Green imperialism (also calledeco-imperialism,eco-colonialism, orenvironmental imperialism) is a derogatory epithet alluding to what is perceived as a Western strategy to influence the internal affairs of mostlydeveloping nations in the name ofenvironmentalism.
The skeptical perception of theBrundtland report by theThird World elites was summarized asgreen imperialism byHelge Ole Bergesen in 1988.[1] In 1999,Deepak Lal used the term with the same meaning in his bookGreen Imperialism: A Prescription for Misery and War in the World's Poorest Countries.[2] Nonetheless, the same term is used differently inRichard Grove's 1995 bookGreen Imperialism: Colonial Expansion, Tropical Island Edens and the Origins of Environmentalism 1600–1860.[3] In Grove's book, it means the impact ofutopian tropical islands on European data-driven scientists resulting in early environmentalism.[4]
The first mentions of the termenvironmental colonialism oreco-colonialism appeared in connection withdebt-for-nature swaps since 1989.[5][6] It was feared that the however well-intentioned environmental protection programs could be perceived as meddlesome and imperialistic.[6] The establishment ofnational parks in Africa has in some cases led to the impoverishment and displacement of local populations.[7]
Eco-imperialism (orecoimperialism[8]) was originally an abbreviation forecological imperialism, a concept laid out byAlfred Crosby inhis book of the same name, butchanged its meaning after the publication ofPaul Driessen'sEco-Imperialism: Green Power Black Death in 2003.[9] Crosby's eco-imperialism is interference with a degrading effect on the environment of targeted countries, while Driessen's eco-imperialism is interference with a degrading effect on the economy in the name of environmental improvement.[9]
During theBattle of Seattle in 1999, media presented environmentalism as a new form of imperialism.[10] The rich, developed countries impose their environmental preferences and priorities on the developing countries.[11]
Several European governments announced boycotts of Malaysian timber due to unsustainabledeforestation in Malaysia as in a publication byMahathir Mohamad in 1999.[12] Malaysia's Prime Minister, Mahathir Mohamed, opposed the boycotts, arguing that "we are not exploiting the forests for no good reason. We need money. We have to export wood because we need the foreign exchange without which we cannot buy what we want".[13]Federal Land Development Authority (FELDA) accused theEuropean Union of "economic colonisation" for banning palm oil in biofuels by 2020, in order to halt deforestation.[14] A representative of FELDA said: "It's the same colonial attitudes, the white man imposing their rule on us from afar." In 2022, Malaysia threatened to stop the export of palm oil to EU as response to new regulations on deforestation.[15][16]
In 2009, Germany called French proposal ofcarbon tariffs as eco-imperialism.[17] Back then, greenhouse tariffs met strong opposition from developing countries such as India and China, since these tariffs would impact their exports.[17]
The biofuel transnational meta-standard regulation of theEuropean Union promotes certain sustainable fuels.[18][19] However, this regulation extends beyond EU's jurisdiction and raises the issue of eco-imperialism.[18]
In 2014, Joji Morishita, a Japanese commissioner, expressed his concerns about calls of sustainable whaling from theInternational Whaling Commission by the words "The whaling issue is seen as a symbol of a larger issue sometimes in Japan... You might have heard the word 'eco-imperialism'".[20]
The approval of the World Bank loan of $3.05bn (£2.4bn loan) for 4,764 MWMedupi Power Station drew criticism for supporting increased global emissions ofgreenhouse gases.[21][22] If the coal plant was not built, there would have been significant limitations placed on industrial development in the country.[22]
US president'sJoe Biden's"Executive Order on Tackling the Climate Crisis at Home and Abroad" is described byAsian Times as green imperialism and a hiddenprotectionist policy, which should protect American jobs from competition by "cheap carbon-dirty goods".[23]
Eco-imperialism is sometimes described as a combination of global environmental and broadneoliberal agendas.[24] Eco-imperialism is perceived to result in a policy ofcommodification of all resources of earth.[25] This tendency ofcommodification of nature for environmental goals is also known as"selling nature to save it" orgreen grabbing.[26][27][28]Committee for the Abolition of Illegitimate Debt mentionsOuarzazate Solar Power Station as an example of such green grabbing, which was built without informing surrounding communities onpasture land and will export some of the energy to Europe.[28][29]
Critical voices depreciate environmentalism as an excuse for hindering economic development ofdeveloping countries.[22] Critics see alternative energy sources as far from realistic, andfossil fuels as the key to lifting entire populations out of poverty.[30] Developing nations, led by Brazil, India and Singapore, opposed entangling global trade with pollution controls in 1994, calling them hidden protectionism, which will keep jobs in the developed countries and deprive poor nations of their competitive advantages.[31] The agenda of environmentalist NGOs is called neo-colonialism and eco-imperialism in 2022 by Japan, Peru, South Africa, Kenya and Bolivia.[32] Eco-imperialism functions as a derogatory epithet.[33][24]
According toAnil Agarwal, a 1990 study[34] by theWorld Resources Institute allocated responsibility for global warming to developing countries.[35] Agarwal considered this study to be flawed, politically motivated, and unjust, and saw it more as exacerbating theNorth–South divide.[35] In his 1991 paper, he called this an example of environmental colonialism and blamed U.S.overconsumption for global warming.[36] However, a 1990s worldwide survey"Bicycles, Yes — Cheap Shoes, No" byWorldPaper showed that 66% of the participants did not agree to perceive debt-for-nature swaps as eco-colonialism.[6]
Environmental colonialism became a subject in the bookApocalypse Never: Why Environmental Alarmism Hurts Us All byMichael Shellenberger. InThe Wall Street Journal,John Tierney, a long-standing critic of environmentalism, wrote that "Shellenberger makes a persuasive case, lucidly blending research data and policy analysis with a history of the green movement and vignettes of people in poor countries suffering the consequences of 'environmental colonialism.'"[37]
