Ecuador’s Rights of Nature and the Barriers to Sustainable Development

Ecuador made history when it included environmental protections known as the “Rights of Nature” (RON) in its 2008 Constitution. Activists saw their ratification as crucial to shifting the country away from its historically extractive economy that brought environmental destruction, upended Indigenous communities, and embedded rampant inequality. However, the state’s failure to invest in alternative industries has delayed this transition, and Ecuador continues to rely on the export of natural resources. The following article examines this dependency and offers ways to strengthen the Rights of Nature towards promoting sustainable development as initially intended.

The official “Rights of Nature” are a series of amendments that treat the environment as a subject with rights rooted in the Kichwa (local Indigenous group) term “sumak kawsay,” roughly translating to “life in harmony.” Specifically, the constitution guarantees the following:

• Nature’s intrinsic right to exist, regenerate its vital cycles, and its processes in evolution.
• Nature’s right to restoration and the state’s responsibility to fulfill this obligation in the case of severe damage caused by the extraction of non-renewable resources. 
• The right of individuals and communities to bring cases to local authorities on behalf of nature.
• Restrictions on environmentally destructive practices.
• The right of all people, communities, and nationalities to benefit from the environment.

These declarations pose a radical alternative to the Western legal tradition of who, or what, can be designated a holder of rights by incorporating an ecocentric perspective. In doing so, the constitution encourages an economic model that does not rely on the export of natural resources at the cost of environmental decline and Indigenous disenfranchisement. But as historic as these articles were, implementation is a much greater challenge than inscription. At the time of the RON’s passage, the state viewed the continued export of raw materials as necessary to financing alternative industries. Yet, almost two decades later, progress towards Ecuador’s sustainable development has abated, while the country's historical dependence on extractive industries has not.

Despite the destruction caused by Ecuador’s oil industry, the sector continues to fuel the country’s economy. Yes, petroleum has moved from over half of all exports to less than 40% since 2008, but this figure alone is misleading. By volume, oil production has decreased by less than 10% in the years after the RON gave hope to a drastic overhaul of the country’s extractive model. Ecuador has also recently begun focusing on developing its mining industry, expanding its reliance on the sale of raw materials. Spurred by a global need for critical minerals, 2023 witnessed a 19% increase in Ecuador’s mining exports, and the sector accounts for over 51% of the country’s foreign investment. This failure to shift the country’s economic model has made sustainable development obsolete, in addition to creating a country where protecting natural resources can even be harmful for the most vulnerable.

Dependent by Design

Ariel Irumenga is a member of the Waorani Indigenous group from Pastaza Province in the Ecuadorian Amazon, where he grew up in a community hosting a complicated relationship with the oil industry. When asked about his thoughts on the sector, he described a toxic dependency.

“There are two aspects: Of course, the negative environmental impacts, but within this are the incomes generated by these companies provided to the communities. For all the things people here need to survive, electricity, sugar, salt, they create pacts with the businesses that destroy the land.” Here, Ariel describes how oil companies are often allowed onto Indigenous lands with the stipulation they provide employment and other services to the underdeveloped local communities. The result is a reliance on the companies contaminating their land, with Ariel noting that “many Indigenous people have never been able to study and only know of work with the oil industry as their source of income. Companies promise development to the Indigenous communities, so people believe the extraction of petroleum and minerals is their development path.”

With this in mind, the problem with slowing the extraction of natural resources without funding alternative development strategies becomes evident: How would shrinking the presence of these industries empower Indigenous groups if they need these businesses to purchase necessary goods and services? Ariel himself has been impacted by such a dilemma. In 2023, Ecuadorians voted to discontinue oil extraction from the 43-ITT block within Yasuní National Park in eastern Ecuador over concerns about threats to biodiversity and local indigenous groups. He studied at the San Francisco University of Quito (Spanish, Universidad San Francisco de Quito) at the time, thanks to a scholarship supported by revenues generated from the 43-ITT block. Sadly, after the vote to discontinue operations, he lost his scholarship and has since left the university. Altogether, seven Indigenous communities on the Yasuní reserve will lose funds received from Petroecuador due to the block’s closure.

Ariel believes change will only come when the government recognizes the sovereignty of Indigenous groups. “We need respect for our territories. Our land has so many resources, but we have never received the financing to develop it ourselves in a way that does not compromise the environment.” He also emphasized the need for revenues from these extractive industries to be invested into the growth of local economies independent of the natural resource sector. Speaking directly about the RON, despite their failure to significantly alter Ecuador's economy, Ariel still thinks educating Indigenous communities about these legal processes can be an excellent tool for “winning space” in their fight against the further degradation of their territory.

Small Victories and the Path Forward

Fulfilling the RON’s grander sustainable development goals will be largely counterproductive without considerable investment into alternative industries. That said, the articles have not been entirely ineffective. Ecuador’s justice system first issued a ruling based on the RON in a 2011 case preventing a road-widening project from depositing excavation materials into the Vilcabamba River, increasing the risk of flooding. The courts have since used the RON to protect mangrove ecosystems, prevent wastewater from contaminating river systems, ensure local communities have access to potable water, and more. In addition to fostering an environmentally balanced society, investigating these cases highlights what else is needed for the RON to facilitate sustainable development.

1. Time: While the first RON court case occurred in 2011, it was not until 2019 that a new Constitutional Court bench began to select cases establishing thorough jurisprudence on the subject. These new judges have helped clarify the judicial system’s application of the RON in contrast to previous rulings that often gave inconsistent reasoning. More time allows the courts to continue cementing the RON’s reach, which can limit the expansion of Ecuador’s extractive industries and subsequently encourage investment into alternative sectors. Additionally, over time, competencies in RON litigation that are crucial for expanding its influence will increase. A country’s constitutional protections are only as strong as the ability of its legal professionals to defend them. To that end, the American Bar Association Rule of Law Initiative implements an array of programs focused on justice system capacity building. For the Latin America and Caribbean region, this includes the Strengthening Legal Representation of Workers and Trade Unions in Mexico Project and the Justice Sector Support Project in Peru, among others.
2. Stronger Enforcement: Rulings favoring the RON mean little if they fail to produce meaningful changes. This is evident in the 2021 Los Cedros case that revoked mining licenses from projects in a protected forest home to several endangered species. While mining operations within the forest have ceased, studies show the forest’s management plan that the Ministry of Environment, Water, and Ecological Transition (MAATE) had to create as part of the ruling has mostly gone unimplemented. Also, the agency has not updated their licensing process, allowing for the possibility of mining projects in the area to receive approval in the future. Those responsible for enforcing pro-RON decisions must be held accountable not just to limit the proliferation of the country’s unsustainable industries but also out of respect for Ecuador’s rule of law.
3. Legislative Action: Following the enactment of the 2008 Constitution, officials did not develop secondary legislation on the Rights of Nature, leading to confusion and a multitude of discrepancies in their implementation that persist today. Such questions include a sound definition of what constitutes nature, where to draw the line between protecting the environment and satisfying humans’ right to natural resources, and other questions that have been left to an often-contradictory court system. Ecuador’s National Assembly must act to create laws further specifying the RON’s application, without which the state faces few hurdles in continuing its current economic model.

Final Thoughts

The Rights of Nature were supposed to transform Ecuador by changing what could be a legal entity. Its economy would no longer be allowed to subsist on the destructive extraction of natural resources - or at least that was the hope. But the state’s lack of funding for alternative development strategies had made weaning off this dependency a painful endeavor, and the exports of products like petroleum remain king. Nonetheless, the amendments have still enacted marginal changes via the court system, and hope remains they can fuel sustainable development. By allowing for more time to stamp out their application in the judicial system, assuring rulings in their favor are carried out, and creating secondary legislation to remove remaining ambiguity, the Rights of Nature could have the chance to finally become the revolutionary force they should have always been.