Yeşil Kalkınma: Kalkınma Yazınında Süreklilik mi Farklılaşma mı? Biyoçeşitlilik Piyasası Örneği

Year 2017, Volume: 41 Issue: 3, 3 - 48, 30.10.2017

Ferda Uzunyayla

Abstract

1940’lı yıllarda uluslararası gündemin konusu kalkınma sorunsalı, 1990’lı yıllarda “yeşil kalkınmacılık” adı altında “yoksulluk ve çevre” ilişkisi üzerinden uluslararası kuruluşların ve devletlerin tartışmalarında yeniden canlandırılmıştır. Kalkınma yazınının “azgelişmişliği” tanımlama ve buna “müdahale” yöntemleri bu süreçte yeniden şekillendirilmiştir. 1940’lı yıllarda “azgelişmiş”liğin kriterleri tasarruf, yatırım ve kişi başına düşen gelir üzerinden tanımlanırken; 1990’lı yıllarda yerel halkın ekolojik varlıkları birikim kaynağı değil geçimlik amaçla kullanımı, ortak kullanılan varlıklarda mülkiyetin belirgin olmaması, ekosistem piyasalarının kurulmaması yeşil kalkınma anlayışının “azgelişmişlik” kriterleri olarak sunulmuştur. 1940’lı yıllarda tasarruf oranının yetersizliği ve böylece dış borç üzerinden bir finansal müdahale zemini oluşturulurken; 1990’lı yıllarda ekosistem piyasalarının kurulması için gerekli fon ve ekipman dolayısıyla ortaya çıkan çevre kredileri üzerinden bir finansal müdahale oluşmuştur. “Azgelişmişliği yok etme” söylemi bu dönemde de devam ederken buna yeni söylemler, “fayda paylaşımı”, “doğanın korunması” eklenmiş; ekolojik varlıklar üzerinden yeni piyasalar (biyoçeşitlilik piyasaları; bioprospecting sözleşmeleri, çevresel hizmet ödemeleri, biyoçeşitlilik kredileri/ofsetleri) yaratılmıştır. Çalışmanın amacı bu dönüşüm sürecinin (azgelişmişliği tanımlama, finansal müdahale, yeni ortaya çıkan söylemler), diğer kalkınma süreçleriyle olan benzerlik ve farklılıklarla nasıl bir seyir izlediğini, biyoçeşitliliğin nasıl bir paylaşım mücadelesine çekildiğini ve sürecin toplumların doğayla kurduğu ilişkiyi nasıl dönüştürdüğünü incelemektir.

Keywords

Yeşil kalkınma, biyoçeşitlilik piyasaları, fayda paylaşımı, bioprospecting sözleşmeleri, ekosistem hizmeti ödemeleri.

References

• Adams W vd. (2004). Biodiversity Conservation and the Eradication of Poverty. Science, 306, 1146-1149.
• Adams W (2009).Green Development: Environment and Sustainability in a Developing World. London and New York:Routledge.
• Artuso A (2002). Bioprospecting, Benefit Sharing, and Biotechnological Capacity Building. World Development, 30(8), 1355-1368.
• Aylward B vd. (1993). The Economic Value of Species Information and its Role in Biodiversity Conservation: Costa Rica’s National Biodiversity Institute. IIED Discussion Paper Series.
• Ballesteros D (2007). The Convention on Biological Diversity or the International Construction of a Contentious Global Common.OASIS, 12, 27-38.
• Bucher H vd. (2014). Trade in Environmental Goods and Services: Opportunities and Challenges. International Trade Centre Technical Paper, Geneva.
• Brush S (1999). Bioprospecting the Public Domain. Cultural Anthropology, 14(4), 535- 555.
• Byström M vd. (1999). Fair and Equitable: Sharing the Benefits from Use of Genetic Resources and Traditional Knowledge. Swedish Scientific Council on Biological Diversity.
• Castree N (2003). Bioprospecting: From Theory to Practice (And Back Again). Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, New Series, 28(1), 35-55.
• CBD (Convention on Biological Diversity) (1996).Biyolojik Çeşitlilik Sözleşmesi, Resmi Gazete, sayı: 22860.
• Chichilnisky G. (1993). Property Rights on Biodiversity and the Pharmaceutical Industry. Working Paper, Columbia University, Graduate School of Business, New York.
• Corson C ve MacDonald K (2012). Enclosing the Global Commons: The Convention on Biological Diversity and Green Grabbing. The Journal of Peasant Studies, 39:2, 263-283.
• Çoban A (2004). Caught Between State - Sovereign Rights and Property Rights: Regulating Biodiversity. Review of International Political Economy, 11(4), 739-762.
• De Jonge B (2011). What is Fair and Equitable Benefit-Sharing. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics, 24, 127-146.
• Duru B (2003). Dünya Bankası, GEF ve Küresel Çevre Sorunları. Ankara Üniversitesi SBF Dergisi, 58(2), 79-96.
• Ercan F (2003). Modernizm, Kapitalizm ve Azgelişmişlik. İstanbul: Bağlam Yayınları
• Escobar A (1998). Whose Knowledge, Whose Nature? Biodiversity, Conversation, and the Political Ecology of Social Movements. Journal of Political Ecology, 5, 53-82.
• Estevo G (2007). Kalkınma. İçinde: W Sachs (der.), Kalkınma Sözlüğü: Bir İktidar Olarak Bilgiye Giriş, Çev. O Etiman, İstanbul: Özgür Üniversite Yayınları
• Fairhead vd. (2012). Green Grabbing: A new Appropriation of Nature? The Journal of Peasant Studies, 39(2), 237-261.
• Fisher B ve Christopher T (2007). Poverty and Biodiversity: Measuring the Overlap of Human Poverty and the Biodiversity Hotspots. Ecological Economics, 62, 93-101.
• Fletcher R (2012). Using the Master’s Tools? Neoliberal Conservation and the Evasion of Inequality. Development and Change, 43(1), 295-317.
• GEF (Global Environmental Facility) (1995). GEF Operational Strategy. Washington.
• GEF (Global Environmental Facility) (1996). Quarterly Operational Report. November 1996.
• Ghosh S (2015). Capitalisation of Nature. Economic&Political Weekly, 16, 53-60.
• Greene S (2004). Indigenous People Incorporated? Culture as Property in Pharmaceutical Bioprospecting. Current Anthropolgy, 45(2), 211-237.
• Jenkins M (2003). Markets for Biodiversity Services: Potential Roles and Challenges. Environment, 46(6), 32-42.
• Kerr J (2002). Watershed Development, Environmental Services, and Poverty Alleviation in India. World Development, 30(8), 1387-1400.
• Kloppenburg J ve Silva R (1992). Conservationist and Corsairs? https://www.grain.org/ article/entries/489-conservationists-or-corsairs. Son erişim tarihi, 25.03.2016
• Kursar T vd. (2006). Securing Economic Benefits and Promoting Conservation through Bioprospecting. BioScience, 56(12), 1005-1012.
• Laird S ve Wynberg R (2008). Bioprospecting: Securing a Piece of of the Pie. World Conservation, January, 28-29.
• Lake R (1998). Finance for the Global Environment: the Effectiveness of the GEF as the Financial Mechanism to the Convention on Biological Diversity. Finance for the Global Environment, 7(1).
• Landell Mills N ve Porras I (2002). Silver Bullet or Fools’ Gold? A Global Review of Markets for Forest Environmental Services and Their Impact on the Poor. Instruments for Sustainable Private Sector Forestry Series, International Institute for Environment and Development, London.
• Lee E ve Mahanty S (2009). Payments for Environmental Services and Poverty Reduction: Risks and Opportunities, RECOFTS Issues Paper.
• Madsen B vd. (2011). State of Biodiversity Markets: 2011 Update, Forest Trends, Washington.
• Martinez-Alier J (2002). The Environmentalism of the Poor. Paper prepared for the conference on: The Political Economy of Sustainable Development, Environmental Conflict, Participation and Movements.
• McAfee K (1999a). Biodiversity and the Contradictions of Green Developmentalism, University of California.
• McAfee K (1999b). Selling Nature to Save It? Biodiversity and the Rise of Green Developmentalism. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 17(2), 133-154.
• Mulligan S (1999). For Whose Benefits? Limits to Sharing in the Bioprospecting Regime. Environmental Politics, 8, 35-96.
• OECD (The Organisationfor Economic Co-operation and Development) (2001). Environmental Goods and Services: The Benefits of Further Global Trade Liberalisation. Paris.
• OECD (The Organisationfor Economic Co-operation and Development)(2012). Green Growth and Developing Countries: A Summary for Policy Makers, June.
• Pagiola S vd. (2005). Can Payments for Environmental Services Help Reduce Poverty? An Exploration of the Issues and the Evidence to Date from Latin America. World Development, 33(2), 237-253.
• Peters M (2003). Bilderberg Grubu ve Avrupa’nın Birleşmesi Projesi. İçinde: M Türkay (der.), AB, Türkiye: Gerçekler, Olasılıklar, İstanbul: Yenihayat Yayıncılık.
• Rahnema M (2007). Yoksulluk.İçinde: W Sachs (der.), Kalkınma Sözlüğü: Bir İktidar Olarak Bilgiye Giriş, Çev. O Etiman, İstanbul: Özgür Üniversite Yayınları
• Raustiala K ve Victor D (2004). The Regime Complex for Plant Genetic Resources. International Organization, 58(2), 277-309.
• Satterthwaite D (2003). The Links Between Poverty and the Environment in Urban Areas of Africa, Asia and Latin America. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 590, 73-92.
• ten Kate K ve Laird S (2000). Biodiversity and Business: Coming to Terms with Grand Bargain. International Affairs, 76(1), 241-264.
• ten Kate K vd. (2004).Biodiversity Offsets: Views, Experience and the Business Case. IUCN and Insight Investment, Switzerland and UK.
• Tören T (2006). Yeniden Yapılanan Dünya Ekonomisinde Marshall Planı ve Türkiye Uygulaması. İçinde: D. Yılmaz, F Akyüz, F Ercan, K Yılmaz, T Tören, Ü Akçay (der.), Türkiye’de Kapitalizmin Gelişimi, Ankara: Dipnot Yayınları.
• Türkay M (1994). “Gelişme İktisadı: Büyüme Merkezli Yaklaşımın Yükselişi ve Gerilemesi. (Basılmamış Doktora Tezi). İstanbul: Marmara Üniversitesi
• Şenses F (2003). Gelişme İktisadı ve İktisadi Gelişme: Nereden Nereye. İçinde: F.Şenses (der.), Kalkınma İktisadı: Yükselişi ve Gerilemesi, İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları.
• Shah A (2001). Who Benefits from Participatory Watershed Development? Lessons from Gujarat, India. IIED Gatekeeper Series, No: 97.
• UNCED (United NationsConference on Environment and Development)(1992). Rio Declaration on Environment and Development.
• UNCTAD (United Nations Conference on Trade and Development) (2012). Trade and Biodiversity: The Biotrade Experiences in Latin America, United Nations Publication.
• UNDP (United Nations Development Programme) (2010). Habitat Banking in Latin America and Caribbean: A Feasibility Assessment Main Report.
• UNDP (United Nations Development Programme) (2010a), The Importance of Biodiversity and Ecosystems in Economic Growth and Equity in Latin America and the Caribbean: An Economic Valuation of Ecosystems.
• UNEP ve UNDP (2009).Mainstreaming Poverty-Environment Linkages into Development Planning: A Handbook of Practitioners.
• Vermeylen S (2007). Contextualizing ‘Fair’ and ‘Equitable’: The San’s Reflections on the Hoodia Benefit-Sharing Agreement. Local Environment, 12(4), 423-436.
• World Bank (1992).World Development Report 1992: Development and the Environment, Washington.
• World Bank (1993). The World Bank and the Environment: Fiscal 1993. Washington.
• World Bank (2006). Where is the Wealth of Nations: Measuring Capital for the 21st Century. Washington.
• World Bank (2007). Poverty and Environment: Understanding Linkages at the Household Level.
• World Resources Institute (2005). The Wealth of the Poor: Managing Ecosystems to Fight Poverty. Washington.
• World Resources Institute (2008). Roots of Resilience: Growing the Wealth of the Poor. Washington.
• Wunder S (2005).Payments for Environmental Services: Some Nuts and Bolts. CIFOR Occasional Paper, No: 42.
• Wynberg R ve Laird S (2007). Bioprospecting: Tracking the Policy Debate. Environment, 49(10), 20-32.