Abstract
The case to leave nearly 900 million barrels of oil underground in Ecuador's Amazonian Yasuní National Park demonstrates the significance of transnational networks in the institutionalisation of alternative norms for global environmental governance. Through complex local and global networks, the Yasuní Fund, governed with UNDP, has created a potential model of replication for other developing, megadiverse countries that are trapped in the petro-curse and yet seek solutions contributing towards sustainable development and social justice. What makes the Yasuní–ITT initiative unique is its call to protect the environment and the indigenous societies that live within it by paying for avoided carbon emissions. Such a plan unites global climate change goals for a post-Kyoto solution that involves the South with Ecuador's constitutional and normative base of living in harmony with nature, sumak kawsay in Quichua (el buen vivir in Spanish) or 'the good life’.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
REFERENCES
Abbott, F. (2009) Innovation and Technology Transfer to Address Climate Change: Lessons from the Global Debate on IP and Public Health (Geneva: ICTSD).
Abdel Latif, A. (2010) ‘Technology and Intellectual Property: A Post-Copenhagen Assessment’, Bridges Monthly, 14(1), February.
Anania, G. (2009) How Would a WTO Agreement on Bananas Affect Exporting and Importing Countries? (Geneva: ICTSD).
Anania, G. (2010) The Implications for Bananas of the Recent Trade Agreements between the EU and Andean and Central American Countries (Geneva: ICTSD).
Barton, J. (2007) IP and Access to Clean Energy Technologies in Developing Countries: An Analysis of Solar Photovoltaic, Biofuel and Wind Technologies (Geneva: ICTSD).
Cabrera Medaglia, J. (2010) Disclosure of Origin Requirement in Central America (Geneva: ICTSD).
Cannady, C. (2009) Access to Climate Change Technology by Developing Countries: A Practical Strategy (Geneva: ICTSD).
Correa, C.M. (2005) ‘Can the TRIPS Agreement Foster Technology Transfer to Developing Countries?’, in Maskus, K.E. and J.H Reichman (eds) International Public Goods and Transfer of Technology under a Globalized Intellectual Property Regime (Cambridge University Press), pp. 309-20.
Elliott, K.A. (2010) ‘Making Trade Preferences Work for the Poorest Countries’, CGD Brief, Center for Global Development (Washington).
Elobeid, A. (2009) How Would a Trade Deal on Sugar Affect Exporting and Importing Countries? (Geneva: ICTSD).
European Commission (2010) Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions: Analysis of Options to Move Beyond 20% Greenhouse Gas Emission Reductions and Assessing the Risk of Carbon Leakage, COM(2010) 265 final, Brussels, 26 May, p. 12.
Financial Times (2010) Brazil to Suspend Action in US Cotton Dispute, 18 June.
ICTSD (2010a) ‘Preference Erosion List Marks “New Era” in WTO Farm Talks’, Bridges Weekly, 14(1), 13 January.
ICTSD (2010b) ‘WTO Environmental Goods Talks Focus on Climate’, Bridges Weekly, 14(25), 7 July.
IPCC (2000) ‘Methodological and Technological Issues in Technology Transfer’, http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/sres/tectran/index.php?idp=0.
Jales, M. (2010) How Would a Trade Deal on Cotton Affect Exporting and Importing Countries? (Geneva: ICTSD).
Jha, V. (2009) Climate Change, Trade and Production of Renewable Energy Supply Goods: The Need to Level the Playing Field (Geneva: ICTSD).
Laborde, D. (2008) Looking for a Meaningful Duty-Free Quota-Free Market Access Initiative in the Doha Development Agenda (Geneva: ICTSD).
Lee, B., I. Iliev and F. Preston (2009) Who Owns Our Low-Carbon Future? Intellectual Property and Energy Technologies (London: Chatham House).
Mallet, A., D. Ockwell, P. Pal, A. Kumar, Y.P. Abbi, R. Haum, G. MacKerron, J. Watson and G. Sethi (2009) UK-India Collaborative Study on the Transfer of Low-Carbon Technology, Phase II, Final Report, University of Sussex (SPRU - Science and Technology Policy Research), Institute of Development Studies and Energy and Resources Institute.
OECD (2006) ‘Environmental and Energy Products: The Benefits of Liberalising Trade’, Trade Policy Studies (Paris: OECD).
Ruiz, M. (2010) Disclosure of Origin and Legal Provenance: The Experience and Implementation Process in South America (Geneva: ICTSD).
South Centre and Center for International Environmental Law (2008) ‘The Technology Transfer Debate in the UNFCCC: Politics, Patents, and Confusion’, Intellectual Property Quarterly Update, Fourth Quarter.
Sugathan, M. (2010) ‘WTO Negotiations on Environmental Goods: Ensuring a Meaningful Outcome for Developing Countries’, International Trade Forum, Issue 1.
UNEP, EPO and ICTSD (2010) Patents and Clean Energy: Bridging the Gap between Evidence and Policy, Final Report, UNEP, EPO and ICTSD.
Velez, E. (2010) Brazil’s Practical Experience with Access and Benefit Sharing and the Protection of Traditional Knowledge (Geneva: ICTSD).
Vossenaar, R. (2010) Climate-related Single-use Environmental Goods (Geneva: ICTSD).
WTO (2008) Revised Draft Modalities for Agriculture, TN/AG/W/4/Rev.4, 6 December 2008 (Geneva: WTO).
WTO (2009) Geneva Agreement on Trade in Bananas, WT/L/784, 15 December 2009 (Geneva: WTO).
WTO (2010a) First Quarter of 2010 Sees Trade Value Rise by About 25%, Press Release, 2 June.
WTO (2010b) Lamy Sees ‘New Dynamic’ Emerging in Negotiations, Press Release, 27 July.
WTO (2010c) Trade Value Still Up by About 25% in the First Half of 2010, Press Release, 1 September.
WTO (2010d) Trade Likely to Grow by 13.5% in 2010, Press Release, 20 September.
Wu, D. (2010) ‘Powering the Green Leap Forward: China’s Wind Energy Sector’, UNCTAD Trade and Environment Review 2009-10 (New York and Geneva: United Nations).
Yoke Ling, C. (2010) Access and Benefit-sharing Protocol Negotiations Resume in September, TWN Info Service on Intellectual Property Issues, 9 August.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2011 Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Martin, P.L. (2011). Pay To Preserve: The Global Politics of Ecuador’s Yasuní–Itt Proposal. In: Carbonnier, G. (eds) International Development Policy: Energy and Development. International Development Policy. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-230-31401-6_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-230-31401-6_7
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-0-230-28248-3
Online ISBN: 978-0-230-31401-6
eBook Packages: Palgrave Political & Intern. Studies CollectionPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)