Abstract:Building social alternatives is necessary to resist the destructive impacts of the capitalist organization on well-being, social organization, and the planet. This paper offers an analysis of the ways in which peoples are mobilizing to build organizations and to define social movements to move beyond current crises. The lines for constructing an ecologically sound and social-solidarity society require mechanisms for mutual cooperation based on alternative systems of decision making, as well as for doing work and assuring well-being to every member of the community. These depend on forging a process of solidarity among the members of a society as well as building alliances among communities; to assure the satisfaction of basic needs while also attending the most pressing requirements for physical, social and environmental infrastructure and to assure the conservation and rehabilitation of their ecosystems.

This paper examines the possibility of understanding and measuring well-being as a result of "progress" on the basis of today's dominant epistemological framework. Market criteria distort social values by allowing purchasing power to define priorities, likening luxury goods to basic needs; in the process they reinforce patterns of discrimination against disadvantaged social groups and women, introducing fatal distortions into the analysis. Similarly, because there are no appropriate mechanisms to price natural resources adequately, the market overlooks the consequences of the abuse of natural resources, degrading the quality of life, individually and collectively, or-in the framework of Latin American indigenous groups-foreclosing the possibility of "living well". We critique the common vision of the official development discourse that places its faith on technological innovations to resolve these problems. The analysis points to the need for new models of social and environmental governance to promote progress, approaches like those suggested in the paper that are inconsistent with public policies currently in place. At present, the social groups forging institutions to assure their own well-being and ecological balance are involved in local processes, often in opposition to the proposals of the political leaders in their countries.

In the context of the prevailing abundance of diversity (biological, ethnic), the profound social inequalities, and the trends and attitudes of hegemonic forces in Latin America, a coherent process of environmental governance is proving difficult and environmental injustice is aggravated. In virtually every country in the region, increasing subordination to the global market has led to dramatic transformations in productive structures and processes along with the often violent opening of new territories to domestic and foreign investment in renewable energy projects, primary production for international markets, and natural resources exploitation. These changes are provoking direct confrontations between, on the one hand, domestic policy-makers, well-financed investors positioned to operate in international markets, purveyors of technologies, investors with concessions in regions and sectors recently opened to foreign investment, and, on the other hand, organized groups from many parts of society who see these penetrations as a menace to their productive systems, to their livelihoods and their health, while also being destructive of their communities, their cultures and the We are deeply indebted to the members of the Local Solutions teams participating in the Environmental Governance in Latin America project for their contributions to this chapter; this formulation would not have been possible without the continuing exchanges in the communities over the course of the past three years. The contributions of Gustavo Esteva, Mario Fuente and Victor Toledo have also been important. Special thanks are due to the critical contributions of the participants in the seminar in heterodox economics in the doctoral program in economic sciences at the Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana, and the active participation of the specialists in ecological economics in the participating communities. Of course, responsibility for this text is exclusively that of the authors. 257 F. de Castro et al. (eds.

In the context of great diversity and profound social inequalities, environmental injustice prevails. Conflicts between institutions promoting economic development (i.e., growth) and ecologists and civil society are rampant. This paper introduces alternatives emerging from groups, whose organizations are shaped by different cosmologies, products of their multiple ethnic origins, and by the profound philosophic and epistemological debates among social movements proposing different strategies for achieving progress, improving well-being and conserving ecosystems.

Building social alternatives is necessary to resist the destructive impacts of the capitalist organization on the quality of life, social organization, and the planet. This paper offers an analysis of the ways in which peoples are mobilizing to build organizations and to define social movements to move beyond current crises. The lines for constructing an ecologically sound and social-solidarity economy require mechanisms for mutual cooperation based on alternative systems of decision making as well as for doing work and assuring well-being to every member of the community. These depend on forging a process of solidarity among the members of a society as well as building alliances among communities; to assure the satisfaction of basic needs while also attending the most pressing requirements for physical, social and environmental infrastructure and to assure the conservation and rehabilitation of their ecosystems.