This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Rice, J. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

North—South Relations and the Ecological Debt: Asserting a Counter-Hegemonic Discourse

New Mexico State University, USA, jcrice{at}nmsu.edu

We examine position papers by non-governmental organizations (NGOs) arguing for recognition of the ecological debt. We utilize Toulmin's (2003[1958]) model of argument analysis to outline the major claims advanced. The results illustrate the argument is comprised of four interrelated claims: 1) Northern historical development and present disproportionate production and consumption are founded on a socio-ecological subsidy or the underpayment and, at times, explicit looting of the natural resource assets of Southern countries; 2) the Southern external financial debt should be cancelled because it promotes the socio-ecological subsidy; 3) levels of Northern production and consumption are unsustainable over the long term because they are predicated on the North—South socio-ecological subsidy; 4) equity for present and rational obligations to future generations demands Northern countries begin paying back the accrued socio-ecological subsidy, an obligation defined as the ecological debt.

Key Words: argumentation analysis • ecological debt • ecological unequal exchange • environmental cost-shifting • environmental sociology • Toulmin

Critical Sociology, Vol. 35, No. 2, 225-252 (2009)
DOI: 10.1177/0896920508099193


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?