I can’t help but feel that the three dimensions of injustice we discussed in class are involved in all—and even integral to some—modern economic activity. Most major undertakings that require government approval typically involve cost-benefit analyses that really only factor in net monetary effects, and neglect different values people try to uphold when engaging with others and nature. I think a future where our interaction with our environments is less extractivist and is built on frameworks that acknowledge marginalized perspectives is necessary. For instance, Indigenous Peoples typically see their territories exploited without being consulted, and receive meager compensation (if any) in return. I believe a paradigm shift is necessary, especially in light of the ILO’s findings that Indigenous Peoples are responsible for stewardship of 80% of the world’s biodiversity. It's not clear to me that just the provision of a platform to marginalized voices is enough. If the law begins to require that the views of those who inhabit areas near planned projects are heard and seriously considered (beyond seeking approval from elected leaders who are too often some mix of incompetent and malevolent) we may be able to produce and provide employment inclusively and sustainably, while breaking the ties between economic activity and the perpetration of injustices.
top of page