Sumak kawsay socialism or republican bio socialism digital

Sumak Kawsay Socialism
or Republican Bio-socialism
René Ramírez Gallegos
Secretary for Higher Education, Science, Technology and Innovation

or Republican Bio-socialism
2014
René Ramírez Gallegos
Secretary for Higher Education, Science, Technology and Innovation

INDEX
1. Introduction: What are constitutions?
2. Background: The Constitutional History of Exclusion
3. Conservatism, radicalism and constitutional liberalism
4. Towards a post-Rawlsian and post-utilitarian social justice
5. On the information base: sumak kawsay or Buen Vivir
6. Towards a sumak kawsay socialism or republican (egalitarian) bio-
socialism
7. Ecuador as “bio-polis”: Constructing a new bio-strategy for
accumulation and re-distribution
8. Towards a bio-centric society, free of inequality and envy
Bibliography
7
9
12
14
19
21
34
42
45
Diagramming and Design
Communication Department of Secretariat for Higher Education, Science, Technology
and Innovation

5
1. Introduction: What are constitutions?
One of the most often used examples in political philosophy in order to illustrate the
meaning of constitutions is the story of Ulysses and the Sirens. After visiting awhile in
Circe’s palace, Ulysses sets off on his return to Ithaca. The goddess warns him that
his first challenge will be to prevent himself from being seduced by the Sirens’ song.
To do this, Ulysses covers the ears of his sailors with wax after ordering them to tie
him to the ship’s mast. Thus, when Ulysses begs them to untie him, his companions
remain deaf to his demands.
Constitutionsarerestrictionsandprecommitmentsthatsocietiesputuponthemselves
in order to achieve their desired objectives. The rope and the wax demanded by
Ulysses are similar to these restrictions; the will to tie oneself up and not hear the
Sirens’ song are precommitments by Ulysses and the sailors so as not to give into
the Sirens’ seduction and in order to be able to achieve their desired ends. Just like
Ulysses, societies aim to define a course of action and protect themselves from
thoughtless future actions (Elster, 2002: 20). Through such mechanisms as cost
increases, a society restricts itself and diminishes uncertainty.
In this sense, a constitutional change implies a new pact of coexistence in which
the parts consent to fulfill certain agreements and accept certain restrictions. Basing
itself on this idea, and by utilizing political philosophy, this document attempts to
outline the terms of the social contract implicit within the Ecuadorian constitution of
1998. Afterwards, Ecuador’s new Constitution, ratified in 2008, is analyzed in order
to establish whether it presents a radical change from its predecessor or not. The
typology and objective of the pact are analyzed.
This document has been organized into seven sections. After this brief introduction,
there follows a concise description of the Ecuadorian constitutions and their history,
as well as a classification of the principal constitutional types in order to locate
historically what type of society was sought with the 1998 proposal. Given that,
in terms of distributive justice, the most developed liberal proposal is the theory of
Rawls, the fourth section attempts to respond to the question of whether the 2008

7
2. Background: The Constitutional History of Exclusion
In analyzing theories of justice, two questions normally arise: “who designs the
principles of justice?”, and, “for whom are these principles designed?” These
questions are here answered through the history of constitutional processes. In
Ecuador, this is a history of exclusionary processes: constitutional principles haven’t
had as their end the Buen Vivir of all, but rather the privileging of certain groups.
According to the historian Juan Paz y Miño (2007), the Ecuadorian constitutions
between 1830 and 1929 guaranteed a landowner-oligarchic republic. During this
period, wealth was converted into a mechanism for maintaining power, and the
State guaranteed the reproduction of the oligarchies. Composed of 75 articles, the
Constitution of 1830 left in place an exclusionary and racist society:
Article 12.- In order to enjoy the benefits of citizenship, the following is
required: 1. To be married, or older than 22 years of age; 2. To own property,
the free value of 300 pesos and to have some profession or useful industry
without being subject to another, such as a domestic servant or laborer; 3. To
be able to read and write.
With these restrictions, approximately 90 percent of the then-population could not
enjoy such rights. Moreover, article 68 left intact various forms of discrimination and
domination of indigenous groups. Article 9 of the constitutions of 1835, 1843, 1845
and 1852, and Article 8 of the constitution of 1851, would contain the exact same
text as article 12 of the 1830 Constitution, with the exception that they would lower
the “free value” to 200 pesos. It was not until after the 1861 Constitution that these
clauses finally disappeared, although the clause that stated that people must be able
to “read and write” still remained a requirement for the enjoyment of citizenship. In
the 1864 Constitution, it was also established that citizens were only “those male
Ecuadorians that know how to read and write and have turned 21 years of age”
(article 9). This requirement did not disappear until 1979, which is no minor fact when
one considers that, for example, forty-four percent of the population was illiterate in
1950, and that even in the early 1980s, one in every four Ecuadorians could neither
6
constitutional proposal is post-Rawlsian and post-utilitarian. In the fifth section, the
new coexistence pact is described along with its philosophical axis, sumak kawsay
or Buen Vivir 1
. In the sixth section, this new social pact, an (egalitarian) republican
bio-socialist commitment—or sumak kawsay socialism—, is discussed. The seventh
section then proposes a new bio-accumulation and redistribution strategy for the
country, on the assumption that a new coexistence pact will be impossible to
implement if the current strategy is left unaltered. Finally, the last section synthesizes
the current challenges facing the implementation of this new social pact.
1
Translator’s note: The Spanish term Buen Vivir and the Quichua term sumak kawsay are relatively equivalent
and literally mean “good living”. In the context of the Citizens’ Revolution government, they have been used
to signify the concept of integral good living.

Sumak Kawsay Socialism Republican Bio-socialism
98
fulfill. The openness of the Ecuadorian economy during the period of liberalization
did not lead to an increase in demand for its most abundant factor, unskilled labor,
but instead increased demand for more highly skilled labor (Vos, Taylor and Páez de
Barro, 2002). This led to an increase in the salary gap between skilled and unskilled
workers—the latter of which became part of the informal sector—and contributed
to an increase in income concentration and greater inequality. Currently, the richest
10 percent of Ecuadorians account for 42 percent of total income, while a little
more than half of the population cannot fully satisfy their basic needs, and one in
five Ecuadorians live in consumption poverty. It is no accident that public social
security coverage has decreased, a clear indicator of the gradual reduction in social
citizenship: a mere 14 percent of the country’s poorest decile has access to coverage
while for those within the richest decile, some 53 percent have access.
In summary, a review of the country’s constitutions reveals how, starting in the colonial
period, exclusion and inequality have deepened within Ecuador. This shift away from
a society of privilege for the few and towards an egalitarian society—for all and with
respect for diversity—is perhaps the greatest virtue of the 2008 Constitution.
read nor write. This restriction excluded somewhere between a fourth and half of the
population from the political community.
Other forms of exclusion and discrimination based on religion, gender and ethnic
origin were also perpetuated. In the “Black Letter” of 1869, issued by President
García Moreno, individuals had to be Catholic in order to be considered citizens.
Moreover, slavery was abolished only 22 years after the country’s first constitution,
and it was only with the 1929 Constitution that women were to enjoy both citizenship
and suffrage.
Discrimination also dominated in the echelons of power. For example, in order to be
president, vice president or an elected official, one had to own property or receive a
certain level of rent (Paz y Miño, 2007).
Following the Liberal Revolution at the end of the 19th century, the Ecuadorian state
underwent modernization and there were significant advances in the field of rights.
However, it was not until the Julian Revolution of 1925 that the statist compromise—
in which the state acted as the guarantor of oligarchic-landowner power—was finally
broken and replaced by a period of state-driven economic interventionism, in which
political and civil rights were further advanced. These social rights, however, were
only guaranteed for formal workers. Thus, the Julian Revolution opened the country
up to an international environment of capitalist modernization and, in doing so, gave
form to a developmentalist state.
While there were important qualitative advances in the sphere of civil and political
rights within the 1998 Constitution, it also consolidated a model in which, within the
social and economic fields, the formal worker and the consumer with acquisitive
power become the subjects of rights. The businessman becomes the motor of
change and is charged with stimulating the economy and distributing wealth through
the use of the market.
Empirical evidence suggests that this role was too big for the business sector to

Biosocialismo republicano
11
The guiding principle of the utilitarian perspective is the summation of individual
utilities as a measure of social well-being. Policies and institutions are selected and
prioritized according to the value of the sum of the individual utilities that they create.
Utilitarianism appeals to majority rule in order to choose the best option between
different policies, and the variable to be maximized is consumption.
Historically, radical constitutions have not existed in Ecuador. Those with a
conservative nature have been more prevalent, followed by more liberal constitutions
with strong utilitarian influences. In a country with large social injustices, the failure to
foster real equality in order to permit the flourishing of citizens is symptomatic of falling
into a conservative social proposal. In this sense, while the 1998 Constitution had
certain liberal virtues within the field of rights, it was utilitarian in the socio-economic
area, libertarian in other areas, while also containing conservative elements, given
that rights were principally subject to the wealth (and hence acquisitive power) of
the individual.
Ecuador’s new constitutional project should therefore be understood as a rupture
with previous paradigms, since it seeks to create a social pact based on republican
bio-socialism.
3. Conservatism, Radicalism and Constitutionalism
10
Within the historical constitutional perspective there are three general paradigms:
conservative, radical and liberal constitutions (Gargarella, 2005).
Conservative constitutions: have their basis in a political presence based on moral
perfectionism or political authoritarianism. The constitutional organization focuses
on the concentration of power and on strengthening of executive authority. Rights
depend on the conception of what is good, which is determined according to religion,
wealth and gender. Conservatism defends the thesis that there are adequate models
for living, independent of individual opinion. An example of this form of constitution
would be that promoted by García Moreno in 1869.
Radical constitutions: radicalism is based on strengthening the authority of
citizens, which implies taking into account the demands of local actors. Its posture
is summarized in the dictum: “the voice of the people is the voice of God”; it
seeks to assure greater opportunities for debate and in such a way that rights are
primarily oriented according to the demands and needs of the majority. While there
is recognition of individual rights, social majorities may impose their authority over
even the most basic demands of specific individuals.
Liberal constitutions: are based on limiting and equalizing the branches of
government—that is, on the separation of the three branches of power and seeking
their equilibrium through effective counterbalancing. The liberal concept may be
summarized as: “neither the dictatorship of one, nor the authoritarianism of many”.
Public debate is limited to that between branches of government, and there is an
individualist conception of rights in which they are not dependent on the convenience
of others. Moreover, there is a nearly sacred vision of property rights, and individual
liberty depends only on the will and principles of each person.
On the other hand, while in recent decades constitutions in Ecuador and Latin
America have been judicially liberal within the field of civil and political rights, it is
important to indicate that they have also had utilitarian tones in terms of economics.

Biosocialismo republicano
13
advantages is not achieved in this way” (1999:124).
The focal point of the Rawlsian construction is the design of a situation of rational
deliberation for the collective selection of justice principles, from an equitable “original
position”. “The rational character of a conception of social justice would not consist
in its agreement with a presumed sphere of previous and independent moral truths,
but rather its susceptibility to being agreed upon according to a certain procedure”
(Rodilla, 1999: 19). From this perspective, valid principles of justice would be those
that can unanimously be agreed upon by rational, free and equal individuals who are
in an equal original position and are seeking to protect their interests.
In this way, Rawlsian justice theory proposes two principles. The principle of basic
equal liberties guarantees the equal elevation of all citizens’ fundamental civil liberties
to the highest level (Rawls, 1999: 79). The second principle is divided into two:
The principle of equal opportunity of access to social positions and the difference
principle. In this framework, “a just society is a society in which institutions divide
primary social goods in an equitable way between members, taking into account the
fact that there are variations between members in terms of natural primary goods”
(Hernández, 2006: 190) 3
.
Under this conceptual framework, an institution is that which creates the necessary
conditions so that people do not have to depend upon the chance circumstances
of their lives. In order to achieve this individuals must be made equal by giving them
equal access to primary social goods. The second principle is based on producing
3
Rawls understands natural primary goods as those whose distribution is not directly under the control of
social institutions, such as health and personal talents. In contrast, primary social goods are those “things
that all rational men want”, and include “rent and wealth”, “basic liberties”, “freedom of movement and to
choose their occupation”, “powers and prerogatives over positions of responsibility” and the “social goods
necessary for self-respect.”
4. Towards a post-Rawlsian and post-utilitarian social justice
12
All constitutions contain an implicit form of a specific notion of social justice. The
principle of social justice sustained by the 1998 Constitution is based on Rawlsian
and (neo-)utilitarian theory, which permits the establishment of criteria for gauging
distributive justice, of guidelines that orient or make reference to how society will
distribute scarce resources.
What are utilitarian and Rawlsian justices?
The theory of John Rawls, one of the most influential in political philosophy, is
derived from a radical criticism of utilitarian justice theory. Utilitarianism is based
on two principles: the first supposes the equal consideration of the utilities of all
individuals; the second is based on the principle of decreasing marginal utility. Thus,
utilitarian justice depends on the maximization of total individual utilities and affirms
that the maximization of aggregate well being necessarily requires rent redistribution
due to the principle of marginal utility 2
. Nevertheless, the order of individual well-
beings does not justify distributive measures, since what matters is aggregate well-
being; hence abandoning redistributive policies would be advised if these were
deemed to affect economic growth. According to utilitarianism, a society is just
when its institutions are articulated in such a way as to achieve the greatest “sum of
satisfactions”.
Rawls’ principal criticism towards this perspective is that within the utility principle, “it
does not matter, except indirectly, how this sum of satisfactions is distributed among
individuals any more than it matters […] how one man distributes his satisfactions
over time. It simply happens that under most conditions […] that the greatest sum of
2
Marginal utility is understood as the increase in total utility that produces the last income unit received by
each person. Given that this marginal utility is greater in the poor than in the wealthy, redistribution should
occur.

1514
In articles 23, 47, 50, 53, 57, 60 and 66 of the 1998 Constitution, disabilities are
considered only in terms of the failure of welfare, the prevention and elimination
of barriers, and the provision of social security to people with them. Beyond being
given equal treatment before the law, people with disabilities are not considered
genuinely equal.
In the 2008 Constitution, assistance for people with disabilities is guaranteed but
not as a principal question of the social contract. In addition to those pre-existing
liberties, the new Constitution also focuses on equal treatment, the social inclusion
of people with disabilities, and equality of opportunity (see articles 11 and 330).
Moreover, the new Constitution has a specific section on disabilities (sixth section of
Chapter III), whose principles are transversal.
On nationality
As Nussbaum indicates, another problem within the social contract tradition has
to do with the influence of birthplace on the life opportunities of each individual. In
contrast with the 1998 Constitution, which places emphasis on market liberalization
and capital flows (article 244), the new proposal instead seeks an endogenous
development and intelligent insertion into the world market. Priority is given to the
protection of the national producer or investor, within the framework of seeking
global justice. This effort is based on the real absence of an equality of conditions
at origin: for example, the right to proper nutrition cannot be guaranteed within the
current unjust and unequal system of international trade. It is no accident that the
1998 Constitution uses the term “food security” rather than “food sovereignty”. In
contrast, the third chapter of title VI of the new Constitution is dedicated to food
sovereignty.
Moreover, the new constitutional text regards human mobility and universal
citizenship as of central importance. Rights and responsibilities are not only for
Ecuadorian citizens but for all humans living within Ecuadorian territory (article 9),
the greatest possible benefit for those less fortunate (equity).
The following section describes Martha Nussbaum’s criticism of the limits of Rawls’
proposal.
A Post-Rawlsian Constitution
Both Martha Nussbaum and Amartya Sen propose using “capabilities” as sources
of value judgment information. “Capabilities” are the fundamental liberties necessary
in order to achieve the life we value. In order to achieve this, it is necessary to take
into account the relevant personal characteristics that determine the conversion of
primary goods into the personal capabilities necessary to achieve this goal (Sen,
1999: 99).
There are four problems within this framework that remain difficult to address
using Rawls’ conception of justice: that of determining what is owed to people
with disabilities (whether temporary, permanent, mental or physical); that of justice
beyond national borders; that of determining what is owed to animals and the rest
of nature; and finally the problem of saving for future generations (Nussbaum, 2006:
42).
The proposal put forward by the American philosopher in order to overcome the
problems of Rawls’ theory is explained below, and then an analysis of Ecuador’s
new Constitution in order to see how it aligns with the said proposal is undertaken.
On disabilities
Rawls’ doctrine assumes that contractual agents are citizens more or less equal
in their capabilities. People with disabilities are not considered part of the public
sphere, are not treated as equals, and are left with their voices unheard. The 1998
Constitution does not explicitly guarantee the public participation of disabled people.
In contrast, the current Constitution seeks to guarantee the public participation and
representation of people with disabilities (art. 48, section 4).

16 17
The information base is the key variable that society utilizes in order to realize its
value judgments, prioritize actions and distribute limited goods. While in the 1998
Constitution, the information base consisted of those rights in the political and civil
fields, in practice the key variable was economic growth measured through money
(income/consumption), along with the guarantee of some social minimums necessary
for survival 4
. The rules of distribution were governed by the free market and social
welfare policies.
The current Constitution utilizes the notion of “Buen Vivir” as its information base:
a concept based not only on the value of “having” but also in “being,” “doing” and
“feeling”; on good living and living fully. Implicit within the definition of Buen Vivir
is the complex, nonlinear, living but historically constructed nature of the concept
which, as a result, is in constant redefinition. We can nevertheless, however, attempt
to summarize what we mean by Buen Vivir or sumak kawsay as that which involves
the satisfaction of necessities, the attainment of both a dignified quality of life and a
dignified death, of loving and being loved, and of the healthy advancement of all in
peace and harmony with nature in order to ensure the continued existence of human
cultures and biodiversity. Buen Vivir or sumak kawsay assumes a certain amount
of free time for contemplation and emancipation. It maintains that the real liberties,
opportunities, capabilities and potentials for individuals and collectives can grow and
flourish only insofar as they correspond to the values and desired objectives (both
materially as well as subjectively and without producing any form of domination) held
by all societies, territories, individuals, and diverse collective identities—each seen
as both a universal as well as a specific human or collective being. Our concept of
Buen Vivir obliges us to reconstruct the public sphere and the commons in order to
recognize ourselves, understand ourselves and value ourselves and others—as well
as nature—as diverse but equal, with the goal of making possible reciprocity and
5. On the information base: Sumak Kawsay or Buen Vivir
4
In the utilitarian liberal (neoliberal) period, it is necessary to warn that, in the strictest sense, the focal
(utilitarian) economic variable took supremacy over the liberal part. When it was necessary to choose
between the two perspectives, the utilitarian economic view was imposed.
as well as for those Ecuadorians living in other parts of the world, for whom equal
treatment is also promoted. In contrast to the 1998 project, the new Constitution
also gives the right to migration (article 40), and in this sense, the proposed form of
socialism in the new coexistence pact is post-national.
On the rights of nature and future generations
In the traditional literature on justice, one tends to hear that only those that can fulfill
their obligations are subjects of rights. If this is the case, neither future generations
nor nature can enjoy rights. The 2008 Constitution, in contrast with any other around
the world, extends justice through time to future generations as well as throughout
nature to other species beyond the human (see articles 71 and 317). The protection
of the environment is affirmed not only by the right of future generations to enjoy a
healthy environment, but also because of nature’s own intrinsic importance. With
this Constitution, and by considering nature as a subject of rights, we move from an
anthropocentric to a bio-centric ethic in which the role of human beings is that of a
member of the living community. Human development should not be a threat to the
integrity of nature nor to the survival of other species given that, in addition to the
inherent value of nature, its indiscriminate exploitation would risk the reproduction
of human life. Bio-centrism is fundamental if we are to understand the difference
between the classic development viewpoint and that of sumak kawsay, Buen Vivir or
the full life. The proposed coexistence pact is in this sense post-socialist, a form of
bio-socialism, as will be explained below.

19
6. Towards sumak kawsay socialism or (egalitarian) republican
bio-socialism
The new social contract is post-Rawlsian and post-utilitarian. Merely stating this is
not, however, sufficient in order to properly show its core principles. In order to do
this, the following sections will analyze the new justice criteria being proposed.
In the literature on justice theory, all social contracts stem from the idea that “the
principles of justice are those principles that free and rational people interested in
promoting their own interests would accept in an initial position of equality” (Rawls,
1999: 11). One virtue of the new Constitution is its recognition of the historical
processes of natural degradation, discrimination, and the chasm today separating
Ecuadorians as a result of these. In this sense, it is necessary to shed the principles
of a liberal-utilitarian society for those of a republican (egalitarian) bio-socialism 6
.
As previously mentioned, in terms of rights and the question of distribution, the
1998 Constitution is liberal-Rawlsian in its reference to civil and political rights,
while in economic terms it is utilitarian. The 2008 Constitution instead proposes the
construction of a republican bio-egalitarianism that is based on guaranteeing the
rights of nature and the construction of a bio-centric ethic, erasing undignified social
chasms, eliminating racism and forms of exclusion, seeking a non-dominated positive
liberty—in addition to defending the principle of negative liberty. Towards this goal,
citizens and collectives enjoy republican responsibility, spaces for deliberation and
participation, recognition of plural lifestyles, self-realization through self-government
and civic virtue, and the construction of a pluri-national, intercultural and non-
patriarchal state and society.
Why “bio”?
Without a doubt, one of the biggest criticisms of capitalism has come from the fields
6
In the case of Ecuador, if we consider historical examples it can be speculated that it will be first necessary to
construct a post-neoliberal society—a first step that some Latin American countries are now attempting—,
then a popular capitalism or market socialism and, finally, a republican bio-socialism.
18
mutual recognition, and thereby achieving self-realization and the construction of a
shared social future 5
.
5
Which also includes taking into account not only future generations, but also historically excluded
generations. That is why Buen Vivir not only includes subjective and tangible well-being, but also intangible
well-being. For example, leisure and the enjoyment of free time are considered essential for the enjoyment
of a dignified life—which can be seen in articles 24, 66 and 383 in the new Constitution—.

20
Republican Bio-socialism
21
the environment as a public, common and, indeed, global good. In this sense, the
new coexistence pact is post-anthropocentric and trans-statist 7
. The best example
of this effort is Ecuador’s Yasuní-ITT initiative, which, as well as aiming to diminish
pollution, also seeks to avoid producing it, to ensure oil remains underground. The
greatest possible benefit of the initiative would be raising international recognition of
the value of doing nothing. This would necessarily imply the recognition of the true
meaning of a global, public and common good such as nature; the value of global
collective action and of “non-accumulation”; and that life yesterday, life today and
life in the future is all of equal value 8
.
Why an egalitarian social pact?
First, the new constitution is egalitarian because it seeks political justice. This is
especially relevant if we take into account the fact that Ecuador has the greatest
levels of legislative over-representation within Latin America. The new Constitutional
project seeks a form of representation that respects the principle of “one citizen, one
vote”, and alternation and parity in the numbers of male and female candidates (see
article 116).
Moreover, the 2008 text proposes a more horizontal relationship between
representatives and those represented. It assumes political life consists of more than
merely the relationships between political organs, it supports extra-parliamentary
practices in order to meet social demands, and it establishes more opportunities and
spaces for debate while assuring a stricter control of both public and private spheres
7
While it is problematic to attempt this through the State, it can be considered post-statist in the sense that,
while it will perhaps not cause a response in government centers (as was seen in the last forum on climate
change in Denmark), it will be promoted through global social movements and provoke a behavior change
amongst an environmentally-conscious citizenry.
8
The compensation asked for by Ecuador in exchange for leaving the oil underground is a simple pretext
within this framework, since really it is aiming at a much larger goal: it seeks to achieve that in global
environmental or climate change summits there is recognition of the value of not only decreasing pollution
but also avoiding the production of it, which would show a change in global values. The 2009 Copenhagen
summit clearly showed that this change in values is still very far off: the quest for global power still takes
precedent over the quest for sustainability and the reproduction of life.
of environmentalism and environmental economics. The economy cannot be seen
as a mere closed circuit between commodity producers and consumers who are
coordinated by the market through prices. In reality, it is instead necessary to see
“the economy as an entropic flow of energy and materials, which absorbs exterior
finite resources and which creates waste (unused heat, non-recyclable materials)”
(Martínez-Alier & Schlüpmann, 1991: 156). Through this framework, capitalism, in
any form, is unsustainable in terms of guaranteeing the reproduction of life.
As previously indicated, the new Ecuadorian Constitution presents as part of its
general framework the “rights of nature” in chapter seven, in addition to containing
other articles that make allusion to the environmental rights of citizens, linked with
the concept of sumak kawsay.
Nature or Pachamama, the sphere in which life is reproduced and realized, has the
right to have its existence integrally respected and to have its life cycles, structure,
functions and evolutionary processes preserved (article 71).
Since nature is now itself a rights-holder, the new coexistence pact is not only
between community members, but between these and the environment; or, said
another way, between human beings seen as a part of nature. In this framework,
nature is not incorporated as a function of human rights but rather has its own rights.
Thus, intergenerational justice exists not only for human generations but also for
those of other species.
As Gudynas states (2009: 39), the recognition of the intrinsic value of nature is one
of the central tenets in the construction of a society centered on a bio-centric ethic.
With it, we seek to destroy the anthropocentric (which is inherent to modernity and
defined by its instrumentalist values of use, benefit and advantage) and productivist
posture that dominates under capitalism.
As part of the construction of this bio-centric ethic it is also necessary to recuperate
a trans-statist perspective in regards to the environmental problem, acknowledging

2322
A sixth aspect has to do with the construction of an egalitarian impartial justice
system for all. This is principally achieved through the recuperation of the public
sphere, of social rights that ensure a public defense is accessible to all, as well as
the official recognition of the plurality of justices (see article168, paragraph 4, and
article191).
Finally, the new Constitution promotes socio-economic justice so as to confront
inequality in all its forms (Ramírez, 2008). In order to achieve this, it calls for the
reduction of the large social and economic gaps through two processes: (equitable)
redistribution and distribution. This is visible in fiscal, tributary and social public
policies, as well as through access to the means of production (see article 3 paragraph
5; article 281 paragraph 4; article 285; article 300 paragraph 2; article 334).
Nevertheless, (re-)distribution on its own is insufficient given that, although it improves
the situation of the poorest groups, it does not fundamentally change power relations
or the productive structure, and thus rarely reduces social gaps (Ramírez, 2008). In
this sense, the new Constitution is an invitation to “produce while redistributing” and
“distribute while producing”, to encourage distribution during the very process of
wealth creation (see articles 276 and 284, paragraph 1). This proposal emphasizes
endogenous development in order to construct a social and solidary economy that
intelligently articulates with the world market.
The constitution proposes the creation of an internal social and solidary economy —
a model that does not deny the existence of the market, but rather subordinates it to
the reproduction of life and other forms of organization and production. The social
and solidary economy “recognizes the human being as a subject and an end”, and
proposes the creation of a dynamic relationship between the State and society that
enables the realization of Buen Vivir (see article 283). It is not just a question of (re-)
distribution, however, but also of guaranteeing human rights in order to consolidate
a more egalitarian and democratic society. The social and solidary economy then
proposes
by the citizenry and collectives.
In the same way, it seeks to democratize corporatism as a medium through which
groups not capable of collective action can be publicly heard, which is visible for
example in its creation of “Councils for Equality” (article 156). Moreover, the new
Constitution enables collectives to become rights-holders (article 10).
A third example of the Constitutional State’s egalitarian character under the new
social contract is that rights are affected by actions and omissions of both state and
non-state actors.
A fourth point has to do with the document’s reassertion of inter-generational justice
and its recognition of the “diverse but equal” principle. The new Constitution takes
into account the injustices of the past as well as those facing future generations. The
recognition of the plurinational and intercultural State is perhaps one of the principal
egalitarian achievements of the new coexistence pact. Among other elements, it
includes the affirmation of Quichua and Shuar as official languages (article 2),
the possibility of organizing territories in order to preserve ancestral culture, the
recognition of collectively owned land by communes (article 60), and the state
guarantee that indigenous justice will be respected by public institutions (article
171). In this respect, inter-generational justice not only involves correcting historical
injustices but also instilling and upholding a social and individual behavioral ethic
that can foster a Buen Vivir of equal or greater quality for future generations.
A fifth aspect demonstrating the egalitarianism of the new Constitution is the territorial
reconfiguration that, by seeking to create autonomous areas, creates intermediate,
polycentric and equilibrated governments. With articles 251 through to 269, the
Constitution creates the conditions for the construction of autonomous and solidary
regions articulated into a single, national project. The horizontalization of the country
is indispensable if those geographical barriers that have promoted regionalism and
exclusion are to be excluded.

2524
guarantees reproductive rights (in article 332), for example, facilitates the realization
of the egalitarian spirit in other spheres.
The new coexistence pact in effect emphasizes the construction of other living
worlds different from those proposed by Western civilizational models, which are
principally focused on the realms of economics, production and consumption. The
new pact upholds a broader perspective that aims to transform social relations. It is
also emancipatory in the sense that it frees up time for creative leisure, for eroticism,
for art and artisanal work, for personal discovery and existential investigation, for
study, for travel, for democratic participation, for get-togethers and celebrations, for
taking care of others and the environment, for communal mingas 9
. All of this can
only occur when the basic needs of society and individuals are taken care of, when
a more dignified and egalitarian society is achieved within the framework of seeing
the human being as a constitutive being that is within nature and not separated from
it. Linked with this must be the abolishment of the sexual division of labor and a new
equilibrium in the social division of time that reduces the importance of work to the
benefit of other dimensions of human existence (Riechmann & Recio, 1999: 110).
This new Constitution can also be understood as an attempt to change certain
principles of coexistence. As Jean-Pierre Dupuy (1998) indicates, the values on
which capitalist society is based include envy, selfishness and inequality, which
are inscribed in a system in which decisions are based upon price and which
upholds a private property system where there is unequal access to the means of
production. This system demeans individuals, who, now motivated only by greed,
view their neighbors instrumentally as either a source of wealth or a threat, and
where inequality is deemed necessary to instigate creativity, to compete and to grow
(Ovejero 2005:83).
7
Translator’s note: Minga is a Quichua term for a communal work meeting or party in which community
members work together on a common project.
…a way of creating an economy that organizes production, distribution,
circulation and the consumption of goods and services in an associative
and cooperative way, not based on private gain but rather on meeting the
needs of, and seeking a high quality of life for, all participants, their families
and communities, in collaboration with other communities in order to meet
the material necessities and establish fraternal and solidary social ties, the
responsible management of natural resources, and a respect for future
generations, through the consolidation of harmonic and long-lasting social
links between communities, and without exploiting foreign labor (Coraggio,
2007a and 2007b).
The path to achieving the social and solidary economy is through changing the
current market society’s monopoly over the means of production, in which owners
have control over work processes and production and which prevents workers from
freely exercising their values, alienating them from their capabilities and the product
of their labor. The new proposal appeals to the in situ development of the laborer,
to the sharing of property rights, and to cooperation in all parts of the productive
process. It is based on the premise that “the distribution structure is completely
determined by the productive structure” (Marx cited by Fleischacker, 2003: 97).
This is articulated in the proposal for an insertion within the global market through
a sovereign trade policy (see article 304). Within this framework, it may be said that
egalitarianism does not have as its goal the State, but rather society and collectives.
The social and solidary economy is not part of, but exists alongside, the market and,
as such, foments other, broader forms of organization and property such as state
property, large national property, republican property, communitarian property, social
property and capitalist property. Within this framework, it is necessary to consider all
combinations of property and the organizational forms that arise from them.
Nevertheless, the (re-)distributive process must extend beyond the productive
sphere. Egalitarianism also involves the fair distribution of all work, not just that done
by paid employees, who are the sole beneficiaries under the current system. It aims
to create solidarity in all aspects of daily life. The mere fact that the new Constitution

26
27
An individual that “chooses” between two miserable jobs, who has no social
protection, nor any other work options, is not free. Neither is a woman that gives birth
to her children at home because she has no option of choosing trained assistance.
Neither is the person forced to migrate, and, in doing so, experiences familial
fragmentation, uprootedness, and rupture.
In the new Constitution, civil rights become rights of liberty (see, for example,
paragraph 4 of article 66 and article 48).
b. Participation and deliberation as additional procedures of citizen
interaction
A republican democratic State requires political institutions and public management
methods that leave room for public deliberation, public participation in decision-
making, and the social control of state action.
The vision that the new Constitution promotes is seen in title IV, articles 95 through
to 111. The fourth section, which refers to direct democracy, is particularly pertinent
and establishes a fifth power called the “Citizen Participation and Social Control
Council” (fifth chapter, second section, art. 207).
One of the motivating principles in the classical economics of capitalist well
being refers to the principle of “Pareto optimal” 10
. Nevertheless, given external
characteristics such as inherited wealth, the environment and differences in personal
characteristics, allocation methods cannot be determined by ad hoc characteristics
such as efficiency, efficacy, and optimality; and it is for this reason that the new
social pact of the 2008 Constitution calls into question one of the central principles
of capitalism. Instead of seeking “optimal solutions,” it tries to prioritize, as a society,
10
This concept has been a reference point through which distribution and allocation models have been
defended around the world. It is said that a wealth distribution is “Pareto optimal” when any individual can
increase their utility without diminishing that of another.
The new constitutional proposal for coexistence seeks to construct a continuum of
relations in which members of society are recognized as ends (and not means) and
as integral parts of a social and political community. The elimination of oppressive
inequalities and the construction of equalities are sine qua non conditions to make
possible the cooperation, solidarity, mutual recognition and desire to create a shared
future that are necessary for the achievement of Buen Vivir.
Why a republican Constitution?
The new Constitution proposes creating a republican society that expands negative
liberty to construct a positive liberty, considered as non-domination and the
empowerment of individual capabilities. The following are necessary in order to
achieve this: to have sufficient material resources; to have citizens with republican
responsibility that autonomously outline their preferences and needs, and to
institutionalize spaces for participation and deliberation, where arguments can be
aired and each citizen is able to defend their position. Likewise, while republicanism
holds that liberty is assured by participation in the public sphere, without civic virtue
this participation is non-existent. As indicated by Rousseau, republican citizens, “far
from paying to get out of their duties, are disposed to pay in order to fulfill them”
(Rousseau, 1969: 105).
The premises under which the new Constitution is labeled ‘republican’ are explained
below.
a. Liberty and/or self-realization as the non-interference, non-domination
and expansion of human and social potential
Moving beyond the liberal concept, the new coexistence paradigm is a result of
conceiving liberty as the realization of each individual’s potential, as long as the
potentials of all citizens are also realized (Ovejero, 2006: 133). The liberty of all makes
possible the liberty of each, and vice versa. Beyond viewing liberty as based solely
on non-interference, it is also conceived of positively, in that liberty necessarily
excludes domination and exploitation.

2928
expenditure (see articles 288 and 289).
Part of making public what is hidden involves demonstrating how all that is in the
private arena produces relations of domination or subordination between human
beings (see article 66), such as is evident in the historic relations between men and
women.
On the other hand, it is necessary to recuperate the concept of the public sphere as a
social-collective construction both of and for the common good. In this sense, what
is public “is of interest or common utility for all members of the political community,
connecting collectives and authorities to that from which they spring” (Rabotnikof,
1995: 9-10).
The new Constitution proposes the promotion of civic virtue so that citizens may
contribute to the creation of laws, to decision-making and to taking over public
responsibilities. One of the articles that explicitly establishes the notion of citizens’
public responsibility is to be found in article 278.
Finally, it is necessary to recuperate the concept of the public sphere as necessarily
linked to common spaces in which encounters between citizens can occur; that is,
non-exclusionary spaces which are open to all. Perhaps the best effort in this sense
is the establishment of universal, public and free policies within the fields of justice,
health, education, social security, as well as others (see, for example, articles 356
and 367).
This perspective implies thinking of the public sphere from the perspective of
a certain return of the State but always in relation to the role of civil society. The
Constitution recuperates State intervention for purposes of regulation, control,
planning, re-distribution and in the guaranteeing of rights. This is seen in title VI of
the Economic Regime and in title VII of the Buen Vivir Regime.
At the same time, one must think of the public sphere from the new position of
the development areas and policy dimensions that are the most cost-effective in
social, economic and environmental terms in order to achieve objectives and arrive
at “compromise solutions” (Martínez-Alier & O’Connor, 1996). The participation
between equal actors permits the prioritizing of interests and objectives according
to a series of publicly-defined criteria.
While the prior Constitution affirms that planning must be participatory, it failed to
institutionalize the spaces necessary to make this possible. In contrast, the new
Decentralized System of Participatory Planning takes into account a participatory
logic through the establishment of spaces in both national and regional development
councils that incorporate citizen opinions on planning in such a way as to articulate
central government actions with those of decentralized, autonomous governments
(see article 279). In this way, the planning system is participatory, decentralized and
de-concentrated in the creation, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of public
policies.
c. Public activity as a pillar of republicanism: Towards the construction
of civic virtue
The public good must consist of realizing those transformations that can stall the
deadly machine of the “self-regulating” market. The new Constitution recuperates
conceptions of the public sphere that articulate the construction of the project for an
independent country with an integrated social project and expectations of a better,
collectively created future. Part of the recuperation of the public sphere involves
the creation of common spaces for social, cultural and political encounters that go
beyond mere market relations and seek to decommodify social relations.
In this sense, the Constitution reclaims the public dimension of social and state life,
starting with some central attributes. The idea of the public sphere, for example,
is opposed to that which is hidden. Adequate communication about state actions
is fundamental if inequalities in the allocation of resources are to be avoided and
complaints by those that have been negatively affected are to be heard. This
recuperation can be seen in public procurement processes or in audits of public

3130
ethnicities—a fact which impedes the emergence of open, flexible, diverse and plural
cultural and political systems.
In contrast, the vision of a plurinational, megadiverse and intercultural State aims
to achieve the political recognition of ethnic, regional, and sexual diversity, and to
create a society with multiple trajectories of loyalty and pertinence in the political
community. The new State assumes the idea of a multiplicity of identities in dialogue
with one another, and which reproduce a series of complex relations in the nation
through continual interaction. Thus, the image of the citizen as an individual rights-
holder is articulated in order to then produce the concept of collective rights-holders:
language, culture, justice and territory. This diversity is institutionally reflected in a
flexible state architecture where decentralization, autonomy and special territorial
diversions become part of the overall fundamental structure (such as, for example,
indigenous territorial districts). Moreover, the principle of a State that recognizes
difference should prefigure specific judicial and institutional solutions, under the
form of rights that make possible an effective equality in diversity. Thus, reparation
policies in order to correct the historic disadvantages of certain groups are made
possible, which also prefigures an effective context for egalitarian opportunities
for all Ecuadorians. In this way, it can be seen that the new social pact is post-
patriarchal, post-Eurocentrist and post-identitarian.
civil society: social movements, community associations, citizen collectives, new
emergent identities and the organized participation of volunteers, which all demand
a say in decision-making in order to orient public life (see title IV). In this sense, the
State is the means and not the end, since it is citizens and collectives that orient
policy goals.
While one of the principal objectives of this proposal is the recuperation of citizen
and collective power, in order to give (organized) civil society the power to orient the
“democratization of democracy,” it is also necessary to recuperate the State as an
expression of decentralized collective action. The exclusionary society was based
on an “anti-statist” construction, which is why the pro-inclusion fight “consists of
minimally stabilizing among the popular classes those expectations that the State
stopped guaranteeing when it lost control of social regulation” (Santos, 2005: 90).
d. The construction of a plurinational, intercultural and non-patriarchal
State
The construction of modern states has been dominated by a colonial vision of
power in which a homogeneous vision of national cultural identity is the assumed
center of the social, ethnic and symbolic orders of each nation and which is
defined by the patriarchal-mestizo11
-white universe, producing what Boaventura
de Sousa Santos calls “epistemicide”. The content and form of nations has been
loosely linked to the interests and imaginations of the economic and political elites,
which are predominantly white, bourgeois, masculine, educated and urban. A
cultural-symbolic configuration has thus been created that is based on systems of
oppression and discrimination, which has direct effects on inequality and economic
exclusion—in a map of the region one can see that in almost all countries, areas of
poverty as measured by consumption or basic needs, overlap with areas of certain
10
Translator’s note: Mestizo is a Spanish term meaning “of mixed race,” usually indicating in Latin America
that the person is of mixed indigenous and Spanish origin.

33
The proposal presents a sustainable and endogenous national strategy to achieve
Buen Vivir with a strategic and sovereign insertion into the world system. This
strategy consists of implementing public policies that modify existing patterns of
accumulation, redistribution and distribution, with a territorial focus that permits the
reduction of inequalities. In this framework, public investment planning, productive
tributary incentives and public credit policies seek to overcome the primary
exporter model, democratize access to the means of production and create quality
employment.
Ecuador’s accumulation strategy throughout its republican history was one of agro-
exportation, to which oil exportation was added over the last four decades. This
form of wealth creation was accompanied during the last 25 years by economic
liberalization and a “trickle-down” redistribution strategy, whether through the market
or through social policies that provided targeted welfare. As it is impossible to halt
this strategy overnight, it is necessary to create a medium and long-term roadmap
for shifting away from this inefficient paradigm.
With this objective in mind, it is necessary to remember that Ecuador’s most significant
comparative advantage is its biodiversity, thus the greatest comparative advantage
it can have is to know how best to make use of this, both through conservation and
the creation of bio- and nano-technology industries. In this sense, the new strategy
is oriented towards the medium- and long-term construction of the bio-polis: a “bio-
knowledge” society, with community eco-tourism and agro-ecological products 13
.
Biodiversity is synonymous with life and, as a result, with information. Nevertheless,
it is not creating wealth today because there is inadequate industry and knowledge
through which to take advantage of it 14
. This would imply the creation of added
13
Ecuador as bio-polis not only has to do with the construction of a new accumulation and re-distribution
strategy, but also with the construction of bio-socialism, as previously mentioned. This situation can only be
viable, however, if a proposal is outlined that results in real actions deemed beneficial by society.
14
In order to address the question of “bio-knowledge”, we must remember that calculations show that “more
than 90% of biological diversity that exists on the planet is found in the tropical and subtropical regions of
Africa, Asia and South America. To this must be added the knowledge derived from indigenous knowledge.
32
7. Ecuador as “bio-polis”: Construction a new bio-strategy for
accumulation and (re-)distribution
The construction of the Buen Vivir society has to be associated with the construction
of a new method of accumulation and (re-)distribution. The high levels of inequality
and exclusion that exist, in addition to cultural practices rooted in society, are a
consequence of a development strategy that has been principally based on
wealth accumulation through the production of primary goods that are sold in the
external market: the agro-exportation strategy. The arrival of oil further increased
the dependence of the Ecuadorian economy on primary goods, which, as a result,
became even more extractivist. Except for certain periods during its republican
history when there were attempts to create national industry, wealth has remained
in the hands of a corporatist State that took advantage of oil production, but failed
to redistribute the benefits. The arrival of economic liberalization and dollarization
further increased wealth concentration in the hands of a group that, in the demand
for industrialized goods, saw a niche market to be exploited: importers. Both groups,
with close ties to government and the banking industry, made the vicious circle of
accumulation complete.
The new social pact signed by the Ecuadorian society cannot coexist with a primary
export strategy in a context in which Ecuador must overcome its role as a provider of
primary goods that degrade nature. This role was always destined to failure.
If we are to construct the Buen Vivir society of our dreams, we must have an
alternative plan to generate and (re-)distribute wealth. It is important to clarify that
the economic accumulation and (re-)distribution strategy is merely one of many
elements that a grand strategy for achieving Buen Vivir must contain. In a society in
which there are high levels of unsatisfied basic needs, however, creating alternatives
to the aforementioned, failed strategy is paramount 12
.
12
It is critical to remember that the ultimate goal of this strategy is “Buen Vivir”, whose primary objective is
the satisfaction of people’s basic needs. The first step in the construction of the Buen Vivir society is to
guarantee the reproduction of dignified lives within an inter-generational perspective.

3534
generally, as the axis of the whole strategy. Through selective import substitution15
,
the promotion of the community and agro-ecological ecotourism sector, and
strategic public investment that foments systemic productivity—with an emphasis
on connectivity—16
, the foundations are laid for the construction of national industry
and the production of substantial changes in the energy matrix 17
, which are the
motors of wealth creation in this period. The following are priorities during this
phase: technological disaggregation through technology transfer, investments
outside of the country in order to develop human capacities (especially in the basic
sciences and life sciences) 18
, investment in early childhood development, promoting
environmentally sound agriculture and the strengthening of the necessary conditions
for community ecotourism. Protecting employment-creating and employment–
intensive sectors should take preference in this phase, as well as those associated
with initiatives from the social and solidary economy, the exercise of the country’s
food sovereignty and, in general, the satisfaction of basic needs. Moreover, avoiding
the capture of the surplus by intermediate market actors is fundamental in order to
guarantee long-term and macroeconomic sustainability. Finally, it is necessary to
consolidate a progressive taxation system in which tributary pressure is increased
while policies that consolidate the (re-) distribution of the means of production are
simultaneously promoted.
15
For an effective import substitution, it is advisable to principally incentivize the development of the following
nascent industries: petro-chemistry; bioenergy and biofuels (of both the second and third generation,
which do not compromise food sovereignty nor the agricultural frontier); metallurgy; biomedicine,
pharmaceuticals and generics; biochemistry; hardware and software; as well as environmental services
such as global compensation for not exploiting oil. Moreover, priority should be given to activities that
create added value and which have significant effects on work creation and the satisfaction of basic
needs, such as construction (with emphasis on social housing), food, artisanal fishing, artisan works,
community tourism, textiles and shoes.
16
One of the challenges is to link overall necessary public investment with national savings.
17
Energy production, transfer and consumption should be radically reoriented towards environmental
sustainability through fomenting renewable energy and energy efficiency.
18
These are emphasized because the Ecuadorian higher education system lacks sufficient programs in
these areas and it is more efficient to invest in scholarships for foreign universities, in the repatriation
of talented Ecuadorians, and to participate in exchanges for foreign professors that permit the further
consolidation of programs needed by the country’s new industries that will be related to the development
of bio-knowledge.
value through ethically putting life to work in the service of human beings, while
always respecting the rights of nature. In contrast with orthodox perspectives on
growth, this new strategy incorporates knowledge, dialogue between different forms
of knowledge, information, science, technology and innovation as endogenous
variables in the system, which must be deliberately created and promoted if the
country wants to produce radical qualitative transformations.
Nevertheless, it is necessary to stress that the center of the Buen Vivir strategy
during these periods should remain the satisfaction of the basic needs of the
population and territories through processes of sustainable wealth creation across
time. All actions within this strategy should have as their priority the satisfaction
of basic needs within the framework established in the Constitution. Moreover, if
growth and “trickle-down” redistribution was sought in the era of individualism and
selfishness, in the era of solidarity, reciprocity and cooperation distribution while
producing and production while re-distributing should be sought. In this framework,
the creation and promotion of a popular, social and solidary economy constitutes the
principal tool for incorporating (re-)distribution into the very process of added value
creation. From this perspective, the endogenous and sustainable strategy responds
to medium term guidelines over a 16 to 20 year period, which will be progressively
achieved through consideration of four principal moments:
The first phase is a transition in terms of accumulation, which, in the context of
the country’s economic dependence on primary goods, is not considered in terms
of re-distribution, but as the focal point of change during this period and, more
Of the world’s plant species, more than two thirds originate in peripheral and semi-peripheral countries.
More than 7,000 medicinal compounds used by Western medicine are derived from knowledge of plants.
It can be concluded that throughout the last century local communities have significantly contributed to
industrial agriculture, the pharmaceutical industry and the biotechnology industry. […] The pharmaceutical,
food and biotechnology multinationals have appropriated the knowledge of our peoples with nonexistent
or minimal compensation, later processing their contents and patenting the processes and, at the same
time, their products” (Santos, 2003: 146). Neo-dependency is principally based on the colonization of
knowledge. Within the regional integration framework, it is critical to incentivize the creation of spaces for
dialogue that aim to produce knowledge that addresses the problems facing the country in order to begin
debating even the epistemological form of constructing said knowledge.

3736
their technological application. The goal is for the relative size of these services—
especially those involving bio-knowledge—and of tourist services to be larger than
those created by the primary sector. Knowledge services that are produced as a
result will be linked to those nascent industries being fomented in the first phase.
In this context, the strategy of national sovereignty with strategic global insertion
closely depends on the endogenous strategy for meeting basic needs—not the
reverse, as has historically occurred under neoliberalism, where political decisions
depend on the liberalization policies of the globalized market. Beginning with the
first phase, the starting point for an intelligent insertion should be the consolidation
of Latin American integration and the construction of a political-economic regional
architecture that seeks to create new equilibriums of global power. This political
architecture—UNASUR, OEALC, ALBA—will have to handle at least six programmatic
axes: environment, trade, finance, science, energy, society, as well as politics. It will
be important to maintain a solid political block with respect to such topics as the
ecological debt, the Daly tax or the limiting of CO2 emissions in order to combat
climate change; the consolidation of regional institutions for trade arbitrage and to
consolidate fairer trade between our countries; the creation of the Bank of the South
and a common currency for the region; the search to produce knowledge for and
from the region and to foment integration and mobility between higher education
institutions; the financing of a regional proposal for energy sovereignty, produced and
consumed cleanly and efficiently; the joint affirmation of a strategy for guaranteeing
the rights of all citizens of Latin America, in the region as well as in the North—these
are just some programmatic examples of the importance of working together as a
region in order to create a more just, multi-polar world.
In summary, the focal point of the endogenous wealth creation strategy is
to convert Ecuador’s principal comparative advantage, its biodiversity, into
added value through the enjoyment of its contemplation (community tourism)
and the transformation of the information contained within into industrial
knowledge, goods and services in order to satisfy basic needs (e.g. agro-
ecology and environmentally sound materials for construction). At the same
19
In order for this to succeed, necessary public investment in the energy sector must be consolidated.
Energy and the transformation of the social security system could become a substitute for petroleum as
sources of state income for public investment.
In the second phase, the relative weight of new national industry increases in
relation to that of the primary sector and an energy surplus is sought, principally
through the production and consumption of clean and bioenergy 19
. The strategy
for wealth creation in this phase is bolstered by community eco-tourism, and, during
the production process itself, surplus will be distributed through strengthening the
social, solidary and popular economy. Linked with developing nascent industries,
there will be a prioritization of research and development investment, thanks to
a virtuous tripartite alliance: universities, (public and private) industry, and public
research institutes or technological centers of investigation. With this goal in mind,
the consolidation of a graduate-level higher education system and research centers
of excellence will be a priority during this phase. The creation of income for the
national economy will still be dependent—though in smaller measure than during
the first phase—on the responsible and sustainable extraction of non-renewable
resources during this period.
The third phase consolidates a diversification and export substitution strategy. It is
expected that national energy should be able to satisfy internal demand and create
surpluses for export. The strategy seeks, moreover, to substitute exportations for
those goods with greater value-added and which are not exclusively dependent on
extractive processes. In this phase, the relative weight of national industry will be
somewhat above the relative weight of primary (exportable) goods in the national
economy. Investment in science and technology will promote productive innovation
in aspects related to industry, whose imports we will seek to substitute in an initial
period. In the same way, a social security system will be consolidated during this
phase which will permit wealth accumulation for necessary public investment.
In the fourth phase, the objective of the strategy is to launch bio-services and

3938
connotations that should be taken into account while evaluating the implementation
of public policies, their attainment and durability. The economic accumulation rate
then becomes subject to the objectives of the inter-generational satisfaction of basic
needs and (re-) distribution, not the reverse (Vos, 1989). That is, the reproducibility of
life has primacy over economic accumulation. Having the satisfaction of basic needs
as its goal, it puts emphasis on labor-intensive production, in savings through social
security, and in import savings. For this reason, the required accumulation rate can
be lower than in other development strategies.
time, the center of the strategy for democratizing the benefits of development
is to regionally integrate, redistribute the means of production and consolidate
the social and solidary economy that shares while creating wealth, as well as
transform public systems (social security and public education), which then
makes possible the guaranteeing of rights and the consolidation of a new form
of wealth creation and (re-) distribution.
It is important to clarify that while the objective of the strategy is to create a type
of wealth that has as its goal the satisfaction of the basic needs of the political
community Ecuador; it aims to reach this goal through a sustainable, democratizing
and inter-generationally beneficial process. In this sense, it breaks with two false
dilemmas that have emerged within the public debate: conservation vs. satisfaction
of necessities and efficiency vs. distribution.
In the endogenous strategy of wealth creation that has been described, conservation
and knowledge of the information contained in biodiversity are conditions for the
satisfaction of needs. It relies on the potential of a harmonic coexistence between
both sides of the equation, given that “not paying the social debt today is at the
same time not paying the environmental debt of tomorrow” (Ramírez, 2008) 20
.
The analysis of efficiency should not merely involve the consideration of whether a
more productive economy is being created, but also, and above all, whether we are
achieving a more just society that satisfies the basic needs of its population.
Moreover, it is possible to establish an economy that in the very process of wealth
creation distributes its benefits; that is, which concomitantly shares its wealth while
creating it, just as supposed by the social and solidary economy. The strategy of
constructing a sustainable economy, which makes its processes endogenous in order
to satisfy the basic needs of its members and reduce external vulnerabilities, has
20
For each 1% that nature is degraded, poverty grows by 0,26% (UNDP-UNEP, 2008: 9).

41
The construction of an egalitarian and (bio-) diverse society based on solidarity and
cooperation in the absence of envy is perhaps a far more laudable objective for a
society that, in contrast to the solitary and selfish character on which the utilitarian
society of the free market is based, has as its goal the recuperation of the political,
solidary and gregarious character of the individual. In this sense, the guiding
principle of egalitarian justice in the framework of recognizing (bio-) diversity that is
here proposed
…has to (objectively and subjectively) materialize—on the negative side—
through the elimination of inequalities that produce domination, oppression,
human indignity, subordination or humiliation between persons or territories
and—on the positive side—through the creation of scenarios that foment a
parity which makes possible people’s emancipation and self-realization and
where the principles of solidarity and fraternity (community) can prosper and,
with them, the possibility of mutual recognition (or possibility of reciprocity)
between members and territories of a society (Ramírez, 2008: 32).
Cooperation and solidarity will be developed only to the degree in which interested
parties are conscious of the fact that, in the future, they will be tied together by
joint projects and that the success of these projects is conditional on personal
self-realization—that is, a coexistence pact in which people mutually recognize
one another. In this sense, the search for a society that participates in the solidary
and cooperative construction of a shared future is a necessary condition for the
construction of a society that is more or less free of envy.
The possibility of mutual recognition rests upon the creation of a citizen/collective
public sensibility in which the desire to live together flourishes because as individuals
we recognize that achieving Buen Vivir for all—including for other living things and
for future generations—is a part of ensuring our own quality of life. This does not
mean living identically, but rather living as equals, wanting to live together. This is the
coexistence pact of the new constitutional text. This is the great transformational
challenge of our society!
40
Liberal utilitarian society is based on the depredation of nature in order to create
accumulation; selfishness as the motivation for competition; inequality and envy
as incentives; public activity—state or community public action—as a cost; and
responsibility as a problem. This perspective is based on two premises: that there
are no limits to nature, and that within the social contract all citizens start from equal
conditions; that is, free, equal and independent. In concrete terms, the ultimate
objective has been to increase the well being of the population, seen as an increase
of the aggregate sum of income and expenditures of consumers (citizens?). That
the guarantee of rights is principally subject to the condition that the rights holder
is a formal worker with acquisitive power is a way of facilitating the reproduction
of the dominant class, in which inheritance plays a fundamental role. At the same
time, the mode of production has been characterized by unequal access to property
because property rights require that owners control work and production, thereby
converting the worker into a mere instrument. Wealth distribution—both monetary
and, in the best cases, of primary goods—is done through the market and welfarism
is presented as an alternative to meaningful and effective social policy. These are the
characteristics demonstrated in the 1998 Constitution.
The new coexistence pact of the 2008 Constitution, sumak kawsay socialism or
republican bio-socialism, recuperates a bio-centric ethic of coexistence. It is not
based on the “veil of ignorance”, but rather on the fact of the abysmal inequality,
exclusion and discrimination that exist within Ecuador. In this sense, a first goal within
the proposal is to reduce these gaps through the (re-) distribution of the benefits of
development, through disregarding the “abundance thesis”, through the recognition
of inter-generational justice and the consideration of nature as a subject of rights.
The new coexistence pact is based on the objective of achieving the Buen Vivir of
citizens and collectives—for all and without discrimination—, which is not viable if it
does not have as its goal the guarantee of the rights of nature, the reduction of social
inequalities, the elimination of discrimination and of exclusion, and the construction
of a cooperative and solidary spirit which makes possible mutual recognition between
“diverse equals” in the framework of a bio-strategy of wealth creation.
8. Towards a bio-centric society free of inequality and envy

43
Bibliography
Coraggio, José Luis (2007a). “Crítica de la política social neoliberal: las nuevas
tendencias”. Lecture presented in the Latin American and Caribbean Social Science
Congress, in celebration of 50 years of FLACSO, in Quito, October.
_________(2007b). “El papel de la economía social y solidaria en la estrategia de
inclusión social”. Lecture presented at the International Seminar - Ecuador at 2020.
Pensando estrategias de desarrollo, in Quito, December 10-13.
Dupuy, Jean-Pierre (1998). El sacrificio y la envidia: el liberalismo frente a la justicia
social. Barcelona: Gedisa.
Elster, Jon, y Slagstad Rune, eds. (2002). Constitucionalismo y democracia. México:
Fondo de Cultura Económica.
Elster, Jon (2002), Ulises desatado. Estudios sobre racionalidad, precompromiso y
restricciones. Barcelona: Gedisa.
Fleischacker, Samuel (2003). A Short History of Distribution. Boston: Harvard
University Press.
Gargarella, Roberto (2005). Los fundamentos legales de la desigualdad: el
constitucionalismo en América (1776-1860). Madrid: Siglo XXI.
Hernández, Andrés (2006). La teoría ética de Amartya Sen. Bogotá: Siglo del Hombre
Editores.
Laville, Jean-Louis, y Luiz Inácio Gaiger (2009). «Economía solidaria». In Diccionario
de la otra economía. Buenos Aires: CLACSO.
Martínez-Alier, Joan, y Martin O´Connor (1996). «Ecological and Economic Distribution
Conflicts». In Robert Constanza, Olman Segura y Joan Martínez-Alier, eds., Getting

4544
Riechmann, Jorge, y Alberto Recio (1997). Quien parte y reparte… El debate sobre
la reducción del tiempo de trabajo. Barcelona: Icaria.
Roemer, John (1998). Equality of opportunity. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Rousseau, Jean-Jacques (1969 [1762]). Del contrato social. Madrid: Taurus.
Santos, Boaventura de Sousa (2006). Renovar la teoría crítica y reinventar la
emancipación social. Buenos Aires: CLACSO.
_________(2005). Reinventar la democracia, reinventar el Estado. Buenos Aires:
CLACSO.
Sen, Amartya (2001). La desigualdad económica. México: Fondo de Cultura
Económica.
__________(1992). Nuevo examen de la desigualdad. Madrid: Alianza Editorial.
UNDP-UNEP (2008). Poverty and environment indicators. Cambridge: St. Edmund’s
College.
down to Earth: practical applications of ecological economics. Washington, Island
Press: 153-183.
Martínez-Alier, Joan, y Klaus Schlüpmann (1991). La ecología y la economía. México:
FCE.
Minteguiaga, Analía (2006). Redefiniciones de los sentidos de la educación pública.
El escenario de la Reforma Educativa de los ’90 en la Argentina. Doctorate thesis for
Social Science Research program with specialization in Political Science, FLACSO-
México.
Nussbaum, Martha (2007). Las fronteras de la justicia. Consideraciones sobre la
exclusión. Barcelona: Paidós.
Ovejero, Félix (2005). Proceso abierto: el socialismo después del socialismo.
Barcelona: Editorial Kriterios Tus Quesos.
Paz y Miño, Juan (2007). «Constituyentes, constituciones y economía». In Boletín
Taller de Historia Económica. Quito: Pontificia Universidad Católica del Ecuador,
Economics Department.
Rabotnikof, Nora (2005). En busca de un lugar común. El espacio público en la teoría
política contemporánea. México: Universidad Autónoma de México-Instituto de
Investigaciones Filosóficas.
__________(1995). «El espacio público: variaciones en torno a un concepto». In
Nora Rabotnikof, Ambrosio Velasco y Corina Yturbe, compilers. La tenacidad de la
política. México, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México: 49-63.
Ramírez, René (2008). Igualmente pobres, desigualmente ricos. Quito: Ariel-PNUD.
Rawls, John (1999). Justicia como equidad. Barcelona: Tecnos.

Sumak kawsay socialism or republican bio socialism digital

Sumak kawsay socialism or republican bio socialism digital

Recomendados

Recomendados

Mais conteúdo relacionado

Semelhante a Sumak kawsay socialism or republican bio socialism digital

Semelhante a Sumak kawsay socialism or republican bio socialism digital (10)

Mais de René Ramírez Gallegos

Mais de René Ramírez Gallegos (20)

Último

Último (20)

Sumak kawsay socialism or republican bio socialism digital