IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wpa/wuwpdc/0506003.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Wealth, Poverty and Sustainable Development

Author

Listed:
  • David Barkin

    (Universidad Autonoma Metropolitana, Xochimilco, Mexico)

Abstract

An analysis of the underlying causes of environment destruction debunks the idea that the poor are the principal cause of environmental degradation in present-day societies. The paper also identifies some of the major areas of economic theory and institutional biases in market economies that generate obstacles to the 'proper' functioning of markets. As a result, even the more advanced prescriptions of modern environmental economics are incapable of explaining the deepening of social and economic polarization and the worsening of the environmental conditions in which poor people must exist. The paper ends with a proposal for overcoming this growing crisis through local participation and action.

Suggested Citation

  • David Barkin, 2005. "Wealth, Poverty and Sustainable Development," Development and Comp Systems 0506003, University Library of Munich, Germany.
  • Handle: RePEc:wpa:wuwpdc:0506003
    Note: Type of Document - pdf; pages: 54
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://econwpa.ub.uni-muenchen.de/econ-wp/dev/papers/0506/0506003.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Patricia Allen & Carolyn Sachs, 1992. "The poverty of sustainability: An analysis of current positions," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 9(4), pages 29-35, September.
    2. James Boyce, 1994. "Inequality as a Cause of Environmental Degradation," Published Studies ps1, Political Economy Research Institute, University of Massachusetts at Amherst.
    3. Amin, Samir, 1992. "Can environmental problems be subject to economic calculations?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 20(4), pages 523-530, April.
    4. Boyce, James K., 1994. "Inequality as a cause of environmental degradation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 169-178, 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. Curtis, Fred, 2003. "Eco-localism and sustainability," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 83-102, August.
    2. Tim Wise & Eliza Waters, "undated". "Community Control in a Global Economy: Lessons from Mexico's Economic Integration Process," GDAE Working Papers 01-03, GDAE, Tufts University.
    3. David Barkin, 2003. "Alleviating Poverty Through Ecotourism: Promises and Reality in the Monarch Butterfly Reserve of Mexico," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 5(3), pages 371-382, September.
    4. Barkin, David, 1996. "Macro changes and micro analysis: methodological issues in ecological economics," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 197-200, December.
    5. Hudson-Rodd, Nancy & Nyunt, Myo, 2001. "Control Of Land And Life In Burma," Tenure Briefs 12817, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Land Tenure Center.
    6. Patrick Webb, 2002. "Cultivated Capital: Agriculture, Food Systems and Sustainable Development," Working Papers in Food Policy and Nutrition 15, Friedman School of Nutrition Science and Policy.

    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. Adaman, Fikret & Gökşen, Fatoş & Zenginobuz, Unal, 2003. "Political economy of citizens’ participation in environmental improvement: The case of Istanbul," MPRA Paper 375, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Mark Sommer & Kurt Kratena, 2016. "The Carbon Footprint of European Households and Income Distribution. WWWforEurope Working Paper No. 113," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 58787.
    3. Chao Zhang & Ruifa Hu, 2020. "Does Fertilizer Use Intensity Respond to the Urban-Rural Income Gap? Evidence from a Dynamic Panel-Data Analysis in China," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 12(1), pages 1-15, January.
    4. Karin Andrea Wigger & Dean A. Shepherd, 2020. "We’re All in the Same Boat: A Collective Model of Preserving and Accessing Nature-Based Opportunities," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 44(3), pages 587-617, May.
    5. Zepharovich, Elena & Ceddia, M. Graziano & Rist, Stephan, 2021. "Social multi-criteria evaluation of land-use scenarios in the Chaco Salteño: Complementing the three-pillar sustainability approach with environmental justice," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    6. Jeong Hwan Bae, 2018. "Impacts of Income Inequality on CO2 Emission under Different Climate Change Mitigation Policies," Korean Economic Review, Korean Economic Association, vol. 34, pages 187-211.
    7. Sirisha C. Naidu, 2005. "Heterogeneity and Common Pool Resources: Collective Management of Forests in Himachal Pradesh, India," Working Papers 2005-8, University of Massachusetts Amherst, Department of Resource Economics.
    8. Benjamin Michallet & Giuseppe Lucio Gaeta & François Facchini, 2015. "Greening Up or Not? The Determinants Political Parties’ Environmental Concern: An Empirical Analysis Based on European Data (1970-2008)," Working Papers 2015.25, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    9. Kemkes, Robin J., 2015. "The role of natural capital in sustaining livelihoods in remote mountainous regions: The case of Upper Svaneti, Republic of Georgia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 22-31.
    10. Vincent Anesi & Philippe De Donder, 2011. "Secondary issues and party politics: an application to environmental policy," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 36(3), pages 519-546, April.
    11. Simona-Roxana Ulman & Costica Mihai & Cristina Cautisanu, 2020. "Peculiarities of the Relation between Human and Environmental Wellbeing in Different Stages of National Development," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 12(19), pages 1-26, October.
    12. Dong, Xiao-Ying & Hao, Yu, 2018. "Would income inequality affect electricity consumption? Evidence from China," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 215-227.
    13. James Boyce, 2003. "Inequality and Environmental Protection," Working Papers wp52, Political Economy Research Institute, University of Massachusetts at Amherst.
    14. Bo Yang & Minhaj Ali & Shujahat Haider Hashmi & Mohsin Shabir, 2020. "Income Inequality and CO 2 Emissions in Developing Countries: The Moderating Role of Financial Instability," Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 12(17), pages 1-24, August.
    15. Jorgenson, Andrew & Schor, Juliet & Huang, Xiaorui, 2017. "Income Inequality and Carbon Emissions in the United States: A State-level Analysis, 1997–2012," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 40-48.
    16. Fateh Belaïd, Sabri Boubaker, Rajwane Kafrouni, 2020. "Carbon emissions, income inequality and environmental degradation: the case of Mediterranean countries," European Journal of Comparative Economics, Cattaneo University (LIUC), vol. 17(1), pages 73-102, June.
    17. Andrea Mantovani & Ornella Tarola & Cecilia Vergari, 2014. "Hedonic quality, social norms, and environmental campaigns," Working Papers 2014/36, Institut d'Economia de Barcelona (IEB).
    18. MacNeill Timothy & Vibert Amber, 2019. "Universal Basic Income and the Natural Environment: Theory and Policy," Basic Income Studies, De Gruyter, vol. 14(1), pages 1-15, June.
    19. Salvador del Saz, 2008. "Medio ambiente y desarrollo: una revisión conceptual," CIRIEC-España, revista de economía pública, social y cooperativa, CIRIEC-España, issue 61, pages 31-49, August.
    20. Boukary OUEDRAOGO & Sylvie FERRARI, 2012. "Incidence of forest income in reducing poverty and inequalities:\r\nEvidence from forest dependent households in managed forests’ areas in Burkina Faso," Cahiers du GREThA (2007-2019) 2012-28, Groupe de Recherche en Economie Théorique et Appliquée (GREThA).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    political ecology; sustainability; polarization; heterodox economics; development alternatives;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:wpa:wuwpdc:0506003. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: . General contact details of provider: https://econwpa.ub.uni-muenchen.de .

    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: EconWPA (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://econwpa.ub.uni-muenchen.de .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.