Comércio Internacional Ecologicamente Desigual
Evidências empíricas para América Latina e Caribe (ALC) (1970-2017)
Palavras-chave:
Assimetrias de comércio e poder, Comércio internacional e meio ambiente, Extratitivismo, Comércio ecológico desigualResumo
O Comércio Ecológico Desigual (EET) mostra que o comércio internacional é assimétrico não apenas em termos econômicos, mas também em termos ecológicos. Para identificar o EET, é necessário considerar os aspectos biofísicos das transações comerciais, que podem ser medidos em termos materiais, expressando que mais valores ambientais estão sendo trocados por menos. Ao trabalhar com a metodologia de Análise de Fluxo de Materiais (MFA), o EET pode ser identificado de duas maneiras: i) Uma assimetria líquida no balanço material e energético contra os países do Sul, resultando em um déficit biofísico permanente que desloca a maior parte das pressões e ônus ambientais para seus territórios; ii) Uma deterioração nos termos de troca (razão entre preços de exportação e preços de importação por tonelada) desfavorável aos países exportadores de commodities. Para corroborar essas abordagens nas duas formas de expressão indicadas, foi realizada uma análise empírica em duas etapas: uma primeira que abrangeu o grupo de países da ALC e outra que abordou de forma independente os oito (8) maiores países da região (Argentina, Brasil, México, Colômbia, Chile, Peru, Equador e Venezuela). Esta pesquisa foi realizada com base em estatísticas sobre o fluxo de materiais e saldos monetários do comércio exterior regional para os oito países indicados, abrangendo o período de 1970 a 2017. Os resultados mostram evidências históricas do desequilíbrio material, monetário e ecológico para uma região que tradicionalmente tem sido provedora de serviços naturais e ambientais para o resto do mundo.
Referências
Alonso-Fernández, P., Regueiro-Ferreira, R.M. (2022). Extractivism, ecologically unequal exchange and environmental impact in South America: a study using material flow analysis (1990–2017). Ecological Economics 194: 107351.
Andersson, O. y Lindroth, M. (2001). Ecologically unsustainable trade. Ecological Economics 37: 113–122.
Arrighi, G. (1995). The Long 20th Century. Money, Power, and the Origins of Our Times’ London, New York: Verso.
Arrighi G. (2007). Adam Smith en Pekín: Orígenes y fundamentos del siglo XXI, Ediciones Akal, Madrid.
Ávila-Calero, S. y Sorman, A. (2018). Transición energética (energías renovables). En: Decrecimiento: Vocabulario para una nueva era, Edición ampliada Latinoamericana, DÁlisa, G., Demaria, F., y Kallis, G. (Eds.), Cap. 62, pp. 380-384, Icaria Editorial y Programa Editorial Universidad del Valle, Cali.
Banco Mundial (s.f.). Indicadores. https://databank.worldbank.org/source/world-development-indicators).
Barrientos, S., Dollan, C. y Tallontire, A. (2003). A gendered value chain approach to codes of conduct in African horticulture, World Development, 31-9: 1511-1526.
Van den Bergh, J. y H. Verbruggen (1999). Spatial sustainability, trade, and indicators: an evaluation of the ‘ecological footprint,’ Ecological Economics, Vol. 29: 1, Pag. 61-72.
Bleaney, M. and Greenaway, D. (1993). Long-run trends in the relative price of primary commodities and in the terms of trade of developing countries, Oxford Economic Papers, 45 (3), 349-63.
Cashin, P. y McDermott, C. J (2002). The Long-Run Behavior of Commodity Prices: Small Trends and Big Variability, IMF Staff Papers Vol. 49, No.2, International Monetary Fund.
Crespo-Marín, Z. y Pérez-Rincón, M. (2018) Las economías andinas y centroamericanas vistas desde el metabolismo social: 1970-2013. Sociedad y Economía, (36), 53-81. https://doi.org/10.25100/sye.v0i36.5866
Cuddington, J. (1992). Long-run trends in 26 primary commodity prices: a disaggregated look at the Prebisch-Singer hyphotesis, Journal of Development Economics, 39 (2): 207-227.
Cutcu, I., Beyaz, A., Gokhan-Gerlikhan, S, Kilic, Y. (2023). Is ecological footprint related to foreign trade? Evidence from the top ten fastest developing countries in the global economy, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 413, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.137517.
Da Silva, D., De Oliveira, S., Hoekstra, A., Neto, J. D., Campos, H., Braga, C., De Araújo, L., De Oliveira, A., De Brito, J. I., De Souza, M. D., De Holanda, R. (2016). Water Footprint and Virtual Water Trade of Brazil, Water 2016, 8(11), 517; https://doi.org/10.3390/w8110517.
Dittrich, M., Bringezu, S. (2010). The physical dimensions of international trade part 1: direct global flows between 1962 and 2005. Ecological Economics 69: 1838–47.
Dorninger, C. y Eisenmenger, N. (2016). South America’s biophysical involvement in inter- national trade: the physical trade balances of Argentina, Bolivia, and Brazil in the light of ecologically unequal exchange, Journal of Political Ecology 23: 394–409.
Dorninger, C., Hornborg, A., Abson, D., von Wehrden, H., Schaffartzik, A., Giljum, S., Engler, J., Feller, R., Hubacek, K., Wieland, H. (2021). Global patterns of ecologically unequal exchange: implications for sustainability in the 21st century. Ecological Economics 179: 106824.
EUROSTAT (Statistical Office of the European Union). (2007). Economy-wide material flow accounts and derived indicators. A methodological guide. Luxembourg City, Luxembourg: Eurostat.
EUROSTAT (Statistical Office of the European Union). (2013). Economy-wide Material Flow Accounts (EW-MFA). Compilation Guide. Luxembourg City, Luxembourg: Eurostat.
Fischer-Kowalski, M., Haberl, H. (1997). Tons, joules, and money: models of production and their sustainability problems. Society & Natural Resources, 10 (1): 61-85.
Fischer-Kowalski, M., Krausmann, M., Giljum, S., Lutter, S., Mayer, A., Bringezu, S., Moriguchi, Y., et al. (2011). Methodology and indicators of economy-wide material flow accounting. Journal of Industrial Ecology 15(6): 855–76.
Foster, J. B., and H. Holleman (2014). The theory of unequal ecological exchange: a Marx-Odum dialectic, The Journal of Peasant Studies 41(2): 199-233.
Galeano, E. (1970). Las venas abiertas de América Latina, Siglo XXI Editores, México.
Galli, A., Weidmann, T., Ercin, E., Knoblauch, D., Ewing, B., Giljum, S. (2012). Integrating ecological, carbon and water footprint into a “footprint family” of indicators: definition and role in tracking human pressure on the planet, Ecol. Indic. 16, 100–112.
Giljum, S. (2003). Biophysical dimensions of North-South trade: material flows and land use (tesis). Universität Wien, Viena, Austria.
Giljum, S. (2004). Trade, materials flows, and economic development in the south: The example of Chile. Journal of Industrial Ecology, Volume 8, Number 1–2.
Giljum, S., y Hubacek, K. (2004). Alternative approaches of physical input–output analysis to estimate primary material inputs of production and consumption activities. Econ. Syst. Res. 16 (3), 301–310.
Haberl, H. (1997). Human appropriation of net primary production as an environmental indica- tor: implications for sustainable development. Ambio 26(3): 143–6.
Hoekstra, A.Y., Chapagain, A.K., Aldaya, M.M., Mekonnen, M.M. (2009). Water Footprint Manual: State of the Art, Enschelde, Water Footprint Network.
Hornborg, A. (1998). Towards an ecological theory of unequal exchange: articulating world system theory and ecological economics, Ecological Economics 25: 127–36.
Hornborg, A. (2009). Zero-Sum World: Challenges in Conceptualizing Environmental Load Displacement and Ecologically Unequal Exchange in the World-System. International Journal of Comparative Sociology, 50, 237–262.
Hornborg, A. (2012). Global Ecology and Unequal Exchange: Fetishism in a Zero-Sum World. London: Routledge.
Hornborg, A., & Jorgenson, A. K. (2010). International Trade and Environmental Justice: Toward a Global Political Ecology. Hauppauge NY: Nova Science Publishers, Inc.
Hornborg, A., y Martínez-Alier, J. (2016). Ecologically unequal exchange and ecological debt, Journal of Political Ecology Vol.23, pp. 328-333.
Hughes, A. (2001). Global commodity networks, ethical trade, and governmentality: organizing business responsibility in the Kenyan cut flower industry. Trans Institutional British Geographers 26: 390–406.
Infante-Amate, J., Krausmann, F. (2019). Trade, ecologically unequal exchange, and colonial legacy: the case of France and its former colonies (1962–2015), Ecological Economics 156: 98–109.
Infante-Amate, J., Urrego-Mesa, A., Piñero, P., Tello, E. (2022). The open veins of Latin America: long-term physical trade flows (1900–2016). Global Environmental Change 76: 102579. En español: Infante-Amate et al (2020). “Las venas abiertas de América Latina en la era del antropoceno: un estudio biofísico del comercio exterior (1900-2016)”, Diálogos Revista Electrónica de Historia, Universidad de Costa Rica, Vol.21, n.2, pp.177-214.
I ̇pek Tunç, G., Akbostancı, E. Türüt-Asık, S. (2022). Ecological unequal exchange between Turkey and the European Union: An assessment from value added perspective, Ecological Economics 192 (2022) 107269.
International Resource Panel, IRP (2019). Global Resources Outlook 2019: Natural Resources for the Future We Want. A Report on the International Resource Panel. Nairobi: United Nations Environment Programme.
ISO 14040, 2006. Environmental Management – Life Cycle Assessment – Principles and Framework. International Standard Organization (ISO), Geneva.
Kim, T-J, Tromp, N. (2021). Carbon emissions embodied in China-Brazil trade: Trends and driving factors, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 293.
Krausmann, F., Fisher-Kowalski, M., Schandl, H. and Eisenmenger, N. (2008). The global sociometabolic transition, Journal of Industrial Ecology, 12 (5-6), 637-656).
Krausmann, F., Gingrich, S., Eisenmenger, N., Erb, K. H., Haberl, H. y Fischer-Kowalski, M. (2009). Growth in global materials use, GDP and population during the 20th century, Ecological economics 68(10), 2696-2705.
Krausmann, F., Erb, K., Gingrich, S., Haberl, H., Bondeau, A., Gaube, V., Lauk, C., Plutzar, C., Searchinger, T.D. (2013). Global human appropriation of net primary production doubled in the 20th century. PNAS 110 (25), 10324–10329.
Krausmann, F., Weisz, H., Eisenmenger, N., Schütz, H., Hass, W. & Schaffartzik, A. (2015). Economy– wide Material Flow Accounting: Introduction and Guide. Recuperado de https://www.wiso.boku. ac.at/fileadmin/data/H03000/H73000/H73700/Publikationen/Working_Papers/WP_151_Web.pdf
López, L. A., Cadarso, M. A., Ortíz, M. (2020). La huella de carbono del comercio internacional español, Información Comercial Española, ICE: Revista de economía, No. 913, págs. 141-165, ISSN 0019-977X, ISSN-e 2340-8790.
Macchione-Saes, B. (2018). Comércio ecologicamente desigual no século XXI: evidencias a partir da insercao brasileira no mercado internacional de minerio de ferro. Garamond Universitaria, Rio de Janeiro.
Mahlkow, Hendrik and Wanner, Joschka, The Carbon Footprint of Global Trade Imbalances (2023). CESifo Working Paper No. 10729, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4622025 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4622025.
Martínez-Alier, J., Roca-Jusmet, J. (2018). Economía Ecológica y Política Ambiental, 3rd ed.: México, FCE.
Moran, D. D., Wackernagel, M. C., Kitzes, J. A., Heumann, B. W., Phan, D., Goldfinger, S. H. (2009). Trading spaces: calculating embodied ecological footprints in international trade using a product land use matrix (PLUM), Ecological Economics 68, 1938–1951.
Mubako, S. T., & Lant, C. L. (2013). Agricultural Virtual Water Trade and Water Footprint of U.S. States. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 103(2), 385–396. https://doi.org/10.1080/00045608.2013.756267
Muñoz P. y Roca Jusmet Jordi (2006). Las bases materiales del sector exportador chileno: un análisis input-output, Revista Iberoamericana de Economía Ecológica Vol. 4: 27-40
Muñoz P.; Giljum S.; Roca J. (2009). The raw material equivalents of international trade: Empirical evidence for Latin America, Journal of Industrial Ecology, 13: 6.
Muñoz, P., Strohmaier, R., Roca, J. (2011). On the North-South trade in the Americas and its ecological asymmetries, Ecological Economics 70: 1981–1990.
Muradian, R. & Martinez-Alier, J. (2001a). South North Materials Flow. History and Environmental Repercussions, Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research, 14:2, 171-187.
Muradian, R. and Martinez-Alier, J. (2001b). Trade and the Environment from a ‘‘Southern’’ Perspective, Ecological Economics 36: 281–97.
Muradian, R., O’Connor, M., Martínez-Alier, J. (2002). Embodied pollution in trade: estimating the “environmental load displacement” of industrialized countries, Ecological Economics 41: 51–67.
Ocampo, J. A. y Parra, M. Á. (2003). Los términos de intercambio de los productos básicos en el siglo XX. Revista de la CEPAL No. 79: 7-35, Santiago de Chile.
ONU (s.f.). Environment International Resource Panel Global MFA Database. https://www.resourcepanel.org/global-material-flows-database
Oulu, M. (2015). The unequal exchange of Dutch cheese and Kenyan roses: introducing and testing an LCA-based methodology for estimating ecologically unequal exchange. Ecological Economics 119 (2015): 372–383.
Peinado, G. (2015). Intercambio ecológicamente desigual e Intercambio desigual en Oscar Braun Nexos, puntos en común y especificidades. Revista Iberoamericana de Economía Ecológica, Revibec, 24, (s. d.).
Peinado, G. (2018). Economía ecológica y comercio internacional: el intercambio ecológicamente desigual como visibilizador de los flujos ocultos del comercio internacional, Revista Economía Vol. 70, No. 112 (noviembre 2018), 53-69.
Pérez-Rincón, M. (2006). Colombian international trade from a physical perspective: towards an ecological “Prebisch thesis,” Ecological Economics 59 (4): 519–529.
Pérez-Rincón, M. (2008). Comercio internacional y medio ambiente en Colombia: Mirada desde la Economía Ecológica, Programa Editorial Universidad del Valle, Cali.
Pérez-Rincón, M. (2016). Caracterizando las injusticias ambientales en Colombia: Estudio para 115 casos de conflictos socioambientales. Working Paper (Universidad del Valle, Cali, Colombia, V/2016).
Pérez-Rincón, M. (2023b). Materials Flow Analysis in Latin America. En: The Barcelona School of Ecological Economics and Political Ecology: A Companion in Honour of Joan Martinez-Alier, pp. 123-136, Sergio Villamayor-Tomas and Roldan Muradian Editors, Springer, Cham, Switzerland.
Pérez-Rincón, M. (2024). Economía ecológica para América Latina y el Caribe: bases conceptuales y perspectivas de política pública para la sostenibilidad, pp. 71-139. En: J. Sánchez y M. León (coords.), “Recursos naturales y desarrollo sostenible: propuestas teóricas en el contexto de América Latina y el Caribe”, serie Recursos Naturales y Desarrollo, No 220 (LC/TS.2023/198), Santiago, Comisión Económica para América Latina y el Caribe (CEPAL).
Pérez-Rincón, M., Crespo-Marín, Z. y Vargas-Morales, J. (2017). Dinámica económica, especialización productiva y conflictos ambientales en países andinos, pp. 351-410. En: Ecología Política Latinoamericana: pensamiento crítico, diferencia latinoamericana y rearticulación epistémica. Vol. I. Héctor Alimonda, Catalina Toro Pérez y Facundo Martín (Coord.). Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana de México y CLACSO.
PNUMA-SCIRO (2013). Tendencias del flujo de materiales y productividad de recursos en América Latina. Número de trabajo: DEW/1578/PA, Panamá.
PNUMA-WCMC (2016). El estado de la biodiversidad en América Latina y el Caribe, Programa de las Naciones Unidas para el Medio Ambiente (PNUMA), Edición de PNUMA-WCMC, Cambridge.
Prebisch, R. (1949). El desarrollo económico de la América Latina y algunos de sus principales problemas. Santiago de Chile: ECLAC, E/CN.12/89. Published in English as The Economic Development of Latin America and Its Principal Problems (1950). New York: UNCLA.
Ponte, S. (2002). The “Late Revolution? Regulation, Markets and Consumption in the Global Coffee Chain, World Development, 30-7: 1099-1122.
Rivera-Basques, L., Duarte, R., Sánchez-Chóli, J. (2021). Unequal ecological exchange in the era of global value chains: The case of Latin America. Ecological Economics 180 (2021) 106881.
Røpke, I. (1994). Trade, development, and sustainability: a critical assessment of the “free trade dogma,” Ecol. Econ. 9, 13-22.
Russi, D., González Martínez, A. C., Silva Macher, J. C., Giljum, S., Martínez Alier, J. y Vallejo, M. C. (2008). Material Flows in Latin America. A Comparative Analysis of Chile, Ecuador, Mexico, and Peru, 1980-2000. Journal of Industrial Ecology, (12), 704-720.
Samaniego, P., Vallejo, M. C., Martínez-Alier, J. (2017). Commercial and biophysical deficits in South America, 1990–2013, Ecological Economics 133: 62-73.
Schaffartzik, A., Mayer, A., Gingrich, S., Eisenmenger, N., Loy, C. y Krausmann, F. (2014). The global metabolic transition: Regional patterns and trends of global material flows, 1950–2010. Global Environmental Change, 26, 87-97.
Strassert, G. (2002). Physical-input output accounting. In: Ayres, R.U., Ayres, L.W. (Eds.), A Handbook of Industrial Ecology, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, pp. 102–113.
Tian, X., Sarkis, J., Geng, Y., Qian, Y., Gao, C., Bleischwitz, R, Xu, Y. (2018). Evolution of China's water footprint and virtual water trade: A global trade assessment, Environment International, Vol. 121, Part 1.
Vallejo, M. C. (2009). La estructura biofísica de la región andina y sus relaciones de intercambio ecológicamente desigual (1970-2005). Un estudio comparativo. Madrid, España: Fundación Carolina.
Vallejo, M. C. (2010). Biophysical structure of the Ecuadorian economy, foreign trade, and policy implication, Ecological Economics 70 (2010) 159–169.
Wackernagel, M. and Rees, W. (1996). Our Ecological Footprint: Reducing Human Impact on the Earth. Gabriola Island, BC: New Society.
Wallerstein, I. (1974). The Modern World System: Capitalist Agriculture and the Origins of the European World Economy in the Sixteenth Century. New York: Academic Press.
West, J. and Shandl, H. (2013). Material use and material efficiency in Latin America and the Caribbean, Ecological Economics Vol. 94, issue C, 19-27.
Zhang, Y., Liao, C., Pan, B. (2023). Ecological unequal exchange between China and European Union: An investigation from global value chains and carbon emissions viewpoint, Atmospheric Pollution Research 14 (2023) 101661.
Zhou, D., Kongkuah, M., Kissiwaa-Twum, A., Ibrahim, A. Assessing the impact of international trade on ecological footprint in Belt and Road Initiative countries, Heliyon, Volume 10, Issue 4, e26459.
Downloads
Publicado
Edição
Seção
Licença
Copyright (c) 2025 Mario Alejandro Perez Rincon
Este trabalho está licenciado sob uma licença Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Este obra está licenciado com uma Licença Creative Commons Atribuição 4.0 Internacional.
