The search for renewable energy and the growing protest against large-scale development projects have intensified socioenvironmental conflict in Latin America. In this paper I set out a fresh perspective on this conflict, contrasting developmental interests with traditionalist interests. Although conflict between developers and communities or conservationists is nothing new, I argue that its heightened intensity can be understood as post-Marxist class conflict, with actor coalitions that consistently cut across traditional class, regional, national, and public-private cleavages. I describe the fundamental logics and interests underlying the two groups, the sources of their legitimacy, the narratives supporting them, and the power imbalance between them. I then look at a case study involving an attempted European windfarm investment in a rural Oaxacan village in Mexico. This new class conflict is significant because of the impacts that major investors have on marginalized communities, and because of rising awareness of rights and protections for vulnerable communities.
La búsqueda de energías renovables y la creciente protesta contra los proyectos de desarrollo a gran escala han intensificado los conflictos socioambientales en América Latina. En este artículo propongo una perspectiva renovada sobre dichos conflictos, contraponiendo los intereses del desarrollo con los intereses tradicionalistas. Aunque el enfrentamiento entre promotores del desarrollo y comunidades o conservacionistas no es nuevo, sostengo que su creciente intensidad puede entenderse como un conflicto de clases de corte posmarxista, con coaliciones de actores que atraviesan de forma sistemática las divisiones tradicionales de clase, región, nacionalidad y sector público-privado. Describo las lógicas e intereses fundamentales de ambos grupos, las fuentes de su legitimidad, las narrativas que los sustentan y el desequilibrio de poder entre ellos. Posteriormente, analizo un estudio de caso sobre una inversión fallida de un parque eólico europeo en una comunidad rural del estado de Oaxaca, México. Este nuevo conflicto de clases es significativo tanto por los impactos que los grandes inversionistas generan en comunidades marginadas como por la creciente conciencia sobre los derechos y protecciones de las poblaciones vulnerables.
Aguilera KlinkFedericoAlcántaraVicent (eds.) 1994De la economía ambiental a la economía ecológica. Barcelona: ICARIA: FUHEM.
2.
Alonso SernaLourdes2022 “Land grabbing or value grabbing? Land rent and wind energy in the Isthmus of Tehuantepec, Oaxaca.” Competition & Change26 (3-4): 487–503.
3.
AndreucciDiegoGarcia-LamarcaMelissaWedekindJonahSwyngedouwErik2017 “‘Value grabbing’: A political ecology of rent.” Capitalism, Nature, Socialism28 (3): 28–47.
4.
ArselMuratHogenboomBarbaraPellegriniLorenzo2016 “The extractive imperative and the boom in environmental conflicts at the end of the progressive cycle in Latin America.” The Extractive Industries and Society3 (4): 877–879.
5.
AtkinsEd2019 “Disputing the ‘national interest’: The depoliticization and repoliticization of the Belo Monte dam, Brazil.” Water11 (1): 103–24.
6.
AuzJuan2022 “Human rights-based climate litigation: A Latin American cartography.” Journal of Human Rights and the Environment1: 114–36.
CostanzaJennifer N.2015 “Indigenous peoples’ right to prior consultation: Transforming human rights from the grassroots in Guatemala.” Journal of Human Rights14 (2): 260–285.
11.
DahletLol IanaSelimSamiya A.van PuttenIngrid2023 “A review of how we study coastal and marine conflicts: Is social science taking a broad enough view?” Maritime Studies22.
DoughertyMichael L.2013 “Complejizando los conflictos ambientales en el altiplano guatemalteco (Dossier).” Letras Verdes: Revista Latinoamericana de Estudios Socioambientales14: 160–84.
16.
DoughertyMichael L.2019 “How does development mean? Attitudes toward mining and the social meaning of development in Guatemala.” Latin American Perspectives46 (2): 161–181.
17.
DoughertyMichael L.2024 “Breaking ground: From extraction booms to mining bans in Latin America” [review of book by Rose J. Spalding]. Journal of Latin American Studies56 (2): 365–8.
18.
Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC)2018 “Access to information, participation, and justice in environmental matters in Latin America and the Caribbean: towards achievement of the 2030 agenda for sustainable development.” LC/TS.2017/83. Santiago: United Nations.
19.
FaberDaniel1992 “The ecological crisis of Latin America: A theoretical introduction.” Latin American Perspectives19 (1): 3–16.
20.
FoyerJeanKervranDavid Dumoulin2015 “The environmentalism of NGOs versus environmentalism of the poor? Mexico’s social environmentalism coalitions,” pp. 223–235 in AlmeidaPaulCorderoAllen (eds.), Handbook of Social Movements across Latin America. New York: Springer Press.
21.
García QuintanillaAlejandraReyes GarcíaCasandra2023 “El patrimonio biocultural, las selvas y el “monte” de los mayas peninsulares,” pp. 95–107 in RomeroEduardo MartínezGasparelloGiovannaPereraMiguel Ángel Díaz (eds.), Territorios mayas en el paso del tren: Riesgos previsibles y posturas independientes sobre el tren maya. Mexico City: Bajo Tierra Ediciones. Vol. I.
22.
GivensJennifer E.HuangXiaoruiJorgensonAndrew K.2019 “Ecologically unequal exchange: A theory of global environmental injustice.” Sociology Compass13 (5).
23.
GuardiaSara Beatriz2019 “El marxismo de José Carlos Mariátegui,” pp. 373–91 in GuardiaSara Beatriz (ed.), Simposio Internacional 7 Ensayos 90 años. Lima: Cátedra José Carlos Mariátegui.
HaslamPaul AlexanderTanimouneNasser Ary2016 “The determinants of social conflict in the Latin American mining sector: New evidence with quantitative data.” World Development78: 401–419.
26.
HornborgAlf1998 “Towards an ecological theory of unequal exchange: Articulating world system theory and ecological economics.” Ecological Economics25 (1): 127–136.
27.
HornborgAlfMartinez-AlierJoan2016 “Ecologically unequal exchange and ecological debt.” Journal of Political Ecology23 (1): 328–33.
28.
Inter-American Development Bank (IADB)2017 “Lessons from 4 decades of infrastructure project related conflicts in Latin America and the Caribbean.” Washington, D.C.: IDB.
29.
Inter-American Development Bank and World Justice Project2020 “Environmental governance indicators for Latin America and the Caribbean.” Washington D.C.: IDB.
30.
JorgensonAndrew K.ClarkBrett2009 “Ecologically unequal exchange in comparative perspective: A brief introduction.” International Journal of Comparative Sociology50 (3-4): 211–214.
31.
KueckerGlen David2007 “Fighting for the forests: Grassroots resistance to mining in Northern Ecuador.” Latin American Perspectives34 (2): 94–107.
32.
LaviteCannellaMueller-HoffClaudia2019 “Espacio de la sociedad civil en proyectos de energía renovable: Un estudio de caso de la comunidad de Unión Hidalgo en México.” Berlin: European Center for Constitutional and Human Rights. https://www.ecchr.eu/fileadmin/Publikationen/ECCHR_PP_WINDPARK_ES.pdf (accessed December 11, 2024).
LeyvaAlejandraVelascoAnaidCeramiAndreadel PozoEdmundoRomeroFelipeGarcíaGisselle2018 “Guía para el uso y monitoreo de los procesos de consulta a pueblos y comunidades en contextos de megaproyectos en México.” Mexico City: CEMDA & FUNDAR. http://fundar.org.mx/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/Guia_de_Consulta-web.pdf (accessed December 11, 2024).
35.
LópezJuan Antonio2022 “¿Por qué es importante la victoria de los comuneros de Unión Hidalgo contra abusos de parques eólicos?” Animal Político. September17.
MaletsOlga2017 “The state in private sustainability governance: Contestation, limited statehood, and forest certification in Russia,” pp. 105–26 in EsguerraAlejandroHelmerichNicoleRisseThomas (eds.), Sustainability Politics and Limited Statehood: Contesting New Modes of Governance. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
MariáteguiJosé Carlos2010 (1918) “7 ensayos de interpretación de la realidad peruana.” Lima: Biblioteca Virtual Omegalfa.
41.
MartínezNain2023 “Unpacking the global climate politics-to-local nexus: renewables, community struggles, and social impacts.” Current Sociology72 (4): 753–73.
42.
Martínez AlierJoanJusmetJordi Roca2015Economía ecológica y política ambiental. Mexico City: Fondo de Cultura Económica.
OuluMartin2016 “Core tenets of the theory of ecologically unequal exchange.” Journal of Political Ecology23 (1): 446–66.
47.
PedersenAlexandra2014 “Landscapes of resistance: Community opposition to Canadian mining operations in Guatemala.” Journal of Latin American Geography13 (1): 187–214.
48.
PellowDavid N.2006”Social inequalities and environmental conflict.” Horizontes Antropológicos12 (25): 15–29.
RiceJames2007 “Ecological unequal exchange: International trade and uneven utilization of environmental space in the world system.” Social Forces85 (3): 1369–92.
51.
RobinsonWilliam I.Sprague-SilgadoJeb2018 “Transnational capitalist class,” pp. 309–27 in JuergensmeyerMarkStegerManfred B.SassenSaskia, with FaesselVictor (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Global Studies. New York: Oxford University Press.
52.
Rodríguez GaravitoCésar A.Baquero DíazCarlos Andrés2020Conflictos socioambientales en América Latina: El derecho, los pueblos indígenas y la lucha contra el extractivismo y la crisis climática. Mexico City: Siglo Veintiuno Editores.
53.
Salvador SámanoJulio César2016 “Megaproyectos y territorialidad: Parque eólico Piedra Larga, Unión Hidalgo, Oaxaca. 2006-2015.” Masters thesis. Mexico City: Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana. https://repositorio.xoc.uam.mx/jspui/bitstream/123456789/449/1/192186.pdf (accessed December 11, 2024).
54.
ScheidelArnimBeneDaniela DelLiuaJuanNavasGrettelMingorríaSaraDemariaFedericoAvilaSofíaRoyaBrototiErtörIrmakTemperLeahMartínez-AlierJoan2020 “Environmental conflicts and defenders: A global overview.” Global Environmental Change63.
55.
ShadeLindsay2017 “Politics below the surface: A political ecology of mineral rights and land tenure struggles in Appalachia and the Andes.” University of Kentucky. Theses and Dissertations–Geography. https://uknowledge.uky.edu/geography_etds/50. (accessed December 11, 2024).
56.
SpaldingRose J.2023Breaking Ground: From Extraction Booms to Mining Bans in Latin America. New York: Oxford University Press.
57.
SvampaMaristellaVialeEnrique2014Maldesarrollo: La Argentina del extractivismo y el despojo. Buenos Aires: Katz Conocimiento.
58.
ThompsonEdward P.1966The Making of the English Working Class. New York: Vintage Books.
59.
United Nations Environment Programme2019Environmental Rule of Law: First Global Report. Nairobi: UN Environment.
60.
United Nations General Assembly2018 “Report of the Special Rapporteur on the Situation of Human Rights Defenders on his Mission to Mexico.” New York. A/HRC/37/51/Add.2.
UrkidiLeire2011 “The defence of community in the anti-mining movement of Guatemala.” Journal of Agrarian Change11 (4): 556–580.
63.
WalkerDavidJonesJohn PaulRobertsSusan M.FröhlingOliver R.2007 “When participation meets empowerment: The WWF and the politics of invitation in the Chimalapas, Mexico.” Annals of the Association of American Geographers97 (2): 423–44.
64.
WalterMarianaWagnerLucrecia2021 “Mining struggles in Argentina: The keys of a successful story of mobilisation.” The Extractive Industries and Society8 (4).
65.
WaylandJoshuaKuniholmMatthew2016 “Legacies of conflict and natural resource resistance in Guatemala.” The Extractive Industries and Society3 (2): 395–403.
66.
WorkerJesseDa SilvaLalanath2015 “Environmental democracy index, technical note.” Washington, D.C.: World Resources Institute.
