New smart model fails in Ecuador
Some days ago, the President of Ecuador officially said that their model of saving their precious and valuable rainforests has failed as not enough money was collected. Raffael Correa has pledged in2007 to keep a total of 850 Barrel crude oil in the ground below the Yasuni Rainforest if the Western Nations pay what Ecuador will thus loose by not selling this oil. A total of 49% of the demanded money was already promised by nations like Sweden or Germany. However, Correa said now that he is sick of being treated as a colony and the experiment failed.
Why? We don’t know. Ecuador looses a first-mover advantage PLUS international fame.
Read more on the Initiative her: Save Yasuni
Is this totally bad? Well, who knows what Ecuador would have done after receiving the 3,5 bn EUR? Maybe the next government would oppose the system and still get the oil out of the ground: Ecuador would cheat the climate, the natre and the West. Unlikely, but not impossible.
Taking the world hostage by saying “pay or we kill” the environment is actually not the very best tool in diplomacy. It has the right beginning (money from the Global North into the Global South) and the right end (no more oil), but everything in between seems wrong. Let’s change the middle part and make out the “then” a “and”. We need massive global investment as well as government-to-government transfer of money AND a tight protection of natural reserves including keep oil (everywhere!) in the ground.
Maybe it is important to make TWO NEW LAWS:
1. Outlawing the extraction of oil until 2030 worldwide. In the Global North by 2020.
2. Transfer of 2% of the OPEC-nations GDP per year in (social, economic and ecologic) sustainability projects in the Global South.
For every barrel of oil extracted, the country responsible (the extracting country and the buying-country together) pay US$ 100 climate-fee (natural gas: US$ 50) that goes into a UN Climate Change Fund.
Sounds like a dream? Some years ago it was a mere wish that states were bargaining over a treaty that pays one side for protecting a piece of nature. Well… maybe it was to dreamy, but we got quite a way: there was a good draft.