IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/wdevel/v103y2018icp188-198.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The building of mining discourses and the politics of scale in Ecuador

Author

Listed:
  • Vela-Almeida, Diana
  • Kolinjivadi, Vijay
  • Kosoy, Nicolas

Abstract

In questioning the multiple positions of the stakeholders involved in the mining debate in Ecuador, this paper offers an analytical framework to uncover the ‘politics of scale’ of mining discourses. This is done by understanding how discourses are simultaneously structured, disassembled and restructured according to power relations among stakeholders involved in the mining debate. Q methodology is used as a tool to assess the subjective perceptions of key stakeholders regarding mining projects in the country. Results highlight four distinct discourses: (1) responsible extractivism; (2) local self-determination; (3) national economic development; and (4) local economic development. Discursive analyses suggest that mining positions are constructed to contest power in: decision-making, the enactment of values and rights, and the uneven distribution of economic benefits and socio-environmental burdens associated with mining. The analysis also offers insights for enhancing conflict-resolution and depicting the political complexity associated with structural power inequalities among actors implicated in mining conflicts in the country.

Suggested Citation

  • Vela-Almeida, Diana & Kolinjivadi, Vijay & Kosoy, Nicolas, 2018. "The building of mining discourses and the politics of scale in Ecuador," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 188-198.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:wdevel:v:103:y:2018:i:c:p:188-198
    DOI: 10.1016/j.worlddev.2017.10.025
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305750X17303492
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.worlddev.2017.10.025?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. James McCarthy, 2005. "Devolution in the Woods: Community Forestry as Hybrid Neoliberalism," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 37(6), pages 995-1014, June.
    2. Anthony Bebbington & Jeffrey Bury & Denise Humphreys Bebbington & Jeannet Lingan & Juan Pablo Muñoz & Martin Scurrah, 2008. "Mining and social movements: struggles over Mining and social movements: struggles over livelihood and rural territorial development in the Andes," Global Development Institute Working Paper Series 3308, GDI, The University of Manchester.
    3. W. Neil Adger & Tor A. Benjaminsen & Katrina Brown & Hanne Svarstad, 2001. "Advancing a Political Ecology of Global Environmental Discourses," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 32(4), pages 681-715, September.
    4. Anthony Bebbington & Leonith Hinojosa & Denise Humphreys Bebbington & Maria Luisa Burneo & Ximena Warnaars, 2008. "Contention and Ambiguity: Mining and the Possibilities of Development," Global Development Institute Working Paper Series 5708, GDI, The University of Manchester.
    5. Karolien van Teijlingen & Barbara Hogenboom, 2016. "Debating Alternative Development at the Mining Frontier: Buen Vivir and the Conflict around El Mirador Mine in Ecuador," Journal of Developing Societies, , vol. 32(4), pages 382-420, December.
    6. Joan Martínez Alier, 2001. "Environmental Conflicts, Environmental Justice, and Valuation," UHE Working papers 2001_03, Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Departament d'Economia i Història Econòmica, Unitat d'Història Econòmica.
    7. Agarwal, Bina, 2001. "Participatory Exclusions, Community Forestry, and Gender: An Analysis for South Asia and a Conceptual Framework," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 29(10), pages 1623-1648, October.
    8. Urkidi, Leire, 2010. "A glocal environmental movement against gold mining: Pascua-Lama in Chile," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(2), pages 219-227, December.
    9. Bebbington, Anthony & Humphreys Bebbington, Denise & Bury, Jeffrey & Lingan, Jeannet & Muñoz, Juan Pablo & Scurrah, Martin, 2008. "Mining and Social Movements: Struggles Over Livelihood and Rural Territorial Development in the Andes," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 36(12), pages 2888-2905, December.
    10. Dan Durning, 1999. "The transition from traditional to postpositivist policy analysis: A role for Q-methodology," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 18(3), pages 389-410.
    11. Martinez-Alier, Joan & Kallis, Giorgos & Veuthey, Sandra & Walter, Mariana & Temper, Leah, 2010. "Social Metabolism, Ecological Distribution Conflicts, and Valuation Languages," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(2), pages 153-158, December.
    12. Bebbington, Anthony, 1999. "Capitals and Capabilities: A Framework for Analyzing Peasant Viability, Rural Livelihoods and Poverty," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 27(12), pages 2021-2044, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Stefanie Streit & Michael Tost & Katharina Gugerell, 2023. "Perspectives on Closure and Revitalisation of Extraction Sites and Sustainability: A Q-Methodology Study," Resources, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-17, February.
    2. Coral, Claudia & Bokelmann, Wolfgang & Bonatti, Michelle & Carcamo, Robert & Sieber, Stefan, 2021. "Understanding institutional change mechanisms for land use: Lessons from Ecuador’s history," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    3. Lucía Toledo & Gloria Salmoral & Oswaldo Viteri-Salazar, 2023. "Rethinking Agricultural Policy in Ecuador (1960–2020): Analysis Based on the Water–Energy–Food Security Nexus," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(17), pages 1-22, August.
    4. Sneegas, Gretchen & Beckner, Sydney & Brannstrom, Christian & Jepson, Wendy & Lee, Kyungsun & Seghezzo, Lucas, 2021. "Using Q-methodology in environmental sustainability research: A bibliometric analysis and systematic review," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).
    5. Joseph Horrocks-Taylor, 2018. "Dirty Water, Muddied Politics: Hybridisation of Local and National Opposition to Kumtor Mine, Kyrgyzstan," Land, MDPI, vol. 7(2), pages 1-18, April.
    6. Rodrigo Caimanque, 2023. "The life and death of the ‘Baron mall’: The shifting politics of urban regeneration in Valparaiso," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 41(5), pages 884-902, August.
    7. Goodwin, Geoff, 2019. "The problem and promise of coproduction: Politics, history, and autonomy," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 501-513.
    8. Barandiarán, Javiera, 2019. "Lithium and development imaginaries in Chile, Argentina and Bolivia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 381-391.
    9. Kashwan, Prakash & MacLean, Lauren M. & García-López, Gustavo A., 2019. "Rethinking power and institutions in the shadows of neoliberalism," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 133-146.
    10. Paúl Cisneros, 2020. "A Comparative Study of the Introduction of Restrictions to Large‐Scale Mining in Four Latin American Countries," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 37(5), pages 687-712, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Cem Iskender Aydin & Begum Ozkaynak & Beatriz Rodríguez-Labajos & Taylan Yenilmez, 2017. "Network effects in environmental justice struggles: An investigation of conflicts between mining companies and civil society organizations from a network perspective," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(7), pages 1-20, July.
    2. Joseph Horrocks-Taylor, 2018. "Dirty Water, Muddied Politics: Hybridisation of Local and National Opposition to Kumtor Mine, Kyrgyzstan," Land, MDPI, vol. 7(2), pages 1-18, April.
    3. Dueholm Rasch, Elisabet, 2019. "Subsoil mediations: Strategies of contention at the grassroots and the extraction of subsoil resources," GLOCON Working Paper Series 11, Freie Universität Berlin, Junior Research Group "Global Change – Local Conflicts?" (GLOCON).
    4. Karolien van Teijlingen & Barbara Hogenboom, 2016. "Debating Alternative Development at the Mining Frontier: Buen Vivir and the Conflict around El Mirador Mine in Ecuador," Journal of Developing Societies, , vol. 32(4), pages 382-420, December.
    5. Haslam, Paul Alexander, 2021. "The micro-politics of corporate responsibility: How companies shape protest in communities affected by mining," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 139(C).
    6. Paúl Cisneros, 2020. "A Comparative Study of the Introduction of Restrictions to Large‐Scale Mining in Four Latin American Countries," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 37(5), pages 687-712, September.
    7. Costanza, Jennifer Noel, 2016. "Mining Conflict and the Politics of Obtaining a Social License: Insight from Guatemala," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 97-113.
    8. García-López, Gustavo A. & Arizpe, Nancy, 2010. "Participatory processes in the soy conflicts in Paraguay and Argentina," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(2), pages 196-206, December.
    9. Nathaly M. Rivera, 2020. "Is Mining an Environmental Disamenity? Evidence from Resource Extraction Site Openings," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 75(3), pages 485-528, March.
    10. Michael L. Dougherty, 2013. "Work, mobility and livelihoods in a changing rural Latin America," Chapters, in: Gary Paul Green (ed.), Handbook of Rural Development, chapter 16, pages i-ii, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    11. Abdul–Wadood Moomen & Ashraf Dewan, 2017. "Probing the Perspectives of Stakeholder Engagement and Resistance Against Large‐Scale Surface Mining in Developing Countries," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(2), pages 85-95, March.
    12. Hinojosa, Leonith & Mzoughi, Naoufel & Napoléone, Claude & Guerrero Villegas, Wilma, 2019. "Does higher place difficulty predict increased attachment? The moderating role of identity," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 1-1.
    13. AvcI, Duygu & Adaman, Fikret & Özkaynak, Begüm, 2010. "Valuation languages in environmental conflicts: How stakeholders oppose or support gold mining at Mount Ida, Turkey," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(2), pages 228-238, December.
    14. Schaffartzik, Anke & Mayer, Andreas & Eisenmenger, Nina & Krausmann, Fridolin, 2016. "Global patterns of metal extractivism, 1950–2010: Providing the bones for the industrial society's skeleton," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 101-110.
    15. Haslam, Paul Alexander & Ary Tanimoune, Nasser, 2016. "The Determinants of Social Conflict in the Latin American Mining Sector: New Evidence with Quantitative Data," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 401-419.
    16. Arango-Aramburo, Santiago & Jaramillo, Patricia & Olaya, Yris & Smith, Ricardo & Restrepo, Oscar J. & Saldarriaga-Isaza, Adrián & Arias-Gaviria, Jessica & Parra, Juan F. & Larsen, Erik R. & Gomez-Rios, 2017. "Simulating mining policies in developing countries: The case of Colombia," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 99-113.
    17. Lu, Jixia & Lora-Wainwright, Anna, 2014. "Historicizing Sustainable Livelihoods: A Pathways Approach to Lead Mining in Rural Central China," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 189-200.
    18. Gary Paul Green (ed.), 2013. "Handbook of Rural Development," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 14970.
    19. Spiegel, Samuel J., 2012. "Governance Institutions, Resource Rights Regimes, and the Informal Mining Sector: Regulatory Complexities in Indonesia," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 189-205.
    20. Matthew Himley, 2014. "Monitoring the Impacts of Extraction: Science and Participation in the Governance of Mining in Peru," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 46(5), pages 1069-1087, May.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:wdevel:v:103:y:2018:i:c:p:188-198. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/worlddev .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.