ENVIRONMENT AND DEVELOPMENT -- (decrease poverty; localized; cumulative effects) • POPULATION, CONSUMPTION, TECHNOLOGY - ALL FACTORS IMPORTANT I. DOMINANT MODEL:   1) ATTRACT INVESTMENT (SEE BELOW for details) BUILD INFRASTRUCTURE (INDUSTRY, ENERGY, ROADS, ETC.)


2) TRADE: EXPORT TO CONSUMER COUNTRIES (SEE BELOW for details on trade)

3) WEALTH TRICKLES DOWN

4) CONSEQUENCES:

*loss of self-sufficiency

*debt crisis

*austerity measures & budget cuts

*lowered envir. standards (GATT, WTO)

*encourage consumerism


INVESTMENT:

 e.g., WORLD BANK LOANS:
 
 -1) LARGE AMT. OF MONEY BORROWED FOR "PROJECT" LOANS

 -2) PROJECTS OFTEN FAIL TO PAY WELL

 -3) COUNTRY HAS TROUBLE MAKING PAYMENTS

 -4) "STRUCTURAL ADJUSTMENT" (aka "POLICY") LOANS:   INTERNATIONAL MONETARY FUND (IMF) LOANS MONEY IN EXCHANGE FOR AUSTERITY & MORE EXPORTS.

  - tends to AID LENDER - $50 BILLION PER YEAR IN 1980's  FROM SOUTH TO NORTH
 -5) SOCIAL & ENV. COSTS RISE
PROBLEMS WITH THE WORLD BANK

ACCOUNTABILITY:

 -SECRECY OF DOCUMENTS
 -DISCLOSURE OF RECORD OF DECISIONS
 -LOCAL PEOPLE LEFT OUT


ENVIRONMENT:

 -ENVIRONMENT POORLY INCORPORATED
 -GLOBAL ENVIRONMENTAL FACILITY


TRADE - AN ENVIRONMENTAL PERSPECTIVE:

ARGUMENTS FOR TRADE LIBERALIZATION
 

A. MORE COMPETITION, THUS GREATER ECONOMIC EFFICIENCY

B. TRADE AND INVESTMENTS IN CLEANER TECHNOLOGIES

C. "NORTHERN" COUNTRY TARIFFS ON IMPORTED MANUFACTURED GOODS FORCE EXPORTS TO BE IN PRIMARY PRODUCTS, LEAVING THE MOST INTENSE IMPACTS AND LEAST ECONOMIC BENEFIT IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES.

D. INVESTMENT COULD DIVERSIFY ECONOMIES THAT HAVE BEEN DEPENDENT ON A VERY FEW EXPORT COMMODITIES.


ARGUMENTS AGAINST LIBERALIZATION

A. FREE TRADE ZONES  MAY BECOME POLLUTION HAVENS
BREAKS ON TAXES, REGULATION, AND OTHER ENTICEMENTS

B. DECREASE IN FOOD SELF-SUFFICIENCY

C. DEPENDENCE ON EXTENSIVE TRANSPORTATION

D. DOWNWARD HARMONIZATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL & LABOR STANDARDS


THE WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION (WTO)

HISTORY

THIS PACT:
* CREATED A NEW ORGANIZATION, THE WTO.
* FURTHER REDUCED TARIFFS (INCLUDING AGRICULTURAL ONES FOR THE FIRST TIME)
* ELIMINATED TRADE QUOTAS OR REQUIREMENTS FOR HIGH LOCAL CONTENT.


ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERNS IN SEATTLE WTO PROTESTS:

WHAT CONSTITUTES A 'BARRIER TO TRADE"?
 

1. KILLING OF DOLPHINS IN PURSE-SEINING TUNA IN E. PACIFIC
* 1972 DOLPHINS PROTECTED BY US MARINE MAMMALS PROT. ACT
* 1972 - 368,600 DOLPHINS KILLED; 1983 ONLY 10,000 BY US BOATS
* BOATS 'REFLAGGED' AS MEXICAN, SOLD TUNA INTO US
* 1980'S MMPA AMENDED TO RESTRICT IMPORTED TUNA TO DOLPHIN-FRIENDLY ONLY.
* COUNTRIES RESPONDED - TOTAL DOLPHIN TUNA FISHING MORTALITY DROPPED:
          1986 - 133,000;  1998 - 2,000
* 1991 - GATT PANEL RULES AGAINST US LAW, ARGUING THAT  HOW A PRODUCT IS PRODUCED CANNOT BE A BASIS FOR REJECTING IT
* RULING NEVER FORMALLY ADOPTED, AND COUNTRIES WORKED OUT INTERNATIONAL DOLPHIN CONSERVATION PROGRAM INSTEAD
2. SEA-TURTLE RULES
* STEMMING FROM ESA PROTECTION, THE U.S. REQUIRES TURTLE EXCLUDER DEVISES (TEDs) ON SHRIMP NETS TO ALLOW TURTLES TO ESCAPE. 16 NATIONS RESPONDED BY REQUIRING THEM.
* SHRIMPING WITHOUT TEDS KILLS ABOUT 150,000 TURTLES ANNUALLY
* US EMBARGOS SHRIMP IMPORTS FROM INDIA, MALAYSIA, PAKISTAN, WHICH HAD NOT IMPLEMENTED RULES REQUIRING TEDs. THEY CHALLENGED THE US RULES TO WTO
* 1998, WTO PANEL RULES AGAINST EMBARGO & U.S. RULES, HOLDING USE OF TRADE MEASURES TO PROTECT GLOBAL RESOURCES SOMETIMES JUSTIFIED, BUT NOT IN THIS CASE
* U.S. MODIFIES IMPLEMENTATION, SEEKING TO AVOID STIFF SANCTIONS.
3. RULING THAT U.S. MUST RE-WRITE PARTS OF ITS CLEAN AIR ACT TO PERMIT IMPORTS OF LESS PURE GASOLINE

4. EUROPEAN UNION TOLD IT CANNOT BAN IMPORTS OF BEEF PRODUCTS FROM US THAT HAVE BEEN TREATED WITH POTENTIALLY CANCER-CAUSING HORMONES.

5. JAPAN TOLD TO LIFT IMPORT BAN ON FRUITS CARRYING INVASIVE INSECTS THAT REQUIRE PESTICIDE TREATMENT ON IMPORT.

6. EUROPE TOLD TO STOP FAVORING BANANAS GROWN IN CARIBBEAN BY SMALL INDEPENDENT  GROWERS OVER THOSE BY US CORPORATE BANANAS GROWN PLANTATION STYLE


OTHER ISSUES THAT WERE TARGET OF PROTEST IN SEATTLE:"

* "TRANSPARENCY": NEED FOR MORE OPEN, ACCOUNTABLE PROCEDURES IN WTO, ESPECIALLY IN ITS DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROCESS, WHICH OPERATES IN SECRET (NO PRESS, NO PUBLIC, NO NGO'S.  PANELS COMPOSED OF 3 UNELECTED BUREAUCRAT TRADE SPECIALISTS.

* NET RESULT OF ALL WTO ACTIONS: INCREASING CONSTRAINT ON NATIONS' ABILITY TO PROTECT SAFETY OF PRODUCTS AND NATURE, AND TO INFLUENCE POSITIVE STANDARDS ELSEWHRE.



II. ALTERNATE MODEL: SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
 

Recent extensive survey research in developing countries reveals high degrees of environmental concern & support for protection, despite low 'standard of living' conditions.

Majorities in 21 of 24 nations favored env. protection over economic development


World Commission on Environment and Development (1987):

"SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT IS DEVELOPMENT THAT MEETS THE NEEDS OF THE PRESENT WITHOUT COMPROMISING THE ABILITY OF FUTURE GENERATIONS TO MEET THEIR OWN NEEDS." THIS MEANS INVEST IN  PEOPLE  AND  "NATURAL CAPITAL": 1) RESPECT BIOSPHERIC CONSTRAINTS

2) DECREASE EXCESS CONSUMPTION Center for a New American Dream

3) INCREASE SELF RELIANCE  Grameen Bank

4) APPROPRIATE TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER Solar Cookers

5) ACCOUNTABILITY & REGULATION Global Reporting Initiative;   Coalition for Environmentally Responsible Economies

6) RESPECT LOCAL CULTURE Maasi Envir. Resource Coal.

7) COMMUNITY PARTICIPATION Songtaaba Women’s Group

8) NEW INDICATORS OF DEVELOPMENT & ECONOMIC WELFARE: GENUINEPROGRESS INDICATOR
(FORMERLY THE   ISEW = "INDEX OF SUSTAINABLE ECONOMIC WELFARE"):

U.S. ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE:
 

MEASURE      1976      1986    DIFFERENCE
GNP/CAPITA  $5954    $7226    +$1272
ISEW/CAPITA  $3790   $3403      -$387

ACCOUNTS FOR:

  • SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL COSTS
  • DISTRIBUTION OF WEALTH & BENEFITS
  • DURABLE VALUE OF ECONOMIC PRODUCT