Ecologically unequal exchange and ecological debt

Hornborg, Alf; Martínez-Alier, Joan

doi:10.2458/v23i1.20220

Cited by 94 publications

(59 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Ecologically unequal exchange refers to the environmentally damaging removal of energy and other natural-resource assets from and the externalization of environmentally damaging production and disposal activities to less-developed countries. Research in this tradition indicates that asymmetrical trade relationships and global production network characteristics contribute to the growth of energy use, production-based carbon emissions and deforestation within developing nations (Bunker 1984;Feng et al 2014;Givens 2018;Hornborg & Martinez-Alier, 2016;Huang 2018;Jorgenson 2006Jorgenson , 2012Prell et al 2015;Roberts and Parks 2007). In a related vein, research on the environmental impacts of militarization (e.g., Bradford and Stoner 2017;Clark et al 2010), which is discussed in greater detail above, suggests that nations with larger and more technologically advanced militaries are more able to secure and maintain access to greater amounts of fossil fuel energy and other natural resources from different regions of the world, further leading to increased carbon emissions (Kentor 2000;Tilly 1992).…”

Section: Power Social Stratification and Inequalitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Social Science Perspectives on Drivers of and Responses to Global Climate Change

Jorgenson¹,

Fiske²,

Hubacek³

et al. 2018

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article provides a review of recent anthropological, archaeological, geographical, and sociological research on anthropogenic drivers of climate change, with a particular focus on drivers of carbon emissions, mitigation and adaptation. The four disciplines emphasize cultural, economic, geographic, historical, political, and social-structural factors to be important drivers of and responses to climate change. Each of these disciplines has unique perspectives and makes noteworthy contributions to our shared understanding of anthropogenic drivers, but they also complement one another and contribute to integrated, multidisciplinary frameworks. The article begins with discussions of research on temporal dimensions of human drivers of carbon emissions, highlighting interactions between long-term and near-term drivers. Next, descriptions of the disciplines' contributions to the understanding of mitigation and adaptation are provided. It concludes with a summary of key lessons offered by the four disciplines as well as suggestions for future research.

show abstract

Section: Power Social Stratification and Inequalitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Social Science Perspectives on Drivers of and Responses to Global Climate Change

Jorgenson¹,

Fiske²,

Hubacek³

et al. 2018

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The perspective also allows for analyses from the global to the local of environmental and social harms and the underlying mechanisms that drive these outcomes. Scholars within this tradition note that global inequality, and specifically EUE, is “an underlying source of most of the environmental distribution conflicts in our time” (Hornborg & Martinez‐Alier, , p. 328). Thus, we suggest the theory of EUE is also a theory of global environmental in justice and represents a promising way to explore environmental justice issues and link environmental justice research with a global structural approach.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ecologically unequal exchange: A theory of global environmental injustice

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this article, we review the theory of ecologically unequal exchange and its relevance for global environmental injustice. According to this theory, global political–economic factors, especially the structure of international trade, shape the unequal distribution of environmental harms and human development; wealthier and more powerful Global North nations have disproportionate access to both natural resources and sink capacity for waste in Global South nations. We discuss how the theory has roots in multiple perspectives on development, world‐systems analysis, environmental sociology, and ecological economics. We detail research that tests hypotheses derived from ecological unequal exchange theory on several environmental harms, including deforestation, greenhouse gas emissions, biodiversity loss, and water pollution as well as related human well‐being outcomes. We also discuss research on social forces that counter the harmful impacts of ecologically unequal exchange, including institutions, organizations, and environmental justice movements. We suggest that ecologically unequal exchange theory provides an important global political–economic approach for research in environmental sociology and other environmental social sciences as well as for sustainability studies more broadly.

show abstract

“…Especially in ecological economics and political ecology, the relationship between physical and monetary flows has been studied in order to determine whether countries benefit from trade or not. Studies empirically testing for patterns of ecologically unequal exchange have not reached agreement in their conclusions [34][35][36][37][38][39], also because an acceptable monetary amount of revenue for the social and environmental impacts of resource extraction for export cannot be defined [40]. Recently, the research agenda has been developed to more strongly focus on biophysical flows in identifying ecologically unequal exchange and (potential for) environmental conflict (e.g., [40][41][42]).…”

Section: Extractive Economies In the Global Economymentioning

confidence: 99%

Extractive Economies in Material and Political Terms: Broadening the Analytical Scope

Schaffartzik

Pichler

2017

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In order to curb environmental impact, absolute resource use reductions are urgently needed. To reach this goal, multi-scalar synergies and trade-offs in global resource use must be effectively addressed. We propose that better understanding the role of extractive economieseconomies that extract raw material for export-in global resource use patterns is a prerequisite to identifying such synergies and trade-offs. By combining a system-wide environmental accounting perspective with insights from political ecology and political economy research, we demonstrate that (1) the extractivist expansion may be the corollary of reduced immediate environmental impact in the industrialized countries; and (2) the material flow patterns on which this result is based do not suffice to identify the mechanisms underlying extractivist development and its role in global resource use. Our work on extractive economies illustrates that, in order to supply transformative knowledge for sustainability transformation, biophysical and socio-political conceptualizations of society-nature relations must be more strongly integrated within the interdisciplinary sustainability sciences in general and social ecology in particular.

show abstract

Ecologically unequal exchange and ecological debt

Cited by 94 publications

References 19 publications

Social Science Perspectives on Drivers of and Responses to Global Climate Change

Social Science Perspectives on Drivers of and Responses to Global Climate Change

Ecologically unequal exchange: A theory of global environmental injustice

Extractive Economies in Material and Political Terms: Broadening the Analytical Scope

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About