Post-Extractivism

Vaclav Masek

Related terms: neo-extractivism, Pink Wave, ecosocialism, green-left populism, socioecological transformation, resource conflicts, post-growth futures, degrowth, eco-Marxism, Buen Vivir, green capitalism, Global Green New Deal, territorial sovereignty, commodity consensus

‘Post-extractivism’ is a concept that challenges the dominant economic development model based on intensive resource extraction. It emerged as a critique of extractivism, an economic and political model that relies heavily on the large-scale expropriation of natural resources, primarily for export to global markets. Post-extractivists propose an inherent shift away from this paradigmatic model, advocating for alternative approaches to development that prioritize environmental sustainability, social equity, and local community well-being.

To better understand post-extractivism, it is helpful to consider three different perspectives on resource extraction:

• Business-as-usual extractivism is the traditional model of intensive resource exploitation for economic growth, often at the expense of environmental and social concerns. It is currently paradigmatic across the “developed” world and “developing” economies.
• Neo-extractivism is a modified approach that maintains resource extraction as a key economic driver but operates with increased state control and social redistribution of benefits from revenues elicited by extractive industry.
• Post-extractivism is a transformative vision manifested through practices and mindsets that seek to restructure economies and societies away from resource dependence, emphasizing ecological balance and alternative forms of development. It envisions structural shifts, including decommodification of nature, commons-based economies, and alternative socio-economic models for calculating well-being and human flourishing.

Conceptualizing post-extractivism in light of thermodynamic realities means recognizing its constraints. Indeed, all living systems require resource inputs and produce entropy, making complete independence from environmental resources impossible. So, post-extractivism can be posited as a scaled approach that emphasizes sufficiency over maximization, regeneration over depletion, stewardship over dominance, and reciprocity over one-way extraction. Post-extractivism acknowledges that, while complete independence from resource use is impossible given the laws of physics, there is significant room for transformative change in how we interact with and value natural systems.

The concept of the ‘metabolic rift’ provides a powerful framework for analyzing extractivism, neo-extractivism, and post-extractivism through the lens of human-nature relationships. When focusing on recent experiences in Latin America, this perspective illuminates how different economic paradigms interact with and impact the exchange processes between societies and the environment. In the region, policy shifts over resource extraction that took place under centre-left governments over the last quarter century produced a groundswell of critical approaches. By centring metabolism as the linchpin in understanding these paradigms, we can better assess the limitations of extractivism and neo-extractivism while positioning post-extractivism as a viable pathway toward systemic transformation.

Extractivism exemplifies the metabolic rift that Marx identified (1976[1867]) by intensifying the rupture in the "interdependent process of social metabolism." By prioritizing intensive resource exploitation for economic growth, the destructive effects of the extractive industry are disrupting natural cycles and exacerbating the separation–rift–between human societies and nature. The concept has grown to encompass broader aspects of modern capitalism, including economic, political, cultural, and ecological issues. Marx analyzed the role of 19th Century colonial "conquest and plunder" in the expropriation of lands and resources in Capital Vol. 1. Nowadays, “Marx would have sided with climate justice” and opposed extractive logics in the 21st Century, ecological economist Joan Martínez-Alier contends (2013).

Extractivism emerged in the late 2000s as a critique of large-scale mining and resource extraction. It initially focused on rejecting foreign-funded extractive projects and highlighting environmental degradation and negative social impacts in Latin America. Traditional extractivist economies, reliant on large-scale mining, deforestation, and monoculture agriculture, create ecological imbalances by severing natural cycles of renewal. This model, deeply embedded in the capitalist logic of accumulation, prioritizes short-term economic gains over long-term ecological sustainability, further alienating human societies from nature.

Eduardo Gudynas (2011), whose theoretical work is rooted in the broad historical-materialist tradition, has significantly contributed to defining the concept and exploring transitions away from extractivist economies. He critiques the idea of "sustainable extractivism," arguing that it fails to address the key issues inherent in resource-dependent development models.

The emergence of neoextractivism under leftist administrations at the turn of the century became another analytical tool to consider the persistence of extractive models, even under progressive regimes. During the left-wing governments of the Latin American “Pink Tide,” the concept evolved to address the "commodity consensus" that prioritized resource exports and the tensions between extractivism and Indigenous/environmental rights. Coined by Maristella Svampa (2015), the commodity consensus involves capital-intensive mega-projects with significant social, economic, and ecological impacts, creating export enclaves dependent on volatile international markets. Steve Ellner (2019) provides a nuanced perspective on neoextractivism during Latin America's Pink Tide. He argues that while these governments had mixed results in their performance regarding economic diversification, environmental protection, and relations with Indigenous peoples were often superior to previous neoliberal governments.

Neo-extractivism, while maintaining resource extraction as a primary economic driver, attempts to address some aspects of the metabolic rift through increased state control and social redistribution.  Although proponents of neo-extractivism emphasized resource sovereignty, this approach still relies on the exploitation of natural resources at its core, potentially perpetuating the metabolic rift, albeit with some mitigation efforts. Under different political justifications, the continued large-scale exploitation of natural resources meant that ecological degradation persisted.

Post-extractivism evolved significantly in Latin America, reflecting the region's complex relationship with resource extraction and development models. It proposed considerable policy shifts away from intensive resource exploitation and advocated for alternative approaches prioritizing environmental sustainability and social equity. It centres on environmental sustainability, calling for a halt to large-scale extractive activities that cause acute ecological impacts, including pollution and loss of biodiversity. It also recognizes the need to keep fossil fuels in the ground to combat climate change, challenging the logic of continued extraction. As Svampa (2015) notes, post-extractivism in the region challenges the “imaginario eldoradista” that promises a fast track to Europeanesque modernity through commodity exports and has stood in the way of actual social change for centuries.

As an eco-centric alternative rooted in the Indigenous Andean worldviews of Sumak Kawsay, Alberto Acosta (2013) proposes Buen Vivir as capable of healing the metabolic rift by emphasizing living in harmony with nature and collective well-being. Likewise, Arturo Escobar's (2015) academic work on post-development theory and Buen Vivir intersects with post-extractivist ideas and practices. Escobar critiques Western-centric notions of development, which he sees as inherently tied to extractivist practices that exploit nature and marginalize local communities. He advocates for a 'Pluriverse' that embraces relational ontologies and rejects the dualistic separation between humans and nature.

The transition from growth-based economies to post-extractivist models involves radically rethinking economic priorities, practices, and mindsets. This systemic transformation requires addressing the metabolic rift between human societies and nature as outlined by classical eco-Marxism. Against the backdrop of an unprecedented era of climate collapse, contemporary authors like John Bellamy Foster (1999), Jason W. Moore (2015), and Kohei Saito (2020, 2023) uncover more profound theoretical implications regarding the rift’s alleviation.

Post-extractivism is a concept that spans various disciplines and theoretical approaches within environmental humanities and related fields. Intersectional feminism, for example, can channel post-extractivism as a transformative approach that dismantles interconnected systems of oppression rooted in resource extraction. Drawing on the onto-epistemological proposition of cuerpo-territorio (‘body-territory’) as coined by Lorena Cabnal (2013), centering marginalized voices and promoting ecological and social justice. Indigenous radical approaches can apply post-extractivism as a return to ancestral wisdom and practices that honour the reciprocal relationship between humans and nature. By rejecting colonial-capitalist exploitation of lands and peoples and affirming Indigenous sovereignty, radical Indigenous post-extractivism restores land-based epistemologies that resist commodification. In political ecology, the concept of post-extractivist can be used operatively to challenge hegemonic power structures that sustain extractivist economies and promote grassroots-led transitions to regenerative livelihoods. As a last example, one could posit post-extractivist as a decolonial project, which may challenge the modern/colonial world system's dependence on resource extraction, proposing pluriversal alternatives rooted in diverse knowledge systems.

Addressing the shortcomings of its predecessors, post-extractivism becomes a key term for envisioning environmental futures grounded in transforming material realities, ultimately challenging conventional notions of progress and development. The emphasis on Indigenous rights, self-determination, and incorporating feminist, Indigenous, and decolonial perspectives has become central to its philosophical propositions. In its political practice, integrating post-extractivist concepts with rights-of-nature frameworks has become institutionalized in the region, with countries like Ecuador and Bolivia incorporating these into their legal systems.

The implementation of post-extractivist ideas faces significant challenges. Thea Riofrancos (2020) explores the tensions between leftist governments and grassroots movements in Ecuador, highlighting the conflict between resource nationalism and anti-extractivism. This tension reflects broader debates about balancing immediate economic needs with long-term sustainability, especially in Global South countries where transition scenarios can benefit from gradual approaches rather than abrupt transformation.

As the concept continues to evolve, post-extractivism remains a crucial framework for reimagining development models and addressing the socio-environmental impacts of resource extraction. This is particularly true in Latin America, where environmental grassroots movements adaptably manage the changing sociopolitical contexts in an ever-warming world.

Politically, post-extractivism challenges the power structures perpetuating resource-dependent economies and promotes governance models based on participatory democracy and Indigenous self-determination. Post-extractivists have the potential to demonstrate the global viability of socioecological transformation; producing political imaginaries articulated in alliances via green-left populism; and positing paradigm-shifting policies for Buen Vivir futures.

Economically, post-extractivism calls for diversification and localization of economic activities. Post-extractivist prioritize transitioning from primary resource extraction and fostering sustainable, localized economies that reduce reliance on exploitative global commodity markets.

Ecologically, post-extractivism seeks to restore balance by rejecting extractive logic, embracing circular economies, and institutionalizing the rights of nature. The aims are to heal the metabolic rift between human societies and nature, promoting regenerative practices and circular, self-sufficient economies.

References

Acosta, Alberto. 2013. “Extractivism and neoextractivism: two sides of the same curse” Beyond Development, 61.

Cabnal, Lorena. 2013. “For Indigenous Women, the Defence of the Land Territory Is the Very Defence of the Body Territory” [Para las mujeres indígenas, la defensa del territorio tierra es la propia defensa del territorio cuerpo.] PBI abriendo espacios para la paz, May.

Ellner, Steve. 2019. “Pink-Tide Governments: Pragmatic and Populist Responses to Challenges from the Right” Latin American Perspectives, 46(1), 4-22.

Escobar, Arturo. 2015. “Degrowth, postdevelopment, and transitions: a preliminary conversation” Sustainability Science, 10(3), 451-462.

Foster, John Bellamy. 1999. “Marx's Theory of Metabolic Rift: Classical Foundations for Environmental Sociology” American Journal of Sociology, 105(2), 366-405.

Gudynas, Eduardo. 2011. “Buen Vivir: Today's tomorrow” Development, 54(4), 441-447.

Martínez-Alier, Joan. 2013. “Rafael Correa, Marx and Extractivism,” EJOLT, March 18, 2013. http://www.ejolt.org/2013/03/rafael-correa-marx-and-extractivism/

Marx, Karl. 1976 [1867]. Capital, vol. 1. London: Penguin.

Moore, Jason W. 2015. Capitalism and the Web of Life. Verso Books.

Riofrancos, Thea. 2020. Resource Radicals: From Petro-Nationalism to Post-Extractivism in Ecuador. Duke University Press.

Saito, Kohei. 2023. Marx in the Anthropocene: Towards the Idea of Degrowth Communism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Saito, Kohei. 2020. "Marx's Theory of Metabolism in the Age of Global Ecological Crisis" Historical materialism: research in critical Marxist theory 28 (2): 3-24.

Svampa, Maristella. 2015. “Commodities Consensus: Neoextractivism and Enclosure of the Commons in Latin America” South Atlantic Quarterly, 114(1), 65-82.