The Dilemma Between Economic Growth and Environmental Preservation in the 2019 Amazon Deforestation

(1)

The Dilemma Between Economic

Growth and Environmental Preservation

in the 2019 Amazon Deforestation

An IPE Constructivist Analysis

Author: Francesca Varrese

Student number: S3585743

e-mail: francesca.varrese@outlook.com

Date of thesis completion: May 2020

First Thesis Supervisor: Prof. Dr. H.W. Hoen

(2)

1

DECLARATION BY THE CANDIDATE

I hereby declare that this thesis, “The Dilemma Between Economic Growth and Environmental

Preservation in the 2019 Amazon Deforestation”, is my own work and by my own effort and that it has not been accepted anywhere else for the award of any other degree or diploma. Where sources of information have been used, they have been acknowledged.

Name: Francesca Varrese Date: 14/05/2020

Signature:

ABSTRACT

The thesis is centred around the following research question: “How do the meanings expressed during the 2019 deforestation of the Amazon rainforest provide new insights on the debate among the right countries have to achieve development and the necessity to preserve the environment?”. In order to provide an answer an IPE Constructivist analysis is performed on the relevant meanings, thus the ideas and cognitions, found in the case study in order to uncover them, and foster a better understanding of their values and implications in the case study and in the field of International Relations. The academic dilemma has been selected because of the lack of international consensus and cooperation found in its regards and the importance of the two issues for the wellbeing of international relations, especially among industrialised and developing countries. The case study, which involves the international and domestic discussion sparked by the high number of fires in the Amazon rainforest, has been chosen because in it the contrast between economic and environmental interests has shown to be particularly profound. In order to perform the analysis, the academic dilemma is first explained, and then a codification is performed, through the use of the software Atlas.ti, in order to create one group of codes, differentiating the levels of interest, and two groups of meanings, each representing one of the two sides involved in the dilemma: “Right to Development” and “Preservation of the Environment”, which are further specified in their nuances. Afterwards, the case study is coded through the software, associating relevant quotations (expressed by the actors concerned) with the meaning they embodied. The result showed that the main meanings involved in the international arena were those of “Importance for All Individuals Globally”, held by Western heads of states and green protesters, and “Resentment towards Developed Countries”, embodied by the Brazilian government; while in the national scene the main cognitions corresponded to “Condemnation of Environmental Degradation”, held by Brazilian environmentalist and former politicians, and “Prioritization of Economic Interests”, embodied by the government and Amazon workers. Moreover, on the one hand, for developing countries it appears that the objective of achieving better economic and social standards overcomes any other goal, and that the frustration towards developed countries is still present and influential. On the other hand, developed countries are the main advocates for ecological preservation, since they can have a longer-term perspective and it is in their best interest to contain climate change due to its transboundary consequences. The findings show the contrast among the two sides to be present and influential both locally and internationally, with different nuances in the two contexts. Through the Constructivist lens, these meanings have been revealed, and with them their importance and effect on international discussions, thus this thesis wants to foster their acknowledgment in the conviction that, if the variety of interests and needs are considered in the international arena, the possibility to foster international cooperation and find a reasonable compromise among the parts, the economic and environmental issues can be alleviated successfully.

(3)

2

1. INTRODUCTION

In the world, many different actors live, act and decide every day, and no matter the situation they encounter, each has a particular perspective and reaction dictated by the ideas and values she holds. Each subject in the international arena, e.g. individual, country, institution, is inevitably affected by hers or his past experiences, interests and beliefs. The meaning, an actor endows a situation or a discourse with, is extremely relevant, because it indicates the way she or he reasons the world, problems, and the dynamics of international relations and politics. Therefore, it is important to uncover and understand the meanings held by the international subjects in order to reason and solve global issues.

In this particular historical period, the main issue affecting the present and the future of the world is environmental degradation, and, even though it is widely acknowledged, there are different understandings of the gravity of climate change, which coexist, leading to distinct, and sometimes contrasting, environmental discourses and practices. Another factor affecting how the ecological issues is reasoned lays in the economic status of a country, which includes its welfare, its level of development, and its growth rate. In the world there are great disparities in terms of wealth, which lead to different ideas on if and how to approach climate change. The most notable difference can be found among industrialised countries and developing ones. The first advocate for the preservation of the environment and the application of the sustainable development model and practices; the second are not willing to slow down their growth without financial and technological assistances, since their economic development has allowed them to improve their citizens’ welfare and increase their international political leverage. These two perspectives are present and affect the proceeding of the international discussions on climate change and development, fuelling a debate, that involves countries, researchers, institutions, organizations, and individuals. Moreover, it has to be noted that international cooperation has not been successful in delivering effective and clear policies regarding the right to pursue economic growth and the preservation of the environment, because the consensus among the actors is hindered by the different meanings they hold and the difficulties in compromising.

During the summer of 2019, the Brazilian share of the Amazon rainforest suffered an unusually high number of fires, mainly provoked for economic purposes, e.g. farming, building, mining, thus supported by a belief in the prioritization of the country’s development over the preservation of the jungle. The event was characterized by discussions and arguments in the international and Brazilian scene, reflecting the debate among the necessity to preserve the environment and the right to development. Being a straightforward example of the contrast in real life and involving discussion on both the international and local levels, it has been chosen as the case study of this thesis. Since it is felt that the solution of the debate lays in achieving a prolific cooperation among international actors on both development and environment, the relevant meanings held in the case study are uncovered and evaluated in the thesis’s analysis, placing them in the political and academic debate, in order to show their connections and understand the main points of contrast not only in the context of the Amazon deforestation, but of International Relations in general. The research question is, then, “How do the meanings expressed during the 2019 deforestation of the Amazon rainforest provide new insights on the debate among

(5)

4 the right countries have to achieve development and the necessity to preserve the environment?”. In order to provide an answer to the research question, the thesis will perform a Constructivist analysis of the case study, divided in two steps: one uncovering and exposing the relevant meanings, and one evaluating and connecting them with the debate aforementioned. In the specific, International Political Economy Constructivism has been chosen, since the issues discussed are heavily influenced by the international economic system, which, therefore, needs to be deconstructed and understood in the way it has been reasoned until now.

The outline of the thesis is as follows. First of all, the foundation of the research is presented, thus on the one hand the literature review, which provides the inspiration and justification of the research, and on the other the theoretical framework and methodology, which explores the ties of the thesis with the field of International Political Economy, the choice of performing a Constructivist analysis on the Brazilian case study, the steps of the analysis and the sources. Afterwards, the specifics of the right to development and preservation of the environment are provided, including overviews of the developmental and environmental diplomacy, followed by a presentation of their conflicting relation. Then, the case study is presented, together with the context and the facts related with the deforestation of the Amazon rainforest. The Constructivist analysis is performed in the second to last chapter, where the meanings of the case study are thoroughly examined and assessed. Finally, the conclusion provides a brief summary of the research, some considerations on the topics discussed and on the value of Constructivism, followed by a call for the academia and policy makers, in the hope that a clearer picture of the various ideas and perspectives present in the current world will foster the elaboration of instruments and policies that can overcome the lack of cooperation still present in the international arena.

(6)

5

2. FOUNDATION OF THE RESEARCH

The foundation of the research is discussed in this chapter as follows. The literature review delineates the academic context of the research, its inspiration, and the justification of its existence. The theoretical framework and the methodology provide the structure of the paper, thus the presentation of the supporting theory and the way in which the analysis has been conducted.

2.1 LITERATURE REVIEW

Two of the most relevant issues in the contemporary era are world economic inequality and climate change. The relation of the two is the foundation of the thesis, thus the existing academic research is presented in this section through a review of the environmental and developmental literature and the related arguments present within the field of International Political Economy (IPE). Finally, the inspirations and justifications for the existence of the thesis are provided.

The preservation of the environment and the negative consequences of its negligence are not unfamiliar topics to the academia, where the interest in the matter has been growing in the past decades. Since 1972, date that marks the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment in Stockholm, more and more international actors, i.e. policy makers and researchers, have realized the gravity of the climatic crisis; an awareness that has led to the inclusion of environmental concerns in their agenda, nationally and internationally (Corry & Stevenson, 2017, p.3). In fact, as stated by Corry and Stevenson (2017), the ecological issue cannot be restricted to the local level, rather it is tightly connected with the dynamics and development of international relations, since humanity lives in a “planetary singularity” (p.1). This condition entails that a variety of different societies share and inhabit one place, the Earth, where its fundamental problems cannot be circumscribed in one area or country, rather they overcome borders and can potentially affect every single person. The presence of various actors occupying the same space is reflected in the existence of different perspectives on climate change, and how to solve it, ideas that coexist, while not being equally acknowledged in the international arena (Corry & Stevenson, 2017, p.1). As a matter of fact, one of the main issues in tackling environmental problems is the lack of coordination and cooperation among international actors, which is counterproductive if the objective is that of producing realistic and practical solutions, that do not adversely affect some groups more than others.

In order to understand how to enforce a more effective coordination among international actors, academic research is a great tool, because it allows a thorough analysis and understanding of the issue, leading to more clarity on how to foster it. Various research on the topic of environmental coordination have been produced in the past, leading to important realizations. Falkner (2010) underlines the importance and benefit of creating institutional solutions, which he finds more effective when the requests of the majority, if not all, of the international actors has to be satisfied, since coercion has proven not to be persuasive (p.256). In fact, the problem in elaborating and enforcing effective tools to contain climate change is more institutional than

(7)

6 technical, since the instruments needed to bring about an improvement exist, but the lack of concertation hinders their implementation (Dove, 1994, p.1064). Nonetheless, a major impediment to the feasibility of an effective coordination lays in the existing differences among countries, in particular the dichotomy between developing countries and industrialised ones, which diversify in terms of wealth, interests, needs and capacities (Falkner, 2010, p.257). The global economy, with its dynamics and characteristics, affects deeply the international arena and the single countries, influencing their priorities and their possibilities, thus it is a factor that cannot be disregarded when delivering concerted attempts for the containment of climate change. The economic differences among countries include colluding ideas and stances in regard to the environment and its preservation, and they lead to discrepancies in the discourses and the researches performed at national levels, which are reflected in the international arena, shaping how the related debate and international legislation develop (Rajamani, 2006, pp.54-88). As Rajamani (2006) writes in his book: “the dissonance in international environmental dialogue is translated into differentiation in international environmental treaties”, which has a consequential effect on the development narrative as well (p.88). The actual evolution of the two discourses is further analysed in chapter 3. Nonetheless, it has to be noted that these fundamental discrepancies have been extensively discussed in the academia, especially the difficulties in reaching agreement. Moreover, the particular relationship that connects the economy with the environment, especially in the context of developing countries, has led to the thriving of different ideas and opinions in the field of International Political Economy.

Two major approaches can be found within IPE, which have been pursued by researchers and policy makers, and that fundamentally contrast in how the current economic system is perceived, while differing in their environmental focus. The first one is the Neoliberal current, in which the world economy is understood through the lens of the trade liberalisation model, considered as the most compatible with sustainable practices of growth, that, when implemented, would attain both the preservation of the environment and the advance of the local economy, plus the reduction of poverty, a noticeable contributor to ecological degradation (Williams, 1996, pp.56-57). In other words, the Neoliberals believe that the model they support is the most efficient and functional, for both industrialised and developing countries, since, if applied correctly, it would provide solutions for the issues and interests of both worlds. The questions related to historical responsibilities and costs in adapting to new technology are not discussed in depth by this current. A different opinion is expressed by the more radical approaches within International Political Economy, which support a more critic position, with a focus on the model of growth implemented by developing countries, considered to be one of the main fuels of ecological distress and the direct result of the capitalist model promoted by the Western world since the dawn of industrialisation (Williams, 1996, pp.57-59). Therefore, the conclusion reached by this current is that the contemporary economic structure is not adapt to a sustainable model of development, since it is unfeasible to its actualization. Moreover, some academics have argued that the ecological interest showed by industrialised countries is actually a new form of colonialism, an “environmental colonialism”, that imposes developing countries to slow down their growth or invest in costly technology for the sake of the environment, while the real objective is to maintain the global economic gap (Brookfield, 1992, pp.93-96). This specific

(8)

7 argument focuses on the past exploitation and current conditions of developing countries, finding a strong correlation among the two and individuating in the Western world the source of the problems. This point of view, that perceives the existence of a “North-South” dichotomy, is recurrent and it leads to more specific debates: who is responsible for climate change, who fosters the maintenance of the economic gap, who should finance sustainable development, who can decide on the use of natural resources, and how can developing countries realistically fulfil their right to develop without worsening the climatic crisis (Boyte, 2010; Dove, 1994; Du Pisani, 2006; Fuentes, 2004; Gillard et al., 2017; Matsui, 2004; Rajamani, 2006).

The economic and the environmental spheres are deeply interconnected, they substantially influence each other, nonetheless their relation is very complicated, especially in the current globalized world, therefore it is fundamental that the two are analysed together (Newell & Lane, 2017, pp.143-144). This context rises the importance of analysing how these two spheres, and their interrelation, are perceived by policy makers, in order to individuate and fully understand why an effective coordination among international actors appears to be an uneasy task to be pursued and fulfilled. The current state of international affairs and the existing differences on how development and environmental preservation are reasoned, provide the inspiration and justification for the existence of this research. This paper wants to analyse the meanings and cognitions related to the ecological protection and the pursue of economic growth, when both are part of the same discourse. The juxtaposition of the two in developing countries has been specifically selected, of all the debates pertained to these two objectives, because it is believed to be among the most urgent, due to the violence of the climatic crisis in those regions and their strive to develop and improve their economic status. Moreover, it wants to provide meaning to the positions of the actors involved, in a real life context, in order to reveal the ideas and feelings that hinder the elaboration of clear and practical solutions. Research, discuss and understand why the two contrast and what are the obstacle to a fulfilling cooperation is fundamental for the thriving of a strong international community in a healthy world.

2.2 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK & METHODOLOGY

The question aimed to be answered in this research is: How do the meanings expressed during the 2019 deforestation of the Amazon rainforest provide new insights on the debate among the right countries have to achieve development and the necessity to preserve the environment? In order to provide an answer to the research question, the thesis performs a Constructivist analysis of the discourses and reactions, at the international and Brazilian level, related to the 2019 fires in the Amazon rainforest. The objective of the analysis is, firstly, to uncover and provide meaning to the actions and standpoints analysed, and, secondly, to connect them with the aforementioned debate.

In this section, the backbone of the thesis is presented, thus the theoretical framework and the methodology. First of all, the specific choice of the case study is contextualised, explaining its importance and its value for the topic selected. The inclusion of the thesis within the field of International Political Economy is clarified,

(9)

8 followed by a thorough elucidation of Constructivist Theory. The latter is the theory selected to be the guiding tool for this paper, thus a specification of its role in the analysis, its adaptability to the topic, and the innovativeness of its use in IPE research is provided. Finally, the methodology per se is illustrated, thus how the Constructivist analysis has been performed, the organization of the thesis, and the typology of sources used throughout the different chapters.

The case study selected for this research deals with the 2019 deforestation of the Amazon rainforest in Brazil. This specific happening has been chosen because it is a fairly recent event, in which the academic debate of interest for the research is particularly pronounced. In fact, the case study portrays in itself the contrast between environment and development in an exceedingly straightforward and clear-cut way. Moreover, since only less than a year has passed since the deforestation, and it is uncommon to deal with the sides of the debate without taking specific stances, the choice of this case study in relation to that particular dilemma is innovative, and it can bring important starting points for further research in the analysis of the dissonances present in the international arena, aiming to alleviate them and provide more successful policies.

The research this paper develops is concerned with environmental and developmental issues, with a focus on the international economic system, the growth of developing countries, the state of climate change, and how these aspects interacts with each other and with international politics. Due to the topics addressed, the thesis is a research that belongs to International Political Economy, the subfield of International Relations concerned with the joint study of economics and politics in the international arena, of the connections among the two, and of their effects on the international arena, providing tools for a more detailed and comprehensive understanding of the dynamics and events that concern our world (Jackson & Sørensen, 2014, pp.180-234). Moreover, one of the objectives of International Political Economy is to understand how global economic transaction affects policies, at both the national and the international level (Williams, 1996, pp.49-51); therefore, it provides essential theoretical instruments for this research, especially when analysing the invisible ties that connect specific economic aspects, such as development models and international market dynamics, with the stances and actions of different international actors, exposing how they affect each other and the rest of the international arena, in its social and environmental conditions.

Within International Political Economy there are many currents of thoughts, that respectively correspond to different opinions and positions; in order to fulfil the aims of this research, and to guide its analysis, Constructivist IPE has been selected. Constructivism is an analytical approach to international relations, that focuses on the beliefs, the ideas, and the interests of the actors that act and decide in the international arena, it argues that the facts are only secondary to the ideas that support them, and that the world is social, entailing that it is filled and defined by the intersubjective meanings given to it by its inhabitants and their relations (Jackson & Sørensen, 2014, pp.237-241). As Lincoln and Guba (2013) correctly state, within Constructivism “the social reality is relative to the individuals involved and to the particular context in which they find themselves” and “the relationship between the knower and the knowable (to-be-known) is highly person- and context- specific”, therefore the notions, the policies and the discourses are influenced by the individuals

(10)

9 expressing or supporting them, in particular by their interests and their backgrounds, and can change continuously, in the same way as people and times change (pp.39-40, 47-52, 58). The reason why this theory has been chosen in order to support this thesis lays in the fact that, compared to other International Relations approaches, Constructivism provides more thorough answers to complex issues, through the expositions of the changes in interests, public norms and identifications on both local and global levels, consequentially highlighting how these variations actually change the way international affairs unfolds (Abdelal, 2009, pp.64-65). In the specific, in the field of International Political Economy, this theory has become increasingly useful, in explaining, on the one hand, how social facts influence the way the real world is understood by its actors and what drives them in delivering specific policies, and, on the other, exposing and interpreting specific arrangements of political economy, that with other theories would not be uncovered or even questioned (Abdelal, 2009, pp.62-63, 71-72). Moreover, as Abdelal (2009) discloses, the world economy and the way it currently functions are the result of specific ideas, with the consequence that the market is not an unavoidable fact, but it is social and actually constructed by specific beliefs and intentions, that, if different, could create a completely new system filled with other policies and norms, that, as of today, might be considered unfeasible and impracticable (pp.65-66). In this way, Constructivism allows the thesis to perform an unbiased analysis, that does not take for granted the actual economic system, thus avoiding to side with either liberal or radical approaches to the subject, but rather uncover the meanings that fill the different positions in the case study and in the larger academic debate.

In the literature, various scholars within the field of International Political Economy have focused on the impact that social constructs have in international relations, thus implementing more and more Constructivist analysis in their research in order to reach innovative results (Abdelal et al., 2015, pp.4-5). However, Constructivism has not breached dominant International Political Economy1_{yet, since mainstream scholars tend to accept}

global economy as solely filled with material facts, even though there are still substantial gaps in understanding certain economic issues, which has led many academics to auspicate for more Constructivist researches within the field (Abdelal et al., 2015, pp.1-5). Therefore, this paper wants to respond to the call, demonstrating how IPE can benefit a lot from including the study of social facts, rather than maintain the focus on material ones. The premises of this analysis directly derive from the Constructivist arguments that differentiate the theory from other IPE approaches. The state is considered purposive, thus its authority is strictly connected with the goals it is supposed to reach, and the preferences and the interests of the governments are problematized, assuming that they can change when interacting with local and international actors, and when dealing with institutional norms, consequently resulting in a policy-making that reflects the influence the rulers were subjected to (Abdelal, 2009, p.71). Moreover, in regard to International Political Economy, the focus is on the meanings filling its material facts, and that have allowed actors to understand, respond and operate on them, thus exposing the social constructions that influence the way the field has been developing throughout time

1_{It has to be noted that, on the other hand, in the broader field of International Relations, and in particular in security} studies, Constructivism is one of the prevalent theories (Abdelal et al., 2015, pp.2-3).

(11)

10 and has been interpreted in the world (Abdelal, 2009, pp.72-73). Finally, in relation to a specific event or issue, the paper holds the Constructivist acknowledgement that different actors can, and usually do, carry distinct meanings, thus understand, and act, on identical material facts in various ways (Chwieroth, 2015, p.23). The focus on the meanings that actors give to local and global conditions, as well as events they are involved in or witness, is the starting point for the research.

In fact, the thesis performs a constructivist analysis through which the meanings and the constructions portrayed by international actors in the selected case study are exposed, connecting them with the literature found on the topic, in order to ground it with previous events and academic opinions, and finally the meanings found are confronted and compared. The analysis is performed following the guidelines provided by Lincoln and Guba (2013) in their book “The Constructivist Credo”, where they propose two steps of the research, one focused on uncovering the meanings and ideas that support the behaviour and decisions of the actors involved, and the second one showing how the two contrast and compare in the selected event (pp.37-82). In this thesis, the two steps develop on the two levels of the case study, the international and the Brazilian scene, and they focus on the meanings related with the right to development and the preservation of the environment. In order to proceed with the analysis, the specifics of the two and of the case study are provided as follows. The third chapter discusses the general debate regarding the environment and the economic growth, providing an overview of the developments and academic opinions within each side, while depicting the current factual situations, an expedient that underlines the importance and justification of both sides. The fourth chapter presents the case study per se, thus the relevant events, policies, discourses and reactions are described, explained and contextualised through the single-case study research, which consists in a thorough analysis of one specific phenomenon, recent and situated in the “real-world context” (Yin, 2014, pp.15-16). Finally, in the fifth chapter, the perceptions and ideas of the actors involved are unravelled through the use of Constructivism, and a correlation of the case study with the general debate is performed. The first step uncovers the meanings present in the case study through a content analysis performed with the software ATLAS.ti., which highlights and discloses the subjects relevant for the research from unstructured data. Through the software, three groups of codes have been created. The first one is used to contextualize the meanings in their level, international arena or Brazil. The other two correspond to the two sides of the aforementioned debate, in order to reveal the meanings held by the actors in the case study, and to categorize them. After the exposition of the meanings in the first step, the confrontation is performed in the second one, eventually connecting them with the academic arguments presented in the third chapter.

Throughout the thesis different sources have been used. First of all, many academic researchers are referenced, since they provide the general arguments and views present in international relations in regard with the debate discussed in the thesis. Then, data and maps from economic and environmental institutions are implemented, e.g. the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the United Nations, the United Nations Framework for Climate Change, which are all recognised organization, whose data are accurate and up to date. Finally, since a recent event has been chosen as the case study, in order to provide the details of the different occurrences

(12)

11 various articles from reliable newspapers have been used, e.g. The New York Times, The Guardian, The BBC, El País, The Economist, whose credibility has been ensured by their reputation and viewership, and by their style that include the production of factual reports and citation of official sources when providing specific information.

This research has been inspired by a flourishing literature on the issues regarding the protection of the environment and the development of emerging economies, and it provides an innovative Constructivist analysis of the meanings, the ideas, that foster international dissonances and hinder a fruitful cooperation. In the following chapter the urgency of these two issues, in terms of threatening climate change and world economic gap, provides the justification for the importance and the usefulness of an analysis of this kind, which questions why actors perform in certain ways, and that aims to understand what tilts the scale in the international arena.

(13)

12

3. DEVELOPMENT, PRESERVATION OF THE ENVIRONMENT, AND THEIR ISSUES

The two sides of the debate, which provide the framework in which the thesis is situated, are presented in this chapter, through an in-depth analysis of the issues related to the right to development and the preservation of the environment, followed by a comparison of the two parts, exposing their points of collusion. In the interest of the research, data, facts, theories and events related to each side are presented, in order to depict a clear picture of the dilemma that will ease the study of the positions within the Brazilian case study. Since the thesis is also focused on how the debate unfolds in the context of developing countries, their standpoints and conditions are explored.

The chapter is structured as follows. The first section focuses on the concept of development, thus its evolution in international relations, the right attached to it, and the current global development situation are thoroughly analysed. In the second section, the urgency of the climatic crisis is delineated, providing detailed data and information on the current situation and on the evolution of environmental diplomacy. The last section explains the connections between economic development and environment, and how the two influence and relate to each other, especially in the international arena, in order to lay down the arguments to which the case study is paired with and to avoid presenting one side as more prominent than the other.

3.1 DEVELOPMENT: A CONCEPT AND A RIGHT IN EVOLUTION

The Cambridge Dictionary (n.d.) defines development as: “the process in which someone or something grows or changes and becomes more advanced”, in other words, a positive process, that leads to innovation and progress for the individual or the entity involved. Even if the definition presents itself as fairly clear and straightforward, when referred to more complex issues and processes, e.g. the growth of national economies, the way it is understood and reasoned has a deep impact on the political standpoint that guides the developing process, and consequently it influences the practical policies and actions elaborated for its sake. Moreover, it is important to underline that economic development can be pursued and fostered in different ways, depending on which sectors are prioritized in the process and which means are selected to reach it, and that not all countries share the same level of development. In this section, the theme of development is discussed in-depth, providing an overview of the developmental stages in the world, discussing the evolution of the concept until current days, and, finally, exposing the history of the right to development.

The stage of development in a country has a direct effect on its national economy and its income per capita, it involves its technological capacities, its welfare system, and the social and political conditions of its citizens, and it influences the nation’s international role and leverage, as well as its position in regard to specific political issues, such as the environment and global economy. Acemoglu (2009) locates the origin of the global economic differences in the 19th_{century, when some rapidly embraced the industrial revolution, while others}

followed later o,n for various reasons, therefore, the current growth gap can be understood as the result of the countries’ experiences during the past two centuries (pp.9-15, 112-114). The particular background of a

(14)

13 country has influenced the establishment of certain institutions over others, and, in this context, the defined characteristics of the economic institutions2_{are considered to be the major causes of the differences in}

development and growth, because of their heavy influence on the way the economy is structured and functions, that unfolds through specific policies that may advantage, or disadvantage, certain market choices, investments, productions and infrastructures (Acemoglu, 2009, pp.119-121, 123-137, 781-784). Therefore, the development differences, that can be witnessed nowadays, are the result of the choices and practices of the international and local institutions combined with the events of the 19th_{and 20}th_{century, which have inevitably}

affected how the economic history of the world developed.

The United Nations (2019) has recognised three classes of development in the “World Economic Situation and Prospects of 2019” report, namely developed economies, economies in transition, and developing economies, and each state has been assigned to the group that best reflects its basic economic conditions3_{(pp.167-170).}

The specific categorization of the United Nations has been chosen in this thesis for purposes of clarity, since it precisely defines and groups countries, and because of the reliance and leverage of the source. It appears that currently, in the world, there are 36 developed countries, 17 economies in transition, which the UN defines as those transitioning from a centrally planned to a market model of economy, and 126 developing countries, thus there is an apparent majority, in the international arena, of underdeveloped nations (United Nations [UN], 2019, pp.169-170). Geographically speaking, developing countries are located in Africa, Asia, Latin America and the Caribbean4_{; the only countries of these continents that are not part of the category are Japan, defined}

as a developed economy, and the Asian states of the Commonwealth of Independent States plus Georgia, considered economies in transition (UN, 2019, pp.167-170). Through the data provided by the “World Economic Situation and Prospects of 2019” report of the UN(2019), in the specific the tables 1, 2 and 3 from

2_{Economic institutions are defined by Acemoglu (2009) as “the structure of property rights, the presence and (well or} ill) functioning of markets, and the contractual opportunities available to individuals and firms” (p.120).

3_{The three grand categories have been elaborated in the report with the purpose of facilitating the analysis performed} in it, each group is intended to “reflect basic economic country conditions” (UN, 2019, p.167). The report specifies that some of the countries have features that could place them in two categories (in particular the economies in transition), but for “purposes of analysis, the groupings have been made mutually exclusive” (UN, 2019, p. 167).

4_{Alphabetical lists of all the developing countries, reordered in the three continents mentioned.}

Africa: Algeria,, Angola, Benin, Botswana, Burkina Faso, Burundi, Cabo Verde, Cameroon, Central African Republic,

Chad, Comoros,Congo, Côte d’Ivoire, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Djibouti, Egypt, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea,

Ethiopia, Gabon, Gambia (Islamic Republic of the), Ghana, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Kenya, Lesotho, Liberia, Libya, Madagascar, Malawi, Mali, Mauritania, Mauritius, Morocco, Mozambique, Namibia, Niger, Nigeria, Rwanda, Sao Tome and Principe, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Somalia, South Africa, South Sudan, Sudan, Togo, Tunisia, Uganda, United Republic of Tanzania Eswatini, Zambia, Zimbabwe (UN, 2019, p.170).

Asia: Afghanistan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Bhutan, Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, China, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Fiji, Hong Kong SAR (Special Administrative Region of China), India, Indonesia, Iran (Islamic Republic of), Iraq, Israel, Jordan, Kiribati, Kuwait, Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Lebanon, Malaysia, Maldives, Mongolia, Myanmar, Nepal, Oman, Pakistan, Papua New Guinea, Philippines, Qatar, Republic of Korea, Samoa, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Solomon Islands, Sri Lanka, State of Palestine, Syrian Arab Republic, Taiwan Province of China, Thailand, Timor-Leste, Turkey, United Arab Emirates, Vanuatu, Viet Nam, Yemen (UN, 2019, p.170).

Latin America and the Caribbean: Argentina, Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, Bolivia (Plurinational State of), Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Guyana, Haiti, Honduras, Jamaica, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Suriname, Trinidad and Tobago, Uruguay, Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of) (UN, 2019, p.170).

(15)

14 the pages 169 and 170, the following map has been created, matching each country with the respective categorization in the tables. In Figure 1, the country classification, that corresponds to the one elaborated by the UN, is visually presented on a map of the world. The red colour indicates developing nations, the green one the economies in transition and the blue signals developed countries. The aim of the map is to provide an instrument that allows to clearly individuate the classification of a country, as well as the location and distribution of the three categories. As it can be seen, the majority of the states coloured in blue are limited to the Northern Hemisphere (with the exception of Australia and New Zealand), while the red colour is the most predominant in the map.

Figure 1: Economic classification of world countries for the “World Economic Situation and Prospects of 2019” report of the United Nations, where countries have been categorized in three groups: developing economies (red), economies in transition (green), developed economies (blue).

Source: Own elaboration.

Considering the differences in the growth stage, and the great presence of countries with emerging economies, it is undeniable that the concept of development is relevant in international relations, moreover since it is a relevant objective for nations that want to be competitive in the global economy.

In the international arena, the concept of development has changed, and, in the specific, it has undergone three phases, defined by and related to their respective historical contexts: the years after the Second World War, the decade of the seventies, and the season from the nineties onwards. In fact, the modern notion of development has neither been fixed nor clearly defined, but rather it has evolved together with the different currents that swept through the last seventy years. The first concept of development was elaborated at the end of the second world conflict, when it was acknowledged internationally. It was associated with the notion of economic growth, perceived at the time as the process that would not only foster the economy, but also lead to an improvement in terms of national welfare and political freedom, therefore the advancement of a country was measured in terms of its gross national product growth rate (GNP) (Lindroos, 1999, p.40). During the seventies the perspective changed, there was a growing awareness towards the needs and the welfare of

(16)

15 individuals, thus, instead than solely focusing on the increase of the GNP, which nonetheless continued to be a priority, more attention was devolved towards cultural, social, and political progresses, and a more human-centred concept of development was embraced by international actors, countries and organizations alike (Lindroos, 1999, pp.40-41). This innovation in the international arena was caused by a growing consciousness of the importance of human rights and of the necessity of including them when promoting economic growth, together with the realization that the GNP could not reflect the actual welfare of all the citizens of a country. Eventually, during the nineties, an additional aspect was acknowledged when thinking and preaching about development: sustainability (Lindroos, 1999, p.41). In the specific, in 1989 the Brundtland Reportwas published by the World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED)5_{, which highlighted the deep}

ties connecting the pursue of economic growth and the importance of preserving the environment, and it laid the first formulation of the sustainable development concept, a specific type of development that manages to satisfy the necessities of the current generations, without depriving the future ones of the same possibilities, thus integrating economics with sustainability, while improving both their economic and environmental conditions (Broadhead, 2002, pp.40-43; Yazdi et al., 2017, pp.740-743).

The elaboration of the concept of development was accompanied by the demand of a right, that would protect and strengthen the countries in the process, which were condemning the differences existing in the world in terms of advancement and wealth. In particular, since the decolonisation period, a right to development has been strongly requested by developing countries, because of their economic struggles and their condition of underdevelopment, that they have been blaming on their past, hence on former colonial powers (Lindroos, 1999, pp.51-54, 64-75). The views on the right to development, expressed by industrialised countries and by developing ones, were and still tend to be different, resulting in divergent expectations and practices. On the one hand, emerging economies expect former colonial powers to repair for the exploitation perpetuated in the past and to substantially assist them in closing the economic gap between them, without restraining their freedom of action, while, on the other, industrialised countries demand the full respect of human rights, and, even if they realize the importance of fostering development, they are not willing to accept it as an obligation that binds them to provide finances or technological resources (Bunn, 2012, pp.65-67, 69-71; Lindroos, 1999, pp.64-66). This contrasting views on development have been hindering the evolution of an official and functioning right, that would represent and ensure the interest of those requesting the imbalance to be handle and solved. Nonetheless, some attempts can be found in international diplomacy. First of all, during the United Nations General Assembly on the 4th_{of December 1986, the Declaration on the Right to Development}

(UNDRD) was formulated and issued, one of the first efforts to define the right and to foster international cooperation on the matter, encouraging the increase of consensus among the Global North and the Global South (Bunn, 2012, pp.13-20; Lindroos, 1999, p.5). It has to be noted that the Declaration gained one hundred and forty-six votes in favour, whit only one member against, the United States of America, and eight abstained,

5_{The World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED) was a commission created with the aim of finding}

(17)

16 namely Denmark, Finland, the Federal Republic of Germany, Iceland, Israel, Japan, Sweden and the United Kingdom, almost all developed countries (Bunn, 2012, pp.40-44). Regarding its content, the Declaration defined the right to development as a human right, thus the focus was not only on the economic advances it would lead to, but also on the social, cultural and political progresses (Bunn, 2012, pp.92-94). There was a will to foster the well-being of the individuals and not only national economies. Nonetheless, the vague formulation of the Declaration hindered the accuracy and the transparency needed for the implementation of the right. In fact, the definition of the right itself is too abstract, no specific model of development is presented nor promoted, with the consequence of being unsuccessful in providing guidance and in indicating clearly what states are expected to concretely do, to what extent, and which responsibilities are assigned to the countries already developed and those still undergoing the process (Lindroos, 1999, pp.30-39, 42-47). In fact, the vagueness of the declaration impedes the identification of the duty holders and the beneficiaries of the right to development, as expressed in the Declaration of 1986 (Bunn, 2012, pp.107-112). In 1993, during the United Nations World Conference on Human Rights, the right was discussed once again, and it was officially defined as an inalienable human right in the Vienna Declaration, which led to its inclusion (that still persists) in the directives of many United Nations branches, conferring the right to development with more legitimacy (Bunn, 2012, pp.112-121; Lindroos, 1999, p.6). Nonetheless, its content did not change, because the difficulties encountered during the first official elaboration of the right represented themselves, an issue that still persists nowadays. In fact, it appears to be incredibly difficult to achieve consensus on the actual practices that should be implemented in order to guarantee it, since there is a substantial difference in the way industrialised and developing countries reason the concept, as aforementioned.

In this section, the evolution of the concept and its right highlight the difference in how development is reasoned in the world. Moreover, the economic gap, and the fact that the majority of countries belongs to the less developed category, underlines that the way emerging economies grow and their desire to upgrade their conditions cannot be disregarded, and they should rather be officially acknowledged in the international arena. The presence of meaningful and clear policies in the matter would be valuable for the wellbeing of developing countries and for the harmony of the North-South relations, because it would foster the dialogue and the cooperation among the two sides.

3.2 THE NECESSITY TO PRESERVE THE ENVIRONMENT

We are experiencing and participating in an environmental crisis, which affects every corner of the globe, with different phenomena of distinct intensity. The degree of the crisis is widely recognised, the threat it poses to human society is a matter of great concern, and pretending to not recognise it is neither legitimate, nor acceptable (Ackerman & Stanton, 2013, p.9; Radcliffe, 2000, p.123; The Economist, 2019c). Sea levels are rising, ice caps are melting, mountain glaciers are shrinking, rainfall are intensifying, and droughts are worsening. Compared to the past, the climate is changing at a much faster rate, the global temperature has been rising exponentially, and these environmental developments have negative rather than positive consequences

(18)

17 for the continuation of the world as we know it, and the roots of the ecological problems are to be found in human actions. In this section, the data and the main concepts linked to climate change are delineated, together with a brief overview of the causes and the consequences related to it. Afterwards, countries’ environmental behaviour is outlined, followed by a presentation of the evolution and state of green diplomacy.

The past decades have been characterised by an exponential rose of the average temperatures, resulting in global warming. The concept of warming, in a specific moment in time, has been defined by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change ([IPCC], 2018) as: “the global average of combined land surface air and sea surface temperatures for a 30-year period centred on that time, expressed relative to the reference period 1850-1900” (p.56). In other words, it refers to the rise of the global temperature, compared to the pre-industrial period, selected as reference because, since then, the world has witnessed the exponential calefaction. Nowadays, the average temperature in the world is 1°C higher than the one from pre-industrial times, at least half of this increment has happened in the last thirty years, and, throughout the globe, some regions have already witnessed an increase of 1,5°C or more, e.g. the Arctic where the increment has been of more than 3°C (Mastrojeni & Pasini, 2017, pp.7-8; The Economist, 2019c, UN, 2019, p.72). The map in Figure 2 visually presents the global temperature change in 2018, expressed in Celsius degrees. The distinct colours correspond to different deviations from the 1951-80 average temperature. The colour blue indicates a negative or equal average temperature to the past one, while the different shades of red, from light to dark, signal the intensity of the calefaction from just 0,5°C to more than 2,5°C. As it can be seen, the majority of the world is red-tinted, especially the Northern Hemisphere, whereas the blue areas are extremely limited. The region distinguished by the darker shade of red is the Arctic, confirmed what aforementioned.

Figure 2: Map presenting the global temperature change in 2018, expressed in Celsius degrees, showing the deviation from 1951-80 average

Source: The Economist, 2019c6

(19)

18 It is not the first time the Earth undergoes a change in its climate patterns, since it has been characterized by both warmer and colder eras throughout its history. However, this alteration is peculiar compared to past ones, because the change in the average temperature is occurring at an unnatural fast rate. The main causes of global warming are to be found in greenhouse gases emissions and in the mismanagement of the land, e.g. deforestation and intensive agriculture (Mastrojeni & Pisani, 2017, p.16). These two reasons are strongly embedded in human society, therefore really hard to eradicate and to control. They are involved when fossil fuels are burnt, when the flora is destructed, and when intensive methods of cultivation and breeding are preferred over more natural, and slow, ones, all practices that have allowed the industrialization and that have fostered the economic growth of countries globally (Mastrojeni & Pisani, 2017, pp.12-13). The consequences are extensive and worrisome, affecting both ecosystems and individuals throughout the globe, causing natural alterations, while worsening already profound issues of security and stability (IPCC, 2018, pp.53-54; Mastrojeni & Pasini, 2017, pp.4-5).

Climate change is severely affecting both water and land. The water cycle and weather patterns are changing, glaciers already decreased by 40 percent, sea levels have raised by 25 centimetres since 1880, degradation and desertification are affecting lands, and the current rate of soil erosion is higher than the one of soil formation (Mastrojeni & Pasini, 2017, pp.7-9; UN, 2019, pp.72-74). Moreover, the unpredictability of the climate leads to a great deal of uncertainty in the societies hit by natural disasters, producing economic and security problems, since it affects lands, farming and vital infrastructures, thus either limiting or depriving communities of their incomes and their houses, a situation where chaos, conflicts and instability prevail, creating the perfect setting for the proliferation of criminality and violations of human rights (Mastrojeni & Pisani, 2017, pp.26-30, 41-44; UN, 2019, p.37). It has to be noted that the most violent climate-related phenomena have been hitting vulnerable societies located in low and middle income countries, which are already subjected to food deficiency and poverty (IPCC, 2018, pp.53-55). On the whole, from 2007 to 2017, globally, the number of people hit by natural disasters amounted to 1,7 billion, with an average of 100 billion dollars in economic lost per year (Mastrojeni & Pisani, 2017, pp.26-30, 41-44).

It has to be noted, that not all countries behave in the same way. The environmental policies and the consequent actions implemented by countries show a spectrum of diverse attitudes towards climate change. The rate of pollution varies in the world, depending on which kind of pollution and in which season or year they are emitted. Anyways, countries’ emissions of carbon dioxide are an effective instrument for individuating who are the substantial polluters of the international arena. In 2018, in terms of carbon dioxide emission per square metre, the ten countries that emitted the most (from the most to the least emissions) were China, the United States of America, India, the Russian Federation, Japan, Germany, Iran, South Korea, Saudi Arabia and Indonesia (Global Carbon Atlas, 2019). Even though the data are from 2018, they are still recent enough to provide the reader with a clear idea of who are the main protagonists of climate change. Nonetheless, the emission rate is not necessarily connected with their attitude towards climate change. Overall, even though the situation is not too positive, it appears that more countries are transitioning towards renewables, and among

(20)

19 them there are some substantial polluters. Considering the situation as it is now, the Climate Action Tracker (2019) finds only two countries compatible with the 2015 Paris Agreement, namely Morocco and Gambia, and six that will probably manage to not exceed the 2°C limit, while the others are to be found in different shades of insufficiency (p.11). In particular, it is noticeable that India appears to be in the group of the six, even though it is one of the major emitters. The reason for this apparent contradiction lays in the policies and practices the country adopts in the renewables field, which, if successful, could turn India into a leader of the sector, while seriously improving its environmental conditions (Climate Action Tracker, 2019, pp.11, 20). The “critically insufficient” countries are the Russian Federation, Turkey, Ukraine, Viet Nam, Saudi Arabia, and the United States of America, which seem to highly disregard the implementation of environmentally-friendly policies, thus they are likely to considerably increase their emissions due to this attitude (CAT, 2019, pp.11-13, 23, 26-28). China is not included in the group because, unlike the others, its policies are aimed towards fostering the conversion to renewable energy; nonetheless, since the country heavily relies on fossil fuels, it is classified as “highly insufficient”, and it is expected to worsen its environmental conditions unless it embraces a decisive and effective decarbonisation (CAT, 2019, pp.11-13, 17). Besides the specific policies implemented or planned by countries, the changes in the global environmental situation depend on everyone’s practices, and at the current state of affairs there is the concrete threaten that climate change will exacerbate. This said, countries seem willing to meet and discuss, even though there are still many problems in achieving a global coordinated reaction to it.

In the international community, the causes and the consequences of climate change are well known, and the diplomacy on the matter have not lacked in the last 50 years, following an evolution, through conferences and treaties, that has reflected the changing contexts and ideas. In this paragraph, the most crucial conferences and treaties are presented. The first international meeting that discussed the topic was the 1972 United Nations Conference on the Human Environment held in Stockholm, whose aim was to signal the urgency of the environmental issue and to delineate a framework that would facilitate international actors in understanding the climatic crisis, and eventually act on it (Broadhead, 2002, p.33; Radcliffe, 2000, p.124). At the end of the conference the Declaration of Stockholm, with a vague content that continued to prioritize economic interests, was issued, and the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) was established as the organization that would oversee the developments in ecological matters (Broadhead, 2002, p.34; Radcliffe, 2000, pp.124-128). Afterwards, since the 1972 declaration was not successful in providing clear and practical directives, various conferences were held in order to find agreements among international actors on the topic. The 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro thrived the production of many proposals, and its main outcomes were the Rio Declaration and the Agenda 21, which is a noticeable program that acknowledged the ecological issues in the world, individuating in the international economic system a probable solution rather than a problem (Broadhead, 2002, pp.40-43, 50-51; Radcliffe, 2000, p.129-130). Nonetheless, there were no strict internationally recognised environmental policies, and the economic factors continued to weight a lot in the Brazilian meeting and in the declarations. The two main environmental conventions that followed are the 1997 Climate Change Conference held in Kyoto, and the 2015 one in Paris. The former produced the Kyoto Protocol,

(21)

20 a treaty that established binding emissions limits on all the international actors, which were especially strict on industrialised countries through the “common but differentiated principle”, due to their historical responsibility in the pollution and degradation of the environment (United Nations Framework for Climate Change [UNFCC], n.d.b). The common but differentiated principle refers to the different responsibilities states have in preserving the environment, which is regarded as a common interest, thus entailing for all the subjects involved the importance of being proactive in the fight against climate change, while recognising that not every country can face certain costs or is in possession of adequate technology (e.g. developing countries) (Boyte, 2010, p.64). The principle “has its roots both in equity and in pragmatism”, and even though it is supported by a sound reasoning, its legitimacy in the international arena is not strong because of its limited range and lack of a clarity in defining which country is considered “developing” in the environmental framework, hindering the distribution of fair responsibilities among states (Boyte, 2010, pp.64-65). In the 2015 conference, the Paris Agreement was signed, a deal elaborated in order to foster and strengthen the international response to climate change, to provide more transparency in environmental decisions and practices, and to limit the global average temperature to increase more than 1,5°C above the pre-industrial period (UNFCC, n.d.a). These two conferences were supported by very positive and proactive ideas, attitudes and objectives; however, they were lacking enforcing instruments. Implementing them in the day to day politics, and life, of the majority of countries has resulted to be very difficult, since the environmental international regime lacks coherence and power.

There is no international law that punishes those that do not follow the environmental guidelines established at the various convention, therefore a purposive coordination among all the relevant actors in the international arena, spanning from countries to multinationals and from NGOs to established institutions, is needed in order to face the ecological issue. However, creating consensus on how to deal with climate change, requiring actors to limit their activities or their businesses for long term objectives, without being able to guarantee fair play, is extremely hard and almost impossible in the current economic and political structure. Even though everyone is aware of the issue, there are different opinions, and priorities, related to the necessity to preserve the environment, that inevitably have been limiting the creation of a common front against climate change.

3.3 THE PURSUE OF ECONOMIC GROWTH AND THE PROTECTION OF NATURE: AN OXYMORON?

Economic growth and environmental protection are two strongly interconnected objectives, that, if not pursued efficiently and reasonably, could limit each other. In fact, the former, when deployed through non-renewable resources, actually aggravates climate change and its effects, while the latter appears to require costly technologies and provide benefits only in the long run, rather than short term profits, provoking an apparent deceleration of the economic growth. In the previous section the two sides have been examined, through a vast exposition of their status in the world, some projections, and their evolution and developments in the international arena. In this section, a synthesis of the concepts is performed, in order to expose the connections

(22)

21 between the two and the consequential problems. In order to do so, the section firstly shows the ideas supporting the preservation of the environment, in particular Green theory and the related arguments that focus on the current economic structure. Then, Neoliberalism is presented, together with the ideas it advocates for, followed by an explanation of the importance of development and the reasons supporting its prominence in the context of developing countries.

The theory focusing on the environment, and that supports the necessity to preserve it, is Green Theory. It is an International Relation approach part of the Critical Theory tradition, which challenges how mainstream theories have discussed and faced the ecological crisis, the functioning of the international structure, considering its social, political and economic aspects, and the way in which the discourses and the policies have developed in relation with the threat of climate change (Dyer, 2017, p.84, 86). It is prominently centred on the preservation of the environment, which is prioritized over other issues, thus the needs and demands of nature prevail those of capitalism and consumerism, following the logic that the wellbeing of the Earth, in the long term, is beneficial for humanity, while the contrary could lead, in an extreme panorama, to the extinction of our species (Dyer, 2017, p.86). And it is through this perspective that every aspect and affair of international relations is perceived and explained by the theory. Moreover, the severity of the environmental issue leads the theory to reject the separation between domestic and international politics, because of the inner nature of climate change, which does not observe national borders affecting individuals and regions internationally (Dyer, 2017, p.86-88). Because of the nature of climate change, the theory calls for global solutions, that would take into considerations the long-term benefits rather than the short ones, thus requiring a change in the current political international structure, since Green Theory refutes the existence of a quick technological fix to adjust climate change, and supports a betterment of the way environmental diplomacy unfolds (Dyer, 2017, p.87-89). Many green scholars focus their analysis on the impact the economy and its models have on the environment. It appears that economic structures define, and eventually limit, the way the preservation of the environment is approached and conducted (Broadhead, 2002, p.67). The pursue of growth, together with the ideas and the discourses that shape it, is often a central issue when discussing how to fight and contain climate change, as well as its consequences. Purdey (2010) finds the international system to be highly determined by the “growth paradigm”, which is a shared commitment that leads states to continuously pursue economic growth and development, supported by the belief that, through a thriving economy, nations can secure their prosperity, safety and welfare in a shorter period of time (pp.3-5, 44-49). This is an inherently capitalistic logic, that promotes the obtainment, through a fierce competition at the international level, of immediate welfare and solutions for urgent internal issues, pushing countries to privilege the economy over nature in their trade-offs, and eventually in their policies. Nonetheless, the ecological consequences of capitalism should be considered. For Radcliffe (2000), the destruction of the environment is a direct consequence of the technologies, methods, and ideas that have been developed within the capitalist structure, which has been pervasive in the international system (pp.8-13). Moreover, many academics underline how economic growth, in the way it is conducted today, heavily relies on natural resources and energies, which are inherently dependent on Earth, a finite planet,

(23)

22 thus their exploitation in the long term is neither feasible nor ideal (Broadhead, 2002, pp.19-20; Purdey, 2010, pp.6-9, 90; Radcliffe, 2000, p.9). Fossil fuels, for example, are the non-renewable energies that allowed industrialisation to happen and that still sustain the pursue of economic growth, nonetheless their combustion causes carbon emissions. The importance of these gases for the primary and secondary sectors, the two upon which humanity relies the most, renders the cut of their emissions particularly difficult, since it would imply an enormous change in the means of production adopted by the majority, which have been favoured until now because of their low costs, accessibility and apparent efficiency. This said, the main idea that supports and prompts the protection of the environment is that nature, together with its resources, is unique and irreplaceable, thus, since they are massively used for short term economic gains, the way international economy proceeds should be changed in order to provide long term benefits for current and future generations, thus changing the existing value system, predominant among the majority of countries.

The structure delineated above, against which Green scholars poses themselves, is the one supported by the International Political Economy theory of Neoliberalism. It argues for the importance of economic freedom, thus preferring privatization over the centralized control of businesses, and it expresses complete faith in the competitiveness of the market and its beneficial effects, while, nonetheless, supporting the presence of supranational institutions that would supervise the international economy, preventing market crisis or any other kind of inconveniences within the system (Cooley, 2009, pp.49-51; Jackson & Sørensen, 2014, pp.187-189). The theory became very influential from the eighties onwards, it was embraced by the United States, and it soon affected the economic structure of the world, introducing and fostering the global, and substantial, exchange of goods, services and workers, the presence of international financial investments and the rise of multinationals (Cooley, 2009, pp.49-51; Steger, 2010, pp.37-41). It is a theory whose ideas and concepts are reflected in the actions of powerful institutions, e.g. World Bank and International Monetary Fund, and governments, shaping the international economy. The dominating values are those of free market, competitiveness, entrepreneurship, private initiatives and economic growth, and the concept that a growing and developed economy provides, for countries and enterprises experiencing it, great benefits in terms of wealth and welfare (Chang & Grable, 2014, pp.14-16). Even though it has been criticised by various other International Political Economy theories, it has been dictating the economic models that the world follows, affecting its structure and the way individuals and international actors perceive it, and spreading the idea that development and growth are among the most desirable goals for a country. Even though in the theory ecological subjects are not included, the capitalistic system advocated by Neoliberalism is strongly related with climate change, because pursuing growth inevitably requires energy and natural resources to be consumed. Nonetheless, in the context of developing countries, the development discourse and its environmental consequences have been discussed by different scholars, which are not necessarily advocates of the Neoliberalist model, but always aware of its pervasiveness and importance. In fact, due to the rising interest in ecological matters, the pursue of development in the traditional way, following the same path industrialised countries did, is more complicated than in the past, and it has suffered a lot of criticism. The first point that

The Dilemma Between Economic Growth and Environmental Preservation in the 2019 Amazon Deforestation