UDTR Global Rights of Nature Radar

Local sovereignty in the context of the extraction-ecotourism nexus in Northwest Ecuador: post- neoliberal vignettes from Intag-Manduriacos cloud forests

Identification

Public canonical key

doi:10.4324/9780203384855-21

Authors

Linda d ́Amico

Reported year

2013

Reported language

en

Source type

book-chapter

First detected

2026-11-09T19:15:09.561567+00:00

Last metadata observation

2026-11-09T19:15:09.561567+00:00

Last HTTP verification

Not checked

Documentary abstract — original language

Intag, a cloud forest region in northwest Ecuador, stands out for its megabiodiversity and social opposition to copper extraction in the Toisán Range. Since the mid-1990s, schemes for ecotourism, agro-ecology, reforestation and mining have abounded and transformed the rural imaginary, challenging local residents to consider Intag territories in new ways. In this case, neoliberal policies inadvertently contributed to local empowerment and increased civic participation. Rural women and men expanded their social networks and gained access to scientific and other information. Their success in forcing two transnational corporations to exit the region was not without controversy and conflict, yet the proposal for extraction remains unsettled. As one Intag woman proclaimed, ‘It’s like a recurring nightmare, because the minerals are still in the soil’. However, in 2008 Ecuadorian citizens approved the Constitution of Monticristi, which guarantees their rights to sumak kawsay, the Kichwa concept for an integrated buen vivir/well-being. Notably, the new constitution also stands out for giving rights to Nature,1 thereby granting ecosystems and other species rights within a legal frame for sustainable development. As Arsel (2012) explains, the new constitution aims to redefine and put into practice mutually beneficial nature-society relationships. Notwithstanding these institutional changes, President Rafael Correa’s government advocates large-scale mineral extraction as a sustainable path to sumak kawsay/well-being. As Davidov points out, his regime is lauded by the international press for ‘keeping oil in the ground’ in Yasuní National Park, a megabiodiverse region in the Amazon. However, she explains that Correa has been adept at framing the Yasuni-ITT project as a symbol of national sovereignty: in Ecuador he presented the Yasuní-ITT as a project of self-determination when most Ecuadorians were dissatisfied with policies that brought decades of debt, economic restructuring and foreign oil extraction. These policies also left the environment devastated in the northeast Upper Amazon (Davidov 2012: 12). Hence, even as legal rhetoric championed constitutional protections for the sumak kawsay/well-being of Nature-society in a pluri-national state, the Correa administration has prioritized industrial mining within its strategic development plans. It has also instituted popular cash transfers, health and other social programmes; however, at the same time this ‘citizen revolution’ limited local governance, undermined social organizing and emphasized exploitation of natural resources. Such post-neoliberal processes have provided for small advances in social benefits, but left intact the neoliberal root of extractive economics. Industrial mining emerged as a national priority for the Correa administration. ENAMI, the national mining company, is charged with overseeing ‘responsible mining’ in line with the constitution. The Correa government has framed mining as a technological puzzle with a technological fix that offsets risk. For example, in March 2012, after signing an agreement with China for a 25-year, US$1.4 billion investment for the Cordillera del Cóndor copper concession in Zamora Chinchipe (a southern Amazonian province), Correa touted the long-term benefits of the project on one of his Saturday radio programmes: he complained about opponents’ ‘infantile’ notions of Nature, and assured citizens that upon the cessation of industrial mining after two decades he expected that the south eastern Upper Amazonian landscape would be restored and a lake would fill the open pit – thus, enhancing the natural beauty of the region with a body of water to attract tourists. This official narrative gives Nature value only when it is commercialized. Büscher and Arsal (2012) identify such rhetoric as ‘neoliberal conservation’, which is based upon the same political economic structures that transform Nature into business. Such objectification strips rights from the subject, whether of vulnerable social groups or Nature. This chapter explores some of the contradictions inherent in the postneoliberal formula for development that has transformed agrarian livelihoods in Intag over the past 30 years. I provide on-the-ground details of ways mining proposals and exploration sometimes prompted conflict or coalescence within communities and households, and how environmental sensibilities, reflected in movements towards initiatives like ecotourism, arose in response. By examining a range of Nature-society experiences, dynamics and outcomes, I show some of the complexities in local actors’ lives, as they were entangled within and interpreted conflicting discourses, and out of which they created multiplex livelihoods for the twenty-first century (Bryceson 2002). Repeatedly, as described below, the nexus of extraction and ecotourism was embodied in globalizing forces such as roads, communication networks and local services. These particular circumstances brought together contradictory ideological frames, where boundaries were often unclear. Rural residents have been nimble in interpreting development discourses, and out of the entangled nexus they began to articulate livelihood entitlement within broad and sometimes conflicting scopes.

Identifiers

OPENALEX

W4255530997

DOI

10.4324/9780203384855-21

Documentary context

Documentary family

Book chapter

Source-reported types

book-chapter

Jurisdictions studied — explicit sources

EC

Natural entities mentioned

Lake · Forest · Ecosystem · Species · Landscape · Territory

Entity mentions are not evidence of legal recognition. Jurisdiction studied is separate from author affiliation country.

Book bibliographic description

Access status unknown

Sources

OpenAlex · Record 1 · Record 2

• DOI · https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203384855-21
• OpenAlex · https://openalex.org/W4255530997

Documentary status

Relevance pending

Library

This identity is not yet included in the Legal Library.