Paper short abstract:

Analysis of constitutional contradictions regarding the rights of nature and the Indigenous peoples and progressive development politics in Bolivia and Ecuador.

Paper long abstract:

In recent years, Ecuador and Bolivia have achieved pervasive worldwide attention for their progress in environmental concern and as plausible options to confront the climate crisis and develop alternatives to global capitalism. The new constitutions of Ecuador (2008) and Bolivia (2009) have been labeled the most progressive ones in the world considering the proper rights of nature/the environment. The ancient Indigenous concept of Living Well or Sumak Kawsay on human beings coexisting harmonically with each other and the environment is the fundamental framing of these innovative constitutions, which also embrace advanced recognition of ethnically defined rights. Notwithstanding, the same constitutions likewise include articles granting the State the right to exploit and commercialize natural resources, which conflict with the rights of nature and the Indigenous peoples. The discourses of the actors involved in these conflicts can be categorized as ecocentrism and environmental pragmatism respectively, or more fluid combinations of both stands. This article argues that the constitutional contradictions between extractive economic development politics and environmental and ethnic rights are central in recent social conflicts in Bolivia and Ecuador. The incorporation of Sumak Kawsay in the constitutions and developments plans likewise generates new perceptions and interpretations of welfare politics, the common good and the understandings of development. Similarly, the same contradictions and the way they are being handled constitute serious challenges for the State in the respective countries, in being perceived as emblematic alternatives to the world capitalist system and the climate crisis.