LEGISLACION VIGENTE EN COLOMBIA
3. Materialización de las leyes en Colombia: ¿Logro o fracaso?
The consideration of the Person brings this thesis closer to its objectives, in particular, can we identify what or who is responsible for the environmental challenges we face? Can we identify and help implement solutions? Can we bridge the anthropocentric-ecocentric divide, one of the key questions that inspired this research? Is an integrative approach useful for policy, politics and democracy? Will green, progressive or even conservative political parties continue to be successful if they do not engage with the electorate in an integral fashion? This thesis has demonstrated how environmental challenges arise due to many “whats” and “whos”, that the problems we face are integral in nature and expression. To understand complex policy, political and democratic landscapes, and to envision and put in place appropriate solutions, therefore requires an integral approach. The use of an integral framework by environmental practitioners enables the honouring and inclusion of a diverse range of environmental approaches and views in proposed solutions. It gives us an understanding of why different environmental perspectives are different and how they are all (partly) important for finding a solution. It reveals that the anthropocentric-ecocentric divide is not a divide, but instead a wave-like developmental difference, and that, using an integral framework can help to honour and include both anthropocentric and ecocentric approaches.
Integral ecology helps to bridge this artificial division and also helps to answer some of the environmental critiques from deep ecologists and ecofeminists around postmodern society and indeed of integral theory. Throughout the thesis I demonstrated how one could apply integral theory to Antarctic policy and politics. The use of the Ecoselves of integral ecology, the developmental line dealing with our personal perspectives on nature, was also discussed in that practical policy context. The key methodology underpinning this thesis, Wilber’s Integral Methodological Pluralism, was
181 adopted using the Terrains (quadrants) and Eight Ecological Modes of integral ecology (Wilber’s IMP). This can provide comprehensive and pluralistic explanations and solutions for environmental problems. My new integral model for policy, politics and democracy - the Integral Policy Tryptic - took elements of Wilberian integral theory and EZI and applied them to Wilber's "I", "We" and "Its" in a more ecological version of "Person", "Polity" and "Planet". I demonstrated how the IPT model could provide a comprehensive and integrative approach for policy, politics and democracy. It enables the researcher to rigorously canvass objective and interobjective behaviours and systems (Planet) - in this case related to Antarctica - while “populating” the policy landscape with personal experience, aptitude and development (Person), along with critically developed and broadly agreed (through unconstrained dialogue) ecological and democratic values (Polity)
The methods used to reach the latter shared understanding also need to be integral in nature, reflecting Habermas's call to include the "three worlds' in any communication. Another critical aspect of this thesis was the explicit articulation of what kind of project it was: a project in metatheorising. It is not the type of metatheorising that is philosophical in nature; that is, addressing ontological, epistemological, methodological and ethical aspects of its constituent theories. Like its constituent Wilberian integral theory and EZI, the IPT uses theories as "data points", and I build and test this model "by specifying domains, collecting, reviewing and analysing ‘data’, developing explanations and truth claims and testing those claims on the basis of a posteriori (after the fact) methods." 684 I have analysed the constituent theories (integral theory, EZI, Habermas's critical theory, Eckersley's critical political ecology, and a wide range of other theories, disciplines and studies used to 'populate' the IPT) to create a new overarching model that successfully applies integral ecology to policy, politics and democracy, at least at a broad but robust conceptual level. As I noted earlier, the IPT needs to be road tested. A number of important new research directions have emerged, including the further application of integral principles to Antarctic policy and politics; the development of a 'conservative' version of the IPT; and the use of the IPT model by progressive or green political actors. Key considerations for an Antarctic IPT are presented at Figure 7.1.
One limitation of the thesis is the assumption that the nation state will be the key organisational structure for moving to an ecological state or society. This assumption is not necessarily made by all influential green thinkers, and, as we have seen, Keane recognises that democracy is a moving feast; its adaptation to a host of different social systems across the world and current trajectory of ‘glocalisation’ means we cannot easily predict its future. 685 Consideration also needs to be given to other integral approaches to democracy such as the ‘Crowdocracy’ of Watkins and Stratenus, who
684
Edwards, 'Misunderstanding Metatheorizing', p. 722. 685
182 are suitably prescient on the political and democratic environment we face.686 While I agree with many of their novel suggestions for democratic practice, I would hesitate to jettison the term democracy so hastily. A crowd is still (often) just a crowd, whereas the demos is the people, the electorate, those with the franchise. I suggest that maintaining this etymological link to democracy’s early origins is important, particularly for an integral approach, which should be developmental and hence able to honour assembly, representative, monitory and post-monitory democracy - of which Crowdocracy could well play an integral role, but which is unlikely to be adopted in its entirety. Also, I have not presented any examination of a potential 'world' government or at least world governance model. That was intentional, as in my view at least in this thesis, is that there is no reason a collection or collaboration of sovereign states could not use an integral approach to achieve what a so-called world government could do.
That is no reason to avoid thought (or actual) democratic (or other forms of political) experiments, which can help us at least understand what a global approach to the environment, politics and democracy might entail.687 Another key point is being aware of hubris and the automatic assumption that an integral approach will be able to solve all problems. An integral method should have built-in a way of recognising and self-correcting the flaws inherent in integral approaches.688 Despite these limitations and the boundaries of this research, I demonstrate that the use of an integral framework by policy and political practitioners would enable the honouring and inclusion of a diverse range of environmental perspectives and disciplines in proposed solutions. The enhanced understanding that arises allows us to bridge many environmental divides and helps to tailor responses that address the many "whats" and many "whos" of the environment, policy, politics and democracy. To create solutions to environmental, political and democratic problems therefore requires the mapping and understanding of complex multidisciplinary landscapes. For this to occur, an integral approach is recommended, particularly one informed by integral theory, integral ecology and the Integral Policy Tryptic model.
686
Alan Watkins, and Iman Stratenus, Crowdocracy: The Future of Government & Governance (Wicked & Wise), Urbane Publications, Croydon, 2016. 'Crowdocracy' works on the principle that a crowd of people on average usually come up with better solutions to problems than a "bunch of experts in a room," while not discounting the need for a bunch of (integrally- informed) people to assist and steer the decision-making.
687
John M Bunzl, 'Discovering An Integral Civic Consciousness In A Global Age: Global Problems, Global Governance, and Denial', Journal of Integral theory and Practice, 2012, 7(1), pp. 105–123; John M Bunzl, 'Transcending First-Tier Values in Achieving Binding, Democratic Global Governance', Journal of Integral theory and Practice, 2012, 7(3), pp. 24–42.
688
Elija J Petersen and M Ellis Jaruzel II, 'Argumentum Ad Wilberiam: How Truthiness and Overgeneralization Threaten to Turn Integral theory into a New Scholasticism', Journal of Integral theory and Practice, June 2014, 9(1), pp. 154–162; Susanne Cook-Greuter, 'Assumptions Versus Assertions: Separating Hypothesis from Truth in the Integral Community',
Journal of Integral theory and Practice, 2013, 8(3&4), pp. 227–236; Zachary Stein, 'On The Use Of The Term Integral', Journal of Integral theory and Practice, December 2014, 9(2), pp. 104–114.
183
PERSON - Terrain of Experiences
The author's experiences of an expedition to Macquarie island to observe a pest eradication program are examined through the use of a transpersonal research approach called organic inquiry and through heeding EZI's call to enact integral ecology through striving to operate from a second-tier perspective689, what I call the "integral adviser." This is given expression through an analysis of the author's ecoselves and the ecoselves of Douglas Mawson, an Antarctic explorer. The focus on the Person also asks how political a person can or should be, using the example of the scientist policy-maker.690
PLANET
Behavioural policymaking (also see Person): People do not usually make rational choices. Purely economic or fiscal data is an insufficient grounding for policy, which must be complemented by an evidence-based approach to policy making - one based on actuallyobserving the behaviour of people.691 It is also predicated on the behaviour of organisms in the ecosystems we study, and the exterior facet of physics, chemistry and astronomy.
Terrain of Behaviours POLITY - The Terrain of Cultures
The future management and governance of Antarctica is predicated not only on the materials and structures of governance and societal institutions, but on the normative discourses that exist in relation to both Antarctica and global policy and political issues. Rather than focus on specific intersubjective disciplines - although those are drawn upon too - a broader, and ecological, critical and democratic theory is proposed as a base layer for every IPT. While the theories and concepts drawn upon have their toes first, so to speak, in intersubjective waters, they are all actually integral in nature, recognising that the intersubjective only makes sense in the presence of other spheres, worlds or perspectives. Jürgen Habermas’s critical theory approach – his "communicative action” - is a key philosophy for addressing this aspect of the IPT. Habermas's action is focused on reaching shared understanding692, which is
expanded into an ecological perspective through the use of Robyn Eckersley’s critical political ecology.693 Habermas’s and Eckersley’s critical approaches recognise that while the outcomes of communicative action are focused on the intersubjective (the Polity or Habermas’s “lifeworld”), such action must occur in all Terrains or aspects of the IPT. This is part of Habermas’s ‘unconstrained dialogue’, which acts to prevent “steering media” (institutions underpinned almost solely by the strategic instrumental values of the Planet, or system world, as opposed to values reached through consensual deliberation in the lifeworld) from usurping the lifeworld with system world values not derived from consensual deliberation. Eckersley's critical political ecology and the positive aspects of Keane's 'monitory democracy' (where the conventional power-checks of democracy are interlaced with complex power-monitoring processes and institutions)694 form a robust base for any application of the IPT model. The value of the Polity is in being able to achieve a shared understanding on the political values around Antarctica - to develop a base of integral values that could be inculcated into national and global institutions and organisations.
The legal, political, social and ecological systems affecting Antarctic policy and politics: Legal and policy regimes e.g. - Antarctic Treaty System (ATS)695, Convention for the Conservation of Antarctic Seals (CCAS)696, Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living
Resources (CCAMLR)697, Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty (the Madrid Protocol)698; Ecological studies699;
understanding policy discourse on Australian Antarctic policy700; review and analysis of economic use and relationships701; environmental impact assessment702; strategic plans of government organisations and parliamentary or congressional committee reports703 and global legal principles.704 Antarctica as a political space - its future not determined purely by objective structural or material effects, but by the
"normative discourses underlying governance systems and the principles that will guide human/nature relations as we move deeper into the Anthropocene"705 This is the subject of the Polity and its key underpinning philosophies and theories (see Polity). The goal of the IPT
is not to remove these systems or work against increases in their steering capacity,706 but to ensure their underpinning (integral) values are reached through consensual deliberation in the lifeworld.
Terrain of Systems
Figure 7.1 Key considerations for an Antarctic Integral Policy Triptych (IPT)
689 William Braud, “An Introduction to Organic Inquiry: Honoring the Transpersonal and Spiritual in Research Praxis.” The Journal of Transpersonal Psychology, 2004,36 (1): 18-25; Jennifer Clements, Dorothy Ettling, Dianne Jenett and Lisa Shields, 'Organic Research: Feminine
Spirituality Meets Transpersonal Research', in Transpersonal Research Methods for the Social Sciences: Honoring Human Experience, edited by William Braud and Rosemarie Anderson, Sage Publications, London, 1998 pp. 114-127.
690
Michael E Zimmerman, ’Changing the conversation: Rethinking the Climate Change Debate from an Integral Perspective’, Journal of Integral theory and Practice, 2014,9(2), pp. 115–136.
691
Shafir, The Behavioral Foundations of Public Policy; Thaler and Sunstein, Nudge; Executive Order No. 13707, Using Behavioral Science Insights To Better Serve the American People; Gino, ‘Why the U.S. Government is Embracing Behavioral Science’; Wilson and Juarez, ‘Intuition is Not Evidence; Ho, et al, ‘Improving the Communication of Uncertainty in Climate Science and Intelligence Analysis.’
692 Jürgen Habermas, The Theory of Communicative Action Volume 1: Reason and the Rationalisation of Society, trans. T. McCarthy., Polity Press, Cambridge, 1990; Jürgen Habermas, The Theory of Communicative Action Volume 2: Lifeworld and System: A Critique of
Functionalist Reason, trans. T. McCarthy., Polity Press, Cambridge, 1992.
693
Eckersley, The Green State.
694
Keane, The Life and Death of Democracy, pp. ix - xxix.
695 Marcus Harward and Tom Griffiths, (eds), Australia and the Antarctic Treaty System – 50 years of influence, University of New South Wales Press Ltd, Sydney, 2011; Christopher C Joyner, 'The Antarctic Treaty and the Law of the Sea: Fifty Years On', Polar Record, January
2010, Volume 46(1), pp. 14-17; Oran R. Young, 'Governing the Antipodes: International Cooperation in Antarctica and the Arctic', Polar Record, 2016,52 (263), pp. 230–23; Paul A Berkman, M.A. Lang, D.W.H. Walton and O.R. Young, (Eds), Science Diplomacy: Antarctica, Science, and the Governance of International Spaces, Smithsonian Institution Scholarly Press, Washington, DC, 2011.
696
Marcus Haward, 'Contemporary challenges to the Antarctic Treaty and Antarctic Treaty System: Australian Interests, Interplay and the Evolution of a Regime Complex', Australian Journal of Maritime and Ocean Affairs, 2017, Vol. 9, No. 1, pp. 21–24.
697
CCAMLR (Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources) of 20 May 1980 (1329 UNTS 48); Erik J Molenaar, 'CCAMLR and Southern Ocean fisheries', The International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law, 2001, Volume 16(3), pp 465-499; Robert J Hofman, 'Sealing, Whaling and Krill Fishing in the Southern Ocean: Past and Possible Future Effects on Catch Regulations', The Polar Record, 2017, 53(1), pp. 88-99.
698 Rothwell, Scott and Hemmings, ‘The Search for 'Antarctic Security,' p. 1.
699 MC Kennicutt II, et al, ‘A Roadmap for Antarctic and Southern Ocean Science for the Next Two Decades and Beyond’, Antarctic Science, 2015,27(1), pp. 3–18; Tanya M. Haupt, et al., ‘Further Support for Thermal Ecosystem Engineering by Wandering Albatross’, Antarctic
Science, 2016, 28(1), pp. 35–43; Trevor McIntyre, Ashleigh Donaldson and Marthán N Bester, ‘Spatial and Temporal Patterns of Changes in Condition of Southern Elephant Seals’, Antarctic Science, 2016, 28(2), pp. 81–90; SJ Lockhart and CD Jones, ‘Biogeographic Patterns of Benthic Invertebrate Megafauna on Shelf Areas within the Southern Ocean Atlantic sector’,CCAMLR Science, 2008, 15, pp. 167–192; T Iwami, et al., ‘Annual Changes in Species Composition and Abundance of Myctophid Fish in the North of South Georgia (subarea 48.3), Antarctica, During Austral Winters from 2002 to 2008’, CCAMLR Science, 2011, 18, pp. 155–165; N Ratcliffe and P Trathan, ‘Review of the Diet And At-Sea Distribution of Penguins Breeding within the CCAMLR Convention Area’,CCAMLR Science, 2011, 18, pp. 75–114; SM Grant, SL Hill and PT Fretwell, ‘Spatial Distribution of Management Measures, Antarctic Krill Catch and Southern Ocean Bioregions: Implications for Conservation Planning’, CCAMLR Science, 2013, 20, pp. 1–19; D Kinzey, G Watters and CS. Reiss, ‘Effects of Recruitment Variability and Natural Mortality on Generalised Yield Model Projections and the CCAMLR Decision Rules for Antarctic Krill’, CCAMLR Science, 2013, 20, pp. 81–96.
700 Jefferey McGee and Danielle Smith, 'Framing Australian Antarctic Policy: the 20-year Antarctic Plan and Beyond', Australian Journal of Maritime and Ocean Affairs, 2017, Volume 9(1), pp. 25-41.
701
Jacquet, Blood-Patterson, Brooks and Ainley, ‘”Rational use” in Antarctic waters.'
702
Tin, Fleming, Hughes, Ainley, Convey, Moreno, Pfeiffer, Scott and Snape, ‘Impacts of Local Human Activities on the Antarctic Environment.'
703
Press, 20 Year Australian Antarctic Strategic Plan; McGee and Smith, 'Framing Australian Antarctic policy'; The Australian Senate, Australia's Future Activities and Responsibilities in the Southern Ocean and Antarctic Waters.
704Rüdiger Wolfrum, Common Interest and Common Heritage in Antarctica, in Handbook on the Politics of Antarctica, pp. 142-151.
705 Oran R. Young, 'Foreword: Why Should We Take an Interest in What Happens in Antarctica?', in Handbook on the Politics of Antarctica, pp. xiv - xvi, p. xvi. 706 Habermas, The Theory of Communicative Action Volume 2, pp. 152-153.
184