file · Web

Foundation BriefsAdvanced Level January/February Brief

Resolved: Developing countries should prioritize environmental protection over resource extraction when the two are in

conflict.

January/February 2014 Table of Contents

Table of ContentsTable of Contents.....................................................................................................................................................1

The Structure of a Foundation Brief..................................................................................................................10

Definitions.............................................................................................................................................................11

Developing Countries Definition TF.........................................................................................................11

Prioritize Definition TF.............................................................................................................................11

Environmental Protection TF....................................................................................................................12

Resource Extraction Definition TF............................................................................................................12

Definition of “environment”. CFS.............................................................................................................13

Explanation of the polluter-pays principle. CFS.......................................................................................13

Topic Analysis One...............................................................................................................................................14

Topic Analysis Two...............................................................................................................................................16

Defend Your Source..............................................................................................................................................18

Authors..............................................................................................................................................................18

Organization......................................................................................................................................................22

Aff Evidence..........................................................................................................................................................23

Environmental Protection Good - Advantages..................................................................................................24

With respect to the environment we should err on the side of caution TF................................................24

There's a list of reasons to protect the environment. PNG........................................................................24

International agreements need to be made to implement consistent environmental regulations. CFS.....26

A study of over 108 developing countries found a negative relationship between resource extraction and genuine savings. CFS.................................................................................................................................27

Environmental Protection Moral.......................................................................................................................28

Stability of the biosphere should be our highest moral consideration TF.................................................28

Businesses have an ethical obligation to sustainable development TF.....................................................28

The primary concern of ethics must be to protect the environment. The alternative is a nihilistic outlook that guarantees our extinction. BG............................................................................................................29

foundationbriefs.com Page 1 of 146


Obligation to the environment comes before all else........................................................................................30

Ethics can only be founded by reflecting on the needs and limits of the environment. BG......................30

Citizens and Activist Groups want Harsher Restrictions on Resource Extraction. ABB..........................31

Environment Dying – Terminal Impacts...........................................................................................................32

CO2 emissions are currently on the rise – environmental protection critical TF......................................32

Terminal impact of global warming is extinction of all life TF................................................................33

Bad environmental factors lead to increased child mortality. BG.............................................................34

Normative uncertainty demands that we default to preventing extinction, even under a non-consequentialist framework. BG...............................................................................................................35

Rate of Temperature Increase Going up in Recent Years. ABB...............................................................35

Sea Level Changes Demand Immediate Action to Stop Global Warming. ABB.....................................36

Developing countries contribute most to deforestation. PNG...................................................................37

Developing countries contribute significantly to global warming through deforestation. PNG...............37

Astropanopticon.................................................................................................................................................38

Resource exploitation perpetuates effects of the astropanopticon TF.......................................................38

The astropanopticon has negative effects TF............................................................................................39

Biodiversity........................................................................................................................................................40

Destruction of biodiversity in developing countries significant TF..........................................................40

Even the slightest loss of biodiversity risks our extinction. BG................................................................41

Resource Extraction Leads to Species Extinction in USA. ABB..............................................................42

Mining and Logging Pose a Threat to Biodiversity. ABB........................................................................43

Deforestation in Indonesia has Ecological Consequences. ABB..............................................................44

Graph Showing Risks to Species due to Resource Extraction. ABB........................................................45

Developing Country Mindset............................................................................................................................46

Developing countries naturally underrate the inherent value of the environment TF...............................46

Developing countries are not approaching environmental policy the same because of the variety of political, social, and environmental variables. CFS..................................................................................46

Due to the global issues resulting from environmental issues in developing countries, these countries seek assistance from developed nations. CFS...........................................................................................47



Over-dependence on natural resources in developing countries is a result of flawed policy, not necessity. PNG...........................................................................................................................................................47

Authoritarianism/Government...........................................................................................................................48

Energy dependence is correlated with authoritarianism. CFS...................................................................48

Resource Extraction Primarily Profitable for Executives and Political Elites. ABB................................48

A multilateral approach by developed nations is required to help developing countries. CFS.................49

Resource Extraction in Authoritarian Regimes Serves Only to Make the Rich Richer. ABB..................50

Examples of REIs Opposing Legitimate Governments in Iran and Chile. ABB.......................................50

Corrupt Government in Angola Fails to use Resources for Development. ABB......................................51

Violent Conflict.................................................................................................................................................52

Violent conflict is more likely to occur in developing countries with oil and gas resources. CFS...........52

Mining decreases time with the family and ultimately leads to violence. BG..........................................52

Chart Showing Revenue from Resource Extraction Related to Conflict. ABB........................................53

Resource Extraction Creates and Perpetuates Violent Conflict. ABB......................................................54

Resource Extraction Promotes Warfare. PNG...........................................................................................55

Fight over control of natural resources in Africa is a huge conflict. PNG................................................55

Conflict Economy Encourages Corrupt Leaders to Maintain Status Quo. ABB.......................................56

Resource Extraction Triggers Conflict in Indonesia. ABB.......................................................................56

A study finds a correlation between resource extraction and violent conflict. CFS..................................58

Conflict in Developing Countries Exacerbates Disregard for Environment. ABB...................................58

Example of Conflict Encouraging Environmental Neglect in the Congo. ABB.......................................59

Imperialism/Colonialism Bad............................................................................................................................60

Imperialism is the root cause of the environmental problems of developing nations. CFS......................60

Developed countries use “environmental guidelines” in an eco-imperialist manner. CFS.......................60

Impacts to Women.............................................................................................................................................61

Mining Affects Equality of Women. BG...................................................................................................61

Deaths Caused by Process of Resource Extraction...........................................................................................62

Lots of premature death due to a bad environment and resource extraction. BG.....................................62

Resource Curse..................................................................................................................................................63



Definition of the resource curse. BG.........................................................................................................63

The resource curse is empirically proven. BG...........................................................................................63

Abundant natural resources do not lead to economic gain in developing countries. PNG.......................64

Access to resources does not ensure economic benefit. PNG...................................................................64

Resource-rich Nigeria doesn’t reap economic benefits. PNG...................................................................65

Resource-rich developing countries almost never benefit. PNG...............................................................65

Export Economies Fail to Benefit from Their Resources. ABB...............................................................66

The “resource curse” arises from exploitation by developed nations. PNG..............................................67

Long-Term Growth............................................................................................................................................68

Current industry practices cannot sustain long-term growth TF...............................................................68

Resource conservation leads to higher future growth in developing countries TF...................................69

Resource Extraction Not Always Linked to Economic Growth. ABB.....................................................69

There exists a duty to protect natural capital for future generations TF....................................................70

Natural resource revenues stifle economic growth. CFS...........................................................................71

The market-based strategies being recommended for developing countries would not work like they do in developed countries. CFS......................................................................................................................71

Environmental policy like energy tax increases hurts political capitol in developing nations. CFS.........72

Resource-rich countries have actually done more poorly than countries without resources. CFS............72

Resource-rich developing countries don’t create sustainable growth strategies. CFS..............................73

Resource Extraction not Always Good for Economy........................................................................................74

Resource Extraction May Lose Money in Some Cases. ABB...................................................................74

Resource extraction does not lead to better education. PNG.....................................................................74

Resource Extraction Destroys Communities.....................................................................................................75

Mining destroys traditional languages. BG...............................................................................................75

Mining creates hierarchies through who they hire. BG.............................................................................75

Exploitation of Natural Resources in Papua New Guinea has led to conflict and environmental damage. PNG...........................................................................................................................................................76

Resource Exploitation has led to violence and extreme environmental damage in the Democratic Republic of Congo. PNG...........................................................................................................................77



Exploitation of oil in Columbia has led to extreme violence, instability, and environmental damage. PNG...........................................................................................................................................................78

Indigenous Cultures...........................................................................................................................................79

Resource extraction affects indigenous cultures negatively TF................................................................79

Industrial development destroys cultures that have inherent value TF.....................................................79

Infringing on indigenous cultures through resource extraction is unethical TF........................................80

Impact of Oil Extraction....................................................................................................................................81

Oil Extraction Causes Dutch Disease . BG...............................................................................................81

Overfishing........................................................................................................................................................82

Fish are one of the most important economic resources being extracted for many communities. BG.....82

We are on the brink of oceanic collapse. As fish stocks decline and overfishing increases, we are headed for the total extinction of all commercial fish by 2048. BG......................................................................83

Species extinction will probably happen before 2048. BG.......................................................................83

Overfishing Impacts.......................................................................................................................................84

If overfishing is not prevented, then the extinction of commercial fish will kill the billions of people whose lives depend on fish. BG...............................................................................................................84

If overfishing makes extinct all commercial fish, then the entire ocean will be a ‘dead zone’ and our extinction will be imminent. BG...............................................................................................................84

Neg Evidence.........................................................................................................................................................85

Economic Collapse............................................................................................................................................86

Without prioritizing the production of energy through resource mining, countries will face global economic collapse in a short amount of time TF.......................................................................................86

Restrictions on natural resource mining will put substantial economic burden on developing countries TF...............................................................................................................................................................86

Limiting resource extraction raises global prices TF................................................................................87

Developing nations are economically unstable primarily because they misuse resource revenues. CFS.87

Economic Growth..............................................................................................................................................88

Using natural resources to fund private and public sector investment would help developing countries economically. CFS.....................................................................................................................................88

Rather than focusing on foreign investment funds, developing countries should focus on domestic economic development. CFS.....................................................................................................................89



Economic development is necessary to solve many of the environmental issues of developing countries. CFS............................................................................................................................................................90

Resource extraction promotes industrial development in poor countries. CFS.........................................91

Developing countries need to control their resources with domestic policies to avoid foreign take-overs. CFS............................................................................................................................................................92

Developing countries need to invest their money in infrastructure and real development. CFS..............93

A study of the resource curse finds no relationship between GDP growth and resource-richness. CFS. .93

Chile has achieved great economic success through resource extraction. PNG........................................94

Natural resource extraction does not damage other economic sectors. PNG............................................94

Economic growth will automatically lead to environmental protection. PNG..........................................95

The only way to achieve environmental protection is through economic growth. PNG...........................95

Developed Countries’ Control Good.................................................................................................................96

Developed countries are using the developing countries’ carry capacity to boost their economic growth. CFS............................................................................................................................................................96

The market theory justifies the domination of developing countries and their environmental resources. CFS............................................................................................................................................................96

Short-Term Growth...........................................................................................................................................97

Resource extraction is much more valuable to short-term growth in developing countries TF................97

Graph Showing Relative Amounts of Resource Extraction Around the World. ABB..............................98

Resource Extraction Tends to Increase as a Byproduct of Development. ABB.......................................99

Ecofeminism....................................................................................................................................................100

Environmental protection marginalizes minority groups such as women TF.........................................100

Indigenous Cultures.........................................................................................................................................101

Wrong to Take Action Without Consulting Indigenous People on Their Land. ABB............................101

National and Internationl Law State Indigenous People should Govern own Land. ABB.....................102

Example of Failure to Properly Consult Indigenous People in Columbia. ABB....................................103

Specific Examples of Inadequate Consultation with Indigenous Groups. ABB.....................................104

Racial Discrimination Encouraged by Current Extraction Practices. ABB............................................105

Sub-Saharan Africa..........................................................................................................................................106



Sub-Saharan Africa doesn’t have sufficient access to commercial energy and has very high levels of poverty. CFS............................................................................................................................................106

Resource Extraction Good...........................................................................................................................106

Studies from SSA (Sub-Saharan Africa) show that renewable energy is correlated to less poverty, better health services, and improved education. CFS........................................................................................106

Africa could use tariffs to increase rural electricity markets. CFS..........................................................107

Africa could use subsidies that are empirically proven to work to increase the energy sector. CFS......107

Air pollution from biomass use causes death. Charcoal production would save lives and increase employement in SSA (Sub-Saharan Africa). CFS...................................................................................108

Resource Extraction Helps Incorporate Developing Countries in Global Economy. ABB....................108

Resource Extraction can be done with minimal negative environmental impact. PNG..........................109

Steps are already being taken towards making resource extraction more environmentally friendly. PNG.................................................................................................................................................................109

Botswana has benefited greatly from resource extraction. PNG.............................................................110

Technological advances do not lessen the need for natural resources. PNG...........................................110

Developing countries will continue to rely heavily on natural resources for economic growth. PNG...111

Resource-rich developing countries in Africa are experiencing extreme growth. PNG.........................111

African nations depend greatly on natural resources. PNG.....................................................................112

Mongolia..........................................................................................................................................................113

Mongolia is finding a balance between resource extraction and protecting the environment. CFS........113

Mongolia cares about the environment and is focusing on improving their natural resources’ management. CFS....................................................................................................................................113

Extraction Companies Responsible.................................................................................................................114

Corporate environmental behavior is not always negative TF................................................................114

Development Good For Environment in Long-Term......................................................................................115

Developed Countries Able to Use Resources More Efficiently. ABB....................................................115

Resource Extraction Less Harmful to Environment In Developed Countries. ABB..............................116

Focusing on effective resource extraction policies actually helps preserve the environment. PNG.......116

Realism Good..................................................................................................................................................117

Countries must do what is in their best interest because there is no central authority above them. BG. 117



Countries must act in a self-interested manner because of the nature of competition with other states. BG............................................................................................................................................................117

Countries in the real world currently act aggressively towards other states. BG....................................118

The international system forces states to be aggressive and seek to securitize themselves. BG.............118

Democracy.......................................................................................................................................................119

There is a link between higher tax revenues on resources and democracy. BG......................................119

Inclusion..........................................................................................................................................................120

Resource extraction leads to inclusion. BG.............................................................................................120

Environmental Statism Bad.............................................................................................................................121

States should not force people to not harm the environment, instead states should use systems of incentives and fees. BG...........................................................................................................................121

Market-based solutions for the environment are much better than the state forcing rules upon people. BG.................................................................................................................................................................121

Government policy that claims to protect the environment actually damages civilian lives more. PNG.................................................................................................................................................................122

Developing Countries Least Responsible for Climate Change.......................................................................123

Developing countries are primarily victims of climate change, not perpetrators. PNG..........................123

Developed countries contribute the most to greenhouse gas emissions. PNG........................................123

Aff Counters........................................................................................................................................................124

A2 – Limiting resources places economic burden...........................................................................................125

Limiting natural resources does not slow economic growth TF..............................................................125

A2- Economic arguments................................................................................................................................126

Economics does not take into account environmental concerns TF........................................................126

A2- Polluter Pays Principle.............................................................................................................................127

Developing countries misinterpret the polluter-pays principle which erases the positive benefits of the principle. CFS..........................................................................................................................................127

Developing countries consistent with the polluter-does-not-pay regime causes more environmental destruction because the government won’t take the time to implement the best environmental policy. CFS..........................................................................................................................................................128

Polluter-does-not-pay-regimes empirically are preferable in areas with poverty and a weak government. CFS..........................................................................................................................................................129


January/February 2014 Table of ContentsNeg Counters.......................................................................................................................................................130

A2- Resource Curse.........................................................................................................................................131

The “resource curse” can be avoided with good governmental management TF...................................131

There is no good evidence to support that the resource curse exists. Some countries do better than others seemingly randomly. BG.........................................................................................................................132

Examples of countries that did not have the resource curse. BG............................................................133

A2- Resource Mining Bad...............................................................................................................................134

Efficient resource management offsets effects of natural resource mining TF.......................................134

A2- Shut down high pollution factories...........................................................................................................135

Shutting down high pollution factories has negative results TF..............................................................135

A2- Harms Indigenous People.........................................................................................................................136

Resource extract actually solves any harm to indigenous people. BG....................................................136

A2- Environmental Impacts.............................................................................................................................137

No matter what harms comes from environment, humans will survive. BG..........................................137

Cases....................................................................................................................................................................138

Aff Case...........................................................................................................................................................139

Observation 1: We must interpret benefit through a global perspective. This directs focus away from case-studies on individual developing countries, which lack global impact.......................................................139

Contention 1: Human-centered concerns do not uphold non-discriminatory utilitarianism TF.................140

Contention 2: Production of energy through resource extraction, harms most other living organisms, adding to the self-centeredness of energy production TF............................................................................141

Contention 3: Extinction is the impact of prioritizing resource extraction. Only through prioritizing the environment can we solve for these impacts TF.........................................................................................142

Neg Case..........................................................................................................................................................144

Contention 1: Without a focus on resource extraction, a global economic collapse is eminent TF...........145

Contention 2: Economic decline’s impacts are disastrous TF....................................................................146


January/February 2014 Definitions

The Structure of a Foundation Brief Topic Analysis

This is a general reflection on the resolution. It will provide to you an impression of the topic at hand, challenges you will face while debating, and a picture of where we see the debate headed.

FrameworkOften times, the most important part of the debate is to actually win before the debate begins. With this

section, we will set you up for such a feat. With unique analysis on how to lay the conditions for victory, you will be guaranteed to begin battle already with an advantage.

Strategy SectionsFoundation Briefs is committed to making sure you understand the evidence provided to you. We will never simply throw quotes at you and hope you can understand what we are trying to imply. That is where the Strategy Section comes in. At the beginning of all major sections (i.e. the section in the brief regarding al-Qaeda) there will appear a small section of original Foundation Briefs analysis to tell you how we see the evidence being used, what rhetoric will please the judge and which counterarguments to be prepared for.

Important note: Webpages and online articles that are long and continuous will always be cited as page one (1)



DefinitionsDeveloping Countries Definition TF

The World Bank, FAQ’s About Development.In the United Nations and World Bank lists, the number of developing countries ranges from 104 to 152. The 2008 List of Developing Countries compiled by the World Bank has 152 countries. The World Bank also includes five high-income developing economies - because of their economic structure or the official opinion of their governments, as well as several countries with transition economies - based on their low or middle levels of per capital income. For this Collections Policy Statement, the Library considers a developing country one in which: The majority of population makes far less income, and has significantly weaker social indicators, than the population in high-income countries...[and] lives on far less money–and often lacks basic public services–than the population in highly-industrialized countries.

Specifies number of countries and basic economic structure of developing countries. May be used to justify focus on specific developing countries and provides an objective measure (majority of population makes far less income) of developing country brightline.

Prioritize Definition TFBlack’s Law Dictionary 2nd Edition.A legal preference or precedence. When two persons have similar rights in respect of the same subject-matter, but one is entitled to exercise his right to the exclusion of the other, he is said to have priority.In old English law. Au antiquity of tenure, in comparison with one not so ancient. Cowell.

Restricts definition of prioritize to a legal comparison. For AFFs this will clearly delineate ground, preventing the NEG from squirreling out of arguments of ground. For the NEG, can be used to restrict the AFF to legal action.


http://thelawdictionary.org/in-old-english-law/

http://thelawdictionary.org/in-old-english-law/

http://thelawdictionary.org/subject-matter/

http://thelawdictionary.org/preference/


Environmental Protection TFGlossary of Environment Statistics, Studies in Methods, Series F, No. 67, United Nations,

New York, 1997.Environmental protection refers to any activity to maintain or restore the quality of environmental media through preventing the emission of pollutants or reducing the presence of polluting substances in environmental media. It may consist of: (a) changes in characteristics of goods and services, (b) changes in consumption patterns, (c) changes in production techniques, (d) treatment or disposal of residuals in separate environmental protection facilities, (e) recycling, and (f) prevention of degradation of the landscape and ecosystems.

Lists 6 specific actions that entail environmental protection. Does not necessitate legal action or mindset change on part of the AFF, but does necessitate completion of an action and an objective measure of success.

Resource Extraction Definition TFSecurities and Exchange Commission, 2012.The new rules would require a resource extraction issuer to disclose payments made to governments if: • The issuer is required to file an annual report with the SEC. • The issuer engages in the commercial development of oil, natural gas, or minerals. The new disclosure requirements would apply to domestic and foreign issuers and to smaller reporting companies that meet the definition of resource extraction issuer. In addition, the issuer would be required to disclose payments made by a subsidiary or another entity controlled by the issuer. A resource extraction issuer would need to make a factual determination as to whether it has control of an entity based on a consideration of all relevant facts and circumstances.

Outlines two specific qualifications for a resource extractor under the definitions of the SEC. Does not include unregistered extractors as well as resource goods outside of oil, natural gas, and minerals.



Definition of “environment”. CFSWalter, Ingo. Ugelow, Judith L.“Environmental Policies in Developing Countries” Ambio

Vol. 8, No. 2/3, Technology, Development and Environmental Impact (1979), pp. 102-109 Published by: Springer on behalf of Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences

The definition of "environment" that has been adopted by the United Nations Environmental Program (UNEP) reflects these same views. It is not limited to visual despoliation and environmental damage caused by air and water pollution and solid wastes, as it tends to be in the industrial countries. Rather, it is a much broader view which encompasses urban health and sanitation levels, housing, and similar elements which come much closer to the social priorities in developing countries. Again, it reflects the lower relative weight accorded conventional environmental problems by industrial-country definitions (6).

Explanation of the polluter-pays principle. CFSLuppi, Barbara and Parisi, Francesco and Rajagopalan, Shruti, “Environmental

Protection for Developing Countries: The Polluter-Does-Not-Pay Principle” (February 6, 2009). International Review of Law and Economics, Forthcoming; Minnesota Legal Studies Research Paper No. 09-08. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1339063

The polluter-pays principle is an international guideline for environmental policy stipulating that the person or firm who damages the environment must bear the cost of such damage. Since an environmental harm is often an externality, liability induces the responsible party to internalize the full social cost of his activity, thereby bringing the environmental harm down to the optimal level. In this paper, we shall consider a recent trend observed in developing countries such as India, Malaysia, Taiwan, Ecuador, Chile, Costa Rica, Kenya, and South Africa, which have adopted through judicial, legislative and constitutional reforms a variation of the polluter-pays principle, focused on mitigation of the harm through governmental liability. These new regimes have been advocated to ensure victims’ compensation when polluters cannot be identified or are insolvent. Subverting the original rationale of the polluter-pays principle, these regimes suggest that the primary aim is to provide prompt compensation to the victims of environmental harm, and only secondarily to impose liability on the responsible parties. Within this context, in the last few decades several legal systems have recognized a primary obligation on local and central governments to provide prompt relief and compensation to victims of environmental harm. This is a distinct shift from the regime of the polluter-pays regime, a shift that we shall refer to as the polluter-does-not-pay regime.


January/February 2014 Topic Analysis One

Topic Analysis OneTommy Fang

Resolved: Developing countries should prioritize environmental protection over resource extraction when the two are in conflict.

General Overview: At first glance, this topic seems pretty straightforward, with the AFF arguing on behalf of the environment while the NEG justifies resource extraction. Closer inspection, however, reveals the complexity of the topic. First is the word “prioritize”. Prioritize may entail legislation, a vow by governments to protect environments, or simply a change of mindset in the citizens of a nation. It is up to the framework debate to decide how the AFF satisfies the resolution. Next is the resolution’s designation of the resolution scope to only include developing nations. Environmental protection is very easily justifiable in developed nations such as the U.S., but limiting to developing countries gives the NEG much more ground. Further, the question arises as to what defines a developing country – will case studies of specific countries satisfy the resolution; is China (a game-changer) a developing country or an already developed one? Finally is the phrase “are in conflict”; it can be argued that many resource extraction practices come with minimal consequence to the argument – does this still count as conflict? Answering these questions in the framework debate will result in a much more clear and educational debate for both debaters in the round.

Affirmative and Negative Burdens

The role of the AFF in this round is to prove environmental protection as paramount. The AFF doesn’t have to prove a complete halt to resource extraction and as mentioned above, the extent of the AFF’s burdens will be determined in round. If the AFF’s burden ends up being something as simple as “be wary of the environment” while extracting resources, the round shifts hugely towards this side. On the converse, if legislation is needed, the AFF must actively justify huge changes to developmental policies of developing countries.

The burden of the NEG is to prove the need of resource extraction to developing countries. Like most topics, the NEG doesn’t have to disprove the “goodness” of environmental protection, but simply that the two are on similar or equal terms. The NEG burden of this topic is much more varied and can be adapted to changes in-round.

General Framework

Besides the framework mentioned above in the general overview section, another major point of clarification is impact analysis, assuming both sides use the most common framework of utilitarianism/consequentialism. Using general framework, three aspects of impacts: magnitude, probability, and time frame, must be evaluated.


January/February 2014 Topic Analysis OneMost important is time frame, as the AFF will likely go for long-term impacts while the NEG does the opposite. Whoever wins this aspect of this round in the framework will have a huge leg-up in impact weighing for utilitarian rounds.

In addition, burdens will be huge in this round, especially the burden of the AFF. Both sides should spend significant time specifying this burden of the AFF; the NEG can adapt easily to demonstrate how the AFF does not satisfy the burden.

Lastly is the actor/implementability of the topic. The actor is not specified; thus a specific government or organization could be the default actor unless defined in framework by one side or the other. The real-world impact of this topic is also decided by framework; does the AFF have to propose a plan that’s feasible? If so, real-world impacts come first in the round.

Value/Criterion Pairs

The easiest value for the AFF would be “societal welfare” or “governmental legitimacy” (which states the government’s first duty is to protect it’s citizens). This, coupled with “utilitarianism” or “prioritizing long-term consequences” would work well as a consequentialist AFF. If used, this combination would necessitate a lot of “environment good cards”, as well as careful analysis and expert opinion over the global impact from developing country actions.

For the NEG, similar values of “societal welfare” or “sovereignty” can be used. Sovereignty used in this case refers to the sovereign nature of states and can be coupled with a criterion of “prioritizing interest of state citizens” to create a case saying the only duties of a country are the welfare of its citizens, which may not mean the general welfare of the world. “Preventing economic collapse” or “preventing government coercion” may work as consequentialist NEGS, relevant cards of which are listed in the NEG evidence section of this brief.

Note to AFFs

I would take the utilitarian approach for the AFF. The briefs for this topic contain a large portion of “environment good” cards, ranging from indigenous cultures to ecofeminism. As long as you lay good framework to make your burden reasonable, a utilitarian AFF should get the job done with both progressive and lay judges for the simple reason that it makes sense to protect the environment at most costs if the impact/reason truly is that significant.

Note to NEG’s

Utilitarian cases also work for the NEG, although K’s and DA’s also work very well for this topic. Examples of K’s include humanitarian aid K’s, environmental K’s, and capitalism K’s. I’ll end this TA with a very good case strategy that I’d like to see a NEG run. The argument is that we’re past the tipping point of environmental


January/February 2014 Topic Analysis Onecollapse; the world is doomed within the next “x amount of years” no matter what. Thus, resource extraction for short-term benefits is the most logical solution, justifying a negative ballot.


January/February 2014 Topic Analysis Two

Topic Analysis TwoColton Smith

Resolved: Developing countries should prioritize environmental protection over resource extraction when the two are in conflict.

This is a great topic with the potential to encourage some in-depth, educational debates. The affirmative and negative burdens seem to be clearly laid out with the affirmative advocating for environmental protection and the negative defending resource extraction. This topic analysis will focus on theory, topicality, and other progressive aspects of the resolution but also will provide many arguments that can be applied to a traditional setting.

This topic has a lot of ground for both the affirmative and the negative but the most common and prescribed arguments will be of utilitarian nature. For once, a LD topic doesn’t contain a moral evaluator such as “ought” or “morally permissible” but rather uses the policy-making evaluator, “should”. Util. debaters that properly interpret the resolution to delink moral arguments and focus the framework level to policy-making will have leverage against framework debaters on this topic. First, debaters can substantively justify util. without use of moral arguments to dismiss common moral theories. Possible justifications would be agent/government specific, functionality, etc. Debaters can claim that morality is completely irrelevant under their version of utilitarianism. Second, debaters can take advantage of the theoretical reasons to prefer utilitarianism to add another layer to the framework debate. Common arguments include reasons why utilitarianism gives both debaters equal ground and is the most predictable framework to use. There are also educational reasons to prefer utilitarianism. Debaters can argue that the topical education that would happen on the contention level would outweigh the possible philosophical education on the framework level. Also, there are arguments why policy-making role-playing is the most education form of debate. If debaters are confident in defending util. on a theoretical basis then they can define “should” as a utilitarian obligation. This would also help the negative because they won’t have to spend time reading a framework against the affirmative if is util. then they will be able to straight ref and increase the amount of offense they generate under util.

In addition to utilitarianism being the most defendable framework on this topic, the resolution gives debaters a large diversity of possible scenarios, plans, CPs, and DAs. Since there are so many justifiably topical arguments I think that it is close to impossible for debaters to block out the many possible strategies. Thus, I predict a large influx of relying on theory and topicality to account for being unprepared on the substantive level. Relevant theory debates occur on every topic but this topic is set up for some great topicality debates. Besides topicality


January/February 2014 Topic Analysis Twoon “should” which was discussed in the previous paragraph, I think T- “prioritize” and T- “developing countries” have potential. The resolution is vague on what the affirmative’s action must entail to be considered prioritizing environmental protection over resource extraction. Affirmatives could argue that anything from passing regulations to making a political statement meet the definition. A strategic way for negatives to address the overwhelming plan ground is to prepare multiple interpretations that can be read against any plan, no matter how it is implemented or what it does. Next, many affirmatives may try and claim advantages from individual developing countries. “Developing countries” is plural in the resolution which contests whether the affirmative has to defend all the developing countries as a general principle or may choose to defend a single country. I think there are arguments going both ways and would be an important issue for affirmatives and negatives to be ready to debate. Finally, the resolution is specifying when environmental protection and resource extraction are in conflict thus it seems to be the affirmative’s burden to prove that they are in conflict in the scenario that they choose. In some instances this may be very difficult to do and give the negative some possible theory ground.

With utilitarianism being a very common framework on this topic, I think that impact turns and impact defense are highly strategic options for debaters. Many of the wide variety of plans and DAs have similar impact scenarios, so if debaters can generate offense on the common impacts then they will be able to substantively engage in more positions. For example, all negatives support resource extraction which is often justified because of the economic growth that developing nations would have. These negatives are very susceptible to de-development turns and arguments why economic growth is bad. Next, the environmental scenarios on both sides leave room for some impact analysis. Many affirmatives arguing in favor of environmental protection rely on the fact that the environment can be ruined which would cause human destruction through global warming, famine, etc. A strategic negative could answer the impact by proving that global warming is irreversible and extinction will occur no matter what countries do. In that instance, there would be no reason to prioritize environmental protection because it simply wouldn’t help. Analyzing and being prepared for the different impact scenarios on this topic will give you an advantage against unprepared debaters.

Since this topic excludes most conventional philosophical positions I think that there will be quite a few kritiks read. The critical ground on this topic is actually pretty good. Some possible kritiks include capitalism, environmental/anthropocentric arguments, and feminism. A critical capitalism affirmative could be interesting and strategic in some scenarios. The most applicable K would probably be some “caring about the environment” good affirmative. There are many different ways throughout the literature to justify environmental protection. Environmental feminism or anthropocentrism are possible starting points of research.

In conclusion, this topic has a wide variety of possible cases and positions but the majority seem to be utilitarian. Blocks and theory/T prep will be vital to successfully answer the different positions. When writing cases try to choose the most specific, true, advocacy that can be theoretically defended.


January/February 2014 Defend Your Source

Defend Your SourceAuthors

Heidi Albers: Professor of forest ecosystems and society at Oregon State University.

James Anaya. UN Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous People.

Terry L Anderson: Executive director of the Property and Environment Research Center, a John and Jean de Nault senior fellow at Stanford University's Hoover Institution, and adjunct professor at the Stanford Graduate School of Business

William Ascher: the Donald C. McKenna Professor of Government and Economics at Claremont McKenna College

Roy Bahl: Professor of economics at Georgia State University.

Anthony Bebbington: Geographer, Professor and Director of the Graduate School of Geography, Clark University, USA

Wilfred Beckerman: emeritus fellow at Balliol College, Oxford.

Arno Behrens: Researcher at the Sustainable Europe Research Institute. Researcher at Centre for European Policy Studies.

Nick Bostrom: Professor of philosophy at Oxford

Christa Brunnschweiller: Chair of economics at Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Zurich.

Gilles Carbonnier: Professor of development economics at the Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies since February 2007. He is editor-in-chief of International Development Policy since 2008, and President of the board of directors of CERAH, the Centre for Education and Research in Humanitarian Action (CERAH).

Paul Collier: Professor of economics and public policy at the Blavatnik School of Government, and Director for the Centre for the Study of African Economies at The University of Oxford

Jerry Coyne: Professor in the department of ecology and evolution at UChicago

David Diner: Holds a Master of Laws Degree in Military Law and a Masters in Strategic Studies. He attended the Judge Advocate Basic and Graduate Courses, the Army Command and General Staff College, and the U.S. Army War College.

Herschel Elliot: Professor of philosophy at University of Florida.

Felix FitzRoy: Professor in School of Economics and Finance at University of St. Andrews


January/February 2014 Defend Your SourceJennifer S. Franz: Research associate at the University of Manchester

Antonino Giambrone: teaches at City View Alternative Senior School, Toronto, Canada, a school focused on social and environmental justice. Has a Master of Arts at the Ontario Institute for Studies in Education of the University of Toronto (OISE/UT) in Curriculum Studies, focusing on environmental education and change theory.

Ginger Gibson: Professor at University of British Columbia

Ruth Greenspan Bell: Lawyer formerly at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, directs international institutional development and environmental assistance at Resources for the Future in Washington, D.C.

Gene Grossman: the Jacob Viner Professor of International Economics at Princeton University.

Longlong Guo: Former researcher for the Department of Biotechnology, Chemistry, and Environmental Engineering at Aalborg University.

Manjusha Gupte: Professor of political science at Purdue University.

David Hafemeister: Professor of physics at Cal Poly University.

James Hansen: Professor of earth and environmental sciences at Columbia University.

Terry Heymann: BA and MEng in Manufacturing Engineering, Cambridge University; MBA, Harvard Business School. Leads the Responsible Gold programme at the World Gold Council.

Macartan Humphreys: Professor of Political Science at Columbia University

Saleemul Huq: Senior Fellow in the Climate Change Group at the International Institute for Environment and Development.

D. M. Kammen: Professor at the Goldman School of Public Policy, University of California, Berkeley

C. Kirubi: Director of Renewable and Appropriate Energy Laboratory, University of California, Berkeley

Martin Khor: Executive director of the South Centre, a research centre of 51 developing countries, based in Geneva.

Jason Klinck: Professor at University of Alberta

David Korowicz: Human systems consultant in Ireland, PhD in Physics.

Donald Leal: Leal received his B.S. in mathematics and his M.S. in statistics from California State University at Hayward. He joined PERC in 1985 where he is a senior fellow. - See more at: http://perc.org/staff/donald-leal#sthash.H4KqlvY8.dpuf

David Lertzman: Professor of environmental management and sustainable development at University of Calgary.


January/February 2014 Defend Your SourceElisabeth Losos: Professor of biology at Duke University.

Timothy Luke: Professor of political science at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University Blacksburg.

Barbara Luppi: Professor at the University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Department of Economics and Center for Economic Research (RECENT).

John J Mearsheimer: American Professor of Political Science at the Universtiy of Chicago

Thomas Mowle: Associate Professor of Political Science at the United States Air Force Academy

Vikas Nath: Associate Director, Future of the United Nations Development System (FUNDS). International Chair, World Information Technology Forum (WITFOR).

Sukru Ozen: Professor of business administration at Yildirim Beyazit Unviersity, Turkey.

Elena Paltseva: Research Fellow at SITE, Stockholm School of Economics and a Visiting Professor in Economics at the New Economic School

Stewart M. Patrick: A senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations (where he writes the blog (The Internationalist) and is the Director of the Program on International Institutions and Global Governance.

Frederick van der Ploeg: Professor of economics, Oxford University, Co-Director of the Oxford Centre for the Analysis of Resource Rich Economies

Rick Van Der Ploeg and Tony Venables: Professors of economics at the University of Oxford and co-directors of the Oxford Centre for the Analysis of Resource Rich Economies.

Robert Pomeroy: Senior Associate for the Coastal and Marine Projects, Biological Resources Program at the World Resources Institute

Lawrence Powers: Professor of Natural Sciences, Oregon Institute of Technology

Madison Powers: Dr. Powers is Professor in the Department of Philosophy and Senior Research Scholar in the Kennedy Institute of Ethics, Georgetown University.

Phil Rabinowitz: Major contributor to Work Group for Community Health and Development at the University of Kansas.

Darryl Reed: Professor of business and society at York University.

Michael Renner: Senior researcher at the Worldwatch Institute.

Carolyn Roffensburger: Executive director of the Science and Environmental Health Network, independently founded in 1994.

Jesper Roine: Associate Professor at the Stockholm School of Economics

Michael L. Ross: Professor at UCLA department of Political Science


January/February 2014 Defend Your SourceClifford Russell: Professor of economics and director of the Vanderbilt Institute for Public Policy Studies at Vanderbilt University in Nashville, Tennessee.

Jeffrey D. Sachs: Professor of Health Policy and Management at Columbia University

Stephen Salant: Professor of economics at University of Michigan.

Joseph E. Stiglitz: a Nobel laureate in economics, is University Professor at Columbia University.

Oliver Tickell: Environmental researcher at The Guardian UK.

Mark Tran: correspondent for the Guardian's Global development site

Harrie Vredenburg: Professor at University of Calgary

Ingo Walter: Professor of finance, corporate governance and ethics as well as Vice Dean of Faculty at New York University's Stern School of Business.

Douglas S. Winnail: Professor at Living University

Jinhua Zhao: Professor urban studies and planning at MIT.


January/February 2014 Defend Your Source

Organization Black’s Law Dictionary: Widely used U.S. law dictionary.

Environmental Protection Agency: an agency of the U.S. Federal Government which was created for the purpose of protecting human health and the environment by writing and enforcing regulations based on laws passed by Congress.

Glossary of Environmental Statistics: Managed by United States Statistics Division.

Maplecroft: the world’s leading global risk analytics, research and strategic forecasting company.

Marine Conservation: Dr. Elliot Norse published Global Marine Biological Diversity in 1993, the world’s most-cited book on marine conservation. To get more scientists applying their understanding to marine conservation decision making, he founded Marine Conservation Biology Institute (MCBI) in 1996.

Marine Fish Conservation Network: The Marine Fish Conservation Network is the largest national coalition solely dedicated to promoting the long-term sustainability of marine fish. With almost 200 members - including environmental organizations, commercial and recreational fishing associations, aquariums, and marine science groups - the Network uses its distinct voice and the best available science to educate policymakers, the fishing industry, and the public about the need for sound conservation and better management practices.

Securities and Exchange Commission: U.S. governmental agency.

Science Magazine: leading journal of original scientific research, global news, and commentary.

The World Bank: A U.N. agency designed to assist developing nations grow.

United Nations: an intergovernmental organisation created in 1945 to promote international cooperation.


Aff Evidence


January/February 2014 Aff: Environmental Protection Good

Environmental Protection Good - Advantages With respect to the environment we should err on the side of caution TF

Carolyn Roffensburger (1999). Protecting Public Health & the Environment: Implementing the Precautionary Principle. Executive director of the Science and Environmental Health Network.

"When an activity raises threats of harm to human health or the environment, precautionary measures should be taken even if some cause and effect relationships are not fully established scientifically. In this context the proponent of an activity, rather than the public, should bear the burden of proof. The process of applying the precautionary principle must be open, informed and democratic and must include potentially affected parties. It must also involve an examination of the full range of alternatives, including no action."

The precautionary principle dictates that, which respect to the environment, we should err on the side of caution in the face of objective scientific inconsistencies. The burden of proof is to illustrate that all of the correct precautions are adequately accounted for—not the other way around. This is particularly true in the case of global climate change.

There's a list of reasons to protect the environment. PNGRabinowitz, Phil. Section 9: Protecting Environmental Quality. Community ToolBox,

Kansas University. 2013.The reasons for protecting environmental quality span a broad range. To preserve the health of the community and its members. Clean air, water, and soil, adequate open space, abundant resources – all of these, as well as other environmental factors, ensure the health of individuals and contribute to building a healthy community. To preserve community resources. Making sure that the community’s water supply, for example, and the streams, swamps, and other bodies of water that feed it, are kept clean is not just a matter of environmental quality, but one of necessity. To create a more pleasant and better quality of life. The physical attractiveness of the community and its recreational and relaxation opportunities, make life more pleasant for community residents. A pleasant environment reduces stress and encourages interaction, leading ultimately to a better quality of community life. To enhance the aesthetic character of the community. Living amidst natural and man-made beauty contributes to health and the quality of life, and also stimulates pride in and a sense of ownership of the community. It encourages people to maintain the community both physically and socially, and gives them hope. To attract new, environmentally-friendly business and sustain economic health. A community that cares for its environment is an attractive place to live and work, especially for “green” businesses (those that care about, or whose business itself is concerned with, environmental


January/February 2014 Aff: Environmental Protection Goodpreservation). To attract visitors and new residents. Visitors, like those birders who come to the Hallsville Wildlife Refuge, often seek out places where environmental quality is high for their scenic and recreational value. People seeking new homes, whether for retirement or for other reasons, look for pleasant and attractive communities. To preserve community history. Protecting historic buildings or districts, and the sites of old settlements or battlefields, or preserving untouched the spot from which the original settlers first viewed the community, can be important to community pride and to the maintenance of social memory. To protect the community from environmental disaster. The large-scale destruction of the coastal marshes in Louisiana in the second half of the 20th Century contributed greatly to the 2005 destruction of much of New Orleans by Hurricane Katrina. Clear-cutting timber on hillsides can lead to mudslides that carry away or bury communities and alter the landscape. To prevent people from taking actions they’ll later regret. If you allow building in a floodplain or on an eroded slope, sooner or later you’ll be sorry. In the 1950’s, a subdivision in a Massachusetts town was built in the floodplain (the area into which a river expands in heavy rains) of a local river, despite the warnings of engineers. Not long after, there was, in fact, a flood. Not a dangerous flood – there were no deaths or serious injuries – but virtually all of the houses in the subdivision were ruined by water damage, and none had flood insurance. As a result, the state soon after passed laws that prohibited building in a floodplain. To protect endangered species. Protecting environmental quality can also protect habitat and help preserve endangered or threatened animals and plants. To maintain ecosystems. Disrupting ecosystems – the interrelated stable systems of landscape, plants, animals, resources, and climate that interact with and sustain the character of the environment in a particular place – generally leads to unforeseen (usually negative) consequences, such as global warming, erosion, and the disappearance of species. Frogs are dying out in various parts of the world, for reasons that aren’t yet clear. Scientists suspect, however, that global warming – caused, as far as we know, by human activity – creates conditions that are perfect for the growth of a fungus that infects frogs and kills them quickly. More than 100 frog species have disappeared worldwide since the 1980’s, and if the trend continues, there will be few, if any, species of frogs left by the end of the 21st Century. Each frog population that dies out affects numerous other animals – those that they eat, those that eat them, and all the other plants and animals that are affected by the frogs’ predators or prey. To be good stewards of the planet. Earth is, at least for the foreseeable future, the only home we have, and it is both our duty and in our self-interest to take as good care of its natural environment as possible. If our own species is to survive, we have to pass the planet on to our descendants in at least as good a condition as we found it.

This piece of evidence is extremely long, so I would suggest just using the specific examples that fit best with your case.



International agreements need to be made to implement consistent environmental regulations. CFS

Khor, Martin. "Developing Countries Should Get Paid for Environmental Damage." Atlantic-Community. Atlantische Initiative, Oct. 2010. Web. 11 Dec. 2013.

While everyone is still talking about the BP oil spill, large-scale ecological disasters caused by private, international firms are nothing new. What is new is the concentrated and largely successful effort by a government (US) to induce a major international corporation (BP) to pay for damages. The following examples clearly show that this has hardly ever been the case up to date, in particular in the context of developing countries. In Ecuador, Texaco - today known as Chevron - continued to dump crude oil into the Amazon rain forest for years. The Niger delta is the site of yet another environmental catastrophe of gigantic proportions, thanks to leaky oil wells at the site of old drilling holes. Neither in Ecuador nor in Nigeria did the damaged parties succeed in obtaining court-settled compensation payments. This was due to the firms' reluctance to admit to any wrongdoing and be forthcoming about payments, as well as to the ineffectiveness and corruption of the regimes on the spot. The best known example remains Bhopal in India, where a poisonous gas leakage at Union Carbide killed over 2,300 individuals and injured tens of thousands of others, many of whom retained permanent health damage. While symbolic payments were made in this case, they were blatantly insufficient given the sheer scale of the disaster. Inspired by the recent successes of the Americans, Bhopal victims are currently attempting to get their cases retried in court. However, it is not only governments in developing countries that must do a better job at getting multinational corporations to pay for damages inflicted in the event of ecological disasters, but also the appropriate authorities where these firms are registered. Throughout the world, firms should have to face the fact that they have to pay compensation. It is simply not acceptable that they cash in on profits while ignoring the long-term costs of their business activities. In the firms' countries of origin, governmental authorities must pass laws that hold them accountable for any environmental damage they cause not only at home, but also abroad. It is imperative to speedily conclude international agreements that will regulate compensation claims and payments in the event of environmental damage.



A study of over 108 developing countries found a negative relationship between resource extraction and genuine savings. CFS

Carbonnier, Gilles, Natascha Wagner, and Fritz Brugger. "The Impact of Resource-Dependence and Governance on Sustainable Development." The Centre on Conflict, Development and Peacebuilding (2011): n. pag. The Graduate Institute. Web. 11 Dec. 2013.

This paper examines the dynamic relationship between resource extraction, institutional quality, armed violence and sustainable development with a panel data covering 108 developing countries over 24 years. While the literature shows mixed outcomes of resource dependance on GDP growth in developing countries, our results highlight a negative relationship between resource extraction and genuine savings. This is not surprising since, ceteris paribus, natural resource extraction reduces genuine savings. Yet, as the Bostwana example illustrates and our results indicate, this relationship is not systematic: it can be averted if appropriate governance mechanisms and institutional arrangements are nurtured.


January/February 2014 Aff: Environmental Protection Moral

Environmental Protection Moral Stability of the biosphere should be our highest moral consideration TF

Herschel Elliott (1997). A General Statement on the Tragedy of the Commons. ACC Journal. Professor of Philosophy at the University of Florida.

Fourth, ecosystems are in dynamic equilibrium. In addition, technology and human institutions are constantly evolving in novel and unpredictable ways. Furthermore, living things must compete with each other for space and resources; yet each organism also depends symbiotically on the well-being of the whole for its own survival and well-being. Indeed the welfare of all organisms -- including human beings -- is causally dependent on the health and stability of the ecosystems which sustain them. As a consequence, the stability and well-being of the Earth's biosystem has moral priority over the welfare of any of its parts -- including the needs and interests of human societies and individuals.

Moral justification for environmental protection.

Businesses have an ethical obligation to sustainable development TFDavid Lertzman, Harrie Vrendenburg (2005). Indigenous Peoples, Resource Extraction

and Sustainable Development: An Ethical Approach. Journal of Business Ethics 56.It has been argued that business has a moral responsibility to ensure that its activities are ecologically sustainable (DesJardins, 1998). DesJardins has proposed that the ‘‘moral minimum’’ which constrains the impacts of economic activity should be extended to ecosystems. He argues that all markets operate within constraints, the most obvious being those imposed by the biophysical limits described in the laws of natural science. The classical model of corporate social responsibility (CSR) includes legal constraints and the neo-classical model incorporates moral limits. The sustainable development approach includes biophysical constraints. While business is free to pursue profits, the ‘‘rules of the game must be changed to include the obligation to leave natural ecosystems no worse off in the process.’’ (p. 831) In order to address the global quandary of population growth, poverty and environmental destruction, Desjardins advocates a shift from unrestricted material growth to the concept of development. This conceptual evolution from a growth based ethic to qualitative economics is discussed below.

Ethical obligation to environment.


January/February 2014 Aff: Environmental Protection Moral

The primary concern of ethics must be to protect the environment. The alternative is a nihilistic outlook that guarantees our extinction. BG.

Herschel Elliot. (2003) “The Revolutionary Import of Garrett Hardin’s Work,” The Garrett Harden Society. http://www.garretthardinsociety.org/tributes/tr_elliot_2003jul.html

An ethics capable of being practiced in a finite world must be founded on the moral obligation never to cause the environment to break down. This obligation stipulates a necessary condition for moral life. It can be stated as the environmental principle, namely, to preserve the endurance and the resilience of the earth's system of living things. This principle cannot be justified by appeals to reason or the infallible revelations of God. It cannot be justified by valid inferences from human-centered definitions and universal moral principles. And it is not subject to scholarly rebuttal by professionals in moral philosophy. Rather, it is a factual necessity. Any ethics which denies the environmental principle is doomed to fail. People who live by an ethics which denies it simply die out. In effect, the moral certainty of the environmental principle is proved by the absurdity of its denial. Indeed, conditions of impending and intractable scarcity change the types of behavior that are suited to the various environments in which they occur. They change the moral behavior that is possible. As always, the moral necessity stands to discriminate against those who break moral law. For example, Western ethics discriminates against thieves, murderers, and all who commit immoral acts. It does not give them equal rights, freedoms, and opportunities. Similarly, an ethics founded on the environmental principle discriminates against those who trash their environments and those who fail to control their reproductive behavior. It does not give them equal rights, freedoms, and opportunities. Hence human rights are not universal and the obligation to render philanthropic aid to all in need is not unconditional. People who either ignore or deny the environmental principle diminish their rights, freedoms, and opportunities. They may forfeit their right to philanthropic aid as well. Just as Western ethics does not subsidize or reward people for their sins, so an ethics founded on the environmental principle does not subsidize or reward people for their environmental sins. The possibility of a tragedy of the commons refutes both the a priori methodological assumption and the egalitarian, human-centered principles of Western ethics. In a finite world human rights, opportunities, and freedoms are not the birthrights of all who are genetically human. Rather they can be accorded only to those who live as the environmental principle requires. Finally, to accept the environmental principle is to effect a revolution in ethics [where]. It changes the conception of good and evil, right and wrong. Saving human lives and promoting human welfare no longer define moral behavior. Rather the first moral obligation is to sustain the earth's delicately balanced system of interdependent living things. Then the epitome of evil is not selfishness, theft, and murder. Rather it is to violate the environmental principle by degrading the earth's biosystem. Then secondarily, after the environment is secure, moral attention can be directed to human


January/February 2014 Aff: Environmental Protection Moralconcerns - how to best to direct personal and societal behavior so as to make human life in a finite world ever more worth living.


January/February 2014 Aff: Obligation to Environment

Obligation to the environment comes before all else. Ethics can only be founded by reflecting on the needs and limits of the environment. BG.

Herschel Elliot. (2003) “The Revolutionary Import of Garrett Hardin’s Work,” The Garrett Harden Society. http://www.garretthardinsociety.org/tributes/tr_elliot_2003jul.html

Hardin's thought experiment proves that if people do what is right or good according to established moral principles, they can in fact cause great harm; they can destroy the commons - the environment - that sustains moral life. In this seminal essay, Hardin proves the tragic error implicit both in individualism and in the philanthropic, human-centered ethics which people in the Western nations commonly assume to be the final moral truth. The fact that a tragedy of the commons is possible proves that a factual state-of-affairs can refute a moral theory. In effect, it proves the falsity of the methodological assumptions on which Western ethics is founded, namely, that reason and valid a priori arguments and/or the infallible revelations of God justify moral laws and principles. Consequently a priori reasoning and non-empirical arguments do not suffice to justify moral beliefs [because] Knowledge of moral laws and principles is not a priori knowledge. It cannot be certain; it cannot be universal in scope; it [and] cannot be invariant under changing circumstances. Henceforth the rules of correct moral conduct must pass environmental and factual tests. Nature can veto moral beliefs and theories. A priori thinking in ethics is a kind of species narcissism. It is an instance of the hubris of rationalism to believe that the human mind creates or determines moral reality. By contrast, the contingent character of empirical knowledge requires that human beings be humble before the facts. People can only rearrange events in the world according to the laws and limits of nature. The empirical constraints that apply to engineering and architecture apply to ethics as well. People can only make ethical proposals; nature either tolerates or denies their proposals.


January/February 2014 Aff: Obligation to Environment

Citizens and Activist Groups want Harsher Restrictions on Resource Extraction. ABBDarryl Reed. (2002) “Resource Extraction Industries in Developing Countries.” Journal

of Business Ethics.Public concern about the activities of REIs is being expressed through a wide range of civil society organizations including development NGOs, environmental groups (e.g., Friends of the Earth, Environmental Defense Fund), human rights organizations (e.g., Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch), affected groups in developing countries (e.g., MOSOP), progressive businesses (e.g., the Body Shop), shareholder groups (e.g., BHP Shareholders for Social Responsibility) and corporate watchdog organizations (e.g., Multinational Monitor), including a number specifically dedicated to resource extraction industries such as mining (e.g., Mining Watch Canada, Mineral Policy Institute, Project Underground, Mining Impact Coalition, etc.). Such organizations may engage in a wide variety of activities designed to force REIs to change their policies and practices including, among others: 1) publicly criticizing irresponsible activities, e.g., Anita Roddick’s criticism of Shell (Curtis, 1999); 2) disrupting the activities of companies; 3) initiating legal processes, e.g., to stop specific activities, to get compensation for damages, etc.; 4) boycotting company projects; 5) encouraging shareholder activism, and; 6) lobbying governments to penalize corporations or restrict the activities, e.g.,

recent efforts taken against Unocal because of their operations in Burma (Hood and Penniman, 1998).8 While most NGOs remain suspicious of REIs, their tactics are not always confrontational or oppositional (Knott, 1998). As noted above, some NGOs seek to work closely with corporations and local communities to help better, ensure more responsible behavior.

Civil society groups and local communities have achieved a number of individual victories in the form of shutting down operations or preventing them from being undertaken in the first place. One frequently cited example was the closing of Ok Tedi Mine on Bougainville Island in Papua New Guinea (Clark and Cook Clarke, 1999). More generally, however, the success of such groups has come in the form of increasing public consciousness about issues and altering the manner in which new projects are approved and undertaken. This is most notable, as the other articles in this volume attest, in the increased attention by REIs to environmental issues and the concerns of local communities.

An argument can be made that it is the responsibility of governments to respond to the desires of its citizens. As private citizens and groups favor a focus on environmental protection, this is the course of action that governments should take.


January/February 2014 Aff: Environment Dying—Impacts

Environment Dying – Terminal Impacts CO2 emissions are currently on the rise – environmental protection critical TF

David Hafemeister and Peter Schwartz (2008). Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Physics Department at Cal Poly University.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has projected a likely temperature rise of 3C (2 to 4.5 oC) from a doubled CO2 of 560 ppm in this century.[i] Many believe that a rise of 2–2.5 oC will cause a “dangerous anthropogenic interference with climate.” Earth has already had a rise of 0.8C in less than one-half century, and it is projected to rise another 0.6 oC as the planet adjusts to the present level of CO2. Scientists have accumulated compelling evidence besides the temperature data to document a warming Earth. The observations include the shrinking of the northern ice cap (40% thinner in 30 years, and a considerable loss in surface area in the last year) and Greenland’s glaciers, lakes are frozen a shortened time by about two weeks, and summer is two weeks longer as determined by animal and plant cycles. The discussion sensibly moves to two main questions: “Are non-anthropogenic causes of warming significant” and “how much warmer will Earth become?”We will not review the scientific literature, as that path is well trod. Rather, we present some basic physics models, to shore up basic understandings. [ii] Put a blanket over a light bulb, and you will have a fire. For the full power of the light bulb to pass through the blanket, the inner temperature must rise considerably. The atmosphere is not a mere thermal resistor, but the analogy is illuminating. Svante Arrhenius, a Swedish physicist, first suggested in 1896 that increases in atmospheric CO2 would lead to global temperature rises. Below, we conduct an analysis in a similar fashion. The naturally occurring greenhouse gases (present before industrialization) cause the earth to be 33 oC warmer than if there was no infrared trapping by the atmosphere. One can attribute 21 oC of that warming to the IR trapping of water vapor, 7 oC to CO2 and 5 oC to other gases. If we add even more CO2, we should expect it to increase the surface temperature. There are also feedbacks, but IPCC has observed that feedbacks are more positive than negative, meaning they will further increase warming. It is our belief that “theory leads experiment” on climate change because all well-accepted atmospheric models predict a temperature rise. The data over the past decade is now solidifying in general agreement with theory. General Circulation Models (GCM) and our basic models connect cause and effect. Some critics believe that the warming is “directly linked to two distinctly different aspects of solar dynamics: the short-term statistical fluctuations in the Sun’s irradiance and the longer–term solar cycles.” [iii] We will show that observed solar fluctuations cannot be responsible for the presently observed global climate changes.

Scientific evidence of global climate change.



Terminal impact of global warming is extinction of all life TFOliver Tickell (2008). The Guardian UK. Environmental researcher.We need to get prepared for four degrees of global warming, Bob Watson [PhD in Chemistry, Award for Scientific Freedom and Responsibility from the American Association for the Advacement of Science] told the Guardian last week. At first sight this looks like wise counsel from the climate science adviser to Defra. But the idea that we could adapt to a 4C rise is absurd and dangerous. Global warming on this scale would be a catastrophe that would mean, in the immortal words that Chief Seattle probably never spoke, "the end of living and the beginning of survival" for humankind. Or perhaps the beginning of our extinction. The collapse of the polar ice caps would become inevitable, bringing long-term sea level rises of 70-80 metres. All the world's coastal plains would be lost, complete with ports, cities, transport and industrial infrastructure, and much of the world's most productive farmland. The world's geography would be transformed much as it was at the end of the last ice age, when sea levels rose by about 120 metres to create the Channel, the North Sea and Cardigan Bay out of dry land. Weather would become extreme and unpredictable, with more frequent and severe droughts, floods and hurricanes. The Earth's carrying capacity would be hugely reduced. Billions would undoubtedly die. Watson's call was supported by the government's former chief scientific adviser, Sir David King [Director of the Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment at the University of Oxford], who warned that "if we get to a four-degree rise it is quite possible that we would begin to see a runaway increase". This is a remarkable understatement. The climate system is already experiencing significant feedbacks, notably the summer melting of the Arctic sea ice. The more the ice melts, the more sunshine is absorbed by the sea, and the more the Arctic warms. And as the Arctic warms, the release of billions of tonnes of methane – a greenhouse gas 70 times stronger than carbon dioxide over 20 years – captured under melting permafrost is already under way. To see how far this process could go, look 55.5m years to the Palaeocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum, when a global temperature increase of 6C coincided with the release of about 5,000 gigatonnes of carbon into the atmosphere, both as CO2 and as methane from bogs and seabed sediments. Lush subtropical forests grew in polar regions, and sea levels rose to 100m higher than today. It appears that an initial warming pulse triggered other warming processes. Many scientists warn that this historical event may be analogous to the present: the warming caused by human emissions could propel us towards a similar hothouse Earth.

Scientific prediction of impact.



Bad environmental factors lead to increased child mortality. BG Jennifer S. Franz and Felix FitzRoy “ Child Mortality and Environment in Developing

Countries” Population and Environment, Vol. 27, No. 3 (Jan., 2006), pp. 263-28 http://www.jstor.org/stable/27503961

Environmental health factors play an important role in child survival even when con trolling for socio-economic variation (Anderson et al., 2002). Although difficult to deci pher in empirical analyses, Rainham and McDowell (2005) found child survival, like all population health outcomes, are clearly linked to the environment. McKee and Chenet (2002) note Central Asia is plagued by "an unusual pattern of mortality and struggles with the double burden of infectious and non-communicable diseases" (p. 57); poor and/or restricted health data on the region are a persistent problem and thus analysis of mortality and interpreting relevant data has been severely limited. Mezentseva and Rimachevskaya (1990) reported that in the Soviet Republics with the highest rates of infant mortality, infectious, parasitic, respiratory and digestive conditions explained the largest varia tion?all conditions linked to environmental quality as well as socio-cultural and economic variations. Carlson and Bernstam (1990) performed a study on the determinants of life expectancy and infant mortality in the USSR, focusing on socio-economic and environmental health variables. Incorporating three cross-sections, female farm workers and cotton fields per female farm worker were significant (positively) in explaining infant mortality. Jensen et al. (1997) also studied the effects of the ecological degradation in the FSU on health, particularly in the Aral Sea region in Kazakhstan. Exposure to toxic chemicals was inter correlated with poor health, and lead levels, for example, were 30 times higher in Kazakhstani children than in the control sample from Western Germany. At the household level, Buckley (2003) examined three Republics within the CARs to test, among others, the effects of ethnic and regional variation on rates of anaemia and low weight for age?two factors of significant concern for child health in the region. Across all estimates, maternal health had the most consistent explanatory power. Housing variables were used as a proxy for access to water and sanitation and found to be inconsistent in explaining morbidity in the analysis. These findings support our hypothesis that environmental factors particular to the region, such as long-term agricultural chemical exposure, may help to explain high mortality rates.



Normative uncertainty demands that we default to preventing extinction, even under a non-consequentialist framework. BG

Nick Bostrom. (2005) “On our Biggest Problems” http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/view/id/44.

Our present understanding of axiology might well be confused. We may not now know— at least not in concrete detail—what outcomes would count as a big win for humanity[.]; we might not even yet be able to imagine the best ends of our journey. If we are indeed profoundly uncertain about our ultimate aims, then we should recognize that there is a great option value in preserving— and ideally improving—our ability to recognize value and to steer the future accordingly. Ensuring that there will be a future version of humanity with great powers and a propensity to use them wisely is plausibly the best way available to us to increase the probability that the future will contain a lot of value. To do this, we must prevent any existential catastrophe.

This evidence acts as good weighing analysis for extinction impacts about the environment. You can use this evidence so that any risk of extinction due to the environment comes before any ethical framework and win the round based off of this argument alone.

Rate of Temperature Increase Going up in Recent Years. ABBJames Hansen. (2004) “Defusing the Global Warming Time Bomb.” National Aeronautics

and Space Administration.Global average surface temperature has increased about 0.75 degree C during the period of extensive instrumental measurements, which began in the late 1800s. Most of the warming, about 0.5 degree C, occurred after 1950. The causes of observed warming can be investigated best for the past 50 years, because most climate forcings were observed then, especially since satellite measurements of the sun, stratospheric aerosols and ozone began in the 1970s. Furthermore, 70 percent of the anthropogenic increase of greenhouse gases occurred after 1950.


http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/view/id/44


Sea Level Changes Demand Immediate Action to Stop Global Warming. ABBJames Hansen. (2004) “Defusing the Global Warming Time Bomb.” National Aeronautics

and Space Administration.These moderate climate effects, even with rapidly increasing greenhouse gases, leave the impression that we are not close to dangerous anthropogenic interference. I will argue, however, that we are much closer than is generally realized, and thus the emphasis should be on mitigating the changes rather than just adapting to them.

The dominant issue in global warming, in my opinion, is sea-level change and the question of how fast ice sheets can disintegrate. A large portion of the world’s people lives within a few meters of sea level, with trillions of dollars of infrastructure. The need to preserve global coastlines sets a low ceiling on the level of global warming that would constitute dangerous anthropogenic interference.

The history of the earth and the present human-made planetary energy imbalance together paint a disturbing picture about prospects for sea-level change. Data from the Antarctic temperature record show that the warming of the past 50 years has taken global temperature back to approximately the peak of the current interglacial…. Given the present unusual global warming rate on an already warm planet, we can anticipate that areas with summer melt and rain will expand over larger areas of Greenland and fringes of Antarctica. Rising sea level itself tends to lift marine ice shelves that buttress land ice, unhinging them from anchor points. As ice shelves break up, this accelerates movement of land ice to the ocean. Although building of glaciers is slow, once an ice sheet begins to collapse, its demise can be spectacularly rapid. The human-induced planetary energy imbalance provides an ample supply of energy for melting ice. Furthermore, this energy source is supplemented by increased absorption of sunlight by ice sheets darkened by black-carbon aerosols, and the positive feedback process as melt water darkens the ice surface.

The potentially rapid costs that society may endure due to the sea level rising drastically would most likely trump economic benefits to research extraction in the long term.



Developing countries contribute most to deforestation. PNGEnvironmental Protection Agency (EPA). “Global Greenhouse Gas Emissions Data.”

2013.Changes in land use can be important - global estimates indicate that deforestation can account for 5 billion metric tons of CO2 emissions, or about 16% of emissions from fossil fuel sources. Tropical deforestation in Africa, Asia, and South America are thought to be the largest contributors to emissions from land-use change globally. [3] In areas such as the United States and Europe, changes in land use associated with human activities have the net effect of absorbing CO2, partially offsetting the emissions from deforestation in other regions.

This card is best used in a case that emphasizes the negative effects of global warming. This card is most effective if you can successfully argue that deforestation is not a necessary form of resource extraction in most countries (because deforestation is done out of need to clear space, trees are often burned instead of used, etc.)

Developing countries contribute significantly to global warming through deforestation. PNGMaplecroft Global Risk Analytics. “Climate Change and Environmental Risk Atlas.”

2012.The world’s highest rates of deforestation, a significant cause of global warming, are happening in the key emerging economies of Nigeria, Indonesia, and Brazil, according to new research evaluating the state of the world’s forests. The Deforestation Index, released by risk analysis and mapping company Maplecroft, states that economic growth, poverty, corruption and the rise of biofuels are among the major causes of deforestation in nine countries which have been classified as ‘extreme risk.’ These include Nigeria, Indonesia and Brazil, as well as Bolivia, Cambodia, DR Congo, Nicaragua, North Korea and Papua New Guinea. Maplecroft’s research evaluates deforestation in 180 countries, which poses significant threats to carbon sinks, habitats for biodiversity, water tables and indigenous peoples. The index uses the latest available data, from the UN Food and Agricultural Organisation, to calculate changes in the extent of overall forest cover, and in primary and planted forests between 2005 and 2010. Deforestation is a key factor in contributing to rising atmospheric CO2 levels and subsequent climate change. Deforestation and forest degradation are estimated to contribute up to 20% of global greenhouse gases (GHG) every year. According to the 2007 report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) this amounts to more than the entire global transportation sector and is second only to the energy sector.

Another potential argument arises from deforestation evidence, which is that in addition to contributing to global warming, deforestation also robs millions of species of their natural habitats. This is a bit of a


January/February 2014 Aff: Environment Dying—Impactssquirrelly argument, but you could successfully argue its topicality due to the wording of the resolution (“environmental protection”).


January/February 2014 Aff: Astropanopticon

Astropanopticon Resource exploitation perpetuates effects of the astropanopticon TF

Timothy Luke (1997). The (Un)Wise (Ab)Use of Nature: Environmentalism as Globalized Consumerism? International Studies Association Journal. Department of Political Science Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University Blacksburg.

While many remember 1968 for the May events in Paris, a far more significant development unfolded during December on the flight of Apollo 10 to the Moon and back. Even though this space craft did not actually land on the lunar surface, it crew provided the first photographs and video images captured by human beings on an astronautical mission into space. The impression made these images of a sun lit, cloud-swatched blue/green/brown ball floating in the dark cosmos is still recasting humanity's sense of place; indeed, the quite common circulation of these and many other similar images now constitutes a thematic center for new "astro" panoptic disciplinary discourses. Because we can see Earth from space, like aliens arriving on Mars or Venus, our worldwatching abilities from a space craft presumably empowers such technoscientific worldwatchers with special worldacting responsibilities to craft space on Earth by reaching for its most optimal ecologized performance as [quote] "Spaceship Earth." At some point during the next century, human beings might, as some astronautical scientists advocate today, terraform Mars, a Jovian moon or some asteroids. Until then, however, environmentalists and others speaking ex cathedra from this photographically-mediated astropanopticon advance their own unique and varied projects for terraforming the Earth. This astropanopticon has effects: the reaffirmation of environmental vigilance in geo-economic discourses in the 1980s and 1990s arguably is altering the behavior of some corporate and state agencies toward Nature. Because the Earth, as Al Gore asserts, is in the balance, the raw externalization of some environmental costs to generate economic benefits is becoming less common in some countries around the world, if not in fact then, at least, as principle. Yet, this more refined internalization of ecological debits and credits also implicitly articulates a new understanding about Nature. One must push past the gratifying green glow emanating from documents like the Brundtland Report or Agenda 21 in which humanity often appears ready to call an end to war against Nature in order to launch a new era of peaceful coexistence with all the Earth's wild expanses and untamed creatures. In fact, these initiatives, like many other visions of sustainable development, balanced growth or ecological modernization, simply underscore the validity of Jameson's take on postmodernity. That is, our postmodern condition flows out of transnational networks of global production and consumption, a situation in which "the modernization process is complete and Nature is gone for good."25 Gore's Strategic Environmental Initiative culminates in the infrastructuralization of the planet.

The astropanopticon is the impulse of humans to dominate the planet, and has been implanted into our cultural memory since the advent of intergalactic exploration. The view of the Earth as a special object to


January/February 2014 Aff: Astropanopticonbe exploited derives from our separation from Earth in space exploration. This drive to dominate and manage nature threatens the end of nature, thus making the minimization of this astropanopticon of utmost importance.

The astropanopticon has negative effects TFTimothy Luke (1997). The (Un)Wise (Ab)Use of Nature: Environmentalism as Globalized

Consumerism? International Studies Association Journal. Department of Political Science Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University Blacksburg.

The wild autogenic otherness or settled theogenic certainty of "Nature" is being replaced by the denatured anthropogenic systems of "the environment." The World Commission of Environment and Development admits humanity is unable to fit "its doings" into the "pattern of clouds, oceans, greenery, and soils" that is the Earth. The hazards of this new reality cannot be escaped, but they "must be recognized--and managed."26 Through astropanoptic technoscience, "we can see and study the Earth as an organism whose health depends on the health of all its parts," which gives us "the power to reconcile human affairs with natural laws and to thrive in the process."27 This reconciliation rests upon understanding "natural systems," expanding "the environmental resource base," managing "environmental decay," or controlling "environmental trends."27 As the Rio Declaration asserts, Earth's "integral and interdependent nature" can be, and then is, redefined as "the global environmental and developmental system" in which what was once God's wild Nature becomes technoscientific managerialists' tame ecosystems. The infrastructuralization of Nature through environmentalizing movements and discourses propels contemporary societies and economies beyond the autogenic giveness of Nature into terraformative anthropogenesis, dissolving the formal boundaries between inside/outside, Nature/Culture, or earth/economy. As Baudrillard observes, "it implies practical computation and conceptualization on the basis of a total abstraction, the notion of a world no longer given but instead produced--mastered, manipulated, inventoried, controlled: a world, in short, that has to be constructed” … Humanity stands at a defining moment in history. We are confronted with a perpetuation of disparities between and within nations, a worsening of poverty, hunger, ill health and illiteracy, and the continuing deterioration of the ecosystems on which we depend for our well-being. However, integration of environment and development concerns and greater attention to them will lead to the fulfillment of basic needs, improved living standards for all, better protected and managed ecosystems and a safer, more prosperous future. No nation can achieve this on its own; but together we can - in a global partnership for sustainable development.

Luke explains that as we continue to disregard our environment more and more, we compel ourselves to manage an Earth that is ultimately impossible to completely regulate without stripping it of all nature.


January/February 2014 Aff: Biodiversity

Biodiversity Destruction of biodiversity in developing countries significant TF

Heidi Albers, Paul Ferrero (2006). The Economics of Terrestrial Biodiversity Conservation in Developing Nations.

Species, genes, and ecosystems are not evenly distributed across the globe. In fact, approximately half of all terrestrial species are located in 25 areas that cover about ten percent of land (Myers, 2003; Pimm and Raven, 2000). Approximately 16 of these 25 high-biodiversity, and two-thirds of terrestrial species areas are located in tropical forests, which fall largely in developing countries, especially in the Amazon, Congo, and South East Asia (Pimm, MEA, 2003). Only 12 percent of the original habitat in these 25 areas remains, which implies significant losses of species already (Myers, 2003). Although the non-linear biological relationship between species and area suggests that more than 12 percent of species remain, the rate of species extinction in recent history appears to be many times—perhaps several thousand times—the natural rate of extinction. Among the most important proximate causes of this biodiversity loss are habitat destruction, although hunting, non-native invasive species and climate change are also important in current and future losses (Vitousek et al., 1997; Pimm and Raven, 2000; Thomas et al., 2004). In our analysis of policy responses to biodiversity loss, we concentrate on habitat destruction, but we will briefly discuss responses to other causes of biodiversity loss as well.

Biodiversity link card.



Even the slightest loss of biodiversity risks our extinction. BG David Diner (1994). "The Army and the Endangered Species Act: Who’s Endangering

Whom?” Military Law Review, Winter, 143 Mil. L. Rev. 161, Lexis Nexis)Like all animal life, humans live off of other species. At some point, the number of species could decline to the point at which the ecosystem fails, and then humans also would become extinct. No one knows how many [*171] species the world needs to support human life, and to find out -- by allowing certain species to become extinct -- would not be sound policy. In addition to food, species offer many direct and indirect benefits to mankind. n68 2. Ecological Value. -- Ecological value is the value that species have in maintaining the environment. Pest, n69 erosion, and flood control are prime benefits certain species provide to man. Plants and animals also provide additional ecological services -- pollution control, n70 oxygen production, sewage treatment, and biodegradation. n71 3. Scientific and Utilitarian Value. -- Scientific value is the use of species for research into the physical processes of the world. n72 Without plants and animals, a large portion of basic scientific research would be impossible. Utilitarian value is the direct utility humans draw from plants and animals. n73 Only a fraction of the [*172] earth's species have been examined, and mankind may someday desperately need the species that it is exterminating today. To accept that the snail darter, harelip sucker, or Dismal Swamp southeastern shrew n74 could save mankind may be difficult for some. Many, if not most, species are useless to man in a direct utilitarian sense. Nonetheless, they may be critical in an indirect role, because their extirpations could affect a directly useful species negatively. In a closely interconnected ecosystem, the loss of a species affects other species dependent on it. n75 Moreover, as the number of species decline, the effect of each new extinction on the remaining species increases dramatically. n76 4. Biological Diversity. -- The main premise of species preservation is that diversity is better than simplicity. n77 As the current mass extinction has progressed, the world's biological diversity generally has decreased. This trend occurs within ecosystems by reducing the number of species, and within species by reducing the number of individuals. Both trends carry serious future implications. Biologically diverse ecosystems are characterized by a large number of specialist species, filling narrow ecological niches. These ecosystems inherently are more stable than less diverse systems. "The more complex the ecosystem, the more successfully it can resist a stress. . . . [l]ike a net, in which each knot is connected to others by several strands, such a fabric can resist collapse better than a simple, unbranched circle of threads -- which if cut anywhere breaks down as a whole." n79 By causing widespread extinctions, humans have artificially simplified many ecosystems. As biologic simplicity increases, so does the risk of ecosystem failure. The spreading Sahara Desert in Africa, and the dustbowl conditions of the 1930s in the United States are relatively mild examples of what might be expected if this trend continues. Theoretically, each new animal or plant extinction, with all its dimly perceived and intertwined affects, could cause total ecosystem collapse and human extinction. Each new extinction


January/February 2014 Aff: Biodiversityincreases the risk of disaster. Like a mechanic removing, one by one, the rivets from an aircraft's wings, mankind may be edging closer to the abyss.

Resource Extraction Leads to Species Extinction in USA. ABBElisabeth Losos. (1995) “Taxpayer-Subsidized Resource Extraction Harms Species” The

American Institute of Biological Sciences.Because the federal government is the largest single landholder in the country, it is important to consider how species are affected by resource extraction on federal lands. The government has unrivaled influence over how lands and natural resources are developed and con- served (Waller 1988).USFS and BLM together manage more than 20% of the nation's landmass; all federal agencies combined manage close to 30%. Furthermore, at least half of all endangered and threatened species depend, at least in part, on federal land (NHDCN 1993). For many plant and animal species, federal lands provide the last remnant of habitat on which they can survive.

All too often, commodity-based activities on federal lands have been carried out in ways that degrade other resources, including biological diversity. As a result, land management agencies frequently find themselves subsidizing resource development on the one hand and mitigating its negative effects on biological diversity on the other. When taxpayers pay twice-once to subsidize resource extraction activities and again to prevent species extinction caused by those activities-it is time to rethink natural resource management policies on federal lands.

Note that many individual species can only inhabit very specific habitats. This may lead to conflicts that will certainly lead to extinction if resource extraction is conducted in these areas.



Mining and Logging Pose a Threat to Biodiversity. ABBMichael Renner. (2002) “The Anatomy of Resource Wars.” The Worldwatch Project.Mining and logging are highly destructive of the environment, both because of the methods of extraction used and because these operations often take place in ecologically fragile areas. This is particularly true of mining operations, which involve the removal of what the industry calls overburden—the soil and rock that obstruct access to desired ores. But along with this overburden, rich vegetation is removed as well, destroying or compromising the quality of natural habitat for many plants and animals. Moreover, mining companies use a range of toxic chemicals to treat the ores extracted. The resulting waste streams are often either intentionally dumped or leak accidentally, contaminating rivers and lakes. As for logging, it can in principle be done in relatively careful and responsible ways, but many timber operations still engage in devastating clear-cutting practices. The toll inflicted by large- scale logging includes soil erosion, more severe flooding, and the destruction of wildlife habitat and fisheries.99

These impacts are felt even under the best of circumstances. They are worse where resource extraction is done in a rapacious fashion that makes light of the survival interest of local communities and discounts biodiversity, as demonstrated in Aceh, West Papua, Bougainville, and many other locations.

We can see that in the instances where a clear conflict exists between obtaining resources and harming the environment, careless resource extraction can have very serious ecological consequences.



Deforestation in Indonesia has Ecological Consequences. ABBMichael Renner. (2002) “The Anatomy of Resource Wars.” The Worldwatch Project.A series of Indonesian laws passed in the 1960s marginalized the rights of indigenous peoples. The Basic Forestry Law of 1967 parcelled out huge chunks of Dayak forests to logging concessionaires (influential generals first, then timber companies headed by cronies of the Suharto military dictatorship). The Mining Law of 1968 similarly took control away from indigenous communities and overrode their traditional (and far less environmentally disrupting) ways of gold mining.101

The Suharto regime relied on foreign loans to pursue economic development. The loans were paid for by

massive resource extraction, particularly timber. Foreign debt therefore translated into rapid deforestation.

Almost 70 percent of Kalimantan’s forests were opened to logging. In the province of Central Kalimantan

alone, some 7 to 8 million hectares, an area larger than all of Ireland, were allocated to timber companies. The

Indonesian government also invited oil palm companies to move in after forests had been cleared by loggers,

and facilitated transmigration to provide cheap labor for the plantation companies. Although logging is destroying Borneo’s forests at a rapid pace, some 63 percent of Kalimantan is still forested. But if current logging trends continue, the forests of West Kalimantan will be gone in 10 to 20 years.102

We can see that a combination of social and economic factors lead to policies that are harmful to both the indidenous people and the environment in Indonesia.



Graph Showing Risks to Species due to Resource Extraction. ABBElisabeth Losos. (1995) “Taxpayer-Subsidized Resource Extraction Harms Species” The

American Institute of Biological Sciences.

Figure 1. Percentage of US species listed under the Endangered Species Act that are affected by hard-rock mining, livestock grazing, water development, logging, or recreation. Known resource extraction causes include primary causes, significant causes, secondary causes, and historical causes. Potential causes include likely future threats or are unverified current threats of endangerment. Number of Species in each category is given in parenthesis.

This shows that a huge percentage of endangered plants and animals are threatened by resource extraction.


January/February 2014 Aff: Developing Country Mindset

Developing Country Mindset Developing countries naturally underrate the inherent value of the environment TF

Sukru Ozen, Fatma Kusku (2009). Corporate Environmental Citizenship Variation in Developing Countries: An Institutional Framework. Journal of Business Ethics.

Moreover, given the cost effect of CEC practices, corporations in developing countries are more likely to ignore CEC practices due to their concern over economic survival. Placing economic priority over environmental concerns may well be seen as legitimate at the societal level. For example, Franzen (2003) finds that compared to citizens in wealthier countries, a lower percentage of citizens in poorer countries are concerned about environmental protection as much as economic growth. Additionally, the findings of Inglehart (1995) show that among 43 countries, wealthier nations have larger proportions of postmaterialistws ho give less priorityt o economic issues and greater attention to other values, one of which is the concern for protecting the natural environment. The same findings also indicate that the greatest support for environmental protection is found in countries with higher GNP per capita, such as Sweden, Denmark, and the Netherlands.

General framework card; more needs to protect.

Developing countries are not approaching environmental policy the same because of the variety of political, social, and environmental variables. CFS

Walter, Ingo. Ugelow, Judith L.“Environmental Policies in Developing Countries” Ambio Vol. 8, No. 2/3, Technology, Development and Environmental Impact (1979), pp. 102-109 Published by: Springer on behalf of Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences

To summarize, sovereign nations are going about the business of environmental protection at different speeds, with different degrees of rigour, using different techniques. "Objective functions" related to environmental quality differ markedly in time and space. Existing variations in environmental policy "climates" follow largely from inter-country differences in degrees of industrialization and levels of living. A great deal of policy already exists in such highly industrialized nations as Japan and West Germany. It is just beginning to emerge in nations such as Spain and Brazil. It probably will be some time in coming in countries like Ethiopia and Bangladesh. Other policy differences exist mainly because of variations in political and social philosophies (3). Such radically different approaches to essentially similar problems reflect different traditions of business-government relations, philosophies of collective intervention, patterns of competition and degrees of sophistication on the part of public officials.


January/February 2014 Aff: Developing Country Mindset

Due to the global issues resulting from environmental issues in developing countries, these countries seek assistance from developed nations. CFS


Fourth, developed countries have been pressing the developing nations on the shortsightedness of permissive environmental policies-this has been reflected in World Bank project appraisal criteria, national development assistance programs, etc. In response, the developing countries have demanded "environmental reparations" in the form of greatly increased assistance in improving their environment (broadly defined) from the industrial nations. The industrial countries have also argued that trans- frontier pollution of the oceans and the atmosphere gives them a direct interest in what the developing countries do about environmental policy, and that they cannot be given a completely free hand if the world as a whole will have to bear part of the environmental costs involved. Finally, to the extent that the developed countries depart from the "polluter pays" principle and subsidize pollution control costs at home, some of the production shifting to the developing countries that might otherwise occur via competitive market processes may not materialize at all (8).

Over-dependence on natural resources in developing countries is a result of flawed policy, not necessity. PNG

Ascher, William. “Why Governments Waste Natural Resources: Policy Failures in Developing Countries.” July 1999.

It is certainly true that the ethics of balancing economic development against the noneconomic values of ecosystems remains a thorny problem. Yet the premise that resource managers and government officials are at a loss to choose and implement better policies for forests and other ecosystems is unfounded. The “primitive art” of sustainable yield may not be able to gauge precisely how much resource can be extracted without risking future yields, but it is certainly robust enough both to identify the many resource policies and practices that are unsustainable and to guide resource managers to moderation when the level of sustainable yield is not certain. The essential point, demonstrated time and again in the case studies, is that many natural-resource policies are known to be clearly in error, by government officials as well as by outside observers. They are in error in the crucial sense that they do not husband natural resources in ways that further society’s welfare, whether or not they are political errors on the part of the government officials that choose them.

This card is a good response to a neg argument that developing countries need to focus on resource extraction because it is the cornerstone of their economy. If you respond with this card, be sure to stress


January/February 2014 Aff: Developing Country Mindsetthat with better policy, developing countries would easily be able to coordinate sustainability with sound economic success, thus making your opponent’s argument non-topical.


January/February 2014 Aff: Authoritarianism/Government

Authoritarianism/Government Energy dependence is correlated with authoritarianism. CFS

Patrick, Stewart M. "Why Natural Resources Are a Curse on Developing Countries and How to Fix It." The Atlantic. N.p., 30 Apr. 2012. Web. 04 Dec. 2013.

First, a few facts. The correlation between energy dependence and authoritarianism is clear. "There are twenty-three countries in the world that derive at least 60 percent of their exports from oil and gas and not a single one is a real democracy," observes Larry Diamond of Stanford University. There are numerous hypotheses to account for this correlation, as I note in my book, Weak Links: Fragile States Global Threats and International Security. Most obviously, easy resource revenues eliminate a critical link of accountability between government and citizens, by reducing incentives to tax other productive activity and use the revenue to deliver social services effectively. The same revenues also generate staggering wealth that facilitates corruption and patronage networks. Together, they consolidate the power of entrenched elites and regime supporters, sharpening income inequality and stifling political reform. The history of the oil-rich Arab Middle East has long been a case in point--with Saudi Arabia being exhibit A.

Resource Extraction Primarily Profitable for Executives and Political Elites. ABBDarryl Reed. (2002) “Resource Extraction Industries in Developing Countries.” Journal

of Business Ethics.Early on in the century REIs seem to have been in a very strong position to promote their own interests. In the case of colonial territories, such firms typically had the support of their home government. In Latin America, where most countries were independent, REIs were also in a relatively strong position vis-à-vis domestic governments. In the oil industry, for example, foreign firms tended to dominate operations in part due to the level of risk involved and start-up costs which served as effective deterrents to local entrepreneurs. During this period they enjoyed very low tax rates, relatively low labour costs and earned high profits. There were of course variations across countries due to specific historical circumstances. Key determinants of higher profits rates – apart from the nature of supplies, demand, geography – included the ability of local elites to extract rents and the ability of labour to demand high wages (as well as a lack of competition from domestic entrepreneurs). For REIs, the most favourable circumstances for controlling such costs tended to be some form of “strongman” rule. Such a political arrangement typically enabled them to get more extensive concessions and control labour costs.


January/February 2014 Aff: Authoritarianism/GovernmentIt would be helpful to compare this version of resource extraction, which primarily benefits a privileged few, to environmental protection, which is beneficial to everyone.



A multilateral approach by developed nations is required to help developing countries. CFSPatrick, Stewart M. "Why Natural Resources Are a Curse on Developing Countries and

How to Fix It." The Atlantic. N.p., 30 Apr. 2012. Web. 04 Dec. 2013.Given this sorry picture, can anything be done? In fact, the past decade has seen a raft of international initiatives designed to combat corruption and improve governance in resource-rich nations. The Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative works to improve revenue management in some thirty resource-rich countries. The Open Government Partnership co-chaired by the United States and Brazil, aims to fight corruption by securing concrete national action plans to fight corruption from governments. The Publish What You Pay and Publish What You Lend campaigns call on transnational corporations and banks to publicize their payments and loans to local authorities. The Equator Principles seek to ensure that private bank investments do not exacerbate environmental and social risks. The World Bank-sponsored Stolen Assets Recovery (StAR) Initiative assists successor governments in tracking down the wealth looted by deposed autocrats. Finally, the Dodd-Frank Act of 2011 mandates annual reports by U.S. extractive industry companies to the SEC disclosing payments to host governments.

The secret to improving governance in resource rich countries, Lawson-Remer argues, is to improve cooperation among three groups: "capital-exporting countries, international financial institutions, and private sector companies." To advance this overall goal, she calls on the United States to work with likeminded countries in major multilateral frameworks (including the Group of Eight, Group of Twenty, Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), and the Financial Stability Board) to forge consensus on four priorities.



Resource Extraction in Authoritarian Regimes Serves Only to Make the Rich Richer. ABBDarryl Reed. (2002) “Resource Extraction Industries in Developing Countries.” Journal

of Business Ethics.The extent to which the populations of developing countries benefited from nationalization and the extractions and processing of resources generally was, again, conditioned by a range of factors (viz., demographics, organizational capacities and expertise of government, etc.), most notably perhaps, the make-up of the political forces within the country. While more populist governments tended to distribute wealth more widely (e.g., Venezuela), many “authoritarian governments” were able to limit the gains to a small coterie of supporters (e.g., Mobutu in Zaire) (Philip, 1982; Wrong, 2001).

It should not always be assumed that Increased resource extraction will lead to liberalization. In countries with highly oppressive regimes, it can have the effect of making leaders even more wealthy and augment the oppression of the common man.

Examples of REIs Opposing Legitimate Governments in Iran and Chile. ABBDarryl Reed. (2002) “Resource Extraction Industries in Developing Countries.” Journal

of Business Ethics.Historically, REIs have acted in ways that have had adverse effects on political development. Perhaps, the most blatant cases involve the direct support by firms for the overthrow of legitimate governments (which typically occurs after such governments have asserted their sovereignty over their natural resources). One clear example of this involves the decision by the government of Mohammad Mossadegh in Iran to nationalize the holdings of British Petroleum 1951. In response to this move, BP was first able to win assurances from the other major oil companies that they would not buy oil from Iran, a strategy that placed tremendous economic pressure on the Mossadegh government to reconsider its policy. When this did not have the desired effect, the British government – joined by the U.S. government (which had been reluctant to take any action, in part due to its own interests in breaking up the British monopoly in Iran) – was persuaded to intervene in the matter. The result was strong support for a coup in 1953 that led to the overthrow of Mossadegh, the return of the Shah and the (re-) entry of foreign oil companies into Iran (Sampson, 1984). A similar case involves the democratically elected government of Salvador Allende in Chile in 1973, which fell victim to a CIA backed coup in 1973 after nationalizing foreign copper holdings, of which the U.S. companies Anaconda and Kennecott had the largest stake (Kaufman, 1988). In both these instances, industry actors found sympathetic ears within their home governments in their efforts to promote their economic interests over the will of the people of the countries in question.


January/February 2014 Aff: Authoritarianism/GovernmentAgain, we can see that resource extraction is not intrinsically linked to the development of democracy. In instances such as the one above, the effect is quite the opposite.

Corrupt Government in Angola Fails to use Resources for Development. ABBMichael Renner. (2002) “The Anatomy of Resource Wars.” The Worldwatch Project.Jonas Savimbi led a violent life and died a violent death. Yet when the leader of the Angolan rebel group UNITA (União Nacional para a Independência Total de Angola) was killed in an ambush in February 2002, his death freshened hopes that Angola might finally emerge from the nightmare of a quarter- century of nearly uninterrupted civil war. In short order, a cease-fire was signed and plans made for the demobilization and dis- armament of rebel fighters.1

The United Nations Children’s Fund has described Angola as “the worst place in the world to be a child.” Almost 30 percent of children die before they reach the age of six. Nearly half of all Angolan children are underweight, and a third of school- age children have no school to go to. Adults are hardly better off. Two-thirds of Angolans scrape by on less than a dollar a day, and 42 percent of adults are illiterate. Unsafe drinking water (68 percent of the population lacks access) and a pervasive lack of health services (80 percent have no access to basic medical care) have combined with food shortages to limit life expectancy to 47 years. The 2002 Human Development Index of the UN Development Programme (UNDP), a broad gauge of social and economic progress, ranked Angola 161st out of 173 nations.2

Endowed with ample diamond and oil deposits, Angola should not be on the bottom rungs of the world’s

social ladder. But instead of a blessing, Angola’s natural resource wealth has turned out to be a curse. While the majority of the population lived in misery and terror, the leaders of both the government and the rebel UNITA forces devoted most of the money they gained selling Angola’s resources to buying weapons and lining their own pockets. The conflict ravaged the economy, displaced close to 4 million people—one out of three Angolans—and left about a million people dependent on foreign food aid. The ideological differences that first sparked the war came to reside in the dustbin of history, but resource- driven greed and corruption proved to be powerful fuel for its continuation.3

As we can see from this extreme case, resource extraction is capable of promoting conflict in areas with corrupt governments. It also does little to improve weak economes in these cases.


January/February 2014 Aff: Violent Conflict

Violent Conflict Violent conflict is more likely to occur in developing countries with oil and gas resources.

CFSPatrick, Stewart M. "Why Natural Resources Are a Curse on Developing Countries and

How to Fix It." The Atlantic. N.p., 30 Apr. 2012. Web. 04 Dec. 2013.Finally, the very presence of oil and gas resources within developing countries exacerbates the risk of violent conflict. The list of civil conflicts fought at least in part for control of oil and gas resources is long. A partial list would include Nigeria, Angola, Burma, Papua New Guinea (Bougainville), Chad, Pakistan (Balochistan), and of course Sudan. Econometric studies confirm that the risk of civil war greatly increases when countries depend on the export of primary commodities, particularly fossil fuels. At least three factors could explain this correlation. First, the prospect of resource rents may be an incentive to rebel or secede. Second, wealth from resources may enable rebel groups to finance their operations. Third, the high levels of corruption, extortion, and poor governance that accompany resource wealth often generate grievances leading to rebellion.

Mining decreases time with the family and ultimately leads to violence. BGGinger Gibson and Jason Klinck. (2004) “The Impact of Mining on Aboriginal

Communities” Pimatisiwin: A Journal of Aboriginal and Indigenous Community Health. http://www.pimatisiwin.com/uploads/330599908.pdf

Limited time can lead families to progressively fragment. By decreasing the amount of time for communication, existing problems can be exacerbated and sometimes lead partners to look elsewhere for interaction. The stress associated with mine work is also passed on to other family members. Spouses are required to take up household responsibilities (such as child care) while their partners are away and home recovering, and also must deal with any financial consequences, not from a lack of income, but poor money management. Children also bear the consequences of prolonged absences and family dysfunction. In a 1979 study on the effect of mining rotation schedules on children, 68% of the respondents reported bad consequences for children (Hobart, 1979), such as missing the father, and a need for father’s discipline. The BHP Ekati survey reported an impact on children of age 0-4 years old for 49.5% of mine workers with children (Government of the Northwest Territories, 2000). Impacts may lead to children acting out, dropping out of school, or mimicking addictive behaviours (North Slave Metis Association, 2002). These strains may materialize in family conflict. Violence is already a serious problem in the North; in 2003, the rate of violent crimes per capita in the Northwest Territories was five times that of the rest of Canada (Government of the Northwest Territories, 2003). There are indications that this situation may be worse due to mining. Brubacher and Associates reported an increase in alcohol-associated abuse of women at Nunavut’s Nanisivik mine (2002). In the Northwest Territories, during


http://www.pimatisiwin.com/uploads/330599908.pdf

January/February 2014 Aff: Violent Conflictthe period from 1991 until 1996, a 10% increase in the number of single families in the North was observed (Government of the Northwest Territories, 2002).

Chart Showing Revenue from Resource Extraction Related to Conflict. ABBMichael Renner. (2002) “The Anatomy of Resource Wars.” The Worldwatch Project.

This chart provides a wide range of examples in which people are exploited through resource extraction so that they can make a profit for the elites of their countries or others.



Resource Extraction Creates and Perpetuates Violent Conflict. ABBMichael Renner. (2002) “The Anatomy of Resource Wars.” The Worldwatch Project.In some places, the pillaging of oil, minerals, metals, gemstones, or timber allows wars to continue that were triggered by other factors—initially driven by grievances or ideological struggles and bankrolled by the superpowers or other external supporters. Elsewhere, nature’s bounty attracts groups that may claim they are driven by an unresolved grievance, such as political oppression or the denial of minority rights, but are in effect predators enriching themselves through illegal resource extraction. They initiate violence not necessarily to overthrow a government, but to gain and maintain control over lucrative resources, typically one of the few sources of wealth and power in poorer societies. They are greatly aided by the fact that many countries are weakened by poor or repressive governance, crumbling public services, lack of economic opportunity, and deep social divides.

Another dimension to the relationship between resources and conflict concerns the repercussions from resource extraction itself. In many developing countries, the economic benefits of mining and logging operations accrue to a small business or government elite and to foreign investors. But in case after case, an array of burdens—ranging from the expropriation of land, disruption of traditional ways of life, environmental devastation, and social maladies—are shouldered by the local population. Typically, these communities are neither informed nor consulted about resource extraction projects. This has led to violent conflict in places like Nigeria’s Niger Delta, Bougainville in Papua New Guinea, and several provinces in Indonesia. Rather than full-fledged war, these conflicts usually involve smaller-scale skirmishes, roadblocks, acts of sabotage, and major human rights violations by state security forces and rebel groups. A number of these conflicts, however, have evolved into secessionist struggles.

It is easy to see how resource extraction has the potential to not only create, but to perpetuate, situations involving violent conflict in many areas.



Resource Extraction Promotes Warfare. PNGUnited Nations. “Natural Resources and Conflict in Africa: Transforming a Peace

Liability into a Peace Asset.” June 2006.Natural resources have been shown to play a key role in the conflicts that have plagued a number of African countries over the last decade, both motivating and fuelling armed conflicts. Revenues from the exploitation of natural resources are not only used for sustaining armies but also for personal enrichment and building political support. As a result, they can become obstacles to peace as leaders of armed groups involved in exploitation are unwilling to give up control over these resources. Even when conflict gives way to a fragile peace, control over natural resources and their revenues often stays in the hands of a small elite and is not used for broader development of the country.

Fight over control of natural resources in Africa is a huge conflict. PNGUnited Nations. “Natural Resources and Conflict in Africa: Transforming a Peace

Liability into a Peace Asset.” June 2006.Dr. Abiodun Alao, noted that in the last decade, perhaps no issue has engaged attention about Africa as much as the numerous conflicts involving the ownership, management and control of natural resources. Among the issues that have emerged are violent ethno-nationalism, acrimonious inter-group relations, youth revolts, small arms and light weapons proliferation, corruption, money laundering, cross-border looting and alleged links with global terrorism. Moreover, the conflicts have also introduced a diverse array of actors: sometimes working together; most times working at cross-purposes; but all the time working to advance narrow aspirations over and above wider public interests. While conflicts involving natural resources have increased and their devastating consequences have widened, interests have also expanded on how to ensure that natural resource endowments cease from causing tragedy and become instruments of peace, stability and post-conflict peace-building, especially in countries coming out of the throes of war. This is evidenced by the catalogue of national and international initiatives designed to stem illegal exploitation and sale of natural resources. Dr. Alao also pointed out that for African countries as well as international organizations with commitments towards the continent, the major challenges have been how to ensure that natural resources are used to promote responsible, just and economically productive purposes in post-conflict societies, and to develop mechanisms for ensuring equitable distribution of wealth to all stakeholders.



Conflict Economy Encourages Corrupt Leaders to Maintain Status Quo. ABBMichael Renner. (2002) “The Anatomy of Resource Wars.” The Worldwatch Project.Actions that are often described as chaos, collapse, and senseless violence in media reports actually flow from a certain logic, albeit a perverted one. David Keen, a lecturer at the London School of Economics, argues that violence serves an economic function, maintaining a conflict economy that benefits certain groups—government officials, warlords, combatants, arms smugglers, and unscrupulous traders and business people. Those who benefit from this violent “mode of accumulation” derive profit, power, and status, even as it spells impoverishment, broken lives, and death for society at large. Groups living off a lucrative resource have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo and, if need be, in prolonging conflict. They are likely to find this to be a more attractive choice than settling conflict because it allows them to maintain their privileged position and bestows a quasi-legitimacy on their actions.20

As any attempts at reform would damage the conflict economy that keeps leaders wealthy, it is unlikely that these leaders will take action to end profitable resource extraction.

Resource Extraction Triggers Conflict in Indonesia. ABBMichael Renner. (2002) “The Anatomy of Resource Wars.” The Worldwatch Project.Indonesia features some of the most intense resource-triggered struggles, which are to a large extent the product of policies pursued during the long years of the Suharto dictatorship (1966–98). Under Suharto, licenses were awarded to domestic and foreign businesses that were closely linked to or broadly supportive of the regime. In part because this practice was heavily tinged by corruption and favoritism, it brought about precisely the kind of imbalance of benefits and burdens described above, and with it, the seeds of conflict. And the Suharto-era policy of “transmigration”—encouraging the movement of people from the most densely populated parts of the country to outlying provinces—has added fuel to an already combustible situation. (See Figure 6.)

Since 1998, the rapid growth in illegal resource extraction has complicated the picture and added new strains of conflict. The Indonesian military and police are involved in both legal ventures and illegal logging and mining conducted through front companies and joint ventures with private timber barons. These activities, along with protection rackets under which illegal operators pay to avoid prosecution, raise half or more of their operational budgets.78


January/February 2014 Aff: Violent ConflictThe province of Aceh, located at the northern tip of Sumatra, has seen increasing violence. Aceh is home to Arun, Indonesia’s second-largest gas field and the site of a huge liquefied natural gas plant. Operated by ExxonMobil and owned by the state company Pertamina, Arun generates 30 percent of the country’s oil and gas export income, or about $1.2 billion a year. The facility gave rise to local resentments in a number of ways. Construction in the late 1970s displaced several villages and hundreds of families. Gas leaks and chemical spills caused health and environmental problems, devastating local communities depending on agriculture and fish farming.79

Aceh is also rich in timber, minerals, and fertile land. These resources, too, were exploited by cronies of the Suharto dictatorship. Land traditionally owned by indigenous people was expropriated; deforestation resulting from excessive logging has caused landslides and flooding and has destroyed homes and rice paddies. Transmigrants from Java that came to Aceh under Suharto to set up timber, pulp, and wood-processing industries have also been a source of intense resentment for the Acehnese. 80

The Aceh Freedom Movement, known as GAM (Gerakan Aceh Merdeka), began in 1976, but its first

uprising was easily crushed by the military. A second rebellion in the late 1980s met with arrests, torture,

and rape; it is estimated that more than a thousand civilians were killed by the military. Aceh was put under martial law from 1990 to 1998, but the fall of the Suharto regime allowed exiled GAM guerrillas to return. Some 2,000 fighters face about 21,000 government soldiers and 12,000 police. Renewed violence has killed about 2000 people, mostly civilians, in 2001, and several thousand more in earlier years. The Indonesian military has pushed the GAM rebels out of urban centers; it routinely carries out arbitrary arrests, torture, disappearances, reprisal killings, and other human rights violations. The Indonesian government is considering declaring a state of emergency that would give the military an even freer hand. Though support for autonomy or independence for Aceh runs high among the province’s population of 4.5 million, many are as wary of the GAM as they are of the military, given the abuses committed by both sides.81

As we can see from this specific example, corrupt resource extraction can lead to internal violence in countries when groups of people feel they are being exploited.



A study finds a correlation between resource extraction and violent conflict. CFSCarbonnier, Gilles, Natascha Wagner, and Fritz Brugger. "The Impact of Resource-

Dependence and Governance on Sustainable Development." The Centre on Conflict, Development and Peacebuilding (2011): n. pag. The Graduate Institute. Web. 11 Dec. 2013.

We find a positive link between resource dependence and conflict intensity with a coefficient of 17.5%. Controlling for country-fixed effects the coefficient drops to 6.7%. In our dynamic panel analysis we take the relative size of the youth bulge to instrument the governance indicators. Therefore, we want to verify that the “first-step” correlations show the expected sign. We find a positive correlation between both the conflict dummy and the homicide rate and the youth bulge. This finding supports earlier research by Urdal (2004) that argues that the bigger the relative size of the youth bulge, the higher the propensity for conflict. In addition, we find a negative correlation between the relative size of the youth bulge and all our governance indicators. Obviously, the intensity of the correlation varies. It is highest in absolute terms between the youth bulge and the Polity2 indicator, followed by the measure of the acceptance of established institutions. Thus, in line with our theoretical considerations we find that societies that have a relatively larger share of young people perform relatively worse in terms of governance indicators (Table 3).

Conflict in Developing Countries Exacerbates Disregard for Environment. ABBMichael Renner. (2002) “The Anatomy of Resource Wars.” The Worldwatch Project.Under conditions of full-scale war, the consequences of rapacious resource extraction can be even more severe. Because much resource extraction occurs illegally, and because loggers and miners are intent on extracting resources before they might lose control over an area, they have no incentive to conduct their operations in a responsible, let alone truly sustainable, manner. Their primary interest is in raising funds for weapons purchases or self-enrichment and they try to extract as much, and as fast, as possible. In these circumstances, the enduring value of preserving biological treasure troves and ecosystems crucial to human wellbeing all too easily loses out to the urge to exploit the narrow spectrum of natural wealth— minerals, gemstones, and timber—that can be turned into cash.104

We can see from this example that developing countries are areas with an unusually high potential for environmental harm resulting from research extraction. This is because leaders in these areas are unlikely to prioritize sustainability during times of crisis.



Example of Conflict Encouraging Environmental Neglect in the Congo. ABBMichael Renner. (2002) “The Anatomy of Resource Wars.” The Worldwatch Project.The eastern part of the Democratic Republic of the Congo has been ravaged by a series of civil wars and refugee flows since the early 1990s. Although it is impossible to assess the full consequences as long as war and insecurity prevail, there can be little doubt that a number of factors—the overall state of anarchy in much of the country, widespread illegal logging, mining, and poaching, resource battles, and refugee movements—have had a devastating impact on forests and wildlife.

The Rwandan civil war of 1990–94 spilled over into neighboring Zaïre almost from the beginning, with both sides conducting military operations in the Virungas area. The military presence in the forest kept growing, landmines were laid, and vegetation was cut down. But this was mere prelude to far greater destruction. Following the Rwandan genocide, nearly 2 million people left Rwanda in a sudden, massive out- flow in July 1994; half went to eastern Zaïre and settled mostly on the edge of Virunga Park or inside it. Desperate for firewood, the refugees cut and gathered as much as 1,000 tons of wood a day, causing serious deforestation. During the 27 months that the refugee camps existed, a total of 113 square kilometers of forestland was affected; of that, 75 square kilometers were clearcut.105

The subsequent Congolese civil wars (discussed earlier) imposed additional burdens. Congo’s national parks—Kahuzi- Biega, Salonga, Virunga, Maiko, Garamba—and the Okapi Reserve have been severely affected by war, anarchy, refugee flows, and massive illegal resource extraction. (See Table 3, page 52.) But because no complete baseline wildlife or plant inventory had been conducted prior to the war, it is difficult to evaluate the full consequences.106

The lure of resource wealth drew not only a variety of armed factions into the Congo’s natural parks, but also some 10,000 miners, with calamitous consequences. Kahuzi-Biega National Park and the Okapi Wildlife Reserve are both UNESCO World Heritage sites, a status that extols their unique value to all of humanity. But severe environmental degradation as a result of “gold rush”-like events has landed them on the organization’s list of sites in danger. Poaching of elephant tusks left only 2 out of 350 elephant families in Kahuzi-Biega in 2000. Likewise, the number of eastern lowland gorillas has been so reduced that they are threatened with extinction. Coltan miners strip off the bark of eko trees to fashion troughs in which they flush out coltan from ore-bearing mud; thousands of trees have been destroyed, undermining the livelihoods of the local indigenous people, the Mbuti, who use the eko trees for gathering honey.10

In instances such as this, violence causes a great deal of harm to the environment that can only be exacerbated by flagrant resource extraction.


January/February 2014 Aff: Imperialism/Colonialism Bad

Imperialism/Colonialism Bad Imperialism is the root cause of the environmental problems of developing nations. CFS

Nath, Vikas. "White Collar Invasion: Developed Country Policies Leading to Environmental Degradation in South." Inkas Fellow, London School Economics, 2001. Web. 6 Dec. 2013.

Countries lying within the tropical belt have always been rich in natural wealth and bio-diversity and it has always attracted the eyes of other nations to possess this wealth- to provide raw material for wars and to fuel their own economies. The conquest of India by the British for its abundant natural wealth and year-round agricultural season; of Mekong valley by the French and the British for teak forests; and countries in Africa by Britain for diamond and mineral mines are some of the glimpses of conquests over natural resources. Imperialism sowed the seeds of environmental unsustainability in these countries that were to later emerge as developing countries.

Developed countries use “environmental guidelines” in an eco-imperialist manner. CFSNath, Vikas. "White Collar Invasion: Developed Country Policies Leading to

Environmental Degradation in South." Inkas Fellow, London School Economics, 2001. Web. 6 Dec. 2013.

Developed countries are now moving towards eco-imperialism by forcing developing countries to adopt the higher western environmental standards through measures like health standards, and phyto-sanitary guidelines. Yet, imposition of additional costs on the exports of developing countries, through environmental regulations, will likely lead to lower wages in these countries. The export of rich countries' environmental standards would thus happen at the expense of poor workers forcing them to further exploit their local environment to safeguard their livelihood, and in process exacerbating the environmental damage. It is ironical that developed countries are trying to impose the same trade rules on developing countries, in the absence of which the developed countries have been able to economically prosper. This is suffocating developmental processes and is forcing developing countries to remain as subsidizers of western economies.


January/February 2014 Aff: Impacts to Women

Impacts to Women Mining Affects Equality of Women. BG

Ginger Gibson and Jason Klinck. (2004) “The Impact of Mining on Aboriginal Communities” Pimatisiwin: A Journal of Aboriginal and Indigenous Community Health. http://www.pimatisiwin.com/uploads/330599908.pdf

Women are especially vulnerable to inequity as they experience more of the negative effects of a mine. Some of these gender-specific consequences include higher rates of depression (Burvill and Kidd, 1975), risk of poverty, increased STD incidence due to rape and prostitution (Oxfam Australia, 2002), and reduced levels of participation in development decisions (Oxfam Australia, 2002). For those that are able to find work in the male-dominated mining industry, women often face sexist views that limit career advancement (Gibson and Scoble, 2004; Tallichet, 2000). Further, in many instances, the burden of shift rotation stress and addictive problems (especially alcohol- ism) that mine work causes in men, is passed on to women through abusive relationships, increased conflict, and an abdication of household and child rearing responsibilities. Gender equality is well recognized in the context of development as a key indicator of well-being. The influence of women on societal well-being is largely felt through the significant role they play within the family, especially with children. The inclusion of women in areas such as education, for example, has been found to produce a wide range of socioeconomic and health benefits, such as increased economic growth, reduced fertility and child mortality, and lower rates of under-nutrition (Abu-Ghaida and Klasen, 2004). The heavy effect of gender equity on child development indicators and, as such, future community well-being, underscores the importance of this factor.



January/February 2014 Aff: Deaths from Resource Extraction

Deaths Caused by Process of Resource Extraction Lots of premature death due to a bad environment and resource extraction. BG

Jennifer S. Franz and Felix FitzRoy (2006) “ Child Mortality and Environment in Developing Countries” Population and Environment, Vol. 27, No. 3, pp. 263-28 http://www.jstor.org/stable/27503961.

Exposure to environmental pollution and its [has] effects on human health are well established. Millions of premature deaths occur every year due to biological and chemical agents in the environment. However, in countries where conventional economic development dominates environmental concerns, the link between well-being and environmental quality does not receive adequate attention (Corvalan & Kjellstrom, 1996). Home to over 55 million people, the CARs exemplify a region where the effects of environmental degradation from resource intensive agriculture on economic, political and social development and security are now seriously compromis[e]ing human health and well-being (Horsman, 2001). Significant international and academic attention has focused on the human-induced disaster in the region linked to industrialized cotton production, and the resulting widespread erosion of natural and human resources (Glantz, 1999; O'Hara et al, 2000; UNEP, 1992; Wiggs, O'Hara, & Wegerdt, 2003). The cumulating loss of the Aral Sea has become the most infamous reminder of the non-sustainability of agricultural methods in the region (Elpiner, 1999; Feshbach & Friendly, 1992; French, 1991; Glantz, 1999; Micklin, 1998). Access to potable water


January/February 2014 Aff: Resource Curse

Resource Curse This analysis explains why resource extraction is not actually effective for helping a developing countries economy and in fact actually harms it.

Definition of the resource curse. BGElena Paltseva and Jesper Roine. (2012) “Are Natural Resources Good or Bad for

Development?”http://freepolicybriefs.org/2011/11/21/are-natural-resources-good-or-bad-for-development/.

As a result, greater attention has been devoted to the political-economic explanations of the resource curse. The main idea in recent work is that the impact of resources on development is heavily dependent on the institutional environment. If the institutions provide good protection of property rights and are favorable to productive and entrepreneurial activities, natural resources are likely to benefit the economy by being a source of income, new investment opportunities, and of potential positive spillovers to the rest of the economy. However, if property rights are insecure and institutions are “grabber-friendly”, the resource windfall instead gives rise to rent-seeking, corruption and conflict, which have a negative effect on country’s development and growth. In short, resources have different effects depending on the institutional environment. If institutions are good enough resources have a positive effect on economic outcomes, if institutions are bad, so are resources for development.

The resource curse is empirically proven. BGElena Paltseva and Jesper Roine. (2012) “Are Natural Resources Good or Bad for


Mehlum, Moene and Torvik (2006) develop a theoretical model to this effect and also find empirical support for the idea. In resource-rich countries with bad institutions incentives become geared towards “grabbing resource rents” while in countries where institutions render such activities difficult resources contribute positively to growth. Boschini, Pettersson and Roine (2007) provide a similar explanation but also stress the importance of the type of the resources that dominate. They show that if a country’s institutions are bad, “appropriable” resources (i.e., resources that are more valuable, more concentrated geographically, easier to transport etc. – such as gold or diamonds) are more “dangerous” for economic growth. The effect is reversed for good institutions – gold and diamonds do more good than less appropriable resources. In turn, better institutions are more important in avoiding resource curse with precious metals and diamonds than with mineral production. The following graph illustrates their result by showing the marginal effects of different resources on growth for varying institutional quality. Distinguishing the growth contribution of mineral production in countries with good institutions with the effect in countries with bad institutions, the left panel shows a positive effect in the


http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9442.2007.00509.x/abstract

http://www.res.org.uk/economic/freearticles/january06.pdf

January/February 2014 Aff: Resource Curseformer and a negative in the latter case. The right hand panel illustrates the corresponding, steeper effects when isolating only precious metals and diamond production.

Abundant natural resources do not lead to economic gain in developing countries. PNGHeymann, Terry. World Economic Forum. Geneva, Switzerland 2013. “Natural Riches?

Perspectives on Responsible Natural Resource Management in Conflict-affected Countries.”

Natural resources hold immense potential for financing development. In 2010, exports of oil and minerals from Africa, Asia and Central and South America were worth roughly US$ 1,117 billion, over 15 times the value of international aid. Yet instead of contributing to development and prosperity, the exploitation of natural resources often has the opposite effect – increased poverty and suffering. On average, resource-rich countries have performed more poorly than countries that lack natural resources. They have grown more slowly, with greater inequality, and are prone to political instability and violent conflict.

Access to resources does not ensure economic benefit. PNGChow, Jeffrey. “Energy Resources and Global Development.” Science magazine.

November 2003.Large fossil fuel reserves are concentrated in a small number of countries, with half of the low-income countries and more than a third of the middle-income countries having no fossil fuel reserves whatsoever (6). If energy reserves were necessary for economic development, several of the world's poorest nations would be disadvantaged. However, many energy-bereft countries (such as Japan) have become highly developed through sufficient access to international energy markets. Conversely, Nigeria possesses substantial reserves but remains one of the poorest countries, its energy production activities mired in corruption. Thus, simply possessing large fossil energy reserves is of questionable value to a country's development if there is no well-functioning and adequately equitable socioeconomic system enabling it to extract and deploy those energy resources for their full social benefit.

This card would be a good response to a neg argument along the lines of “developing countries should prioritize resource extraction because it pulls them out of poverty.” This card can be used to demonstrate that resource extraction is not the key to reducing poverty, a sound economic system is.



Resource-rich Nigeria doesn’t reap economic benefits. PNGVan der Ploeg, Frederick. Journal of Economic Literature 2011. “Natural Resources:

Curse or Blessing?”Accounts of the resource curse are available for many countries (e.g., Alan Gelb 1988; Terry Lynn Karl 1997, 1999; Adrian J. B. Wood 1999; Richard M. Auty 2001b). The most dramatic example is perhaps Nigeria (David Bevan, Pal Collier, and Jan Willem Gunning 1999; Xavier Sala-i-Martin and Arvind Subramanian 2003). Oil revenues per capita in Nigeria increased from US$33 in 1965 to US$325 in 2000, but income per capita has stagnated at around US$1,100 in PPP terms since its independence in 1960 putting Nigeria among the fifteen poorest countries in the world. Between 1970 and 2000, the part of the population that has to survive on less than US$1 per day shot up from 26 to almost 70 percent. In 1970, the top 2 percent had the same share of income as the bottom 17 percent but, in 2000, the same share as the bottom 55 percent. Clearly, huge oil exports have not benefited the average Nigerian.

Resource-rich developing countries almost never benefit. PNGVan der Ploeg, Frederick. Journal of Economic Literature 2011. “Natural Resources:

Curse or Blessing?”Of sixty-five resource rich, developing countries, only four managed to achieve long-term investment exceeding 25 percent of GDP and an average GDP growth exceeding 4 percent—namely Botswana, Indonesia, Malaysia, and Thailand (Thorvaldur Gylfason 2001). These three resource rich Asian countries have achieved this by economic diversification and industrialization. Still, they fared less well than their neighbors Hong Kong, Singapore, and South Korea with little raw material wealth.



Export Economies Fail to Benefit from Their Resources. ABBMichael Renner. (2002) “The Anatomy of Resource Wars.” The Worldwatch Project.Examining the world’s most oil- and minerals-dependent states, Jeffrey Sachs and Andrew Warner found that they tend to experience lower economic growth than countries less reliant on such commodities. More important, the type of growth is often ill-suited to the needs of the majority of the population: being capital-intensive, extractive industries provide only a limited number of jobs, and many of those go to skilled technicians from developed countries.21

Resource extraction industries tend to have “enclave” characteristics, i.e., they create only small pockets of wealth and have few linkages to the rest of the national economy, particularly if the resources are exported before any processing takes place. The benefits to the economy and population at large are therefore quite limited. Frequently, enclaves are even physically separated, as mineral deposits or timber resources are often found in remote areas; some oil resources, for instance, are located offshore.22

Furthermore, worsened by the volatility of world commodity market prices, extractive industries follow a disruptive boom-and-bust cycle. Projected revenues from commodity exports are often used as collateral for loans, yet projections may prove overly optimistic and world market prices can unexpectedly decline; indeed, non-fuel commodity prices have been on a downward slide since the mid-1970s. (See Figure 1, page 19.) As a result, foreign debt balloons, and if the loans were used for unproductive purposes (as is often the case), repayment becomes problematic. According to Michael Ross, 12 of the world’s 25 most mineral-dependent states, and 6 of the world’s 25 most oil-dependent states, are among the group of countries categorized by the World Bank as “highly indebted poor countries.”23

Ross’s statistical analysis finds that the more that countries depend on exporting minerals, the worse they

score on UNDP’s Human Development Index. Specifically, they under- achieve in terms of under-5

mortality rates, life expectancy at birth, and child education. And they also experience significantly higher levels of inequality between rich and poor than other countries with comparable levels of income. Oil-dependent states experience a similar, though somewhat less pronounced, situation.24

It would be erroneous to assume that resource wealth will always benefit an economy and a country’s people. This can only happen if the necessary conditions for development exist. Otherwise, resource wealth does more harm than good.



The “resource curse” arises from exploitation by developed nations. PNGPowers, Madison. “The Resource Curse: A Comprehensive Discussion of the Evidence.”

Georgetown University, November 2013.Why should the presence of rich reserves of resources be so commonly associated with poor economic performance and the perpetuation of poverty? It is reasonable to suppose that rich reserves of natural resources needed by the developed world would offer an exceptional opportunity to get out of poverty. However, the truth is that non-renewable resources invite exploitation from the outside, enable autocratic leaders and their cronies to finance their own lifestyles, and build up arms and infrastructure that allow them to remain in power through repression and elaborate systems of bribery and patronage. An economic irony as well is the fact that the sale of resources can strengthen a developing nation's currency and make its other exports more expensive for international buyers, and thus less competitive on the world market (a phenomenon known as the Dutch Disease).


January/February 2014 Aff: Long-Term Growth

Long-Term Growth Current industry practices cannot sustain long-term growth TF

David Lertzman, Harrie Vrendenburg (2005). Indigenous Peoples, Resource Extraction and Sustainable Development: An Ethical Approach. Journal of Business Ethics 56.

Evidence indicates that current trends of industrial expansion and consumption are unsustainable and that we are undermining the systems upon which humans (and other species) depend. One indicator of human impact on the biosphere is loss of biodiversity. Biodiversity can indicate ecosystem stability; its loss is an indicator of ecological strain.1 As a result of human intervention in the biosphere, according to Wilson (1999), we are witnessing the greatest rate of extinction of species since the Mesozoic Era 65 million years ago. Wilson challenges economists and business leaders to use ‘‘full-cost’’ accounting to figure the environmental and social costs to the ‘‘real, real world’’ of current industrial practices and pleads for conservation-based ethics. The ecological footprint is a tool that reckons such costs by measuring human impact on global ecosystems. Eco-footprint analysis reveals that cities in the northern hemisphere and newly industrialized nations typically appropriate the biophysical services of a land and water base some two to three orders of magnitude larger than their geopolitical boundaries. All ecologically productive ‘‘open space’’ on the planet is already fully employed in producing biophysical goods and services for humans. We are deficit spending our natural capital. According to William Rees (1996), originator of the ecological footprint concept, if the world’s population were to stabilize at between 10 and 11 billion people sometime this century, ‘‘five additional Earths would be needed, all else being equal – and this is just to maintain the present rate of ecological decline.’’ (p. 210). His analysis indicates that the wealthiest quarter of the world’s population has already appropriated the entire long-term carrying capacity of the Earth (Rees, 1996, 1997). Not only are we reaching the limits to growth, the data expose global inequities in the distribution of these increasingly scarce natural resources. The ethics of sustainable development demand that economic equity and social values be factored into the ecological equation.

Status-quo bad card.



Resource conservation leads to higher future growth in developing countries TFJinhua Zhao, David Zilberman (2001). Fixed Costs, Efficient Resource Management, and

Conservation. American Journal of Agriculutral Economics 83(4).Our results suggest that policy makers and the public in general should be open-minded about the possible development/restoration patterns brought forth by the new management practice. Sometimes efficient utilization of management practices that are perceived to be resource conserving may lead to increased development. Our results also call for more detailed scrutiny of the cost structure of a project, especially the differentiation between fixed and variable costs. Such differentiation is not required in some evaluation handbooks, such as the Principles and Guidelines (U.S. Water Resources Council).

Must combine with future growth good cards.

Resource Extraction Not Always Linked to Economic Growth. ABBArno Behrens. (2005) “The Material Basis of The Global Economy: Implications for

Sustanable Research Use Policies in the North and South.” Charles University Environmental Centre.

In many industrialised (and newly industrialised) countries, relative de-coupling of domestic material extraction from GDP growth has been observed. In some developing countries, on the other hand, domestic resource extraction grows even faster than economic performance, owing to the fact that a substantial share of material extraction is linked to export activities. This highlights the importance of including trade aspects in international environmental policy. While Europe will need to implement policy measures to further reduce overall primary material extraction (both domestic and abroad) in order to achieve more sustainable production and consumption patterns, policies in developing countries need to focus on vertical and horizontal diversification of economic structures in order to reduce their dependence on primary commodity exports.

It cannot always be assumed that resource extraction will affect GDP in the same way or that it will always be beneficial to the people and economies of countries. It must first be decided whether an instance of resource extraction is beneficial to an economy or country independently before these benefits can be weighed with potential environmental harms.



There exists a duty to protect natural capital for future generations TFDavid Lertzman, Harrie Vrendenburg (2005). Indigenous Peoples, Resource Extraction

and Sustainable Development: An Ethical Approach. Journal of Business Ethics 56.Natural capital is a concept from ecological economics. Like any form of capital, natural capital is a stock that yields a flow of income. The ‘‘natural income’’ produced by natural capital consists of biophysical services and natural resources (Daly, 1994). Applying this concept to the notion of intergenerational equity provides two interpretations: (i) wealth comprising human made and environmental assets, and (ii) environmental assets alone (Pearce et al., 1989). Implicit in the first is an assumption that natural capital and human-made capital are equal substitutes. Turner et al. (1994) use the terms ‘‘weak’’ and ‘‘strong’’ sustainability3 to characterize the distinction. The constant natural capital stock criterion of strong sustainability dictates that a constant amount of natural capital must be preserved and passed on from one generation to the next. The ethical implication of strong sustainability is a moral obligation to current and future generations to preserve natural capital. What of social systems and their capacities? Along with ecosystems maintenance, sustainable development must address equity in the distribution of the biophysical goods and services which humans appropriate. A working definition for sustainable development based on social and ecological considerations is offered by Rees (1989): Sustainable development is positive socioeconomic change that does not undermine the ecological and social systems upon which communities and society are dependent. Its successful implementation requires integrated policy, planning, and social learning processes; its political viability depends on the full support of the people it affects through their governments, their social institutions, and their private activities. (p. 3.) Making the connection between ecological and social systems upon which humans depend, intergenerational equity dictates a passing on of the life assets required for healthy communities. Thus, we can think of maintaining and building social capital as part of sustainable development. Exceeding productive capacities of ecosystems to maintain patterns of consumption amounts to a dangerous deficit spending of natural capital. There are limits to growth if the ecosystems upon which humans depend are to be maintained. It has been elegantly argued that growth is different than development (Daly 1994; DesJardins, 1998; Rees, 1990). Whereas growth refers to physical change entailing an increase in size, development implies a qualitative change characterized by capacity building and systems enhancement. The ethics of the two are as different as their outcomes: one is sustainable and Indigenous Peoples, Resource Extraction and Sustainable Development 243 the other is not. If the transition to ecological sustainability requires a decrease in our demand on natural capital perhaps this can be offset with a greater supply of social and cultural capital (Lertzman, 1999).

Moral viewpoint card on future growth.



Natural resource revenues stifle economic growth. CFSPatrick, Stewart M. "Why Natural Resources Are a Curse on Developing Countries and

How to Fix It." The Atlantic. N.p., 30 Apr. 2012. Web. 04 Dec. 2013.Natural resource revenues have also been linked to slow economic growth rates, inequality, and poverty. One culprit may be the so-called "Dutch disease," whereby resource revenues raise a country's exchange rate, hurting competitiveness in non-resource sectors. Other factors may include the volatility associated with commodity prices, which can have especially negative impacts on weak-state economies; and the underdevelopment of agricultural and manufacturing sectors during boom periods in resource-based economies. And even when oil abundance produces high growth, it often benefits only a few corrupt elites rather than translating into higher living standards for most of the population. Oil-rich Angola is a case in point. Despite having one of the world's highest growth rates from 2005 to 2010, averaging some 17 percent annually, its score on the human development index remained a miserable 0.49, and its infant mortality rate was lower than the sub-Saharan African average.

The market-based strategies being recommended for developing countries would not work like they do in developed countries. CFS

Bell, Ruth G., and Clifford Russell. "Environmental Policy for Developing Countries." Issues In Science and Technology. National Academy of Sciences and Engineering, University of Texas at Dallas, 2007. Web. 6 Dec. 2013.

Most nations lack the infrastructure and expertise necessary to implement the market-based strategies being recommended by the international development banks. Most developing countries have long since established laws and formal governmental structures to address their serious environmental problems, but few have been successful in alleviating those problems. The development banks, which control resources desperately needed by the developing countries, are promoting the use of economic incentives and other market-based strategies as the key to more effective environmental protection. However, the donors have rarely asked whether the approaches they are urging, which have recently had some success in Europe and the United States, can be implemented effectively in developing countries with limited resources and little experience with market-based policies of any kind.



Environmental policy like energy tax increases hurts political capitol in developing nations. CFS

Bell, Ruth G., and Clifford Russell. "Environmental Policy for Developing Countries." Issues In Science and Technology. National Academy of Sciences and Engineering, University of Texas at Dallas, 2007. Web. 6 Dec. 2013.

The final concern here is political reality. Instituting taxes, particularly those that bite, often requires significant expenditures of political capital, as demonstrated by the U.S. experience with proposed energy tax increases. Environmental policymakers must ask whether the governments in developing countries and the countries in transition, facing steep unemployment and weak industries, will undertake this act of courage, particularly when they rank environmental issues very low among their priorities. Poland reduced its pollution charges in the mid-1990s in response to industry protest when the charges began to rise to a level that might have changed behavior.

Resource-rich countries have actually done more poorly than countries without resources. CFS

Stiglitz, Joseph E. "Resource Rich, Cash Poor." Slate. Project Syndicate, 12 Aug. 2012. Web. 11 Dec. 2013. <http://www.slate.com/articles/business/project_syndicate/2012/08/why_resource_rich_countries_usually_end_up_poor_.html>.

New discoveries of natural resources in several African countries—including Ghana, Uganda, Tanzania, and Mozambique—raise an important question: Will these windfalls be a blessing that brings prosperity and hope, or a political and economic curse, as has been the case in so many countries? On average, resource-rich countries have done even more poorly than countries without resources. They have grown more slowly and with greater inequality—just the opposite of what one would expect. After all, taxing natural resources at high rates will not cause them to disappear, which means that countries whose major source of revenue is natural resources can use them to finance education, health care, development, and redistribution. A large literature in economics and political science has developed to explain this “resource curse,” and civil-society groups (such as Revenue Watch and the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative) have been established to try to counter it. Three of the curse’s economic ingredients are well known: Resource-rich countries tend to have strong currencies, which impede other exports; Because resource extraction often entails little job creation, unemployment rises; Volatile resource prices cause growth to be unstable, aided by international banks that rush in when commodity prices are high and rush out in the downturns (reflecting the time-honored principle that bankers lend only to those who do not need their money).


http://www.revenuewatch.org/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_reserves_in_Ghana#2000s


Resource-rich developing countries don’t create sustainable growth strategies. CFSStiglitz, Joseph E. "Resource Rich, Cash Poor." Slate. Project Syndicate, 12 Aug. 2012.

Web. 11 Dec. 2013. <http://www.slate.com/articles/business/project_syndicate/2012/08/why_resource_rich_countries_usually_end_up_poor_.html>.

Moreover, resource-rich countries often do not pursue sustainable growth strategies. They fail to recognize that if they do not reinvest their resource wealth into productive investments above ground, they are actually becoming poorer. Political dysfunction exacerbates the problem, as conflict over access to resource rents gives rise to corrupt and undemocratic governments. There are well known antidotes to each of these problems: a low exchange rate, a stabilization fund, careful investment of resource revenues (including in the country’s people), a ban on borrowing, and transparency (so citizens can at least see the money coming in and going out). But there is a growing consensus that these measures, while necessary, are insufficient. Newly enriched countries need to take several more steps in order to increase the likelihood of a “resource blessing.”


January/February 2014 Aff: Not Good for Economy

Resource Extraction not Always Good for Economy Resource Extraction May Lose Money in Some Cases. ABB

Elisabeth Losos. (1995) “Taxpayer-Subsidized Resource Extraction Harms Species” The American Institute of Biological Sciences.

Concern over the national deficit has brought about closer scrutiny of a number of federally subsidized programs. Among them are subsidies for natural resource extraction-particularly hard rock mining, logging, and livestock grazing-on federal lands and for federal water development. The U.S government’s own figures reveal the magnitude of thesubsidies. For example, accordingto the US Department of Agriculture's Forest Service (USFS), timber sale programs in most national forests lose money every year; in 1992 alone, 95 of the 120 national forests operated at a loss-totaling $174.9 million-because the agency spent more money preparing and administering timber sales than it received in revenue from those sales (USFS 1993). The losses are even higher when transfer payments to states and long term capital expenditures related to road construction are included. Similarly, the Bureau of Land Management loses money annually on its livestock-grazing program. In this fiscal year 1990 BLM spent $49.8 million to operate the livestock grazing program, but collected only $19.3 million in fees from permittees.

Although Resource Extraction is often seen as vital to the economy, it should be noted that it is not even efficient in numerous cases.

Resource extraction does not lead to better education. PNGVan der Ploeg, Frederick. Journal of Economic Literature 2011. “Natural Resources:

Curse or Blessing?”In a sample of eighty-five countries the share of natural resource wealth in national capital is negatively correlated with both gross domestic investment as percentage of GDP and the average ratio of broad money (M2) to GDP (a measure of financial development). Furthermore, although there are exceptions such as Botswana, there is an inverse correlation between resource dependence and school enrollment at all levels, expected years of schooling, and public spending on education. This may matter as there is a positive correlation between education and growth.


January/February 2014 Aff: Destroys Communities

Resource Extraction Destroys Communities Mining destroys traditional languages. BG

Ginger Gibson and Jason Klinck. (2004) “The Impact of Mining on Aboriginal Communities” Pimatisiwin: A Journal of Aboriginal and Indigenous Community Health. http://www.pimatisiwin.com/uploads/330599908.pdf

The most directly measurable cultural effect is the loss of traditional languages. Language is an important indicator of culture, in that it conveys meaning and holds the keys to identity. Over the last fifteen years, fewer people can speak an Aboriginal language in the Northwest Territories, demonstrated across all age groups and in both urban and rural communities. Overall, it has dropped from 55.6% of the Aboriginal population in 1989, to 45.1% in 1999 (Government of the Northwest Territories, 2003). This trend has been attributed to greater participation in the English labour market, the aging of the most fluent community members, a lack of educational materials and programs in Aboriginal languages, and the migration of non-Aboriginals into the North (Government of the Northwest Territories, 2003).

Mining creates hierarchies through who they hire. BGGinger Gibson and Jason Klinck. (2004) “The Impact of Mining on Aboriginal

Communities” Pimatisiwin: A Journal of Aboriginal and Indigenous Community Health. http://www.pimatisiwin.com/uploads/330599908.pdf

Probably the most significant direct community benefit of mining is the employment it provides. However, while efforts have been made to ensure employment quotas of local and/or Aboriginal workers, outsiders still disproportionately occupy the highest rank and paid positions. Without training, entry level positions carrying the least opportunity for advancement are the default positions for most Northerners, thus maintaining geographic and racially defined hierarchies. Mining in the North has favoured communities closest to the mines, with the Indigenous communities signing private agreements with the companies. Communities remote from the mine may be a much lower priority for mine employment. Within a community, employment also favours those with the highest levels of education and experience. In this regard, mining may leave behind those with the lowest education qualifications, and further stratify communities into “haves” and “have nots.” Also, due to the time demands and remote locations associated with shift work and mine operations, mining employment is more feasible for those with the least financial responsibilities: people without families. Thus mining is “disproportionately attractive to those who least need the income and are most likely to spend it wastefully, if not in socially abusive ways” (Hobart, 1982: 72), such as alcohol. Indeed, at Nanisivik mine, 42% of the workers were single and 49% did not have any children (Hobart, 1982). Those who do have families as well as elderly or youth dependents to support are also those most in need of the added income. While there is




January/February 2014 Aff: Destroys Communitiessome evidence that this is only an initial effect (Hobart, 1989), workers that head families spread the wealth and benefits much more widely than the more practically feasible and frequently employed young, single males.

Exploitation of Natural Resources in Papua New Guinea has led to conflict and environmental damage. PNG

Giambrone, Antonino. “The Extraction of Natural Resources as a Source of Conflict.” 2006.

Bougainville, an island that is part of Papua New Guinea (PNG), has the world’s largest open-pit copper mine. Owned jointly by the mining corporation CRA (ConZinc Rio-Tinto of Australia Limited) - 80 per cent - and the Papua New Guinea government - 20 per cent - it started operating in 1972. The severe social and environmental problems caused by the mine fuelled demands for separation and independence of Bougainville first from Australia and then from Papua New Guinea. (Bougainville was governed by Australia from 1920 to 1975, when it was made part of a newly independent PNG.) PNG declared that mineral rights belonged to the state, violating Bougainville traditions of land ownership and reinforcing the alienation inhabitants felt under the rules of a different ethnic group. Copper revenues of $500 million per year went to the central government and foreign investors, but the local population saw relatively few benefits. The presence of an affluent foreign mining community and the influx of a large number of workers from other parts of PNG intensified local resentment of the mine. Local people were paid considerably less than other workers. The mine created major social disruptions, including the move away from the island society’s matriarchal structure. Mine waste and chemical pollutants damaged about one-fifth of the total land area, forcing villages to relocate, decimating food and cash crops like cocoa and bananas, contaminating rivers, and depleting fish stocks. Bougainville’s residents complained and demanded compensation, but they were ignored. In 1988, spurred by violent behaviour by PNG security forces, a rebel group launched a campaign of sabotage that quickly developed into guerrilla war.The mine was forced to close in 1989 because of the rebel campaign. Faced with a major loss in revenue, the government launched many military campaigns, burning homes and villages and abusing the civilian population. Although the PNG government had made several attempts at a settlement with the rebel groups, the government also initiated simultaneous harsh military responses to rebel actions. Attempts at settlement have remained largely unsuccessful.



Resource Exploitation has led to violence and extreme environmental damage in the Democratic Republic of Congo. PNG


Coltan, short for Columbite-tantalite, is a metallic ore found mainly in the eastern regions of the Democratic Republic of Congo (formerly Zaire). Coltan is refined to become a heat-resistant powder which has unique properties for storing an electrical charge. It is used to make products such as cellular phones and computers, and is also used in missiles and jet engines. The Democratic Republic of Congo holds 64 per cent of global coltan and is the world’s largest reserve. The demand for coltan and coltan-reliant products has created lucrative business opportunities for rebel movements in the Congo. Rebel groups involved in the conflict include: the Ugandan People’s Defense Forces (UPDF), the Rwandan Patriotic Army (RPA), the Rally of Congolese Democracy (RCD), and the Congolese Liberation Front (CLF). While the average Congolese worker earns $10 per month, the average Congolese coltan-miner earns anywhere from $10 to $50 per week. Ugandan, Rwandan, and Congolese rebels have earned many millions of dollars in sales of coltan, which they have used to finance their war efforts in the Congo. Between 1999 and 2000, the Rwandan army alone earned at least $20 million a month from coltan. The continuing conflict fuelled by the exploitation of coltan has created an increasingly worse humanitarian situation in the eastern part of the DRC. DRC’s 50 million people are less and less secure and their food supplies endangered. Rebels back by Uganda and Rwanda have attacked villages in order to establish their own rule of law. They force children into service for work in mines, in the army and as prostitutes. More than one third of the population lacks access to adequate medical facilities; 47 per cent have no safe drinking water and more than half have insufficient food. There has also been significant environmental damage. The DRC is home to more than 50 per cent of Africa’s forests. To mine coltan, rebel groups have cleared large areas of these lush forests, destroyed mountain gorilla habitat, and cut the gorilla population by nearly half. Many international corporations have imported coltan from the DRC via Rwanda for use in Asia, Europe, and the United States. Like many other resources, once coltan reaches international markets, it is impossible to trace its source. At least two coltan-manufacturing companies, Kernet Corp. and Cabot Corp., have asked their suppliers to certify that their tantalum does not originate in the eastern Democratic Republic of Congo. However, coltan currently lacks any sort of certification system.



Exploitation of oil in Columbia has led to extreme violence, instability, and environmental damage. PNG


Columbia has not seen full-scale civil war, but has had long-running, lower intensity violence that continually threatens to escalate. Conflict in Columbia has its roots primarily in the struggle for political change and in ideological confrontations that began in the 1940s. More recently a fight over cocaine and crude oil has fuelled conflict. Repression against political dissent in the form of military action against small landowners and peasant groups, along with the growing concentration of wealth and power in the hands of a small elite, spurred the rise of several leftist guerrilla groups in the 1960s. The Revolutionary Armed Forces of Columbia (FARC) are mainly based in the coca-growing regions of southern Columbia. The National Liberation Army (ELN) operates mostly in the oil-rich northeast. Together, they have about 20,000 combatants. Oil production accounts for one third of the country’s total export earnings. For the government, oil is a critical resource, not least because Columbia has come under increasing pressure from the International Monetary Fund to accelerate oil development so it can pay its foreign debts. The rebel groups have sought to get payments from oil firms and others, and have tried to cut into the government’s oil income by obstructing the flow of oil. For example, they have attacked the country’s key pipelines - jointly owned by the state and Los Angeles-based Occidental Petroleum - more than 900 times. These attacks have caused 2.6 million barrels of oil to spill into lakes, rivers, and soil. Occidental Petroleum has successfully lobbied the US government to provide aid - $573 million in 2003 - that allows the Columbian military to protect the flow of oil. The conflict over oil most affect’s Columbia’s indigenous populations, including the U’wa. As a result of government expropriation of about 85 per cent of their ancestral lands their population numbers have dwindled from 20,000 in 1940 to 5,000 today. Since the early 1990, the U’wa, with the support of solidarity groups worldwide, have resisted Occidental Petroleum’s attempts to drill for oil on ancestral land adjacent to their current reservation, which is also a delicate cloud forest ecosystem. In 1999, the government granted a drilling permit to Occidental without consulting the U’wa.


January/February 2014 Aff: Indigenous Cultures

Indigenous Cultures Resource extraction affects indigenous cultures negatively TF

David Lertzman, Harrie Vrendenburg (2005). Indigenous Peoples, Resource Extraction and Sustainable Development: An Ethical Approach. Journal of Business Ethics 56.

Resource extraction industries are directly involved with natural systems, causing the most obvious environmental impacts. Along with biophysical processes and non-human inhabitants of ecosystems, industrial development impacts the lands and lives of people, in particular Indigenous peoples. Such long-resident cultures sustain beliefs, values and uses of local ecosystems frequently at odds with those of industrial resource extraction. Interactions with Indigenous peoples have thus led resource extraction companies into ethically challenging situations, often resulting in conflict.

Indigenous cultures in danger.

Industrial development destroys cultures that have inherent value TFDavid Lertzman, Harrie Vrendenburg (2005). Indigenous Peoples, Resource Extraction

and Sustainable Development: An Ethical Approach. Journal of Business Ethics 56.The impact of industrial development on Indigenous peoples has led to a sense of urgency for the survival of Indigenous cultures as the loss of biodiversity has been accompanied by a similar collapse in the diversity of human culture. Drawing the connection between ecology and culture, research has demonstrated a direct correlation between biodiversity and linguistic diversity (Nettle and Romaine, 2001). The greatest ‘‘biolinguistic diversity’’ on the planet is found in areas inhabited by Indigenous peoples, where 4% of the world’s population speak 60% of the world’s languages. Most of these languages and the ecosystems their speakers inhabit are threatened or on the verge of collapse. Loss of a language represents more than a loss of words and syntactical rules for their organization. Languages represent meaning systems, a way for organizing and making sense of the universe. Each embodies an inimitable example of human ingenuity and adaptation to the environment. Along with words, knowledge, and understanding, when a language is lost so is a way of life and our human species is diminished. Indigenous peoples living close to their ecosystems for long periods of time have garnered an enormous degree of descriptive and applied knowledge. Much more than ‘‘data’’, this information characteristically functions within time tested resource management systems and social institutions of long resident peoples. This adaptation to and use of ecosystems by Indigenous peoples offers alternatives for Western science based resource management. Although one could state the business case and practical utility of maintaining such cultural diversity, 5 we concur with the ethical position put forward by Crawley and Sinclair (2003) that cultures have value in and for themselves.


January/February 2014 Aff: Indigenous CulturesCultural impact card.

Infringing on indigenous cultures through resource extraction is unethical TFDavid Lertzman, Harrie Vrendenburg (2005). Indigenous Peoples, Resource Extraction

and Sustainable Development: An Ethical Approach. Journal of Business Ethics 56.We argue that it is unethical to forfeit the viability of Indigenous cultures for the benefit of industrial resource extraction. Furthermore, it is ethical to engage with Indigenous peoples in a manner consistent with their wishes, cultures and means for survival as they determine these to be. The findings of our case study provide insight into how such a process can work. These findings concur with the spirit and substance of the ethical model for enduring relations between Indigenous and non-Indigenous peoples and their institutions put forward by Crawley and Sinclair. For example, cultural literacy is the skill set of ‘‘two-way learning and adaptation’’. One means for sharing power is to engage with Indigenous peoples in relationship and institution building exercises that work with traditional protocols and are guided by traditional authority and teachings.

Moral impact argument.


January/February 2014 Aff: Oil Extraction

Impact of Oil Extraction Oil Extraction Causes Dutch Disease . BG

Macartan Humphreys, Jeffrey D. Sachs, and Joseph E. Stiglitz. (2007). “Introduction What Is the Problem with Natural Resource Wealth?” http://www.columbia.edu/~mh2245/papers1/erc01.pdf

Once a contract has been negotiated and the money begins to flow in, new problems arise. In the 1970s, the Netherlands discovered one of these problems. Following the discovery of natural gas in the North Sea, the Dutch found that their manufacturing sector suddenly started perform- ing more poorly than anticipated.2 Resource-rich countries that similarly experience a decline in preexisting domestic sectors of the economy are now said to have caught the “Dutch disease” (Ebrahim-Zadeh 2003). The pattern of the “disease” is straightforward. A sudden rise in the value of natural resource exports produces an appreciation in the real exchange rate. This, in turn, makes exporting non–natural resource commodities more difficult and competing with imports across a wide range of commodities almost impossible (called the “spending effect”). Foreign exchange earned from the natural resource meanwhile may be used to purchase internationally traded goods, at the expense of domestic manufacturers of the goods. Simultaneously, domestic resources such as labor and materials are shifted to the natural resource sector (called the “resource pull effect”). Consequently, the price of these resources rises on the domestic market, thereby increasing the costs to producers in other sectors. All in all, extraction of natural resources sets in motion a dynamic that gives primacy to two domestic sectors—the natural resource sector and the nontrad- ables sector, such as the construction industry—at the expense of more traditional export sectors. In the Dutch case, this was manufacturing; in developing countries, this tends to be agriculture. Such dynamics appear to occur widely, whether in the context of Australian gold booms in the nineteenth century, Colombian coffee in the 1970s, or the looting of Latin America’s gold and silver by sixteenth-century Spanish and Portu- guese imperialists. Globally, these shifts can have adverse effects on the economy through several channels. Any shift can be costly for an economy, as workers need to be retrained and find new jobs, and capital needs to be readjusted. Be- yond this, the particular shifts induced by the Dutch disease may have other adverse consequences. If the manufacturing sector is a long-term source of growth—for example, through the generation of new technologies or improved human capacity—then the decline of this sector will have adverse growth consequences (Sachs and Warner 2001). Another channel is through income distribution—if returns to export sectors such as agriculture or manufacturing are more equitably distributed than returns to the natural resource sector, then this sectoral shift can lead to a rise in inequality. In any case, the Dutch disease spells trouble down the road—when activities in the natural resource sector eventually slow down, other sectors may find it very difficult to recover.


http://www.columbia.edu/~mh2245/papers1/erc01.pdf

January/February 2014 Aff: Overfishing

Overfishing This argument states that fishing is an important form of resource extraction for many countries; however, this resource is being exploiting to the point of overfishing. Thus, all countries (including devleping countries) have and obligation to stop doing so.

Fish are one of the most important economic resources being extracted for many communities. BG

Marine Conservation. (2013) "Ocean Resources." http://marinebio.org/oceans/ocean-resources.asp

The ocean is one of Earth's most valuable natural resources. It provides food in the form of fish and shellfish—about 200 billion pounds are caught each year. It's used for transportation—both travel and shipping. It provides a treasured source of recreation for humans. It is mined for minerals (salt, sand, gravel, and some manganese, copper, nickel, iron, and cobalt can be found in the deep sea) and drilled for crude oil. The oceans have been fished for thousands of years and are an integral part of human society. Fish have been important to the world economy for all of these years, starting with the Viking trade of cod and then continuing with fisheries like those found in Lofoten, Europe, Italy, Portugal, Spain and India. Fisheries of today provide about 16% of the total world's protein with higher percentages occurring in developing nations. Fisheries are still enormously important to the economy and wellbeing of communities. The ocean plays a critical role in removing carbon from the atmosphere and providing oxygen. It regulates Earth's climate. The ocean is an increasingly important source of biomedical organisms with enormous potential for fighting disease. These are just a few examples of the importance of the ocean to life on land. Explore them in greater detail to understand why we must keep the ocean healthy for future generations.


http://marinebio.org/oceans/ocean-resources.asp

http://marinebio.org/oceans/ocean-resources.asp


We are on the brink of oceanic collapse. As fish stocks decline and overfishing increases, we are headed for the total extinction of all commercial fish by 2048. BG.

Marine Fish Conservation Network (2008), http://www.oceanlegacy.org/pdfs/ocean-conservation-2008.pdf

After millennia of seemingly inexhaustible bounty, the last 50 years has seen a rapid decline in the oceans’ abundance. Unlike polluted air or clear cut forests, the plight of the oceans went unnoticed for many decades. Since 1972, however , researchers have documented the global extinction of at least 16 known species of marine fish and mollusks, birds, and mammals, largely as the result of human actions. Today, many marine species continue to drift toward extinction. In the most recent global assessment, one quarter of fish stocks were found to be overexploited, depleted or recovering from depletion due to excess fishing. In addition, half of the world’s fish stocks are on the verge of being overfished. Global commercial fishing takes billions of pounds of fish and shellfish from our oceans every year. In many cases, fish stocks are unable to reproduce fast enough to maintain stable populations or rebuild their numbers. Recent scientific evidence indicates that the stocks of fish we rely on are dwindling. A 2003 study found that the last 50 years of industrial fishing had reduced worldwide populations of large predatory fish—sharks, swordfish, and tuna—by 90%. A study in 2006 found that the loss of biodiversity in the marine ecosystem could cause commercial fish stocks to collapse by the year 2048 if overfishing, pollution and other environmental stresses were [is] not reversed .

Species extinction will probably happen before 2048. BG Douglas S. Winnail (1996) “On the Horizon: Famine.”According to the U.N.'s studies, all 17 major fishing areas in the world have either reached or exceeded their natural limits. In fact, nine of these areas are in serious decline. The realization that we may be facing a shortage of food from both oceanic and land-based sources is a troubling one . It's troubling because seafood--the world's leading source of animal protein--could be depleted quite rapidly. In the early 1970s, the Peruvian anchovy catch—the largest in the world--collapsed from 12 million tons to 2 million in just three years from overfishing. If this happens on a global scale, we will be in deep trouble. This precarious situation is also without historical precedent!



Overfishing ImpactsIf overfishing is not prevented, then the extinction of commercial fish will kill the billions of

people whose lives depend on fish. BGRobert Pomeroy (2001). “Devolution and Fisheries Co-Management” , Despite intense fishing pressure and a decline in productivity, small-scale fisheries in the inland, estuarine and near-shore areas still play an important role in local food security in developing countries. They provide food, income and employment. In most societies, small-scale fishers are particularly hit by the problem of shrinking resource base as they have low social status, low incomes, poor living conditions and little political influence. They frequently compete for resource access with larger-scale fishers and other sectors of the economy. It is important to remember that small-scale fisheries are embedded in larger aquatic resource, social, economic and political systems and many of the solutions to improving standard of living lie outside the fisheries sector. The resources on which these people depend are still largely natural fish populations. It is estimated that at least 50 million people in developing countries are directly involved in the harvesting, processing and marketing of fish and other aquatic products and worldwide fish production provides some 150 million people with employment. Approximately 1 billion people rely on fish as a major source of their food, income and/or livelihood (ICLARM 1999). The combined effects of increasing population growth and stabilization of fish supplies has led to a decline in the per capita availability of fish supplies for human consumption, while prices have continued to rise due to a widening gap between supply and demand. Capture fish production has not been able to keep pace with the demand for fish. Production of fish by capture fisheries reached its upper limits in 1989 and began a decline thereafter.

If overfishing makes extinct all commercial fish, then the entire ocean will be a ‘dead zone’ and our extinction will be imminent. BG

Jerry Coyne (2007). "Diversity Lost as we Head Towards a Lonely Planet.” Meanwhile, with increased pollution and run-off, as well as reduced forest cover, ecosystems will no longer be able to purify water, and a shortage of clean water spells disaster. In many ways, oceans are the most vulnerable areas of all. As overfishing eliminates important predators, while polluted and warming waters kill off phytoplankton, the intricate aquatic food web could collapse from both sides. Fish, on which so many humans depend, will be a fond memory. As phytoplankton vanish, so does the ability of the oceans to absorb carbon dioxide and produce oxygen. (Half of the oxygen we breathe is made by phytoplankton, with the rest coming from land plants.) Species extinction is also imperilling coral reefs [which], a big problem since these reefs have more than recreational value: they provide tremendous amounts of food for human populations and buffer coastlines against erosion. Indeed, the global value of hidden services provided by ecosystems -- those services, such as waste disposal, that aren't bought and sold in the marketplace -- has been estimated to be as much as $US50thousand billion ($53.8 thousand billion) a year, roughly equal to the gross domestic product of all countries combined. And that doesn't include tangible goods such as fish and timber. Life as we know it would be impossible if ecosystems collapsed. Yet that is where we're heading if species extinction continues at its present pace.


Neg Evidence


January/February 2014 Neg: Economic Collapse

Economic Collapse Without prioritizing the production of energy through resource mining, countries will face

global economic collapse in a short amount of time TFDavid Korowicz (2011). On the Cusp of Collapse: Complexity, Energy, and the Globalized

Economy. New Society Publishers.The systems on which we rely for our financial transactions, food, fuel and livelihoods are so interdependent that they are better regarded as facets of a single global system. Maintaining and operating this global system requires a lot of energy and, because the fixed costs of operating it are high, it is only cost-effective if it is run at near full capacity. As a result, if its through put falls because less energy is available, it does not contract in a gentle, controllable manner. Instead, it is subject to catastrophic collapse.

Core NEG Argument.

Restrictions on natural resource mining will put substantial economic burden on developing countries TF

Roy Bahl, Richard Bird (2008). Tax Policy in Developing Countries: Looking Backward – and Forward. National Tax Journal LXI (2).

Second, the growing price of natural resources, largely but not exclusively oil, shows no sign of abating, reflecting both political issues in some major producing regions and continued heavy demand from newly emerging industrial countries, notably China. If countries tax energy consumption and petroleum imports at ad–valorem rates, tax bases and revenues will expand. However, if countries are locked into specific rates or subsidize the price of motor fuels and the industrial use of petroleum, they face unpopular but necessary tax decisions. The need for a more rational energy tax policy to cope with these developments (as well as environmental issues) poses a substantial challenge for many, perhaps most, developing countries. Third, natural–resource considerations are also important on the expenditure side of the budget. Rising natural–resource prices will continue to force up the prices of industrial, agricultural and government inputs, as well as consumer goods. The entry of China into the international economic stage will continue to put pressure on the price of mineral and oil, requiring many countries to increase taxes to maintain the real level of public services. On the other hand, the increased cost of private production and consumer goods, especially food, will certainly increase resistance to tax increases.

Economic burdens through tax policies.


January/February 2014 Neg: Economic Collapse

Limiting resource extraction raises global prices TFStephen Salant (1995). The Economics of Natural Resource Extraction: A Primer for

Development Economists. The World Bank Research Observer 10 (1).Because natural resources often tend to be geographically concentrated and because firms without access to a particular resource cannot enter an extraction industry, such industries tend to have noncompetitive elements (see Hotelling 1931). If a single extractor owns all underground reserves and sells the resource at the same price per unit, which may vary over time, the monopolist will plan extraction so that the marginal profit (the excess of marginal revenue over marginal cost) received from selling another unit of the resource in another year is equal, in discounted terms, to the marginal profit received from selling it this year. In other words, the monopolist will plan extraction so that there is no gain from extracting more in one period and less in another. How does such behavior affect market prices over time? Even the simplest cases are ambiguous. Assume a fixed real rate of interest and costless extraction. Under competition, the price is predicted to rise each year by the interest factor so long as all shifts in demand are foreseen. Under the same circumstances, a monopolist would extract enough so that marginal revenues would rise each year by the interest factor. Unfortunately, when shifts in demand are fully anticipated, the implied path of extraction might yield virtually any path of prices. If the demand in future years does not shift, the monopolist always finds it optimal to raise prices over time-by less than the interest factor in all but exceptional cases, where the insensitivity of consumer demand to price might lead a monopolist to raise the resource price faster (Stiglitz 1976).

Global economic impact not limited to developing countries.

Developing nations are economically unstable primarily because they misuse resource revenues. CFS

Ploeg, Rick Van Der, and Tony Venables. "How Developing Countries Rich In Natural Resources Should Harness The Revenues For Growth." Royal Economic Society. N.p., Mar. 2011. Web. 04 Dec. 2013.

Many countries have made a mess of managing their natural resource revenues. The 'resource curse' is the term usually used to express the fact that countries that are well endowed with natural resources – particularly oil – have on average had worse economic performance than resource-poor countries.

There are many reasons for the resource curse: some countries have failed to capture resource revenues; others have dissipated them in rent-seeking, corruption or conflict; many have suffered the adverse effects of price and revenue volatility; and many have saved and invested too little of the revenue.


January/February 2014 Neg: Economic Growth

Economic Growth Using natural resources to fund private and public sector investment would help developing

countries economically. CFSPloeg, Rick Van Der, and Tony Venables. "How Developing Countries Rich In Natural

Resources Should Harness The Revenues For Growth." Royal Economic Society. N.p., Mar. 2011. Web. 04 Dec. 2013.

Developing countries that are well endowed with natural resources should use the revenues to increase wages and employment, boost private and public sector investment and so bring forward economic development. They should ignore those who advise using all the revenues to build a stock of foreign assets to provide dividend income for future generations.

These are the key conclusions of research by Professors Rick van der Ploeg and Tony Venables, published in the March 2011 issue of the Economic Journal. They argue that current poverty levels in developing countries mean that it is appropriate to skew the consumption benefits of windfall revenues towards the current generation rather than passing them on to future generations, who will in any case be richer.



Rather than focusing on foreign investment funds, developing countries should focus on domestic economic development. CFS

Ploeg, Rick Van Der, and Tony Venables. "How Developing Countries Rich In Natural Resources Should Harness The Revenues For Growth." Royal Economic Society. N.p., Mar. 2011. Web. 04 Dec. 2013.

Capital scarcity in developing countries means that saving should, where possible, be invested in increasing human and physical capital in the domestic economy rather than in foreign investment funds. So while it is important that developing countries save more of their resource revenues, advice that it should all be saved in foreign funds is inappropriate.

The researchers outline how the balance between consumption and domestic investment should be managed to ensure maximum impact on economic growth and development. Central to this is securing an increase in private sector investment: resource revenues can be used to remove obstacles to investment by reducing taxes and improving infrastructure.

Policy in developing countries should therefore typically follow a profile of measures to increase public and private sector investment, accompanied by some initial increases in consumption (perhaps achieved through tax reductions or conditional cash transfers).

The objective should be to use resource revenues to increase wages and employment and so bring forward economic development in the country, not to build a stock of foreign assets to provide dividend income for future generations.



Economic development is necessary to solve many of the environmental issues of developing countries. CFS


The available evidence seems to suggest that environmental policy in developing countries remains comparatively permissive. The developing countries do have major environmental problems, but most of them are the product of poverty rather than affluence. Non-separation of storm and sanitary sewers and the use of open fires for cooking and heating, for example, serve to create environmental problems in developing country urban centers that rival the worst conditions in the advanced nations. Yet only economic growth can generate the real resources required to alleviate such conditions. This fact, together with myriad competing social needs far more pressing than pollution control, contributes to a generally permissive set of environmental attitudes in developing countries. Nevertheless, there is substantial variance among developing countries in environmental policy, partly because of differences in levels of development and partly because of differences in environmental preferences-and environmental attitudes have sometimes demonstrated rapid change. Past environmental "disasters" like the dramatic losses in the Peruvian cotton crop after introduction of pesticides, the stripping of the Haitian mahogany forestand the ecological effects of the Aswan Dam in Egypt are not as likely to be repeated quite as readily in the future. In general, though, environmental constraints specifically in the extractive sector are not likely to serve as a major obstacle to growth of the industry. Certainly, mine shutdown rates of 8-9 percent as have recently been experienced in the USA for environmental reasons, together with numerous environmental blockages of new mining ventures, are unlikely to materialize in the developing countries in the foreseeable future (10).



Resource extraction promotes industrial development in poor countries. CFSWalter, Ingo. Ugelow, Judith L.“Environmental Policies in Developing Countries” Ambio

Vol. 8, No. 2/3, Technology, Development and Environmental Impact (1979), pp. 102-109 Published by: Springer on behalf of Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences

Fundamentally lower environmental preferences on the demand side, combined with greater or unused assimilative capacity in the developing countries should confer certain economic advantages upon them. First, pollution control expenditures (to the extent that they are not subsidized by governments) tend to be passed forward to product prices or backward to returns on productive factors, thus making pollution-intensive productions less profitable and less attractive in the marketplace. By having fewer pollution-control costs to pass along, suppliers of internationally traded products in developing countries should be able to achieve a competitive advantage over their industrial-country rivals in certain product lines. New pollutive investment projects in the advanced countries that are blocked or delayed for environmental reasons suggest themselves for establishment in the developing countries. Both would tend to shift the international allocation of production from developed to developing countries, and from high-pollution to low-pollution areas, having the dual effect of promoting industrial development in the poor countries and using more efficiently available global environmental resources.



Developing countries need to control their resources with domestic policies to avoid foreign take-overs. CFS

Stiglitz, Joseph E. "Resource Rich, Cash Poor." Slate. Project Syndicate, 12 Aug. 2012. Web. 11 Dec. 2013. <http://www.slate.com/articles/business/project_syndicate/2012/08/why_resource_rich_countries_usually_end_up_poor_.html>.

First, these countries must do more to ensure that their citizens get the full value of the resources. There is an unavoidable conflict of interest between (usually foreign) natural-resource companies and host countries: The former want to minimize what they pay, while the latter need to maximize it. Well-designed, competitive, transparent auctions can generate much more revenue than sweetheart deals. Contracts, too, should be transparent, and should ensure that if prices soar—as they have repeatedly—the windfall gain does not go only to the company. Unfortunately, many countries have already signed bad contracts that give a disproportionate share of the resources’ value to private foreign companies. But there is a simple answer: renegotiate; if that is impossible, impose a windfall-profit tax. All over the world, countries have been doing this. Of course, natural-resource companies will push back, emphasize the sanctity of contracts, and threaten to leave. But the outcome is typically otherwise. A fair renegotiation can be the basis of a better long-term relationship. Botswana's renegotiations of such contracts laid the foundations of its remarkable growth for the last four decades. Moreover, it is not only developing countries, such as Bolivia and Venezuela, that renegotiate; developed countries like Israel and Australia have done so as well. Even the United States has imposed a windfall-profits tax.



Developing countries need to invest their money in infrastructure and real development. CFSStiglitz, Joseph E. "Resource Rich, Cash Poor." Slate. Project Syndicate, 12 Aug. 2012.

Web. 11 Dec. 2013. <http://www.slate.com/articles/business/project_syndicate/2012/08/why_resource_rich_countries_usually_end_up_poor_.html>.

Equally important, the money gained through natural resources must be used to promote development. The old colonial powers regarded Africa simply as a place from which to extract resources. Some of the new purchasers have a similar attitude. Infrastructure (roads, railroads, and ports) has been built with one goal in mind: getting the resources out of the country at as low a price as possible, with no effort to process the resources in the country, let alone to develop local industries based on them. Real development requires exploring all possible linkages: training local workers, developing small and medium-size enterprises to provide inputs for mining operations and oil and gas companies, domestic processing, and integrating the natural resources into the country’s economic structure. Of course, today, these countries may not have a comparative advantage in many of these activities, and some will argue that countries should stick to their strengths. From this perspective, these countries’ comparative advantage is having other countries exploit their resources. That is wrong. What matters is dynamic comparative advantage, or comparative advantage in the long run, which can be shaped. Forty years ago, South Korea had a comparative advantage in growing rice. Had it stuck to that strength, it would not be the industrial giant that it is today. It might be the world’s most efficient rice grower, but it would still be poor.

A study of the resource curse finds no relationship between GDP growth and resource-richness. CFS

Carbonnier, Gilles, Natascha Wagner, and Fritz Brugger. "The Impact of Resource-Dependence and Governance on Sustainable Development." The Centre on Conflict, Development and Peacebuilding (2011): n. pag. The Graduate Institute. Web. 11 Dec. 2013.

As discussed in section 2.1, earlier studies on the resource curse that take per capita GDP growth as dependent variable find a negative relationship between income growth and resource richness. Our dataset does not support the resource-curse argument when looking at the relationship between GDP growth and resource-richness: We do not find any significant correlation (an insignificantly small, positive correlation), which holds also for the correlation between log GDP per capita and resource richness. But the correlation between resource-richness and sustainable development as measured by ANS per capita is clearly negative. The


January/February 2014 Neg: Economic Growthcorrelation between log per capita ANS and log per capita GDP is rather high, namely 72%, which is not surprising since it confirms the strong link between income and capital in a Solow sense (Table 3).



Chile has achieved great economic success through resource extraction. PNGAscher, William. “Why Governments Waste Natural Resources: Policy Failures in

Developing Countries.” July 1999.Through the 1980s, Chile’s economy was still highly reliant on copper production for foreign exchange and government revenues. Copper constituted more than 50 percent of Chile’s exports in 1976 and more than 40 percent all through the 1980s. Payments from the state copper company to the central government accounted for one-fifth of government revenues as late as 1991. However, copper wealth, combine with relatively good economic policies, has fueled strong economic growth and a diversification of the economy. Some of the diversification has involved other natural-resource-based sectors, such as fruit, timber, and wines, for which the Chilean economy is well suited, as indicated by the profitability of producing these commodities for domestic and international sales. Some of the diversification has been in manufacturing and the expansion of the service sector. Yet the Chilean government has avoided forcing the economy away from natural resources; the choice of economic activity has largely been left to the market signals of profitability. To be sure, historically Chile’s copper (and before that, its nitrates) exposed the country to economic booms and busts, as the world prices for these materials have fluctuated during this century. However, there is no question that Chile has been better off than, say, Paraguay, which has far less natural-resource wealth, or Bolivia, whose gold and silver were depleted early on. Moreover, over the past two decades Chile has learned how to smooth out the impacts of changes in raw-material export prices. When Chilean copper prices are high, the additional revenues go into a stabilization fund that is available to offset lower government revenues when world copper prices are low. As a consequence, Chile has done a good job of managing both the resource and the proceeds from its export sale. No one in Chile is arguing that the nation should turn its back on the copper wealth, which still accounts for roughly 40 percent of export earnings.

Natural resource extraction does not damage other economic sectors. PNGAscher, William. “Why Governments Waste Natural Resources: Policy Failures in

Developing Countries.” July 1999.A final complaint is the more subtle worry that natural-resource export booms can damage other economic sectors. An export boom generally increases the value of the local currency, making it more difficult for the nation’s other exports to find markets. In addition, the flood of export earnings can lead to inflation and rising demand for imported goods that displace domestically produced goods. Yet here again the culprit is not the export boom itself, but its faulty management and poor macroeconomic policies. Governments can support the sectors with long-term “postboom” potentials and keep portions of the windfall profits out of the local economy in order to smooth out disposable income. The problem of more valuable local currencies is real, but many


January/February 2014 Neg: Economic Growthgovernments have kept their currencies overvalued beyond the effects of the export boom and could do much more to rein in their currency values through general monetary policies.



Economic growth will automatically lead to environmental protection. PNGGrossman, Gene. Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University. “Economic Growth

and the Environment.” 1995.We find little evidence that environmental quality deteriorates steadily with economic growth. Rather, we find for most indicators that economic growth brings an initial phase of deterioration followed by a subsequent phase of improvement. We suspect that the eventual improvement reflects, in part, an increased demand for (and supply of) environmental protection at higher levels of national income. The turning points for the different pollutants vary, but in most cases they occur before a country reaches a per capita income of $8000. For seven of the fourteen indicators we find a statistically significant positive relationship between environmental quality and income for a middle-income country with a per capita GDP of $10,000.

Be sure to use this card in conjunction with a card states that resource extraction in developing countries will/does lead to economic growth.

The only way to achieve environmental protection is through economic growth. PNGBeckerman, Wilfred. University of Oxford, World Development, Vol. 20, No. 4, 1992.

“Economic Growth and the Environment: Whose Growth? Whose Environment?”The important environmental problems for the 75% of the world’s population that live in developing countries are local problems of access to safe drinking water or decent sanitation, and urban degradation. Furthermore there is clear evidence that, although economic growth usually leads to environmental deterioration in the early stages of the process, in the end the best — and probably the only — way to attain a decent environment in most countries is to become rich.


January/February 2014 Neg: Developed Countries’ Control Good

Developed Countries’ Control Good

Developed countries are using the developing countries’ carry capacity to boost their economic growth. CFS


Comparing ecological footprints of developed nations with their available biological capacity is a good indicator of the transfer of environmental currency resources. The average ecological footprint of the world in 1995 was 2.5 hectare. In comparison, the ecological footprint of US was 9.6 ha (as against its available capacity of 5.5 ha), Japan was 4.2 ha (as against its available capacity of 0.7 ha), and Germany was 4.6 ha (as against its available capacity of 1.9 ha). Developed countries account for much larger footprints as compared to developing countries. Ecological footprint of India is 1 ha (as against its available capacity of 0.5 ha), Argentina has a footprint of 3 ha (as against its available capacity of 4 ha.), and China has an ecological footprint of 1.4 ha (as against its ecological capacity of 0.6 ha). The figures indicate that developed countries have been using up a higher proportion of the earth's carrying capacity and are also using the carrying capacity available with developing countries to boost their domestic growth. Interdependence of nations, specifically trade, is one of the mechanisms by which the developed countries appropriate carrying capacity from developing countries and are able to increase their own ecological footprints. The case of environmental currency transfer therefore builds up.

The market theory justifies the domination of developing countries and their environmental resources. CFS


From a reductionist perspective, the underlying mechanism adopted by developed countries is better explained in terms of market theory: to buy, to produce or to take-over. Developed countries have assumed that it is a wiser decision for them to procure environmental goods and services from developing countries if it is more expensive or damaging to produce them in their own countries. And it may be strategic to dominate the countries, which produce goods that are in demand, but are not available in the host country. This simple market theory has proved to be the bane of environmental sustainability in developing countries and is being practiced even at present.


January/February 2014 Neg: Short-Term Growth

Short-Term Growth Resource extraction is much more valuable to short-term growth in developing countries TF

Paul Collier, Frederick Ploeg, Anthony Venables (2009). Managing Resource Revenues in Developing Economies. University of Oxford journal.

One implication is that the high yield will in aggregate imply that resource-rich developing countries can expect rapid growth. As a consequence, the value to the society of consumption in the near-term is considerably higher than consumption in the distant future when the economy has become fully developed. It is therefore appropriate for a developing country to use its resource revenues to raise consumption up towards the level of the distant future, rather than to use them to raise the level of consumption in that distant future. This strategy contrasts with the PIH, which provides a solution for a society wishing permanently to raise its consumption and thereby placing relatively high weight on the interests of the distant future. To achieve this objective, how much of the revenue should be used for asset acquisition?

Must combine with short-term good cards.



Graph Showing Relative Amounts of Resource Extraction Around the World. ABBArno Behrens. (2005) “The Material Basis of The Global Economy: Implications for


Shares of Global Resource Extraction by World Region (In Billions of Tons)

As we can see from the increasing share that Asia has on this map, increased resource extractions tends to accompany countries that are developing. It is likely that this is a necessary to allow short-term growth, and that extraction levels will fall again once the country finishes industrializing. Increased resource extraction may be inevitable to becoming in today’s competitive global economy.



Resource Extraction Tends to Increase as a Byproduct of Development. ABBArno Behrens. (2005) “The Material Basis of The Global Economy: Implications for


Asia’s share in global resource extraction has increased considerably as a consequence of rapid industrialisation in countries such as China and India. In China, for example, extraction of fossil fuels, metal ores and biomass grew by 130%, 160% and 80%, respectively, between 1980 and 2002. The total increase in used extraction was 123%, as compared to an increase of 70% in India. Other than in Asia, a considerable part of the Latin American increase in domestic resource extraction results from specialisation in resource-intensive export products, such as metal ores (see also Muradian and Martinez-Alier, 2001). The regional used extraction of metal ores thus increased by 161%. The most dramatic decline is observed for the transition countries, which faced deep economic recession in the beginning of the 1990s (for example, real GDP of the Russian Federation fell by 30% between 1992 and 1998), resulting in a reduction of domestic resource extraction of -15%. The share of Western Europe declined, mainly reflecting a reduction of metal ores and fossils extraction. These raw materials are increasingly being substituted by imports from other world regions.

It seems that resource extraction is intrinsically linked to development and economic prosperity. It can therefore be inferred that massive reductions in resource extraction has the potential to halt the growth of the global economy, particularly by slowing the growth of developing countries.


January/February 2014 Neg: Ecofeminism

Ecofeminism Environmental protection marginalizes minority groups such as women TF

Manjusha Gupte (2004). Participation in a Gendered Environment: The Case of Community Forestry in India. Human Ecology 32(3).

In the literature on participatory democracy, few scholars note that marginalized groups could be left out of deliberative practices. This issue merits attention because social stratification hinders real participation for the powerless and marginalized groups in society, even in policy programs that seek to promote societal participation. Evidence from the above cases shows that gender stratification does affect women's participation. The fact that women's participation is comparatively stronger in Maharashtra than in Rajasthan could perhaps be explained by the fact that Maharashtra is more progressive and less stratified than Rajasthan. Thus in highly stratified societies it is difficult for women to be actively involved even in participatory policies (Agarwal, 2000). What implications do these findings have for participatory environmental policy? It needs to be recognized that merely enacting participatory policies will not automatically translate into a vibrant democratic polity. There is an inherent danger in enacting participatory policies that use participation merely as a means to achieve some other substantive goal, in this case, forest regeneration. In such cases the stress is more on vegetative results, and if these are good, participation is not given much attention. On the other hand, villages like Village 3 that are trying to bring in social equity in the Joint Forest Management process are neglected by the Forest Department because they have not achieved stellar vegetative results. For the Forest Department, the focus is more on plantations and not on the working of the Forest Protection Committees. Green democracy may be a viable option even in developing countries if greater stress is laid on empowerment mechanisms for marginalized groups to overcome barriers of social stratification. Sometimes even the involved NGOs are not able to discern the need for effective women's participation. As in Village 3, if women's meetings are held separately, then women can get an opportunity to organize separately and assert themselves.

Framework card for kritik.


January/February 2014 Neg: Indigenous Cultures

Indigenous Cultures Wrong to Take Action Without Consulting Indigenous People on Their Land. ABB

James Anaya. (2005) “Indigenous Peoples’ Participatory Rights In Relation To Decisions About Natural Resource Extraction: The More Fundamental Issue Of What Rights Indigenous Peoples Have In Lands And Resources.” Annals of Tourism Research.

It has become a generally accepted principle in international law that indigenous peoples should be consulted as to any decision affecting them. This norm is reflected in articles 6 and 7 of I.L.O. Convention No. 169, and has been articulated by United Nations treaty supervision bodies in country reviews and in examinations of cases concerning resource extraction on indigenous lands. The existence of a duty to consult indigenous peoples is also generally accepted by states in their contributions to discussions surrounding the draft declarations on indigenous peoples’ rights, at both the United Nations and in the Inter-American system. This widespread acceptance of the norm of consultation demonstrates that it has become part of customary international law.

Ambiguity remains, however, as to the extent and content of the duty of consultation owed to indigenous peoples. In particular, there is much debate as to whether indigenous peoples’ right to participation in decisions affecting them extend to a veto power over state action. Logically, the extent of the duty and thus the level of consultation required is a function of the nature of the substantive rights at stake. Thus the more critical issue underlying the debate over the duty to consult is the nature of indigenous peoples’ rights in lands and resources.

It can be argues that any action taken without consulting indigenous peoples on their land is unethical, and this is frequently the case with resource extraction.



National and Internationl Law State Indigenous People should Govern own Land. ABBJames Anaya. (2005) “Indigenous Peoples’ Participatory Rights In Relation To Decisions

About Natural Resource Extraction: The More Fundamental Issue Of What Rights Indigenous Peoples Have In Lands And Resources.” Annals of Tourism Research.

Indigenous peoples, furthermore, typically have looked to a secure land and natural resource base to ensure the economic viability and development of their communities.

These aspirations are reflected in article 26 of the United Nations Draft Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, produced by the U.N. Working Group on Indigenous Populations, through a process in which indigenous representatives had a great deal of participation. Article 26 reads:

Indigenous peoples have the right to own, develop, control and use the lands and territories, including the total environment of the lands, air, waters, coastal seas, sea-ice, flora and fauna and other resources which they traditionally owned or otherwise occupied or used. This includes the full recognition of their laws, traditions and customs, land-tenure systems and institutions for the development and management of resources, and the right to effective measures by States to prevent any interference with, alienation of or encroachment upon these rights.3

Although indigenous representatives were not as heavily involved in its drafting, a proposed declaration on the rights of indigenous peoples produced by the Inter- American Commission on Human Rights for approval by the Organization of American States contains a similar provision:

Indigenous peoples have the right to the legal recognition of their varied and specific forms and modalities of

their . . . control, [ownership, use] and enjoyment of territories and property. Indigenous peoples [have the

right] to [the] recognition of their property and ownership rights with respect to lands, territories and resources they have historically [occupied, as well as] to the use of those to which they have historically had access for their traditional activities and livelihood.4

If both national and international law agree that resource extraction should not occur without the consent of the indigenous peoples it affects, why then is such resource extraction so widely tolerated?



Example of Failure to Properly Consult Indigenous People in Columbia. ABBJames Anaya. (2005) “Indigenous Peoples’ Participatory Rights In Relation To Decisions


In a complaint concerning the Embera Katío people of Colombia, the ILO Committee responsible for

Convention compliance found that, even though the government had engaged in a consultative process that had

in fact led to an agreement with the Embera Katío people concerning the flooding of their lands for a

hydroelectric project, the duty to consult had not been fully met because further consultation had not

taken place in light of modifications to the project after the agreement, with the objective of obtaining consent to the modifications.16 The Convention’s provisions specifically require “free and informed consent” for relocation of indigenous peoples, in the absence of which special procedures of consultation must apply.17

The ILO Committee pointed out that the objective of such consultations should be understood in connection with the Convention’s other provisions and its general mandate that governments develop, “with the participation of the peoples concerned, coordinated and systematic action to protect their rights and to guarantee respect for their integrity.”18

This is one specific example showing that the responsibility to consult and involve indigenous people in resource extraction is often not taken seriously. This suggests that many such laws and regulations are easily skirted or are not taken seriously.



Specific Examples of Inadequate Consultation with Indigenous Groups. ABBJames Anaya. (2005) “Indigenous Peoples’ Participatory Rights In Relation To Decisions


In two other cases concerning oil exploration concessions in Ecuador and Colombia, which had been granted with either no or very perfunctory consultations with the indigenous peoples concerned, ILO committees emphasized article 6(2), which requires that consultations must be in good faith, through culturally appropriate procedures, and with the objective of reaching an agreement with the affected indigenous peoples.19

Although in those countries oil is understood to be under state ownership, the emphasis on consent accords with the indigenous interests in surface resources at stake.

In yet another ILO proceeding concerning Mexico’s Decree on Constitutional Reform in the Areas of Indigenous Rights and Culture, very different indigenous interests were at issue. In that case, there had been extensive consultations and agreement on the proposal to be put before Congress, but once that was done, subsequent consultation was restricted to brief legislative hearings, during which indigenous demands were not accommodated and in fact changes to the contrary were made. Although the process is analogous to that in the Embera case, where further consultation was required to meet the standards in the Convention, here, while admitting the consultation was not ideal, the Committee would not “conclude that such a list of 'best practices' is actually required.”20

We can see a trend of countries and companies choosing the profitable path of resource extraction over emphasizing the rights of indigenous people. As countries often have a good deal of autonomy over their actions on indigenous lands, the rights of the indigenous people are regularly ignored in the interest of turning a profit.



Racial Discrimination Encouraged by Current Extraction Practices. ABB James Anaya. (2005) “Indigenous Peoples’ Participatory Rights In Relation To Decisions


The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination has also addressed the duty to consult and accommodate. In its General Recommendation 23,23 the Committee called on states to “recognize and protect the rights of indigenous peoples to own, develop, control and use their communal lands, territories and resources[,]”24 in fulfillment of the non-discrimination norm. CERD further exhorted states to “ensure that members of indigenous peoples have equal rights in respect of effective participation in public life and that no decisions directly relating to their rights and interests are taken without their informed consent.”25 In its 1995 review of Nicaragua’s compliance with the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, CERD expressed concern at “insufficient participation of the indigenous groups in decisions affecting their land and the allocation of the natural resources of their land, their cultures and their traditions.”26

It could be advantageous to mention the dangerous precedent that is set by extracting resources without the consent of indigenous peoples. It is implied that the needs and desires of indigenous peoples are inferior to those of the groups extracting resources. This precedent may have the potential to influence legislation and policy making in other areas.


January/February 2014 Neg: Sub-Saharan Africa

Sub-Saharan Africa Sub-Saharan Africa doesn’t have sufficient access to commercial energy and has very high

levels of poverty. CFSKammen, D. M. and Kirubi, C. (2008), Poverty, Energy, and Resource Use in Developing

Countries. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1136: 348–357. doi: 10.1196/annals.1425.030

Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), the region with the highest levels of the population in poverty, also has the least access to modern supplies of commercial energy. Since the late 1980s, the absolute number of the poor in SSA has grown five times more than in Latin America and twice that in South Asia.1 In the past decade, SSA has lagged behind globally not only in gross domestic product per capita but also in electricity consumption. The levels of electricity consumption are strikingly low at 126 kWh per capita, or 150 times that in industrialized countries. Further, in the 1990s, the average per capita consumption of modern energy in Africa was less than 300 kg of oil equivalent, or approximately 50% of the global average.

Resource Extraction GoodStudies from SSA (Sub-Saharan Africa) show that renewable energy is correlated to less

poverty, better health services, and improved education. CFS.Kammen, D. M. and Kirubi, C. (2008), Poverty, Energy, and Resource Use in Developing


After five decades of rural electrification, less than 5% of the rural population has access to the central grid in SSA, and new connections barely keep pace with population growth (table 1). The patterns of regional energy production and consumption are far from uniform, however. North Africa is heavily dependent on oil and gas and the Republic of South Africa, on coal and nuclear power; in the rest of SSA, biomass (charcoal, fuelwood, dung, and crop residues) supplies 70%–90% of energy demand. The Republic of South Africa accounts for 50% of installed electricity generation on the continent. Moreover, energy use and energy investments SSA are clearly mismatched. Despite serving a minority, large-scale conventional energy sectors (electricity and petroleum) receive most energy investments. This is at the expense of the abundant, mature, and cost-effective small-scale renewable energy technologies, such as microhydro, solar energy, and improved biomass cookstoves. Many studies in SSA and elsewhere demonstrate strong empirical linkages between renewable


January/February 2014 Neg: Sub-Saharan Africaenergy technologies and a wide range of the United Nations Millennium Development Goals, including reduced child and maternal mortality, poverty alleviation, improved education, and health services.

Africa could use tariffs to increase rural electricity markets. CFSKammen, D. M. and Kirubi, C. (2008), Poverty, Energy, and Resource Use in Developing


Getting tariffs right is essential if rural electricity markets are to emerge and grow in Africa. Common claims that rural people cannot afford the true cost of electricity can be misleading. Through wide use of batteries to power lights, television, and radio, a sizable proportion of rural people have demonstrated willingness and ability to pay for improved energy services on the order of US$3–$10/kWh. In setting tariffs, the regulator must therefore ensure that private rural electricity suppliers receive a reasonable return on investment. This is not an argument against subsidies, however. If directed at capital investments rather than operating costs, combined with cost-reflective tariffs, technology-neutral subsidies could make a positive difference in rural electrification.

Africa could use subsidies that are empirically proven to work to increase the energy sector. CFS

Kammen, D. M. and Kirubi, C. (2008), Poverty, Energy, and Resource Use in Developing Countries. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1136: 348–357. doi: 10.1196/annals.1425.030

Linking subsidies to concrete outputs is another institutional innovation suitable for the energy sector in Africa. Introducing supply competition through output-based contracting for rural electrification has increased electricity access while lowering costs in Cape Verde, Chile, and South Asia. Under this system, private companies bid to supply rural electricity services to selected areas at lowest cost. Payment of subsidies and/or renewal of contracts (by government or donors) are conditional on meeting predetermined targets (e.g., number, rate, and cost of connections). Active participation of the beneficiary community through financial or labor contributions, in local management, and in the contract renewal processes can lower costs further, enhance monitoring of targets, and improve service delivery.



Air pollution from biomass use causes death. Charcoal production would save lives and increase employement in SSA (Sub-Saharan Africa). CFS

Kammen, D. M. and Kirubi, C. (2008), Poverty, Energy, and Resource Use in Developing Countries. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1136: 348–357. doi: 10.1196/annals.1425.030

In 2001, 400,000 premature deaths, especially for women and children, in SSA, or 25% of such deaths globally, were attributable to indoor air pollution from biomass use. This mortality trend is projected to reach 10 million by 2030. Rapid transitions to sustainable charcoal production and could prevent 3 million deaths, however. Moreover, biomass fuels, particularly the charcoal trade, are a vital source of livelihoods and employment to millions of people in Africa. In Kenya, for example, charcoal trade provides direct employment to about 200,000 people and supports roughly 2.5 million livelihoods, with women playing a significant role in production, distribution, and selling.

Resource Extraction Helps Incorporate Developing Countries in Global Economy. ABBDarryl Reed. (2002) “Resource Extraction Industries in Developing Countries.” Journal

of Business Ethics.From the perspective of TNCs (Trans-National Corporations) liberalizing reforms are obviously very attractive. They imply reduced barriers to entry, decreased risk and new investment opportunities, both through green- field activities and mergers and acquisitions (especially as countries privatize state enterprises). Indications of the impact of economic liberalization are perhaps most evident in resource sectors such as mining. Since the mid 1980’s there has not only been an increase in investments in this sector in developing countries, but a significant shift from developed countries to developing countries, most notably towards Latin America (Otto, 1998). Major trade agreements such as APEC have the liberalization of the mining industry as a high priority objective. For their part, Asian countries have recently been re-regulating the mining industry in an effort to attract foreign capital (Naito et al., 1998). African countries too have been liberalizing their mining policies since the 1980s, in large part due to direct pressures from international financial institutions. By 1995, some 35 African countries had amended their mining regulations to make them more attractive to foreign investors (African Agenda, 1997). As a result of such changes, between 1991 and 1997, exploration investments expanded 6 times in Latin America, quadrupled in the Pacific region, and doubled in Africa (Drillbits and Tailings, 1998)

It can be argued that failing to engage in resource extraction will leave many developing countries isolated from the global economy and will lead to them being exploited as producers.



Resource Extraction can be done with minimal negative environmental impact. PNGHeymann, Terry. World Economic Forum. Geneva, Switzerland 2013. “Natural Riches?

Perspectives on Responsible Natural Resource Management in Conflict-affected Countries.”

Land set aside for mineral extraction is not available for other uses, and this can have major impacts on other sectors, regions and peace processes. What is an appropriate policy mix to satisfy both the demands for natural resources and the need for available land? Policy-makers must also consider the environmental impact of leasing land for productive activities. For example, wetlands represent a key component of the ecosystem, yet may also be one of the most productive areas for large-scale rice farming. What is the appropriate choice to make? In both cases, it is essential that the population be involved in discussions on the issue.

Steps are already being taken towards making resource extraction more environmentally friendly. PNG

Heymann, Terry. World Economic Forum. Geneva, Switzerland 2013. “Natural Riches? Perspectives on Responsible Natural Resource Management in Conflict-affected Countries.”

Recent foreign investment legislation pays greater attention to the need to mitigate the adverse environmental impacts of large-scale development projects. Effective environmental impact assessments (EIAs) can provide useful tools for this purpose. EIAs are processes for “identifying, predicting, evaluating and mitigating the biophysical, social, and other relevant effects of development proposals prior to major decisions being taken and commitments made.”72Protests over the expansion of Letpadaung copper mine in September 2012 and the derailing of the Myitsone dam project in September 2011 highlight the urgency of incorporating EIAs, currently not mandatory, into Myanmar’s legal framework.73 The country needs to ensure independent and transparent EIAs for potentially disruptive projects, and the approval of such projects should be contingent upon acceptable outcomes.



Botswana has benefited greatly from resource extraction. PNGVan der Ploeg, Frederick. Journal of Economic Literature 2011. “Natural Resources:

Curse or Blessing?”Forty percent of Botswana’s GDP stems from diamonds, but Botswana has managed to beat the resource curse. It has the second highest public expenditure on education as a fraction of GNP, enjoys the world’s highest growth rate since 1965, and its GDP per capita is at least ten times that of Nigeria (Maria Sarraf and Moortaza Jiwanji 2001). The Botswana experience is noteworthy since it started its postcolonial experience with minimal investment and substantial inequality.

Technological advances do not lessen the need for natural resources. PNGAscher, William. “Why Governments Waste Natural Resources: Policy Failures in

Developing Countries.” July 1999.Despite all the predictions that the importance of natural resources would recede rapidly in our increasingly technological world, our industrial and agricultural bases are still firmly rooted in raw materials. Most important, because of population growth and rising incomes, the demand for manufactured goods, food, housing, and energy has continued to soar. These all require greater quantities of raw materials, both renewable and nonrenewable. The increasing demand for natural resources easily outstrips the capacity of new technologies to reduce the need for natural-resource inputs. Technology that miniaturizes devices to save on resource inputs, or that substitutes lighter or more abundant materials for traditional ones, has had negligible impact on the total volume and value of raw-material inputs.

This card is best used not as a contention itself but as a response to an opponent’s argument.



Developing countries will continue to rely heavily on natural resources for economic growth. PNG


While the world’s continued dependence on raw materials poses some risks for continued economic growth throughout the world, it also represents enormous opportunities for developing nations that can husband natural resource effectively. Although a few developed countries such as Norway, Canada, and the United States benefit greatly from raw material exports (oil, timber, and food, respectively), it is the developing world that relies most heavily on natural resources for domestic production and crucial foreign-currency earnings through export. Table 1.1 displays the proportions of export earnings for the countries examined in this book, as well as several others. This table quickly dispels any illusions that the developing world has “graduated” from its reliance on natural-resource-based exports. The countries with the largest populations, such as China, India, Indonesia, Brazil, and Mexico, have relatively lower portions of export earnings coming from resource-based exports, in part because industries from developed countries have chosen the larger countries as the sites for labor-intensive, export-oriented manufacturing. Some of these countries, particularly China and India, have already largely exhausted their natural-resource-based exports. Even so, many countries, both big and small, still owe much of their production and exports to natural resources, going far beyond agricultural products.

Resource-rich developing countries in Africa are experiencing extreme growth. PNGTran, Mark. “Are natural resources a blessing or a curse for developing countries?”

October 2012.A recent World Bank study, Africa's Pulse, compared growth of Africa's resource-rich and non-resource-rich countries between 1980 and 2010. In the 1980s, both sets of countries experienced a virtual stagnation in per-capita gross domestic product. Overall, resource-rich countries were unable to harness resource wealth in the first two decades. Since 2000, however, it has been a different story: higher growth in all groups, with oil-rich countries in the lead. The oil producers achieved sustained growth over the past decade, with some growing faster than others. Angola and Equatorial Guinea experience annual average growth rates of more than 7%. At the lower end, Nigeria, Sudan and Cameroon had rates of 3-6%.



African nations depend greatly on natural resources. PNGTran, Mark. “Are natural resources a blessing or a curse for developing countries?”

October 2012.Oil, gas and mining are important sectors and account for a major source of income. Economic rents from minerals in sub-Saharan Africa came to $169bn (£105bn) in 2010. In Nigeria and Angola, two of Africa's biggest oil producers, the combined size of the rents was more than $100bn. Government revenues from natural resources – a combination of tax and royalties – accounted, on average, for 45% of total general revenues in resource-rich countries. The economist Paul Collier says African resource reserves may be underestimated, as less exploration has taken place in Africa than in other regions. African countries' share of global reserves and production of non-fuel minerals is considerable as well. Zambia and the Democratic Republic of the Congo have a combined share of 6.7% of total world copper production, while Ghana and Mali account for 5.8% of total world gold production.


January/February 2014 Neg: Mongolia

Mongolia Mongolia is finding a balance between resource extraction and protecting the environment.

CFS"Mongolia Strikes a Balance between Development and Environmental Protection." The

World Bank, 16 Mar. 2012. Web. 11 Dec. 2013. <http://www.worldbank.org/en/news/feature/2012/03/16/mongolia-strikes-balance-between-development-environmental-protection>.

G. Ulziibaya is a senior hydrologist at Oyu Tolgoi, a copper-and-gold mine that is expected to account for one-third of Mongolia’s GDP by 2020. Part of his work is to ensure that drilling for water at the mining sites goes deeper than 300 meters underground. “We also seal-off the deep aquifers from the shallow water sources located above, so that it won’t have side effects on underground water near the surface,” he says. He is making this effort so that the mining business, which is springing up at a remarkable speed in Mongolia, won’t take away water from neighboring communities or animals and herders residing in the region. Like Ulziibaya, Mongolians today recognize the need to balance development with environmental protection, as the vast reserve of sought-after minerals is driving the country’s economic growth at 17% a year.

Mongolia cares about the environment and is focusing on improving their natural resources’ management. CFS

"Mongolia Strikes a Balance between Development and Environmental Protection." The World Bank, 16 Mar. 2012. Web. 11 Dec. 2013. <http://www.worldbank.org/en/news/feature/2012/03/16/mongolia-strikes-balance-between-development-environmental-protection>.

“We inherited from our ancestors the traditional customs, nomadic culture and religion. They have taught us to respect and love Mother Nature,” says Ch. Jargalsaikhan, Vice Minister of Ministry of Nature, Environment and Tourism (MNET). “As mining is recognized as the key sector of Mongolia’s development agenda, environmental issues are becoming increasingly broader while economic development and living standards are improving.” To address environmental issues, the World Bank, together with the Government of Mongolia, began to administer the Netherlands-Mongolia Trust Fund for Environmental Reform (NEMO) in 2005 with funding provided by the Dutch Government. The overarching objective of the funds was to strengthen environment and natural resources management in Mongolia.


January/February 2014 Neg: Extraction Companies Responsible

Extraction Companies Responsible Corporate environmental behavior is not always negative TF

Sukru Ozen, Fatma Kusku (2009). Corporate Environmental Citizenship Variation in Developing Countries: An Institutional Framework. Journal of Business Ethics.

Corporate environmental behavior has been researched as an attempt to explain the heterogeneity of organizational responses to environment-related institutional pressures (Sharma, 2000). Studies concerning this specific issue have generally recognized that companies are subject to strong institutional pressures in the form of normative societal expectations, coercive regulations, tight public policies, media and non-governmental organization (NGO) scrutiny, and mimetic isomorphism within their fields (Aragon-Correa, 1998; Hoffinan, 1999; Sharma, 2000; Sharma and Vredenburg, 1998). Against these strong pressures, organizational responses vary from reactive to proactive environmental strategies( Janssone t al., 2000; Kusku, 2007; Rojsek, 2001; Rondinelli and Berry, 2000; Sharma et al., 1999; Vanderwerwe and Oliff, 1990), or from conforming to regulations and standard industry practices, to voluntary actions for environmental preservation (Sharma, 2000). This variation in environmental strategy is often attributed to organizational/ manageriadli fferencess uch as discretionary slack, employee performance evaluation, and managerial interpretations of environmental issues (Jenningsa nd Zandbergen,1 995; Sharma2, 000).


January/February 2014 Neg: Good for Environment Long-Term

Development Good For Environment in Long-Term

Developed Countries Able to Use Resources More Efficiently. ABBArno Behrens. (2005) “The Material Basis of The Global Economy: Implications for


Industrialised economies are characterised by the lowest material intensities (or highest eco-efficiency), with Western Europe being world-leader with around 1 ton per 1000 US $ GDP in the 1980s and improving to 0.6 tons at the beginning of this decade. Although North America has high levels of per capita resource extraction, material intensity is still low and declining. The two major drivers for this trend in industrialised regions are the use of new technologies with improved material and energy performance and structural change of economies towards service sectors characterised by less material input per economic output. Together with a significant improvement of eco-efficiency in Asia (resulting in a downward trend of the material intensity curve), these two regions also determined the development of eco-efficiency on the global level, which increased from 2.1 tons in 1980 to 1.6 tons in 2002. This means that about 25% less material inputs were needed to produce one unit of constant GDP at the end of the time period as compared to the year 1980. Hence, relative de-coupling of economic growth from the extraction of natural resources was achieved on the global level. The above figure also reveals the enormous differences concerning the material intensity when comparing rich industrialised regions (except Oceania with its special characteristics, see above) to developing regions. Although the situation improved significantly in the region of Accession Countries in the past 10 years, particularly in Eastern European countries, the generation of GDP is still linked to a domestic resource extraction almost 4 times higher than world average.

It follows from this that industrialized countries eventually reach a state where they are able to develop new technologies and methods to use their resources more efficiently. It may be worth a sacrifice to the environment now so that we can focus on creating more sustainable and efficient usage in the future.


January/February 2014 Neg: Good for Environment Long-Term

Resource Extraction Less Harmful to Environment In Developed Countries. ABBArno Behrens. (2005) “The Material Basis of The Global Economy: Implications for


Regarding the international agenda, sustainability goals will not be achievable without considerable North to South transfer of financial and technological resources. Debt is a considerable driver of resource extraction in developing countries, the returns of which are used to meet debt obligations. A redistribution of financial resources in form of debt relief or co-financing of development projects will thus take pressure from natural resources in the South. Additionally, increasing transfers of environmental technology and know-how will help to improve resource efficiency and reduce waste and emissions of production processes in the South.

Potential environmental benefits can also be expected from the provision of increasing market access for Southern products in the North by eliminating tariff distortions, reforming the subsidy system etc. Since these barriers exist not only for agricultural products but also for manufactured ones, an alleviation of these barriers will increase incentives to manufacture products in the South instead of merely exporting the raw materials. Northern environmental standards will apply to these products and may have spill-over effects on the environmental quality of products sold in the South. Furthermore, increasing income through extended market access is expected to have environmentally beneficial effects on the structure of developing economies, leading to an accelerated shift towards the less resource intensive service sector.

Once developing countries have finished the transitional stage, we will no longer see a system in which developed countries rely on less developed ones, which generally have much lower environmental standards. This makes development now potentially good for the environment long term.

Focusing on effective resource extraction policies actually helps preserve the environment. PNG


For resource extraction, the value of the resource can be squandered by extracting and selling it at the wrong times (e.g., when the prices are too low) or by extracting it with excessive losses (e.g., pumping oil out too rapidly leaves more in the ground; reckless timber harvesting can cause great damage to other trees). These are essentially conservation issues, assessed in terms of both getting the greatest economic value out of the resource endowment and preserving ecosystems.


January/February 2014 Neg: Realism Good

Realism Good The evidence in this section all argues states must do what is in their own best interest regardless of the effects on other states. These operate as good framework cards to exclude many impacts about the environment because larger environmental impacts affect the entire world and not just the individual state extracting resources.

Countries must do what is in their best interest because there is no central authority above them. BG.

John J Mearsheimer. (2001) The Tragedy of Great Power Politics, Pg 30. W.W. Norton and Company.

The international system is anarchic, which does not mean that it is chaotic or riven by disorder. It is easy to draw that conclusion, since realism depicts a world characterized by security competition and war. By itself, however, the realist notion of anarchy has nothing to do with conflict: it is an ordering principle, which says that the system comprises independent states that have no central authority above them. Sovereignty, in other words, inheres in states because there is no higher ruling body in the international system.

Countries must act in a self-interested manner because of the nature of competition with other states. BG.

John J Mearsheimer. (2001) The Tragedy of Great Power Politics, Pg 30. W.W. Norton and Company.

The sad fact is that international politics has always beeen a ruthless and dangerous business, and it is likely to remain that way. Although the intensity of their competitions waxes and wanes, great powers fear each other and always compete with each other for power. The overriding goal of each state is to maximize its share of world power, which means gaining power at the expense of other states. But great powers do no merely strive to be the strongest of all the great powers, although that is a welcome outcome. Their ulimate aim to be the hegemon—that is, the only great power in the system.


January/February 2014 Neg: Realism Good

Countries in the real world currently act aggressively towards other states. BG. Thomas Mowle. (2003) "Worldviews in Foreign Policy: Realism, Liberalism, and External

Conflict." Political Psychology, Vol. 24, No. 3, 2003. Pg 583. This article uses this approach to illuminate a debate within the study of international relations. This research indicates that the Western democracies included in the sample express problem representations consistent with liberalism and realism under the situational and systemic circumstances predicted in international relations literature. Such states will be more likely to express problem representations consistent with a liberal worldview when their security is guaranteed by another power, regardless of the overall distribution of power in the system. These states are also more likely to express problem representations consistent with a realist worldview when a rival, ally, or fellow democracy is involved in the conflict.

The international system forces states to be aggressive and seek to securitize themselves. BG.John J Mearsheimer. (2001) The Tragedy of Great Power Politics, Pg 30. W.W. Norton

and Company.Three features of the international system combine to cause states to fear one another: 1) the absence of a central authority that sits above states and can protect them from each other, 2) the fact that states always have some offensive military capability, and 3) the fact that states can never be certain about other states’ intentions. Given this fear–which can never be wholly eliminated–states recognize that the more powerful they are relative to their rivals, the better their chances of survival. Indeed, the best guarantee of survival is to be a hegemon, because no other state can seriously threaten such a mighty power.


January/February 2014 Neg: Democracy

Democracy There is a link between higher tax revenues on resources and democracy. BG

Michael L. Ross. (2001) “DOES OIL HINDER DEMOCRACY?" Project Muse. http://www.maxwell.syr.edu/uploadedFiles/exed/sites/ldf/Academic/Ross%20-%20Does%20Oil%20Hinder%20Democracy.pdf.

The first causal mechanism comes from the work of Middle East scholars, who have pondered this issue for over two decades. In general they argue that governments use their oil revenues to relieve social pressures that might otherwise lead to demands for greater accountability. Case studies describe three ways this may occur. The first is through what might be called a ‘‘taxation effect.’’ It suggests that when governments derive sufficient revenues from the sale of oil, they are likely to tax their populations less heavily or not at all, and the public in turn will be less likely to demand accountability from---- and representation in---their government. The logic of the argument is grounded in studies of the evolution of democratic institutions in early modern England and France. Historians and political scientists have argued that the demand for representation in government arose in response to the sovereign’s attempts to raise taxes. Some Mideast scholars have looked for similar correlations between variations in tax levels and variations in the demand for political accountability. Crystal found that the discovery of oil made the governments of Kuwait and Qatar less accountable to the traditional merchant class.20 Brand’s study of Jordan argued that a drop in foreign aid and remittances in the 1980s led to greater pressures for political representation. Yet not all Middle East specialists have been persuaded: Waterbury argues that ‘neither historically nor in the twentieth century is there much evidence [in the Middle East] that taxation has evoked demands that governments account for their use of tax monies. Predatory taxation has produced revolts, especially in the countryside, but there has been no translation of tax burden into pressures for democratization.’’


http://www.maxwell.syr.edu/uploadedFiles/exed/sites/ldf/Academic/Ross%20-%20Does%20Oil%20Hinder%20Democracy.pdf

http://www.maxwell.syr.edu/uploadedFiles/exed/sites/ldf/Academic/Ross%20-%20Does%20Oil%20Hinder%20Democracy.pdf

January/February 2014 Neg: Inclusion

Inclusion Resource extraction leads to inclusion. BG

Anthony Bebbington. (2003) “Natural resource extraction and the possibilities of inclusive development: politics across space and time." ESID Working Paper No. 21. http://www.effective-states.org/_assets/documents/esid_wp_21_bebbington.pdf

The channels through which resource extraction might foster inclusive development can be separated very simply between those channels that are directly related to the ways in which the extractive enterprise governs and organizes itself (channels 1 to 4 below) and those that derive from the way extractive industry as a sector is regulated by third parties, above all the state (channels 5-8). Each of these is important. We note the following channels: 1. Employment: populations can be included in or excluded from the political economy of extraction depending on the direct and indirect employment effects of mining, oil and gas investments. 2. Supply chain management: companies can manage their supply chains in ways that offer more, or less, opportunities for local and regional populations to be included in their activities. 3. Corporate social responsibility and transparency. Company approaches to employee and community well-being, to redistribution of profits through company sponsored social programmes, and to financial transparency are all additional influences on who is and is not included in the benefits of extraction. 4. Ownership. Though this occurs much less frequently, companies can also include populations and the workforce in the ownership structure of the extractive enterprise, either as shareholders or joint owners 5. Public ownership. A number of extractive enterprises, particularly in the hydrocarbons sector, are publicly owned and as such allow for some sort of social inclusion in their operations, even if in practice such operations generally run as enterprises owned and organized by government. 6. Planning and consultation: populations can be included or excluded depending on practices and rules governing how resource extraction is planned for, who is consulted and how, and how far the voice of those consulted can affect the unfolding of the extractive economy (and relatedly, how far consultation and participation is managed such that it does little more than legitimate decisions and project designs already made: Li, 2009). 7. Taxation and social expenditure: how far populations are included in access to the financial resources generated by extractive industry depends entirely on the ways in which the sector is taxed and the extent to, and means through which this fiscal revenue finds its ways into social investment and other development programmes. 8. Environment: the potential for adverse environmental effects is high in the extractive economy. To the extent that environmental damage is a mechanism through which contemporary and future generations are excluded from (net) benefits, then the governance of environmental impact is important for social inclusion. These different channels make clear that inclusion can take different forms. While inclusion is often taken to refer to access to the benefit flows associated with resource extraction, “inclusion” can also refer to the incorporation of particular ideas and valuations in the planning and regulatory processes surrounding extraction. In addition, inclusion might also occur through involvement in decision making processes – whether these are land use planning and zoning processes, or processes linked to the management of the actual extractive enterprise.


http://www.effective-states.org/_assets/documents/esid_wp_21_bebbington.pdf

January/February 2014 Neg: InclusionInclusion can, then, have economic, socio-cultural and political components, and these are not necessarily co-present.


January/February 2014 Neg: Environmental Statism Bad

Environmental Statism Bad States should not force people to not harm the environment, instead states should use systems

of incentives and fees. BGTerry L Anderson and Donald Leal. (2003). “Regulation: Enviro-Capitalism vs.

Environmental Statism.”It may be true that "We are all environmentalists now," as Michael Kellogg claimed in his article "After Environmentalism," (Regulation, 1994 Number 1) but it is not true that you have to accept command and control to be an environmentalist. Nonetheless, for mainstream environmentalists the litmus test of "greenness" is the acceptance of more government to achieve environmental ends. They typically call for more environmental regulation and more government ownership of land, ad nauseam. But the message from free-market environmentalism is that more government is not necessary to improve environmental quality and may even be inimical to that end. Those who wave the banner of environmental statism cling to the notion that the stick is better than the carrot when it comes to the rights of private property owners. They ignore the enormous growth over the last decade in recreational markets, especially for fee hunting and fishing, that have led landowners such as International Paper Company, a major industrial forest owner, to nurture its environmental assets. Instead, their first line of defense against landowners always seems to be regulation. No wonder private landowners see endangered pecies and wetlands as liabilities instead of valuable assets. Not surprisingly, ranchers in northwest Montana, for the sake of their own financial survival, say in private that the remedy for grizzly bears or wolves on their property is "to shoot, shovel, and shut up." Meanwhile, the clamor goes on for more restrictive legislation, more lawsuits, more government intru sion.

Market-based solutions for the environment are much better than the state forcing rules upon people. BG

Terry L Anderson and Donald Leal. (2003). “Regulation: Enviro-Capitalism vs. Environmental Statism.”

Unlike a market, however, the level of pollution is not determined by willing buyers and willing sellers, but by command and control. A market for pollution would have the polluter paying the receptor in a voluntary transaction. If the polluter is willing to pay the receptor more than the cost the receptor hears, more effluent will be emitted. That requires a system of well-specified property rights and a system of common-law torts that forces a polluter to pay for any damages he generates. Market-based solutions, on the other hand, establish the level of pollution through a political process with little if any compensation paid to those who receive the pollution. It is true that market-based solutions can make the process of meeting governmentally imposed pollution allowances more efficient, and free-market environmentalists applaud such efficiency gains. But there should be no mistaking the fact that the process of determining the level of pollution ought to be a market process.


January/February 2014 Neg: Environmental Statism Bad

Government policy that claims to protect the environment actually damages civilian lives more. PNG


The diagnosis is that commercial loggers cut too many trees; forest peoples burn them to make way for unsustainable agriculture; farmers waste water; fishermen overfish; state workers in mines and oil fields are lazy or incompetent. Policies based on this naive diagnosis are typically both punitive and counterproductive. Vast forest areas have been wrenched away from local people by governments claiming that they were protecting he forests from local people’s irresponsibility. Fishing grounds have been declared off limits; hunting has been banned even in areas where local people depend on it heavily for their protein. In many developing countries, the victims of these “protective” policies are among the poorest, eking out their living in the forests, on the rivers, or scratching minerals from the ground. Governments regularly browbeat or coerce formers, loggers, hunters, miners, oil workers, rubber tappers, fishers and other resource users to comply with regulations, work harder, extract less or get them to stay away from lands that their families had used for generations.


January/February 2014 Neg: Developing Countries Least Responsible

Developing Countries Least Responsible for Climate Change

Developing countries are primarily victims of climate change, not perpetrators. PNGHuq, Saleemul. “Mainstreaming adaptation to climate change in Least Developed

Countries (LDCs).” Published by Taylor & Francis. June 2011.The LDCs have contributed least to the emission of GHGs, but are the most vulnerable to the effects of climate change. This is due to their location in some of the most vulnerable regions of the world (Africa, Asia and small islands) and their low capacities to adapt to these changes. They lack the necessary institutional, economic and financial capacity to cope with climate change impacts and to rebuild infrastructure damaged by disasters (Sokona and Denton, 2001). When disasters strike, LDCs are forced to depend on external aid, as they lack the necessary funds to deal with the problem themselves. The LDCs also lack the resources and money to conduct adaptation studies and implement resulting strategies. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) describes the requirements that need to be met for a country to have a high adaptive capacity: a stable and prosperous economy, a high degree of access to technology at all levels, well delineated roles and responsibilities for implementation of adaptation strategies, systems in place for the national, regional and local dissemination of climate change and adaptation information, and an equitable distribution of access to resources. Clearly, LDCs do not meet these criteria.

LDCs refers to least developed countries. This card could be used to demonstrate not only that developing countries already have the least negative impact on climate change, but also that greater financial success is necessary to allow them to make better resource policy decisions.

Developed countries contribute the most to greenhouse gas emissions. PNGEnvironmental Protection Agency (EPA). “Global Greenhouse Gas Emissions Data.”

2013.In 2008, the top carbon dioxide (CO2) emitters were China, the United States, the European Union, India, the Russian Federation, Japan, and Canada. These data include CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion, as well as cement manufacturing and gas flaring. Together, these sources represent a large proportion of total global CO2 emissions.

This evidence is especially helpful if you also make use of the pie chart on this page, which demonstrates that developing countries can be considered responsible for less than 28% of all greenhouse gas emissions.


Aff Counters


January/February 2014 Aff Counters: Creates Economic Burden

A2 – Limiting resources places economic burden Limiting natural resources does not slow economic growth TF

Christa Brunnschweiler, Erwin Bulte (2008). Linking Natural Resources to Slow Growth and More Conflict. Science Magazine 320.

Nevertheless, our cross-country estimations cast serious doubt on the paradigm of a general resource curse. It appears as if, across the board, resource riches may be associated with higher incomes and a lower risk of civil war. Although there are undoubtedly specific countries where specific resources have eroded institutions or torn countries apart in civil strife, we find this is not the general pattern. This is consistent with several case studies that fail to show a robust link between the onset of war and resource extraction (10), and with evidence that the sector involved in turning natural resources into primary products has many more positive spillovers to the rest of the economy than often are argued (11). Finally, it is consistent with the main message sent by the World Bank in its most recent World Development Report, which, after years of intellectual neglect, finally looks favorably at the primary sector. The last word in the resource curse debate is far from having been spoken; but economic advisors should be aware that natural resources do not necessarily spell doom for development. Instead, their exploitation can be a valuable part.

Defense on NEG economic collapse argument.


January/February 2014 Aff Counters: Economic Arguments

A2- Economic arguments Economics does not take into account environmental concerns TF

Stephen Salant (1995). The Economics of Natural Resource Extraction: A Primer for Development Economists. The World Bank Research Observer 10 (1).

Most environmental problems arise when production or consumption of a good generates a flow of pollution that eventually accumulates in the air or water. Damage typically arises not from the current flow of pollution but from its long-term accumulation. Economists contend that the competitive market often fails to maximize social welfare in such circumstances because agents making the production or consumption decisions do not take into account the costs that their actions impose on others. The profession has not been as quick to recognize the central technological feature of these pollution problems. Keeler, Spence, and Zeckhauser (1972) were the first to emphasize the resemblance between the dynamic aspects of pollution and extraction problems. To illustrate, suppose that a good (for simplicity, not a natural resource) can be produced domestically at constant marginal cost and that consuming it gener-ates benefits that are subject to diminishing returns. Suppose, further, that a flow of pollution is also generated in fixed proportion to the rate of production and that any damages from this pollution affect third parties. Suppose that this pollution generates no social costs until it accumulates beyond a known thresh-old-at which point the cost imposed on the third parties is unconscionably high. The competitive market, left to function freely, will not produce the level of output that is socially optimal. The socially optimal production path would coincide with the equilibrium extraction path in the simplest Hotelling model.

Illustrates flaw of bias in purely economical thinking.


January/February 2014 Aff Counters: Polluter Pays Principle

A2- Polluter Pays Principle Developing countries misinterpret the polluter-pays principle which erases the positive

benefits of the principle. CFSLuppi, Barbara and Parisi, Francesco and Rajagopalan, Shruti, “Environmental


In cases of environmental pollution and degradation in developing countries, a different variation of the polluter-pays principle, focused primarily on the need to provide immediate compensation to victims of environmental harm, has emerged. This variant of the polluter-pays principle generally sees a primary role for local and central governments to provide compensation to victims of environmental harm, which virtually subverts the logic of the principle, suggesting that the primary purpose of the principle is to provide prompt compensation to the victims of environmental harm, and only secondarily allowing governments to act in subrogation to recover damage payments from the responsible parties. This quite drastic shift away from the strict liability regime of the polluter-pays principle is best illustrated by the recent developments in environmental protection in India, which we refer to as the polluter-does-not-pay principle.



Developing countries consistent with the polluter-does-not-pay regime causes more environmental destruction because the government won’t take the time to implement

the best environmental policy. CFSLuppi, Barbara and Parisi, Francesco and Rajagopalan, Shruti, “Environmental


These results shed light on some possible policy issues for the adoption of the polluter-does-not-pay regime. A first point concerns the best institutional allocation of oversight powers for the monitoring of prospective polluters under the polluter-does-not-pay regime. The private and social value of the risk-creating activities is generally opaque to courts and governmental agencies. For this reason, these values do not generally play a direct role in tort law. In the absence of a well-functioning liability system, however, when care incentives are driven by governmental monitoring, the evaluation of the private and social value of the risk-creating activity becomes relevant. The polluter-does-not-pay regime does not create immediate incentives on the government to take into account the value of the risk-creating activity when choosing a monitoring level. As we have seen, this may lead to a myopic governmental action that leads to an excessive monitoring of type-P and type-R agents. A possible way to induce monitoring agencies to consider the value of the risk-creating activities would be to facilitate a coordinated action between branches of government entrusted with environmental protection and tax revenue collection. Monitoring that distorts care and activity level incentives reduces the value and the tax-revenue potential of those activities—a cost that would be internalized and somewhat corrected through coordinated governmental action.



Polluter-does-not-pay-regimes empirically are preferable in areas with poverty and a weak government. CFS

Luppi, Barbara and Parisi, Francesco and Rajagopalan, Shruti, “Environmental Protection for Developing Countries: The Polluter-Does-Not-Pay Principle” (February 6, 2009). International Review of Law and Economics, Forthcoming; Minnesota Legal Studies Research Paper No. 09-08. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1339063

A number of developing countries, including India, Malaysia, Taiwan, Ecuador, Chile, Costa Rica, Kenya, and South Africa, among others, have recently enacted legislation or developed judicial precedents that create an obligation on the state to compensate the victims of environmental harm. These judicial and legislative reinterpretations of the polluter-pays principle hold state and local governments jointly-and-severally liable for the environmental damage caused by private parties, allowing these public bodies to act in subrogation against the individual polluters when possible. These solutions are aimed at ensuring an effective and timely compensation of victims, which ensures relief even when polluters cannot be identified or are financially insolvent. In this paper, we have examined the incentives created by this regime of governmental liability on prospective polluters. We built on those results to examine the comparative advantage and the welfare properties of the 36 polluter-pays and polluter-does-not-pay regimes as instruments of environmental control. We have shown that polluter-does-not-pay regimes may be preferable in situations characterized by widespread poverty, high interest rates, and judicial delays and uncertainty. We further considered the welfare properties of the polluter-does-not-pay regime, comparing its effects to those that would be induced by the actions of a benevolent, welfare-maximizing government. The polluter-does-not-pay regime may lead local governments to act myopically, choosing a level of monitoring that minimizes the financial exposure of the local government but does not fully internalize the costs as well as the benefits of the agents’ care. The study of the advantages and the limits of these alternative instruments of environmental liability provides a valuable viewpoint to understand the interaction between legal remedies and institutional solutions for environmental protection in developing countries.


Neg Counters


January/February 2014 Neg Counters: Resource Curse

A2- Resource Curse The “resource curse” can be avoided with good governmental management TF

Paul Collier, Frederick Ploeg, Anthony Venables (2009). Managing Resource Revenues in Developing Economies. University of Oxford journal.

The historical record of managing resource revenues has been extensively researched and extensively reviewed (e.g., van der Ploeg, 2007), and the consensus is that while resource revenues have a positive effect on economic growth in countries with good governance, their effect in countries with poor governance has, on average, been negative. Cross-country evidence suggests that countries can escape the resource curse (Sachs and Warner, 2007) and turn the windfall revenue into a boon if they have good institutions (Mehlum, Moene and Torvik, 2006), are open to international trade (Arezki and van der Ploeg, 2008), or have welldeveloped financial systems (van der Ploeg and Poelhekke, 2008).1 It is notoriously difficult to interpret the macroeconomic effects of commodity booms in cross-country studies, so it is useful to examine the dynamics more explicitly. Collier and Goderis (2007, 2008) use global data from 1960 onwards and find that, for the first few years following an increase in the price of commodity exports, non-resource output does indeed increase relative to what it would otherwise have been: people become more productive. However, within two decades the typical resource-extracting economy is producing less than it would have done in the absence of the boom. Simulating the current booms for the typical African commodity exporter, if global history repeats itself then after two decades output will be around 25 percent lower than it would have been without the booms. The key finding in both the cross-section and time-series empirical literature on commodity booms is thus that the resource curse is not cast in stone. Some societies have succeeded in harnessing commodity booms for sustained increases in production, while others have not, with the quality of governance playing an important role.

Answers AFF “resource curse”, that having too many resources is detrimental for a country.



There is no good evidence to support that the resource curse exists. Some countries do better than others seemingly randomly. BG

Macartan Humphreys, Jeffrey D. Sachs, and Joseph E. Stiglitz. (2007). “Introduction What Is the Problem with Natural Resource Wealth?” http://www.columbia.edu/~mh2245/papers1/erc01.pdf

There is a curious phenomenon that social scientists call the “resource curse” (Auty 1993). Countries with large endowments of natural resources, such as oil and gas, often perform worse in terms of economic development and good governance than do countries with fewer resources. Paradoxi- cally, despite the prospects of wealth and opportunity that accompany the discovery and extraction of oil and other natural resources, such endowments all too often impede rather than further balanced and sustainable development. On the one hand, the lack of natural resources has not proven to be a fatal barrier to economic success. The star performers of the developing world—the Asian Tigers (Hong Kong, Korea, Singapore, and Taiwan)— all achieved booming export industries based on manufactured goods and rapid economic growth without large natural resource reserves. On the other hand, many natural resource–rich countries have struggled to generate self-sustaining economic takeoff and growth and have even suc- cumbed to deep economic crises (Sachs and Warner 1995). In country after country, natural resources have helped to raise living standards while failing to produce self-sustaining growth. Controlling for structural attri- butes, resource-rich countries grew less rapidly than resource-poor countries during the last quarter of the twentieth century. Alongside these growth failures are strong associations between resource wealth and the likelihood of weak democratic development (Ross 2001), corruption (Sala- i-Martin and Subramanian 2003), and civil war (Humphreys 2005). This generally bleak picture among resource-rich countries nonetheless masks a great degree of variation. Some natural resource–rich countries have performed far better than others in resource wealth management and long-term economic development. Some 30 years ago, Indonesia and Nigeria had comparable per capita incomes and heavy dependencies on oil sales. Yet today, Indonesia’s per capita income is four times that of Nigeria (Ross 2003). A similar discrepancy can be found among countries rich in diamonds and other nonrenewable minerals akin to oil and gas. For instance, in comparing the diamond-rich countries of Sierra Leone and Botswana, one sees that Botswana’s economy has grown at an average rate of 7 percent over the past 20 years while Sierra Leone has plunged into civil strife, its gross domestic product (GDP) per capita actually dropping 37 percent between 1971 and 1989 (World Bank Country Briefs).


http://www.columbia.edu/~mh2245/papers1/erc01.pdf


Examples of countries that did not have the resource curse. BGElena Paltseva and Jesper Roine. (2012) “Are Natural Resources Good or Bad for


At the same time, there are numerous countries that provide counterexamples to this idea. Being the second largest exporter of natural gas and the fifth largest of oil, Norway is one of the richest world economies. Botswana produces 29% of world’s gemstone diamonds and has been one of the fastest growing countries over last 40 years.Australia,Chile,Malaysia are other examples of countries that have performed well, not just despite of their resource wealth, but, to a large extent, due to it.


http://www.indexmundi.com/en/commodities/minerals/diamond_(industrial)/diamond_(industrial)_t5.html

http://www.eia.gov/countries/country-data.cfm?fips=NO



http://freepolicybriefs.org/2011/11/21/are-natural-resources-good-or-bad-for-development/

http://freepolicybriefs.org/2011/11/21/are-natural-resources-good-or-bad-for-development/

http://freepolicybriefs.org/jesper-roine/

http://freepolicybriefs.org/elena-paltseva/

January/February 2014 Neg Counters: Resource Mining Bad

A2- Resource Mining Bad Efficient resource management offsets effects of natural resource mining TF

Jinhua Zhao, David Zilberman (2001). Fixed Costs, Efficient Resource Management, and Conservation. American Journal of Agriculutral Economics 83(4).

This article develops a framework to analyze the impacts on resource development of efficient management practices that account for possible resource conserving technological changes in the future. The impact depends on both the probability and the level of the changes. For many changes, the conventional wisdom is correct: the new management approach, by fully accounting for these possible changes, can conserve the resource by both reducing and delaying resource development. The extensive restoration efforts going on worldwide highlight the overdevelopment cause, in part, by ignoring the new technologies in resource planning. However, when there are significant fixed costs in resource development, the new (and efficient) management approach may not delay or reduce development for some moderate levels of technologies. Further, when this happens, under efficient management, a higher probability of these resource conserving changes may not conserve more resources: it may lead to more and early development.

Resource management solves.


January/February 2014 Neg Counters: High-Pollution Factories

A2- Shut down high pollution factories Shutting down high pollution factories has negative results TF

Stephen Salant (1995). The Economics of Natural Resource Extraction: A Primer for Development Economists. The World Bank Research Observer 10 (1).

Officials who propose shutting down a polluting gold mine or a leaking landfill but who permit a grace period to mitigate the dislocations caused by the closure may aggravate the very problems they seek to solve. Premature closing lowers the opportunity cost of extracting an additional unit before the shutdown. Consequently, the augmented marginal cost in each period before the date of closing is lower than it was before the policy was announced. If the sequence of world prices is unchanged, the polluter will find it profitable to intensify mining throughout the grace period. A similar policy response would occur if the extracted resource were the remaining space in a polluting landfill. Indeed, in the U.S. solid waste industry, the frenzied dumping in landfills during the grace periods preceding mandated closings is quaintly termed "stuffing" (Ley, Macauley, and Salant 1994).

Impact turn.


January/February 2014 Neg Counters: Harms Indigenous People

A2- Harms Indigenous People

Resource extract actually solves any harm to indigenous people. BG David A. Lertzman and Harrie Vredenburg (2005) “Indigenous Peoples, Resource

Extraction and Sustainable Development: An Ethical Approach” Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 56, No. 3, pp. 239-254 http://www.jstor.org/stable/25123429.

Given the numerous examples of conflict between Indigenous peoples and resource extraction indus tries, we consider it instructive to examine[have] a case with positive results. Ours is of the Scientific Panel for Sustainable Forest Practices in Clayoquot Sound, an independent scientific body established to develop sustainable forest practice standards in the coastal temperate rainforests of Clayoquot Sound on the west coast of Vancouver Island, British Columbia, Canada. Its context was one of the most protracted and fervent environmental conflicts in the country, which eventually brought industry to a halt through roadblocks, public demonstrations, and political pressure. Whereas every previous attempt at land-use planning in Clayoquot Sound had failed, the Clayoquot Scientific Panel achieved full con sensus on all its outcomes. This Panel is a precedent setting example of functional dialogue between Indigenous people and Western science based cul ture. Its mandate to draw equally on traditional ecological knowledge of local First Nations as well as Western science is chiefly notable. The Panel was also unprecedented both procedurally and in substance resulting in the formulation of an ecosys tem-based approach to forestry grounded in both traditional knowledge and Western science. This approach was eventually adopted by the major industrial forestry companies operating in the area. Research for the case study involved interviews with Scientific Panel members, review of government press releases and background information supplied to Panel members, and detailed examination of Pa nel reports, in particular their third report, First Nations Perspectives Relating to Forest Practices in Clayoquot Sound.


January/February 2014 Neg Counters: Environmental Impacts

A2- Environmental Impacts No matter what harms comes from environment, humans will survive. BG

Lawrence Powers (2002) “The Chronicle of Higher Education.” Mass extinctions appear to result from major climatic changes or catastrophes, such as asteroid impacts. As far as we know, none has resulted from the activities of a species, regardless of predatory voracity, pathogenicity, or any other interactive attribute. We are the first species with the potential to manipulate global climates and to destroy habitats, perhaps even ecosystems -- therefore [set] setting the stage for a sixth mass extinction. According to Boulter, this event will be an inevitable consequence of a "self-organized Earth-life system." This Gaia-like proposal might account for many of the processes exhibited by biological evolution before man's technological intervention, but ... the rules are now dramatically different. ... Many species may vanish, ... but that doesn't guarantee, unfortunately, that we will be among the missing. While other species go bang in the night, humanity will technologically isolate itself further from the natural world and will rationalize the decrease in biodiversity in the same manner as we have done so far. I fear, that like the fabled cockroaches of the atomic age, we may be one of the last life-forms to succumb, long after the "vast tracts of beauty" that Boulter mourns we will no longer behold vanish before our distant descendants' eyes.


Cases


January/February 2014 Aff Case

Aff Case Resolved: Developing countries should prioritize environmental protection over resource extraction when the two are in conflict. I stand in affirmation of the resolution.

Definitions:

Utilitarianism: The ethical view that the right act is the act that will produce the greatest balance of pleasure over suffering for everyone affected.

[Pearson] http://wps.ablongman.com/long_waller_ce_1/24/6336/1622214.cw/index.html

Observation 1: We must interpret benefit through a global perspective. This directs focus away from case-studies on individual developing countries, which lack global impact.

Value: Societal welfare, as prescribed by the resolution.

Criterion: Implementing nondiscriminatory utilitarianism.

In this debate, utilitarianism is applicable to all life on the planet, thus when considering the greatest amount of good for the greatest number, we must consider the majority in the context of all living flora and fauna. Utilitarianism upholds the idea of a just society through making the conclusive moral decision of providing the greatest amount of good for the greatest number or organisms.

Singer, ’75. http://msgoddard.org/Documents/RM%20Animal%20Research%20Debate.pdfThe answer to these questions lies in the unquestioned acceptance of speciesism. We tolerate cruelties inflicted on members of other species that would outrage us if performed on members of our own species.

In addition, Jeremy Bentham himself, the founder of fundamental utilitarianism stated:

The day may come when the rest of the animal creation may acquire those rights which never could have been withholden from them but by the hand of tyranny. The French have already discovered that the blackness of the skin is no reason why a human being should be abandoned without redress to the caprice of a tormentor. It may one day come to be recognised that the number of the legs, the villosity of the skin, or the termination of the os sacrum, are reasons equally insufficient for abandoning a sensitive being to the same fate. What else is it that should trace the insuperable line? Is it the faculty of reason, or perhaps the faculty of discourse? But a full-grown horse or dog is beyond comparison a more rational, as well as a more conversable animal, than an infant of a day, or a week, or even a month, old. But suppose they were otherwise, what would it avail? The question is not, Can they reason? nor Can they talk? but, Can they suffer?


http://msgoddard.org/Documents/RM%20Animal%20Research%20Debate.pdf

January/February 2014 Aff CaseBentham’s forward looking passage explores an all conclusive utilitarianism. Utilitarianism was meant to be all inclusive.

Thus, through a fundamental, scientific definition of a global society, we ought to include all respective life. Through this consideration of utilitarianism, we can represent the best interests of society.

Contention 1: Human-centered concerns do not uphold non-discriminatory utilitarianism TF

Through evaluating any system through an approach that is human centered is disastrous toward our definition of utilitarianism. By focusing on humans, we are excluding the larger majority of life on the planet. In order to evaluate the priorities of the resolution, we must look at what is best for a non-human centered world. Stability of the biosphere should be our highest moral consideration

Elliott, ’97. Herschel Elliott, Professor of Philosophy at the University of Florida, “A General Statement on the Tragedy of the Commons.” February 26, 1997, ACC. 5/3/2008, http://dieoff.org/page121.htm

Fourth, ecosystems are in dynamic equilibrium. In addition, technology and human institutions are constantly evolving in novel and unpredictable ways. Furthermore, living things must compete with each other for space and resources; yet each organism also depends symbiotically on the well-being of the whole for its own survival and well-being. Indeed the welfare of all organisms -- including human beings -- is causally dependent on the health and stability of the ecosystems which sustain them. As a consequence, the stability and well-being of the Earth's biosystem has moral priority over the welfare of any of its parts -- including the needs and interests of human societies and individuals.

Brisman, ’06. States Avi Brisman, J.D. University of Connecticut, July 4, 2006, New York Law Journal, ACC. 4/8/2008, http://www.law.nyu.edu/journals/envtllaw/issues/vol13/1/v13_n1_brisman.pdf

Social Justice, define environment as “‘the place you work, the place you live, the place you play.’” Unfortunately, Di Chiro continues, “[m]any mainstream environmentalists would find this formulation incomprehensible, even ethically indefensible, because of its apparent anthropocentrism. Putting humans at the center of environmental discourse is a grave error, they argue, because humans are the perpetrators of environmental problems in the first place.” Asserting that wind farms are beautiful because they protect human health runs the risk of a response similar to that offered by the “mainstream environmentalists” Di Chiro describes.

We must prioritize the environment, containing the majority of our world utilitarian society, over the self-centered interests of humans, one of which is the production of energy. Through this method can we achieve utilitarianism.


January/February 2014 Aff CaseContention 2: Production of energy through resource extraction, harms most other living organisms,

adding to the self-centeredness of energy production TF

Thus, the production of energy, primarily in the form of fossil fuels, benefits only humans. The production of energy accounts for a large percentage of CO2 emissions, damaging all other non-human organisms in the world society.

Omer, 2008. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364032107000834#secx2

Over millions of years ago, plants covered the earth, converting the energy of sunlight into living tissue, some of which was buried in the depths of the earth to produce deposits of coal, oil and natural gas. The past few decades, however, have experienced many valuable uses for these complex chemical substances, manufacturing from them plastics, textiles, fertilizer and the various end products of the petrochemical industry. Indeed, each decade sees increasing uses for these products. Renewable energy is the term used to describe a wide range of naturally occurring, replenishing energy sources. Coal, oil and gas, which will certainly be of great value to future generations, as they are to ours, are non-renewable natural resources. The rapid depletion of non-renewable fossil resources need not continue. This is particularly true now as it is, or soon will be, technically and economically feasible to supply all of man's needs from the most abundant energy source of all, the sun. The sunlight is not only inexhaustible, but, moreover, it is the only energy source, which is completely non-polluting.Industry's use of fossil fuels has been blamed for warming the climate. When coal, gas and oil are burnt, they release harmful gases, which trap heat in the atmosphere and cause global warming. However, there has been an ongoing debate on this subject, as scientists have struggled to distinguish between changes, which are human induced, and those, which could be put down to natural climate variability. Nevertheless, industrialised countries have the highest emission levels, and must shoulder the greatest responsibility for global warming. However, action must also be taken by developing countries to avoid future increases in emission levels as their economies develop and populations grows, as clearly captured by the Kyoto Protocol. Notably, human activities that emit carbon dioxide (CO2), the most significant contributor to potential climate change, occur primarily from fossil fuel production. Consequently, efforts to control CO2 emissions could have serious, negative consequences for economic growth, employment, investment, trade and the standard of living of individuals everywhere.The energy conservation scenarios include rational use of energy policies in all economy sectors and the use of combined heat and power systems, which are able to add to energy savings from the autonomous power plants. Electricity from renewable energy sources is by definition the environmental green product. Hence, a renewable energy certificate system, as recommended by the World Summit, is an essential basis for all policy systems, independent of the renewable energy support scheme. It is, therefore, important that all parties involved support the renewable energy certificate system in place if it is to work as planned. Moreover, existing renewable energy technologies (RETs) could play a significant mitigating role, but the economic and political climate will have to change first. Climate change is real. It is happening now, and GHGs produced by human activities are significantly contributing to it. The predicted global temperature increase of between 1.5 and 4.5 °C could lead to potentially catastrophic environmental impacts. These include sea level rise, increased frequency of extreme weather events, floods, droughts, disease migration from various places and possible stalling


January/February 2014 Aff Caseof the Gulf Stream. This has led scientists to argue that climate change issues are not ones that politicians can afford to ignore, and policy makers tend to agree…Growing evidence of environmental problems is due to a combination of several factors since the environmental impact of human activities has grown dramatically because of the sheer increase of world population, consumption, industrial activity, etc. throughout the 1970s most environmental analysis and legal control instruments concentrated on conventional effluent gas pollutants such as SO2, NOx, CO2, particulates, and CO.These fossil fuels impacts affect virtually every living organism to some degree, while epitomizing the undesirable human-centered society. The negative side is linking into these negative impacts, and by hurting the biosphere severely, is also failing to create a just society. A utilitarian society must prioritize these larger, disastrous environmental impacts over the smaller, selfish needs of humans.

Contention 3: Extinction is the impact of prioritizing resource extraction. Only through prioritizing the environment can we solve for these impacts TF.

Climate change leads to mass extinctions

Thomas, ‘03. http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v427/n6970/abs/nature02121.html

Climate change over the past 30 years has produced numerous shifts in the distributions and abundances of species and has been implicated in one species-level extinction. Using projections of species’ distributions for future climate scenarios, we assess extinction risks for sample regions that cover some 20% of the Earth’s terrestrial surface. Exploring three approaches in which the estimated probability of extinction shows a powerlaw relationship with eographical range size, we predict, on the basis of mid-range climate-warming scenarios for 2050, that 15–37% of species in our sample of regions and taxa will be ‘committed to extinction’. When the average of the three methods and two dispersal scenarios is taken, minimal climate-warming scenarios produce lower projections of species committed to extinction (,18%) than mid-range (,24%) and maximum change (,35%) scenarios. These estimates show the importance of rapid implementation of technologies to decrease greenhouse gas emissions and strategies for carbon sequestration.

Wood, ’07. Mary Wood, Professor of Law, Morse Center for Law and Politics Resident Scholar, University of Oregon School of Law, 2007, Boston College Environmental Affairs Law Review, p. 583-584.

If we do nothing to curb carbon emissions, we will commit ourselves to a future that most Americans cannot even imagine. Jim Hansen, the leading climate scientist for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), presents the ten degree Fahrenheit scenario: it will send fifty percent or more species into extinction . That is equivalent to the mass extinction that occurred fifty-five million years ago. In his words, "Life will survive, but it will do so on a transformed planet." A mere five-degree Fahrenheit temperature increase may cause an eighty foot rise in sea level. Hansen points out: "In that case, the United States would lose most East Coast cities: Boston, New York, Philadelphia, Washington, and Miami; indeed, practically the entire state of Florida would be under water. Fifty million people in the U.S. live below that sea level. "' I could go on detailing on how climate crisis will affect the lives of every human on Earth. What I have mentioned is just the tip of the iceberg—a phrase on its way out. British commentator Mark Lynas, au- thor of


January/February 2014 Aff CaseHigh Tide, summarizes the Earth's situation this way: "Let me put it simply: if we go on emitting greenhouse gases at anything like the current rate, most of the surface of the globe will be rendered uninhabitable within the lifetimes of most readers of this article."

The negative’s advocacy is linking into mass extinctions, and the eventual destruction of the biosphere. Not only is this detrimental to our goal of a just society, if there is even a society left, but also does not take in the interests of non-human life in a utilitarian manner. Environmental prioritization solves through taking the interest of the majority and preventing these extinctions.


January/February 2014 Neg Case

Neg Case Resolved: Developing countries should prioritize environmental protection over resource extraction when the two are in conflict. I stand in negation of the resolution.

DefinitionsPrioritize: Determine the order for dealing with (a series of items or tasks) according to their relative importance. [Merriam-Webster] Thus, prioritizing is providing a time-order of events based upon urgency.

Value: Societal welfare, as prescribed by the resolution.

Criterion: Preventing economic collapse. Appudurai. http://publicculture.dukejournals.org/cgi/reprint/2/2/1.pdfThe new global cultural economy has to be seen as a complex, overlapping, disjunctive order, which cannot any longer be understood in terms of existing center-periphery models (even those which might account for multiple centers and peripheries). Nor is it susceptible to simple models of push and pull (in terms of migration theory), or of surpluses and deficits (as in traditional models of balance of trade), or of consumers and producers (as in most neo-Marxist theories of development). Even the most complex and flexible theories of global development which have come out of the Marxist tradition (Amin 1980; Mandel 1978; Wallerstein 1974; Wolf 1982) are inad- equately quirky and have failed to come to terms with what Lash and Uny have called disorganized capitalism (1987). The complexity of the current global economy has to do with certain fundamental disjunctures between economy, culture and politics which we have only begun to theorize.

The world economy’s complexity and importance makes it fundamental to the global society. An economical collapse takes precedent over any other disaster because of its implications for nuclear war, mass extinction, and global disaster.

Unfortunately, that could change if the world economy turns out to be unstable -- incapable of sustaining adequate growth or vulnerable to severe crises. For the moment the dangers are abstract. In 2004 the global economy grew 4.7 percent, economists at Goldman Sachs report. Asia (excluding Japan) grew 8.2 percent; Latin America, 5.6 percent; the United States, 4.4 percent. Global economic growth should average about 4 percent in 2005 and 2006, the Goldman economists predict. Still, the specter of instability lingers.


January/February 2014 Neg CaseGlobal economic integration -- the merging of markets, the mutual dependencies of countries -- has raced well ahead of either political integration or intellectual mastery. We simply don't understand well how the global economy operates. Nor is it clear how countries with diverging interests and shared suspicions will cooperate in a crisis.

The global economy’s instability increases the importance to preserve the world economy and prevent a source from tipping the delicate economic balance. Thus, preventing economic collapse should be our criterion in this round.

Contention 1: Without a focus on resource extraction, a global economic collapse is eminent TF

Korowicz, ’11. http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=ymU3Zt91pU0C&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq=Without+prioritizing+the+production+of+energy,+we+will+face+global+economic+collapse+in+a+short+amount+of+time&ots=RNRRvVF_Oc&sig=jhoQZwiyKgLsIDfYdDLYrwpHaAk#v=onepage&q&f=false

The systems on which we rely for our financial transactions, food, fuel and livelihoods are so interdependent that they are better regarded as facets of a single global system. Maintaining and operating this global system requires a lot of energy and, because the fixed costs of operating it are high, it is only cost-effective if it is run at near full capacity. As a result, if its through put falls because less energy is available, it does not contract in a gentle, controllable manner. Instead, it is subject to catastrophic collapse.Our entire society’s existence and expansion depends heavily on the usage of resources. As the world’s energy needs grows exponentially with a growing population, we must prioritize our resource extraction needs over any other concerns. Economic collapse often happens overnight, and has happened in cases such as WWII Weimar Germany and the U.S. Great Depression. Thus, economic collapse is an immediate, real concern in stagnating or unstable economies and thus takes immediate priority over any long-term environmental concerns.Pecquet, ’02.In short, energy is an economic problem. Of course, energy is a vital economic resource. It is needed for power, transportation, industry, and almost every other human endeavor. It is the lifeblood not only of a modern society, but of any society.Resource extraction’s intrinsic link to the economy means a deprioritization of resource extraction is a deprioritization of the economy and economical collapse.


January/February 2014 Neg Case

In addition, current energy related jobs number in the millions, and further energy investment will only create even more jobs, thus stimulating the economies of many countries around the globe. Energy journalist Robert Bryce estimated global energy expenditures at $5 trillion. [IER, ’10]

Contention 2: Economic decline’s impacts are disastrous TF

Nuclear war results from economic declineMead, ’92. Walter Russell Mead, NPQ’s Board of Advisors, New Perspectives Quarterly,

Summer 1992, p. 30.What if the global economy stagnates-or even shrinks? In the case, we will face a new period of international conflict: South against North, rich against poor, Russia, China, India-these countries with their billions of people and their nuclear weapons will pose a much greater danger to world order than Germany and Japan did in the ‘30s.

Economic downturn causes nuclear warLewis, ’98. Chris Lewis, environmental historian, University of Colorado-Boulder, 1998,

The Coming Age of Scarcity, p. 56Most critics would argue, probably correctly, that instead of allowing underdeveloped countries to withdraw from the global economy and undermine the economies of the developed world, the United States, Europe, Japan, and others will fight neocolonial wars to force these countries to remain within this collapsing global economy. These neocolonial wars will result in mass death, suffering, and even regional nuclear wars. If First World countries choose military confrontation and political repression to maintain the global economy, then we may see mass death and genocide on a global scale that will make the deaths of World War II pale in comparison. However, these neocolonial wars, fought to maintain the developed nations’ economic and political hegemony, will cause the final collapse of our global industrial civilization. These wars will so damage the complex economic and trading networks and squander material, biological, and energy resources that they will undermine the global economy and its ability to support the earth’s 6 to 8 billion people. This would be the worst-case scenario for the collapse of global civilization.

The affirmative links into economic collapse and these negative impacts. The consequences of nuclear war implicate a disastrous future for all life and the planet itself, thus making economic collapse of utmost importance to prevent.


file · Web

Documents

Transcript of file · Web