarenko A.A. Features of ecological discourse in the policy of the Latin American states. Cuadernos Iberoamericanos. 2019;(3):42-45. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.46272/2409-3416-2019-3-42-45
Views:
685
Email the author 
