A shift from "the world was made for humans to exploit" to ...

[the_future_modernes]

The law of Mother Earth: Behind Bolivia's Historic Bill

Indigenous and campesino (small-scale farmer) movements in the Andean nation of Bolivia are on the verge of pushing through one of the most radical environmental bills in global history. The "Mother Earth" law under debate in Bolivia's legislature will almost certainly be approved, as it has already been agreed to by the majority governing party, Movimiento Al Socialismo (MAS).

The law draws deeply on indigenous concepts that view nature as a sacred home, the Pachamama (Mother Earth) on which we intimately depend. As the law states, “Mother Earth is a living dynamic system made up of the undivided community of all living beings, who are all interconnected, interdependent and complementary, sharing a common destiny.”

The law would give nature legal rights, specifically the rights to life, regeneration, biodiversity, water, clean air, balance, and restoration.

The law would give nature legal rights, specifically the rights to life and regeneration, biodiversity, water, clean air, balance, and restoration. Bolivia's law mandates a fundamental ecological reorientation of Bolivia's economy and society, requiring all existing and future laws to adapt to the Mother Earth law and accept the ecological limits set by nature. It calls for public policy to be guided by Sumaj Kawsay (an indigenous concept meaning “living well,” or living in harmony with nature and people), rather than the current focus on producing more goods and stimulating consumption.

In practical terms, the law requires the government to transition from non-renewable to renewable energy; to develop new economic indicators that will assess the ecological impact of all economic activity; to carry out ecological audits of all private and state companies; to regulate and reduce greenhouse gas emissions; to develop policies of food and renewable energy sovereignty; to research and invest resources in energy efficiency, ecological practices, and organic agriculture; and to require all companies and individuals to be accountable for environmental contamination with a duty to restore damaged environments.

MORE

Corporate Control? Not in These Communities

( Read more... )

What’s So Special About Humans?

( Read more... )

Race poverty and the environment

[the_future_modernes]

Preserving the Future: Indigenous Women in the U.S. and Canada are Taking on Big Oil — and Winning

As executive director of Resisting Environmental Destruction On Indigenous Lands (REDOIL), [Faith] Gemmill is part of a growing network of indigenous women organizing against oil extraction on their lands, both in the U.S. and Canada. In recent years she has focused on halting Shell Oil’s plans to develop offshore drilling in the Chukchi Sea, which borders Alaska’s northwestern coast. Shell leased the area from the U.S. government in 2008 for $2.7 billion, but Gemmill has repeatedly frustrated their attempts to begin exploration. Last year, REDOIL won a lawsuit against Shell, effectively halting production until more studies are completed on the potential environmental impacts of offshore drilling.

The oil industry wields incredible power in communities where exploration is taking place, often dividing residents by offering them economic opportunities—thus complicating activism against the destructive side of the industry’s activities.

“The industry comes into these communities when people are in high school and starts paying men huge amounts of money just to go to trainings—to get them hooked,” says Kandi Mossett, an organizer with the Indigenous Environmental Network. “It causes tension in the community, because while they’re destroying our water supply, they’re also providing jobs.”

While men have jobs in the industry, women have taken on the task of leading the activist fight. “My guess is that 98 percent of the leadership in the activist communities we work with are women,” Mossett says. “It’s not to say that men aren’t worried, but typically they will be the ones working in the industry, on the oil rigs. …I think women recognize that there is an inherent need to do something, because our children are sick and our future is in trouble.”

MORE

The case against plastic

[the_future_modernes]

Van Jones: The economic injustice of plastic

http://www.ted.com Van Jones lays out a case against plastic pollution from the perspective of social justice. Because plastic trash, he shows us, hits poor people and poor countries "first and worst," with consequences we all share no matter where we live and what we earn. At TEDxGPGP, he offers a few powerful ideas to help us reclaim our throwaway planet.

Intersectionality

[the_future_modernes]

Majora Carter: 3 stories of local eco-entrepreneurship

Biofuels targets are 'unethical', says Nuffield report

[spiralsheep]

Source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-13056862 by Roger Harrabin

Biofuels targets are 'unethical', says Nuffield report

EU biofuels targets are unethical, according to a report by the Nuffield Council on Bioethics. Its authors recommend the targets should be lifted temporarily until new safeguards are put in place for biofuels grown in Europe or imported. But they stop short of calling for a complete halt to biofuels, which some environmentalists want. And they hold out the hope that new technologies may be able to develop biofuels from cellulose. Crucially, they hope this could be done in a way that does not damage the environment or compete with food crops. However, they acknowledge that progress towards these new biofuels is too slow, and that the next-generation fuels available are too expensive. They want governments to do more to encourage biofuels that use less land, fertiliser and pesticide.

The Council is an independent body that was set up 20 years ago to ponder ethical issues raised by developments in biology and medicine. It has been studying biofuels for 18 months - specifically relating to the EU Renewable Energy Directive target that biofuels should account for 10% of transport fuel by 2020, a much-criticised mandate originally designed as part of Europe's strategy to combat climate change.

Based on what it says is a set of ethical values which will be widely shared, the report says biofuels should:

* not be at the expense of human rights;
* be environmentally sustainable;
* contribute to a reduction of greenhouse gases (some currently increase greenhouse gases);
* adhere to fair trade principles;
* have costs and benefits that can be distributed in an equitable way.

These principles would be backed by a mandatory - and strictly enforced - EU certification scheme, a little like the Fairtrade scheme.

( Full text of article for archiving purposes. )