According to the following thesis by Leff (2005):

Thus, in the face of global warming of the planet, the degradation is unknown.
entropic that results from economic activity conducted under rationality
economic (whose last degree of degradation is heat) and the origin is denied
anthropogenic of the phenomenon by qualifying its effects as natural disasters.
266).

What are the real causes of the ecological crisis according to Enrique Leff and
why?
Rta: the causes of the ecological crisis as it is described and deepened in its
thesis Enrique Leff, about the world and nature. Where he asserts that the economy is
put into the production of the world, and the exploitation of nature is objectified,
denatured of its ecological difficulty and transformed with the help of machinery into
raw material of an economic process; from which natural resources become
substances necessary for the utilization of capital.

Because in this way it can be inferred that, during the time of the heritage, the
ecological nature ceases to be an object of the work process to be encoded in
terms of capital. More it does not return being to nature, but rather transmutes it into
a form of capital –natural capital– generalizing and extending the ways of
economic valuation of nature (O'Connor, 1993). It is in this sense that, together
with the ancestral methods of intense exploitation that characterized the 'raiding of the third'
"world" (Jalée, 1968), today a "conservationist" exploitation is being promoted.
nature. Biological diversity arises not only as a multiplicity of ways
of life, but as regions of nature reserves - territories and habitats of it
biodiversity and cultural – that today continue to be valued for their genetic richness,
its ecotourism resources and their functionality as carbon collectors.

According to the following statement by Leff (2005):

the territory is a space where differentiated times precipitate, where
they articulate cultural identities and ecological potentials. It is therefore the place of
convergence of sustainability times: the restoration processes and
ecological productivity, assimilation and technological innovation, reconstruction of
cultural identities. Hence the slogan "think globally and act locally"
tenaciously promoted by the discourse of sustainable development, has actually been a
trick to generate a single thought about 'our common future' (Page 270)

Because Leff says that the slogan 'think globally and act locally'
"Locally" generates a unique thought about our common future? Argue.
your answer.
Rta: the world is going through an environmental crisis, and the slogan
"think globally and act locally" (Leff 2005) is a form of deception
because all human beings benefit from the production of the earth, the
those who govern are the ones who benefit the most, What makes the cry for the
recognition of the rights to survival, cultural diversity and
quality of life of the towns, is a policy of being; a policy of becoming and the
transformation, which values the meaning 'A new politics of place and of the
difference being built from the sense of time in current struggles
for identity, for autonomy and for territory” of utopia as the right
of each individual and each community to forge their own future. This leads to
rethink the very meaning of geopolitics. The geographies, like marks left
by the civilizations on earth, they are the locus, the habitat in which a
world that has been disrupted by globalization, which displaces the place of its
lugar, que hace prevalecer la globalidad de una razón única, universal, dominante.
But they are also the writing that the new ones leave in nature.
social movements for the reappropriation of nature (Gonçalves, 2001). From this
in this way, indigenous populations are asserting their cultural rights to
regain control over your territory as an ecological, productive space,
cultural to reclaim a heritage of natural resources and meanings
cultural. Environmental rationality is being internalized by new actors.
social, expressing itself as a political demand that guides new principles for
the appreciation of the environment and for the reappropriation of nature, taking root
in new territories and new identities.
According to the text by Lopez, Ivan. On Development
sustainable and sustainability: conceptualization and critique.
What would be the challenges for the unresolved issue of the
contradictions between economic growth and environmental protection that arise
What is proposed in the Brundtland report?

3. THE UNRESOLVED ISSUE OF CONTRADICTIONS BETWEEN

ECONOMIC GROWTH AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION IN THE BRUNDTLAND REPORT
set of arguments previously presented, it is worth pausing to reflect on the
concept of sustainability and sustainable development from the Brundtland Report that is

develops with special intensity addressing the issue of its capacity to

address the contradictions inherent in the interaction between economic development and
environmental protection - a debate that extends to the sphere of 'the social' or the
living conditions of the population. When analyzing the dilemmas specific to the
interrelation between both spaces, it is necessary to distinguish two planes such as
conceptual or semantic, and that of the market or its empirical translation. In the first of
they -the semantic field- highlight the contradictions inherent in the
intersection between the concepts of 'development' and 'sustainable', or the possibility of
simultaneity between economic development and ecological conservation (Lélé, 1991; Lafferty and
Meadowcroft, 2000; García et al., 2004). Specifically, in the Report, the ambiguity of
the concept of sustainable development exemplifies the difficult reconciliation between both spaces

for two reasons: 1) the existence of limits on lifestyles incompatible with the
conservation of nature; 2) the support for economic growth
for the satisfaction of human needs, this term, that of needs, which,
As has been seen, it remains unspecified (Luffiego García et al., 2000: 474). Nevertheless, to its

three premises that challenge the conventional model of the concept

development: 1) by integrating the concepts of development, social welfare, and quality of life; 2)
in demanding the equitable distribution of wealth, both across generations
presents as about the future; and 3) and by setting as a condition the rationalization in the
use of resources as a condition for having a habitable Planet in the long term
deadline (Font et al., 2000). The sustainable development presented in this way implies a solid principle

for collective action and the resolution of conflicts or crises between the environment and
the development and the vision that a just world and a world would be desirable
environmentally sustainable (Sneddon et al., 2006: 260-261). Before continuing with this
argumentative line, it is worth pausing for a moment to understand more precisely the
development and growth. Riggs (1984), based on the review of the economic literature,
ensures that the term development has largely replaced earlier terms such as the
of 'progress' or 'evolution'. Furthermore, it points out that terms such as 'change',

["growth","transformation","Westernization","industrialization","modernization"]
they are closely tied to the idea of 'development' and with similar connotations if not
identities. Iván López Pardo BARATARIA. Castilian-Manchegan Journal of Social Sciences,
No. 20, pp. 111-128, 2015, ISSN: 1575-0825 118 For their part, Ekins et al. (1998a: 17)
distinguish growth processes, such as that of bioeconomic, that of the
production or income (GDP), and that of human well-being, all three in a continuous state of
interaction. The synthesis is well formulated by O'Connor (1994), in the first instance
formulating two premises. On one hand, that the historical processes of industrialization
(or economic development) are often opposed or antagonistic to paying attention to their
interaction with ecology, whether due to the volume of materials that these require
processes, or through their effects via waste, and the question remains
possibility of preserving the existing ecological capital, at least on the horizon of
long term. On the other hand, human economies depend on natural capital for their
functioning and growth, of natural resources and their use, at the same
time that most of the cycles of the biosphere depend on or are closely
dependency on industrial processes or human agriculture. This same author (O
Connor, 2002: 28) recognizes at least four senses of the term 'to support', which can
refer to 1) maintaining the processes of capital accumulation in the context of the
globalization, and this in a few hands; 2) providing resources to populations of the planet
that need them and maintain them; 3) or to preserve labor, economic and
merchant of broad segments of society; 4) and with a fourth meaning related to
'ecological sustainability'. In turn, in the realm of empirical translation, Victor (1991)
remember that in terms of classical economics, income or welfare can only be
long-term maintained if the starting capital stock does not decline. Now, what about
What stock of capital is being talked about? Not only the capital created by humans, but
which also includes the goods and capabilities of the natural environment, the natural capital that,
In definitiva, it has not been produced by humans in the first place, nor reproduced.
The analysis of the concept of sustainable development, especially from indicators such as the
Gross Domestic Product (GDP) raises at least two questions: whether necessarily a
a higher GDP implies more well-being and greater environmental protection; or of
inverse manner, whether environmental sustainability increases or reduces well-being
the Western countries; or if the compatibility conditions of both objectives would be
less restrictive than those of sustainability and GDP (Jacobs, 1991; Ekins, 1993). A
A widespread idea is that developing countries must prioritize growth.
economic to environmental concerns, since the higher their level of
rental, a better deal will be made of environmental conflicts. This is a premise
difficult to defend, when it is proven, for example, that the United States, the country with
very high income rates, has even higher averages of pollution.
In what Jabareen (2008) calls the 'ethical paradox of the concept', it is not clear.
the compatibility of the union of the two terms under a single concept. The effort is
leads to reconcile two spaces that have historically had an antagonistic relationship,
as they are related to the environment and development, and where the origin is indeed manifest and

the ecological meaning of the term sustainability is not that of development, which especially
it is imprecise from its dimension not only semantic but also political and moral
(Figure 1). A distinction that sheds light on what was previously mentioned is the dichotomy
between anthropocentrism and ecocentrism. The first orientation - the anthropocentric -
exemplified by the Global Strategy for Development (IUCN) that defines the
development as 'the modification of the biosphere and the application of human resources,'
Financial on sustainable development and sustainability: conceptualization and critique
BARATARIA. Revista Castellano-Manchega de Ciencias Sociales, Nº 20, pp. 111-128, 2015,
ISSN: 1575-0825 119 and non-living resources to satisfy human needs and
improve the quality of human life” (IUCN, 1980: section 1, paragraph 3). Figure 1: Framework
conceptual framework of Sustainable Development Source: Jabareen, 2008 Although it is about a

definition by which what is primarily important is to maintain a level

determined by intra- and intergenerational human welfare, it should be noted that in
This strategy is made from the need it appeals to in terms of its compatibility.
with ecological balance; furthermore, it states that "development and conservation operate in
the same global context, and the underlying problems that must be overcome
to be understood as] identical if one wants to succeed” (IUCN, 1980: section 20, paragraph 1), the
which affirms that it entails an integrative character in social objectives
ecological. In turn, regarding the ecocentric meaning, Huetng (1986) defends the
possibility of maintaining well-being through environmental sustainability, even
lowering economic production, and thus highlights the dependency on the
production, the environment and the safety of the future of sustainability
environmental. Both views - the anthropocentric version and the ecocentric - involve
'Weak' versions of sustainability, since neither of the two cases aspire to
resolve the inherent conflicts in the interaction between environmental preservation and
economic development (Dobson, 1998); nor do they affect the equitable distribution of
the wealth between regions of the planet as a solution or part of the solution to the problem of
conflict, or about the dilemma of environmental protection versus social justice (Paehlke,
1995: 135). The solution to the dilemma according to Lafferty et al. (1999: 3) is that "sustainability is

condition or restriction of human development, and implies a positive sense of

development.” From a broader analytical framework, O'Connor et al. (1998: 34) argue that
the term sustainable development can nevertheless consider issues such as
justice in ecological distribution, or economic, ecological, and social sustainability in
the time, the asymmetries in the distribution of resources, or the processes of
merchandising and capitalization of nature as a response to societies of
market in environmental crisis. In this regard, ecological sciences emphasize two
critical spaces. On one hand, social trends towards individualism,
economicism and technological optimism Iván López Pardo BARATARIA. Castellano Journal-
Manchega of Social Sciences, No. 20, pp. 111-128, 2015, ISSN: 1575-0825 120 (Frazier,
1997; Faber et al., 2002; Dawe et al., 2003, Robinson, 2004). On the other hand, the agenda
generic and traditional of the most active environmentalists when it comes to designing the "policies

"green", more precisely in projects like the Local Agenda 21, are insufficient.
to address global environmental challenges (Selman, 2000: 40; Mebratu, 1996, 1998;
Lafferty et al., 1999). In this sense, the capacity for change and transformation of
the concept of sustainability and sustainable development is limited by the application of
concept through strategies focused on local sustainability and thus displacing the
greater responsibility to local authorities (Van der Straaten, 1989: 69; Wallner et
(et al., 1996). In addition to anthropocentric and ecocentric perspectives, a democentric perspective should be added.
Although it is not the purpose of this article to explain them in detail, as an example it is worth mentioning.

mention Arias Maldonado (2004) who will propose the dichotomy between sustainability
normative and the technocratic or closed; between the definition of sustainability resulting from the
public deliberation and that resulting from science or ideology; or a relationship with the
strong' or necessary democracy, or 'weak' and contingent; or finally by its
dominant orientation either procedural or finalistic (see Table 2).