Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
This article was downloaded by: [Monash University Library]On: 26 November 2014, At: 03:00Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH,UK
Capitalism Nature SocialismPublication details, including instructions for authorsand subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rcns20
Ecological Modernization andEco-Marxist Perspectives:Globalization and Gold MiningDevelopment in TurkeyNahide KonakPublished online: 28 Nov 2008.
To cite this article: Nahide Konak (2008) Ecological Modernization and Eco-MarxistPerspectives: Globalization and Gold Mining Development in Turkey, Capitalism NatureSocialism, 19:4, 107-130, DOI: 10.1080/10455750802571264
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10455750802571264
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all theinformation (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform.However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, orsuitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressedin this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not theviews of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content shouldnot be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions,claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilitieswhatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connectionwith, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes.Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly
forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Mon
ash
Uni
vers
ity L
ibra
ry]
at 0
3:00
26
Nov
embe
r 20
14
THEORY AND PRACTICE
Ecological Modernization and Eco-MarxistPerspectives: Globalization and Gold Mining
Development in Turkey
Nahide Konak
Introduction
Within environmental sociology, one of the central debates is between theecological modernization perspective and the eco-Marxist perspective.1 Boththeoretical perspectives have dealt with the environmental implications of globaliza-tion. While Mol (2002) examined the consequences of globalization for ecologicalmodernization studies,2 eco-Marxist treadmill theorists3 maintain that there has beenlittle systematic application of the treadmill logic to analyses of globalization.4
Both perspectives offer persuasive and internally consistent arguments; however,the use of more empirical cases is necessary to critically evaluate their claims and
1Frederick Buttel, ‘‘The Treadmill of Production: An Appreciation, Assessment and Agenda for Research,’’
Organization & Environment, Vol. 17, No. 3, 2002, pp. 323�336; Kenneth A. Gould, David N. Pellow and
Allan Schnaiberg, ‘‘Interrogating the Treadmill of Production: Everything You Wanted to Know about the
Treadmill but Were Afraid to Ask,’’ Organization & Environment, Vol. 17, No. 3, 2004, pp. 296�313; Arthur
P.J. Mol and Gert Spaargaren, ‘‘Ecological Modernization Theory in Debate: A Review,’’ in Arthur P.J. Mol
and David A. Sonnenfeld (eds.), Ecological Modernization Around the World (London: Frank Cass, 2000), pp.
17�49; David A. Sonnenfeld, ‘‘Contradictions in Ecological Modernization: Pulp and Paper Manufacturing in
Southeast Asia,’’ in Mol and Sonnenfeld ibid., pp. 235�256; Richard York, ‘‘The Treadmill of (Diversifying)
Production,’’ Organization & Environment, Vol. 17, No. 3, 2004, pp. 355�362; Richard York and Rosa
Eugene, ‘‘Key Challenges to Ecological Modernization Theory,’’ Organization & Environment, Vol. 16, No. 3,
2003, pp. 273�288.2Arthur P.J. Mol, ‘‘Ecological Modernization and the Global Economy,’’ Global Environmental Politics, Vol. 2,
No. 2, 2002, pp. 92�115.3Treadmill theorists hold that ecological problems emerge from a treadmill of production that was created in
response to the strong drive to expand production and markets. See Allan Schnaiberg, ‘‘Draft for the second
edition of the Handbook of Economic Sociology,’’ online at: http://www.sociology.northwestern.edu/faculty/
schnaiberg/documents/22.ECONOMYYENVIRONMENT.pdf.4Allan Schnaiberg and Kenneth A. Gould, Environment and Society: The Enduring Conflict (West Caldwell, NJ:
Blackburn Press, 2000).
ISSN 1045-5752 print=ISSN 1548-3290 online=08=040107-24
# 2008 The Center for Political Ecology www.cnsjournal.org
DOI: 10.1080=10455750802571264
CAPITALISM NATURE SOCIALISM VOLUME 19 NUMBER 4 (DECEMBER 2008)
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Mon
ash
Uni
vers
ity L
ibra
ry]
at 0
3:00
26
Nov
embe
r 20
14
assumptions. In this regard, cyanide-leach mining at the Ovacik mine in Turkeyoffers an excellent opportunity.
Since the 1980s, many countries have adopted policies of economic liberal-ization in order to attract foreign investment. Gill conceptualizes these policies as‘‘disciplinary neoliberalism,’’ in which a discourse of political economy endorses thepower of capital through the extension and deepening of market values anddisciplines in social life.5 Of course, the global extension and deepening ofdisciplinary neoliberalism does not take place automatically. Rather, disciplinaryneoliberalism involves political and legal reforms of constitutions, laws, propertyrights, and various institutional arrangements by nation-states.6 For example, since1985 more than 90 countries have adopted new mining laws or revised existing legalcodes in an effort to attract foreign investment in the mining sector of theireconomies.7 Bridge examines how neoliberal policy reforms in the developing worldhave driven changes in the geography of primary sector (i.e., extractive) activitiesglobally and analyzes new data on direct investment in the international miningindustry.8 The adoption of neoliberal globalization policies in Turkey has increasedgold mining there by international companies since the 1980s. Cyanide-leach goldmining carries tremendous social and environmental risks in the form of water, air,and land pollution, adverse human health impacts, depletion and degradation ofnatural resources, and the loss of biodiversity, to name a few.9 According to the U.S.EPA Toxics Release Inventory for 2001, the mining industry is the largest source oftoxic releases in the U.S.10 The toxic threat of an ecologically unsustainabledevelopment project triggered the environmental conflict in Bergama during the1990s and resulted in struggles by various civil society groups in Turkey.
The main purpose of this article is to critically evaluate the claims andassumptions of ecological modernization and eco-Marxist perspectives throughanalyzing the gold-mining conflict in Turkey in the age of globalization. The
5Stephen Gill, ‘‘Globalization, Market Civilization, and Disciplinary Neoliberalism,’’ Millennium, Vol. 23, No.
3, 1995, pp. 399�423.6Ibid.7J. Otto, ‘‘A National Mineral Policy as a Regulatory Tool,’’ Resources Policy, Vol. 23, No. 1/2, June 1997, pp.
1�8; A. Warhurst, and Gavin Bridge, ‘‘Economic Liberalization, Innovation, and Technology Transfer:
Opportunities for Cleaner Production in the Minerals Industry,’’ Natural Resources Forum, Vol. 21, No. 1,
1997, pp. 1�12; K.F. Naito, K.F. Remy, and J. Williams, Review of Legal and Fiscal Frameworks for Explorationand Mining (London: Mining Journal Books, 2001.)8Gavin Bridge, ‘‘Mapping the Bonanza: Geographies of Mining Investment in an Era of Neoliberal Reform,’’
The Professional Geographer, Vol. 56, No. 3, 2004, pp. 406�421.9Robert E. Moran, ‘‘De-coding Cyanide: An Assesment of Gaps in Cyanide Regulation at Mines,’’ A
Submission to the European Union and the United Nations Environment Program, sponsored by Hellenic
Mining Watch, Ecotopia, CEE Bankwatch, FOE Europe, FOE Hungary, FOE Czech Republic, Food First
Information and Action Network (FIAN), MineWatch U.K., and Mineral Policy Center, 2002, published
online at: http://www.earthworksaction.org/publications.cfm?pubID�79; Carlos D. Da Rosa, James S. Lyon,
and Philip M. Hocker, Golden Dreams, Poisoned Streams: How Reckless Mining Pollutes America’s Water, andHow We Can Stop It (Washington: Mineral Policy Center, 1997).10U.S. EPA, Toxic Release Inventory, 2001, published online at: http://www.epa.gov/tri/.
108 NAHIDE KONAK
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Mon
ash
Uni
vers
ity L
ibra
ry]
at 0
3:00
26
Nov
embe
r 20
14
ecological modernization theory is useful in analyzing the institutionalization ofenvironmental policies and regulations in Turkey in relation to European Union(E.U.) integration. However, it falls short in terms of analyzing the outcomes of theenvironmental policy conflict among the Turkish state, private companies, and civilsociety. An eco-Marxist perspective is more useful in critically assessing specificstruggles, such as the environmental conflict in the Ovacik gold mine case.
Ecological Modernization versus Eco-Marxist Perspectives
‘‘Ecological modernization’’ is a relatively new concept, developed in the early1980s by German sociologist, Joseph Huber.11 Ecological modernization theoryaims to ‘‘analyze how contemporary industrialized societies deal with environmentalcrises.’’12 It focuses on (existing and programmed) environmental reforms in socialpractices, institutional designs, and societal and policy discourses to safeguardsocieties’ sustenance bases.13 It analyzes the environmental origins and environmentalconsequences of social change. One of the core premises of ecological modernizationtheory is that ecological interests and criteria are slowly but steadily catching up witheconomic criteria in organizing and designing global production and consumption.
Historically, the theory developed in three consecutive stages. The first stage,lasting until the late 1980s, placed emphasis on technological innovations to bringabout environmental reforms. In the second stage, from the late 1980s to the mid-1990s, focus shifted from a determinist technology perspective to the synergybetween the market and the state, and the role of human agency, institutions, andculture in environmental reforms.14 In the third stage, from the mid-1990s to thepresent, the theory has been applied to non-European nations, increasing its focus onchanging global dynamics.15
One of its leading theorists, Mol, states that ‘‘the ecological modernizationtheory focuses on the growing independence, ‘emancipation,’ or empowerment ofthe ecological perspective or sphere from the basic three analytical spheres orperspectives in modern society: political, economic, and socio-ideological orsocietal.’’16 Mol argues that in the economic domain, ecological rationality has
11Gert Spaargaren and Arthur P.J. Mol, ‘‘Sociology, Environment and Modernity: Ecological Modernization as
a Theory of Social Change,’’ Society and Natural Resources,’’ Vol. 5, No. 4, 1992, pp. 323�344; Arthur P.J. Mol,
The Refinement of Production: Ecological Modernization Theory and the Chemical Industry (Utrecht: Jan van
Arkel/International Books, 1995); M.A. Hajer, The Politics of Environmental Discourse: Ecological Modernizationand Policy Process (Oxford: Clarendon, 1995).12Mol and Sonnenfeld, 2000, op. cit., p. 5.13Ibid., pp. 5�6.14Arthur P.J. Mol, Globalization and Environmental Reforms: The Ecological Modernization of the GlobalEconomy (Cambridge, MA and London: MIT Press, 2001), pp. 57�58.15Ibid., p. 58; Gert Spaargaren, Arthur P.J. Mol and Frederick H. Buttel, (eds.), Environment and GlobalModernity (Thousand Oaks, CA, London, and New Delhi: Sage Publications, 2000), p. 5.16Mol, 1995, op. cit., p. 64; Mol, 2001 op. cit., p. 222; Mol, 2002, op. cit., p. 93.
ECOLOGICAL MODERNIZATION/ECO-MARXIST PERSPECTIVES 109
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Mon
ash
Uni
vers
ity L
ibra
ry]
at 0
3:00
26
Nov
embe
r 20
14
begun to challenge the dominant economic rationality.17 Proponents of this theoryconsider:
. . . capitalism neither as an essential precondition for, nor as the key obstructionto, stringent or radical environmental reform. They rather focus on redirectingand transforming ‘‘free market capitalism’’ in such a way that it less and less
obstructs, and increasingly contributes to, the preservation of society’s sustenancebase in a fundamental/structural way.18
Ecological modernization proponents argue that modern economic institutions andmechanisms can be reformed and transformed according to the criteria of ecologicalrationality. These transformations are grouped in four clusters:
. First, modern science and technology are not evaluated for their role in causingenvironmental problems but instead are valued for their actual and potential rolein curing and preventing them.19 From this point of view, science andtechnology should not be viewed as the problem but should be seen as a meansto solve environmental problems. Modern science and technology are seen asprinciple institutions in ‘‘ecologizing’’ the economy.
. Second, attention is paid to the ‘‘increasing importance of market dynamics andeconomic agents . . . as carriers of ecological restructuring and reform.’’20
Procedures, credit institutions, insurance companies, the utility sector, andbusiness associations are said to increasingly turn into social carriers of ecologicalrestructuring, innovation, and reform (along with state agencies and new socialmovements).21
. Third, political modernization is hypothesized to be taking place where thestructure and the function of the nation-state is changing from one that isexclusive, centralized, and bureaucratic to one that is more decentralized,flexible, inclusive, and participatory. Supranational organizations such as theWorld Bank, World Trade Organization (WTO), International Monetary Fund(IMF), and the United Nations have been increasingly involving themselves invarious forms of policy formations, which Mol and Sonnenfeld say ‘‘underminesthe nation-state’s traditional role in environmental reform.’’22 Mol argues thatinstitutions such as the E.U. and NAFTA. ‘‘are probably of greater relevance forthe future taming of transnational capitalism.’’23
17Ibid., p. 94.18Mol and Spaargaren, 2000, op. cit., p. 23.19Mol, 2001, op. cit., p. 61.20Mol and Sonnenfeld, 2000, op. cit., p. 6.21Mol, 2001, op. cit., p. 61.22Mol and Sonnenfeld, 2000, op. cit., pp. 6�7; Mol, 2001, op. cit., p. 62.23Mol, 2002, op. cit., p. 99.
110 NAHIDE KONAK
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Mon
ash
Uni
vers
ity L
ibra
ry]
at 0
3:00
26
Nov
embe
r 20
14
. Fourth, ecological modernization proponents maintain that global social move-ments have been increasingly involved in public and private decision-makinginstitutions (within the state and the market) regarding environmental reforms, incontrast to having been limited to the periphery or even being outside of suchprocesses and institutions in the 1970s and 1980s.24 They see social movementsplaying a central role in the environmental transformation of contemporarysociety in collaboration with government agencies and business firms.
Eco-Marxist Perspective
According to this perspective, the origin of environmental problems is located inthe political economy of advanced capitalist societies. Capitalist economies behavelike a ‘‘treadmill of production’’ that continuously creates ecological harm through aself-reinforcing mechanism of increasing rates of production and consumption. The‘‘treadmill of production’’ concept holds that modern capitalism and the modernstate display a fundamental logic of promoting economic growth and private capitalaccumulation. The imperatives of a capitalist economic system (i.e. profitmaximization and competition) push human societies to increasingly extractresources (withdrawals) and to deposit wastes and by-products (additions). Stateagencies and officials prefer economic growth both to ensure tax revenues andenhance officials’ likelihood of re-election.25 Thus, the role of the state in capitalistsociety is to facilitate the conditions for capital growth. The treadmill of productionis directly linked to the ecological crisis, since economic growth and accumulationrequire natural resource extraction, which contributes to pollution. The key claim isthat capital-intensive economic expansion is intrinsic to capitalist market societiesbecause of the structure of the economy and the role of the state. Furthermore,capital-intensive economic expansion has an intrinsic tendency toward environ-mental degradation.
Eco-Marxists reject the notion that capitalism can somehow be reformed onecological lines, as ecological modernization suggests.26 Rather, they hold that thelogic of capitalist production inevitably results in environmental degradation, sinceproduction necessitates the appropriation of nature. At the same time, the uncheckeduse of raw materials and resultant pollution can undermine the biophysical basis ofproduction itself as capitalism treats nature as a free good. This argument is the‘‘second contradiction of capitalism’’ thesis formulated by James O’Connor.27
‘‘Capitalism [is] a crisis-ridden system . . . that combine[s the] power of capitalist
24Mol and Sonnenfeld, 2000, op. cit., p. 7; Mol, 2001, op. cit., p. 62; Mol, 2002, op. cit., pp. 106�109.25James O’Connor, Natural Causes: Essays in Ecological Marxism (New York and London: Guilford Press,
1998); Allan Schnaiberg, The Environment: From Surplus to Scarcity (New York: Oxford University Press,
1980); Allan Schnaiberg and Ken Gould, Environment and Society: The Enduring Conflict (New York: St.
Martin’s Press, 1994).26D. Goldblatt, Social Theory and Environment (Oxford: Polity Press, 1996); James O’Connor, ‘‘Is Sustainable
Capitalism Possible?’’ in Martin O’Connor (ed.), Is Capitalism Sustainable? (New York: Guilford, 1994).27O’Connor, 1998, op. cit.
ECOLOGICAL MODERNIZATION/ECO-MARXIST PERSPECTIVES 111
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Mon
ash
Uni
vers
ity L
ibra
ry]
at 0
3:00
26
Nov
embe
r 20
14
production relations and productive forces [which] self-destruct by impairing ordestroying rather than reproducing their own conditions.’’28
Eco-Marxist theorists also doubt that technology and science will solveenvironmental problems in the long run. O’Connor points out that the history ofindustrial capitalism shows that ‘‘technologies have been chosen on the basis of theireffects on costs and sales, not on the environment.’’29
Treadmill theorists30 have begun to reconsider the notion of a treadmill ofproduction within the context of globalization and the transition to post-Fordism.They assert that in the age of globalization with its increase in the mobility of financialand industrial capital, a ‘‘transnational treadmill’’ has emerged. They contend that‘‘transnational treadmill market actors’’ predominate over ‘‘national institutions of thenation-state, and its society.’’ They argue that neoliberal policies of economicglobalization have allowed not only the movement of capital and technology, butalso the transformation of social and environmental costs to non-Western societies.31
Eco-Marxist theorists posit that globalization also reinforces national treadmills ofproduction, and thus contributes to the global ecological crisis.32
Ecological Modernization: The European Union, Turkey’s Candidacy, andEnvironmental Policy
On August 9, 1949, Turkey became a member of the Council of Europe,which was the first European intergovernmental organization. The Council ofEurope has close to 200 European treaties or conventions, including the EuropeanConvention for Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the EuropeanConvention for the Prevention of Torture, and the Framework Convention forthe Protection of National Minorities. The Convention formed three institutions,all of which have supranational powers that Turkey accepted. These are theEuropean Commission of Human Rights, the European Court of Human Rights(ECHR), and the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe.33 Turkeyratified Article 25 of the European Convention on Human Rights andFundamental Freedoms and recognized the right of individual petition in 1987,which gives individuals the right to petition the European Commission of Human
28Ibid., p. 165.29Ibid., p. 204.30A. Schnaiberg and K.A. Gould, 2000, op. cit.31Ibid.; O’Connor, 1998, op. cit.32Allan Schnaiberg, Adam Weinberg, and David Pellow, ‘‘The Treadmill of Production and the Environmental
State,’’ in Arthur P.J. Mol and Fredrick H. Buttel (eds.), The Environmental State Under Pressure (London/JAI:
Elsevier, 2002); O’Connor, 1998, op. cit.; Peter Dickens, ‘‘Beyond Sociology: Marxism and the Environment,’’
in M. Redclift and G. Woodgate (eds.), The International Handbook of Environmental Sociology (Cheltenham/
Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar, 1998), pp. 179�192; Ted Benton, Natural Relations (London: Verso, 1993).33Ayse Betul Celik, ‘‘Transnationalization of Human Rights Norms and Its Impact on Internally Displaced
Kurds,’’ Human Rights Quarterly, Vol. 25, 2005, p. 984.
112 NAHIDE KONAK
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Mon
ash
Uni
vers
ity L
ibra
ry]
at 0
3:00
26
Nov
embe
r 20
14
Rights after domestic resources are exhausted.34 There have been about 1,500petitions from Turkey to the European Commission of Human Rights, includingone regarding the Ovacik gold mine case.35
For years, Turkey has sought membership in the E.U. On September 12,1963, Turkey signed an Association Agreement, the Ankara Treaty, with theEuropean Community (E.C.) and became an associate member. On April 14,1987, Turkey applied for full membership to the E.C.36 Ten years later at the1997 Luxembourg Summit, the European Council decided not to include Turkeyamong the list of candidate countries nor start accession negotiations. In March1998, the Commission prepared a European Strategy for Turkey, and the Counciladopted it in June 1998. Turkey then approved the pre-accession criteria that theEuropean Union had adopted at the Copenhagen European Council of June 1993.Finally, the E.U. granted the desired candidacy status to Turkey in Helsinki inDecember 1999. On November 8, 2000, the European Commission approved anAccession Partnership Document for Turkey, which was adopted by the Councilon March 8, 2001. Turkey then adopted its National Program for the Adoption ofthe acquis (the body of E.U. law and regulations) on March 19, 2001. In theCopenhagen summit of December 2002, E.U. leaders agreed to review Turkey’scandidacy based on its ability to meet the political aspects of the Copenhagencriteria. The E.U. has thus far denied Turkey entry, citing human rights violationsand the lack of ‘‘true’’ democracy.37 However, negotiations for membership beganbetween the E.U. and Turkey in October 2005, and they are expected to last for atleast a decade.
Ecological modernization provides the framework within which the E.U. notonly frames and tackles its environmental problems but also marries economicgrowth to its environmental protection policies.38 Ecological modernization requiresthe integration of environmental policy into other areas of governmental action, suchas economic activity, reform of the tax system along ecological lines, taxingexploitation of environmental resources, and the development of clean technology.
34Ibid., pp. 984�985.35E.U. Regular Report on Turkey 2004, published online at: http://ec.europa.eu/comm/enlargement/report
_2004/pdf/rr_tr_2004_en.pdf.36OECD, OECD and Environment (Paris: Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, 1999).37E.U. Regular Report on Turkey, 1998, published online at: http://ec.europa.eu/comm/enlargement/report
_11_98/pdf/en/turkey_en.pdf; 1999, published online at: http://ec.europa.eu/ comm/enlargement/report
10_99/pdf/en/turkey _en.pdf; 2000, published online at: http://ec.europa.eu/comm/enlargement/
report_11_00/pdf/en/tu_en.pdf; 2001, published online at: http://ec.europa.eu/comm/enlargement/
report2001/tu_en.pdf; 2002, published online at: http://ec.europa.eu/comm/enlargement/report2002/
tu_en.pdf; 2003, published online at: http://ec.europa.eu/comm/enlargement/report_2003/pdf/rr_tk_final.pdf.38Susan Baker, ‘‘The European Union: Integration, Competitions, Growth and Sustainability,’’ in W.M. Laerty
and J. Meadowcroft (eds.), Implementing Sustainable Development: Strategies and Initiative in High ConsumptionSocieties (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000), pp. 303�421.
ECOLOGICAL MODERNIZATION/ECO-MARXIST PERSPECTIVES 113
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Mon
ash
Uni
vers
ity L
ibra
ry]
at 0
3:00
26
Nov
embe
r 20
14
The E.U. has been initiating these policy developments, and member and candidatecountries have been adopting them.39
As Roggeband and Verloo40 indicate, the structure of policy-making within theE.U. has changed the nature of policy-making in Turkey. Thus, the E.U. set largeportions of Turkey’s policy agendas in several areas. For example, Turkey integratedenvironmental concerns into its development policy. The preface of the TurkishNational Environmental Action Plan (NEAP), prepared in 1995, states that:
In order to achieve the country’s environmental objectives, the NEAP (i)proposes a number of actions for developing an effective environmental
management system; (ii) emphasizes the need for enhancing environmentalinformation and awareness; (iii) includes a set of new investment proposals ondifferent thematic areas; (iv) builds the first steps to adopt E.U. environmental
standards and regulations at a feasible pace for integration with the E.U. in thelong term.41
The Turkish national environmental policy, which was articulated in the SeventhFive-Year Development Plan (1996�2000), emphasized protection and improvementof the environment with emphasis on pollution prevention rather than clean-up, thepolluter pays principle, and ensuring that environmental policies are in accordancewith E.U. norms and international standards.42
Turkey’s desire to become a member of the E.U. has also played an importantrole in the recent rapid development of environmental regulations and legislationwithin the country. Turkey ratified various environmental conventions, treaties,agreements, declarations, and protocols, and to some extent, modified its nationalenvironmental policies accordingly.43 By 1997, the country had become party to38 conventions, signed 29 declarations, and enacted 15 bilateral agreements onenvironmental protection and management, which, according to the Constitution,
39Andrew Jordan and Duncan Liefferink, Environmental Policy in Europe: The Europeanization of EnvironmentalPolicy in Europe (London: Routledge, 2004); Christoph Knill, The Europeanization of National Administrations:Pattern of Institutional Change and Persistence (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001); Ecotech,
‘‘Administrative Capacity for Implementation and Enforcement of E.U. Environmental Policy in the 13
Candidate Countries,’’ Birmingham, U.K, 2001; Miranda Schreurs, ‘‘Environmental Protection in an
Expanding European Community: Lessons from Past Accessions,’’ Environmental Politics, Vol. 13, No.1, 2004,
pp. 27�51.40Conny Roggeband and Mieke Verloo, ‘‘Global Sisterhood and Political Change: The Unhappy ‘Marriage’ of
Women’s Movements and National States,’’ in Kees van Kersbergen, Robert H. Lieshout, and Grahame Lock
(eds.), Extension and Fragmentation: Internationalization, Political Change and the Transformation of the NationState (Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 1999), pp. 177�194.41DPT-NEAP, 1998, published online at: http://ekutup.dpt.gov.tr/cevre/eylempla/neap.html.42Seventh Five-Year Development Plan, Turkey (1996�2000), published online at: http://ekutup.dpt.gov.tr/
plan/vii/ing.html.43R. Kele, R. and C. Hamamci, Cevrebilim. (Ankara: Imge, 1993); OECD, 1999, op. cit.; Tu rk-AT MevzuatUyumu Su rekli O zel Ihtisas Komisyonu, Cevre Alt Komisyonu Raporu (Ankara: DPT, 1997).
114 NAHIDE KONAK
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Mon
ash
Uni
vers
ity L
ibra
ry]
at 0
3:00
26
Nov
embe
r 20
14
have the ‘‘effect of law.’’ Since then, Turkey has continued to work on making itsenvironmental regulations compatible with environmental regulations of the E.U.44
As laid out in the Copenhagen criteria, candidate states need to meet accessioncriteria and adopt the bulk of E.U. legislation in the areas of human rights,democratization, economic conditions, and environment through approximation,transportation, and adoption of the acquis. ‘‘Under the Treaty, all the newmembers of the E.U. must comply with the full . . . (body of European communitylaw), including all environmental directives and regulations.’’45 According to theE.U. 2003 regular report on Turkey’s progress toward accession, some of thepreconditions for its full membership are that it strengthen its approach toenvironmental issues, increase democratization, and improve its human rightsrecord, with special emphasis on making structural and legal adjustments in theseareas.46 As a formal candidate for membership in the E.U., Turkey’s environ-mental, human rights, and democratization records have come under heavyscrutiny.
Certainly, passing environmental laws and adopting regulations compatible withE.U. environmental regulations is only the first step. Implementing and enforcingthem are also important. Yet, so far, the implementation of such environmental lawshas been extremely ineffective.47 The adoption of an economic development planpredicated upon cyanide-leach gold mining and recent neoliberal policies are inreality contradictory to Turkey’s stated environmental goals. The E.U. RegularReport on Turkey48 points out this contradiction:
Despite the adoption of a number of regulations on nature protection, legalharmonization remains low. A framework law on nature protection and
implementing legislation transposing the provisions of the birds and habitatsacquis needs to be adopted. Steps need to be taken to ensure implementation.Legislative changes foreseen regarding Natural Heritage and a new Mining Law
may seriously hamper progress on nature protection.
44Rana Izci, ‘‘The Impact of the European Union on Environmental Policy,’’ in Fikret Adaman and Murat
Arsel (eds.), Environmentalism in Turkey: Between Democracy and Development (Burlington: Ashgate, 2005), pp.
87�100; Profile, ‘‘Turkiye AB Iliskileri Ortakliktan Tam Uyelige,’’ Ankara, EKO Avrupa Ekonomik DanismaMerkezi, 2001, p. 208; Ahmet Sandal, ‘‘Avrupa Birligine Girme Surecinde Cevre Yonetimi Alaninda
Gerceklestirilmesi Gereken Reformlar,’’ Ankara, Yerel Yonetim ve Denetim Dergisi, Vol. 3, 2001, pp. 52�60;
Nuran Talu, ‘‘Avrupa Birligi Cevre Politikasi ve Turkiye,’’ Ankara, Yeni Turkiye Dergisi, Cevre Ozel Sayisi,2000, p. 1071.45Regina S. Alexrod and Norman J. Vig, ‘‘The European Union as an Environmental Governance System,’’ in
Norman J. Vig and Regina S. Axelrod (eds.), The Global Environment: Institutions, Law, and Policy(Washington, D.C.: CQ Press, 1999), pp. 72�97.46E.U. Regular Report on Turkey, 2003, op. cit.47Zulkuf Aydin, ‘‘The State, Civil Society, and Environmentalism,’’ in Fikret Adaman and Murat Arsel (eds.),
Environmentalism in Turkey: Between Democracy and Development, op. cit., p. 64.48E.U. Regular Report on Turkey, 2003 op. cit., p. 107.
ECOLOGICAL MODERNIZATION/ECO-MARXIST PERSPECTIVES 115
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Mon
ash
Uni
vers
ity L
ibra
ry]
at 0
3:00
26
Nov
embe
r 20
14
According to the E.U., the problem lies in the Turkish state’s incompleteadoption of E.U. standards of regulation and enforcement. But, in reality, as the eco-Marxist perspective argues, the root causes of the problem lie in the contradictionbetween capitalist economic growth and environmental protection, and the state’sprimary role in producing conditions for capital accumulation.49 Thus, the adoptionof these E.U. environmental regulations by Turkey is merely symbolic50 in the sensethat they have had no real power to prevent the movement of environmentally riskycyanide-leach gold mining to Turkey.
The ecological modernization contention that environmental problems can be,and indeed have been, addressed through the structures and processes of modernityhas been strongly criticized by European scholars,51 who argue that the empiricalbasis of the modernization theory*that is, the extent to which European states orindustrial sectors have undergone ecological modernization*remains open.52 Inother words, they point out that ecological modernization theory is inconsistent withthe reality on the ground, since the ecological crisis continues to get worse, even inEuropean countries.
Neoliberal Economic Globalization and Gold Mining: Transfer of ToxicTechnology to Turkey
As with many developing countries, since the 1980s Turkey has adoptedneoliberal export-oriented development policies in the hope of attracting economicdevelopment. Export-oriented industrialization is defined as a type of ‘‘industrializa-tion promoted by transnational firms and their subsidiaries for the manufacture ofconsumer goods for export to markets primarily in the advanced countries.’’53 Theworldwide promotion of export-oriented industrialization has resulted in competi-tion among countries to attract foreign direct investment (FDI). Developingcountries have thus been encouraged with money and assistance from the IMFand World Bank with the aim of subverting nationalist economic developmentmodels. Turkey’s adoption of neoliberal economic policies attracted the globalmining industry54 at a time when disincentives in developed countries*especiallythe U.S., Australia, and Canada*encouraged the mining sector to move intodeveloping countries. These disincentives included the rise of strong environmentalmovements against environmental problems, the exhaustion of high tenor mining
49O’Connor, 1998, op. cit.50Baker, 2007, op. cit.51I. Bluhdorn, Post-ecologist Politics: Social Theory and the Abdication of the Ecologist Paradigm (London:
Routledge, 2000); N. Luhmann, Ecological Communication (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1989).52Baker, 2007, op. cit.53Berch Berberoglu, The Political Economy of Development: Development Theory and the Prospects For Change inthe Third World (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1992), p. 52.54Tahir Ongor, ‘‘Globalization and Mining Laws,’’ presented at the Conference on Globalization and Mining
Laws, Istanbul Technical University, January 13, 2003.
116 NAHIDE KONAK
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Mon
ash
Uni
vers
ity L
ibra
ry]
at 0
3:00
26
Nov
embe
r 20
14
ore, a decrease in the price of metals during the 1980s,55 and strengtheningenvironmental policy (at least until 2001.)56 Mining companies have moved toSouth America, Africa, and South and Central Asia.57 Roger Moody noted that state-owned mining assets ‘‘are being offered for sale under ‘free market’ privatization’’and that ‘‘under pressure from the IMF and the World Bank, more that 70 countrieshave changed their mining laws to make them more attractive to foreigninvestment.’’58
Before 1980, mining in Turkey was under the control of state institutions(namely, the General Directorate of Mineral Research and Exploration, andEtibank), as articulated in article 168 of the 1982 Constitution of the Republic ofTurkey. This article reads as follows:
Natural wealth and resources shall be placed under the control of, and put at thedisposal of the state. The right to explore and exploit resources belongs to thestate. The state may delegate this right to individuals or public corporations forspecific periods. Of the natural wealth and resources, those to be explored and
exploited by the state in partnership with individuals or public corporations, andthose to be directly explored and exploited by individuals or public corporationsshall be subject to the explicit permission of the law.59
As an extension of liberalization policies, mining Law 3213 of 198560 grantednumerous privileges to domestic and foreign capital. Moreover, in 1994 miningwas privatized by Article 3996. This meant that with the transition to a ‘‘free-market’’ economy, the state can now grant mineral rights to foreign companieswith up to 100 percent foreign ownership as long as the foreign companies areregistered in accordance with the laws and regulations of Turkey. The changes inlaws and privatization policies began in the 1980s, and since then the foreigndirect investment in mining*especially gold mining*has increased. As a result,many multinational corporations, such as Eurogold, Camino, and Tuprag, havecome to develop natural resources in Turkey.61 Multinational corporationsinterested in searching for gold were given authorizations for 560 different sites
55M.R. Auty, ‘‘The Geopolitics of Mineral Resources,’’ Mining, Environment and Development Series No.1,
UNCTAD, published online at: http://www.naturalresources.org/minerals/CD/docs/unctad/auty.pdf; P.
Crowson, ‘‘Mining Industry Profitability?’’ Resource Policy, Vol. 27, 2001, pp. 133�142.56Al Gedicks, Resource Rebels: Native Challenges to Mining and Oil Corporations (Boston: South End Press,
2001); Ongor, 2003, op. cit.57Ongor, ibid.58Roger Moody, ‘‘Mining the World: the Global Reach of Rio Tinto Zinc,’’ The Ecologist, Vol. 26, No. 2,
1996, p. 46.59The Constitution of the Republic of Turkey, published online at: http://www.byegm.gov.tr/mevzuat/
anayasa/anayasa-ing.htm.60Published online at: http://www.wmcturk.org.tr/Mining%20in%Turkey_dosyalar/minerals.61Sefa Taskin, Siyanu rcu Ahtapot (Istanbul: Sel Yayincilik, 1998).
ECOLOGICAL MODERNIZATION/ECO-MARXIST PERSPECTIVES 117
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Mon
ash
Uni
vers
ity L
ibra
ry]
at 0
3:00
26
Nov
embe
r 20
14
in Turkey.62 Currently, 88 foreign companies from various countries areregistered for mining,63 nine specifically for gold explorations.64
The Ovacik gold mine in Bergama, run by the Turkish subsidiary ofNormandy Mining, Ltd. of Australia, is the first gold mine in Turkey to usecyanide-leach technology in its production process. The Eurogold/Normandy firmregistered in 1989 for gold reserve prospecting. Following the discovery of theOvacik gold deposit, applications for an operating permit were registered withthe Turkish Ministry of Energy and Natural Resources,65 which granted theenvironmental permit in 1994. The construction of the process plant, tailingspond, and associated infrastructure was initiated in 1996 and completed at theend of 1997.66 However, the mine was not fully commissioned until June 2001,mainly due to grassroots environmental resistance. In June 2001, Turkish officialsgranted a permit to the firm to begin ‘‘trial production,’’ and the mine has beenoperating since. The Ovacik gold mine is located in a heavily populated areaclose to seventeen villages that includes fertile soil and historical and culturalartifacts.
Role of Social Movements in Taming Global Capitalism and Protecting theEnvironment: The Bergama Environmental Movement
Throughout the 1990s, as Eurogold/Normandy tried to obtain permits fromthe Turkish government, a grassroots environmental effort to halt the Ovacikgold mine began in the seventeen nearby villages, prompted by the formerBergama mayor, Sefa Taskin; the Bergama Environment, Art and CulturalSociety; and some Bergama political party leaders. Over time, many local,national, and international civil society organizations also supported the grassrootseffort, which developed out of a collaboration composed of potentially affectedvillagers; local activists; former Bergama city government officials (particularlyleft-oriented local party leaders); regional and national engineering-basedorganizations, such as the Turkish Engineer and Architecture OccupationalOrganization (TMMOB); environmental organizations; public health organiza-tions; university professors; the Izmir Bar Association; and environmental rightslawyers.
Friedhelm Korte, a leading geochemist at the Institute of Chemistry at theTechnical University of Munich, Germany who has conducted extensive research
62Ibid., p. 11.63Ali Ihsan Arol, ‘‘Current Status of FDI and Environmental Issues in Turkey,’’ paper presented at the OECD
Global Forum on International Investment, Conference on Foreign Direct Investment and the Environment:
Lessons to be Learned from the Mining Sector, Paris, February 7�8, 2002.64Ibid.65S. Taskin, 1998, op. cit., pp. 12�13.66E. Koksal, O. Ormanoglu and E.A. Devuyst, ‘‘Cyanide Destruction: Full-Scale at Ovacik Gold Mine,’’ TheEuropean Journal of Mineral Processing and Environmental Protection, Vol. 3, No. 3, 2002, pp. 270�280.
118 NAHIDE KONAK
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Mon
ash
Uni
vers
ity L
ibra
ry]
at 0
3:00
26
Nov
embe
r 20
14
on the ecological and social impacts of cyanide use in mining,67 is the scientificadvisor for the grassroots struggle in Bergama. Turkish geochemical, expert IsmailDuman, and many others have also worked to reveal the hidden risks anduncertainties of the use of cyanide-leach technology in mining.68 Since the 1990s,a network of national and international independent scientists and experts hascalled for banning cyanide leach technology in mining not only in the Ovacikgold mine but worldwide.69
The European Parliament, the Green Party in Germany, and the internationalhuman rights organization Food First Information and Action Network (FIAN),which advocates for the right to food, has called for urgent action to prevent theimminent destruction of the Edremit region, a major agricultural region in Turkey,from gold mining.70 This collaboration has been supported by international NGOsand advocacy networks working on cyanide and ecology, such as Greenpeace, FIAN,the U.S. Mining Policy Center, Mine Watch in England, and the Mineral PolicyInstitute in Australia.71
Strategies and Legal Actions by the Bergama Environmental Movement
In 1993, a report on the proposed cyanide leach gold mining projects in theAegean region was prepared and submitted to the European Parliament. As a result,the European Parliament called upon the Turkish government to ban cyanide leachtechnology use in gold mine production.72 On November 17, 1994, the EuropeanParliament discussed these issues and produced a report that argued that the potential
67Friedhelm Korte, ‘‘Global Inputs and Trends of Chemical Residues in the Biosphere,’’ in F. Coulston and W.
Korte (eds.), Environmental Quality and Safety, Global Aspects of Chemistry, Toxicology and Technology as Appliedto the Environment (Stuttgart: Georg Thieme Verlag, 1976), pp. 183�196; Friedhelm Korte and F. Coulston,
‘‘Some Consideration of the Impact of Energy and Chemicals on the Environment,’’ Regulatory Toxicology andPharmacology, Vol. 19, 1994, pp. 219�227; Friedhelm Korte and F. Coulston, ‘‘From Single-Substance
Evaluation to Ecological Process Concept: The Dilemma of Processing Gold with Cyanide,’’ Ecotoxicology andEnvironmental Safety, Vol. 32, 1995, pp. 96�101; Friedhelm Korte and F. Coulston, ‘‘Some Considerations on
the Impact on Ecological Chemical Principles in Practice with Emphasis on Gold Mining and Cyanide,’’
Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety, Vol. 41, 1998, pp. 119�129; F. Korte, M. Spiteller, and F. Coulston,
‘‘The Cyanide Leaching Gold Recovery Process Is a Nonsustainable Technology with Unacceptable Impacts on
Ecosystems and Humans: The Disaster in Romanian Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety,’’ EnvironmentalResearch Section B, Vol. 46, 2000, pp. 241�245.68Ismail Duman, Bergama ve Altin Madeni [Bergama and the Gold Mine] (Bergama: Bergama Belediyesi Kultur
Yayinlari, 1998); Hayal Ozkilic, Bilim ve Utopya, Vol. 45, 1998, pp. 1�2.69Pergamon-Deklaration, ‘‘Scientific Aspects of Gold Extraction Using Cyanide,’’ Scientific Symposium,
Technical University of Istanbul, Faculty of Mining Sciences, Istanbul, June 26�27, 1997, published online at:
http://korte-goldmining.infu.uni-dortmund.de/index2.html.70European Parliament 1994�1995, published online at: http://www.infu.uni-dortmund.de/korte-goldmining/
Minutes.html.71Birol Ertan, ‘‘The Evaluation of the Verdict of the Court of Appeal: The Public Victory of Bergama and
Environmentalists,’’ Birikim, Vol. 113, 1998, pp. 84�88; Senih Ozay, Bergama ‘da Bir Yurttas Hareketi(Bergama: Bergama Belediyesi Kultur Yayinlari, 1997); S. Taskin, 1998, op. cit.72European Parliament, 1994�1995, op. cit.
ECOLOGICAL MODERNIZATION/ECO-MARXIST PERSPECTIVES 119
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Mon
ash
Uni
vers
ity L
ibra
ry]
at 0
3:00
26
Nov
embe
r 20
14
damage from the project to underground water and rivers would affect not only thesurrounding local environment but also the Mediterranean Sea. The nearby GreekIsland of Lesvos (Midilli) was seen as particularly at risk. Because the potentialdamage to the environment would not remain local but would expand its impactregionally, cyanide leach technology use in the Ovacik gold mine in Bergama becamea European issue.
In 1994, 652 citizens from local villages and the Bergama district petitionedagainst the Turkish Ministry of Environment and the Eurogold company in the IzmirAdministrative Court73 in an attempt to halt the project. Initially, the IzmirAdministrative Court ruled in favor of Eurogold/Normandy. But activists and lawyersappealed, and on May 13, 1997, the Court of Appeal decided that the gold mine hadto shut down its operation due to the fact that it did not serve any public interest.
In 1997 at the end of the three-year-long judicial process, the HigherAdministrative Court in Izmir, 6th Chamber, decided that Eurogold/Normandymust shut down the Ovacik mine, because it violated Turkish constitutional andenvironmental law. Specifically, the court held that the ministerial act violated theprinciples stipulated in Constitutional Article 17, which says ‘‘everyone has the rightto life and the right to develop and protect his/her material and spiritual entity,’’ andArticle 56, which says ‘‘everyone has the right to live in a healthy, decentenvironment. It is the duty of the state and citizens to improve the naturalenvironment and to prevent environmental pollution.’’74 Legal experts cited this as aprecedent-setting case, since the court based its decision on the right to live in ahealthy environment. The decision also rejected the common corporate practice of‘‘cost-shifting’’75 and was set to affect 560 other contracts in Turkey.76
The legal victory, however, proved short-lived. The Turkish government’s firstresponse was simply to not enforce the court’s decision. In response, some movementactivists and lawyers associated with the Izmir Bar Association took the case to aninternational organization, the European Court of Human Rights.77 In 2003, itfound the state of Turkey guilty for refusing to implement national and local courtdecisions and obliged the Turkish government to pay 3,000 Euros to each of theplaintiffs.78
73Cetin Turan, Bergama ve Hukuk (Bergama: Belediyesi Kultur Yayinlari, 1998).74Bergama’daki Siyanurlu Altin Olayina Iliskin Danistay Karari, (Bergama: Bergama Belediyesi Kultur Yayinlari,
1997).75Joan Martinez-Alier, The Environmentalism of the Poor: A Study of Ecological Conflicts and Valuation(Northampton: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2002), p. 73.76Akif M. Oznal, ‘‘National Dimension of Cyanide-Leach Gold Mine and Bergama Struggle,’’ Mimarlar OdasiBulten, Vol. 2, 1997, pp. 1�5.77Arif Ali Cangi, ‘‘Bergama, Siyanur, Altin, Mahkeme Kararlari, Hukuksal Surec,’’ published online at: http://
www.geocities.com/siyanurlealtin/yazi/2002/surec.html.78‘‘Chamber Judgment in the Case of Taskin and Others v. Turkey,’’ published online at: http://
www.echr.coe.int/Eng/Press/2004/Nov/ChamberjudgmentTaskin&OthersvTurkey101104.htm.
120 NAHIDE KONAK
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Mon
ash
Uni
vers
ity L
ibra
ry]
at 0
3:00
26
Nov
embe
r 20
14
The fact that a transnational network that has developed strategies and takenactions at the national and international levels emerged to halt the project seems tosupport the notion of ecological modernization theory that social movements play asignificant role in transforming a society in the direction of ecological rationality.However, this social movement has had only a limited impact on Turkish statebehavior.
Role of Science and Technology in Environmental Protection
Amidst continuing demands to halt the project, in 1997 company officials triedto find new ways to break the resistance and convince government officials and localcommunities in Bergama that the social and ecological risks of cyanide leaching ingold mining could be effectively minimized, if not eliminated by adding a chemicaldetoxification system to the production process. The INCO SO2/AIR method, achemical detoxification system developed by the Canadian company, Inco TechnicalServices, Ltd., was added for the decomposition of cyanide at the Ovacik mine in1997.79
After installing this technology, the Ovacik gold mine was repackaged as a majorgreen economic development project*one with the most stringent environmentalstandards in the world. Furthermore, the former director of the company, JackTestard,80 claimed the mine was the first to have such high internationalenvironmental standards and such a strong commitment to social responsibility.He continues to argue that in the U.S., Canada, Europe, Australia, South Africa,New Zealand, and many other ‘‘civilized’’ countries, more than 100 mines with thistype of technology have contributed significantly to the production of wealth81 andhave proudly done so in an environmentally consciousness way.82 Former AustralianEnvironment Minister, Ros Kelly, who was a member of Normandy Mining’sinternational board, argued that there can be no serious objections to the Ovacikmine on environmental grounds, because its environmental mitigation operations are‘‘way in excess of any mine in Australia.’’ She added that in contrast to Normandy’sAustralian operations, which might not have detoxification plants or double-linedtailings dams, the Ovacik mine in Bergama has a ‘‘policy of exceeding normalstandards.’’83
Eurogold/Normandy officials continue to insist that detoxification technologywill render the cyanide solution harmless. Company representatives also erroneously
79Duman, 1998, op. cit., p. 42; Sukriye Hicdonmez, ‘‘Why Are We Against Cyanide-leach Gold Production in
Bergama?’’ Bilim ve Utopia, Vol. 34, No. 22�26, 1997, p. 23.80Bergama Kuzey Ege Gazetesi (Bergama North Aegean Newspaper), Vol. 6, 1996, p. 1.81Ibid.82Laurie Udesky, ‘‘Turkish Villagers Fight a Multinational that’s Come to Mine Gold in Their Town,’’ TurkishDaily News, February 17, 1997.83Bob Burton, ‘‘Normandy’s Turkish Mine Stumped by Court Ruling,’’ Mining Monitor, Vol. 2/3, 1997, pp.
1�3.
ECOLOGICAL MODERNIZATION/ECO-MARXIST PERSPECTIVES 121
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Mon
ash
Uni
vers
ity L
ibra
ry]
at 0
3:00
26
Nov
embe
r 20
14
claimed that the U.S.-based Sierra Club has stopped protesting against cyanide heapleaching. It also has been reported that Eurogold/Normandy spent about US$100,000 a year on a public relations campaign to convince the public that theOvacik gold mine is ‘‘bringing life not death’’ to the area.84
Meanwhile, in the face of the court’s ruling to shut down the mine, the Turkishgovernment began searching for ways to allow gold mining to continue. Thefollowing quote by Imren Aykut, the former Minister of Environment, bestrepresents the official government line:
[T]he State does not poison its own people. If cyanide is detrimental, why doother countries use it? Cyanide-leaching methods have been used safely [around
the world].85
The Vice Undersecretary for Prime Ministry, Fusun Karaoglu, argued that theresistance to the Ovacik gold mine has blocked foreign direct investment intoTurkey, costing the country important revenue.86 The former Turkish PrimeMinister, Bulent Ecevit, claimed that the Court of Appeal’s decision citing defense ofthe right to life damaged Turkey’s reputation as an attractive venue for investment inthe eyes of foreign corporations.87
The Turkish government also announced that it found the court decisionambiguous, and in August 1999 the Turkish Prime Ministry requested that theScientific and Technical Research Council of Turkey (TUBITAK), the country’spreeminent scientific research organization, assess whether or not Eurogold/Normandy had made enough improvements in the mine to operate withoutharming the environment. During this time, the media reported that Australiangovernment officials, including the Prime Minister, the Minister of NaturalResources and Energy, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, and the Minister ofEnvironment lobbied strongly on behalf of Eurogold/Normandy. They requestedthat Turkish officials do whatever necessary to allow the Ovacik gold mine tocontinue operating in Bergama.88 The activists are convinced that this lobbyingplayed an important role in the Turkish Prime Ministry’s request for TUBITAK’sassessment.
TUBITAK’s report assessing the risks and possible impact associated withcyanide-leach mining at Ovacik came out in 1999 and argued that it would be
84Ibid.85Bergama Kuzey Ege Gazetesi (Bergama North Aegean Newspaper), Vol. 159, 1997, p. 1.86Bergama Kuzey Ege Gazetesi (Bergama North Aegean Newspaper), Vol. 387�388, 2001, p. 1.87Rojda Ildan, ‘‘Siyanure Bakan Destegi,’’ Evrensel, November 26, 2001, published online at: http://
www.evrensel.net/arsiv.php.88Ibid.
122 NAHIDE KONAK
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Mon
ash
Uni
vers
ity L
ibra
ry]
at 0
3:00
26
Nov
embe
r 20
14
impossible to mine gold without cyanide. Instead the report claimed that themain focus should be on the question of whether or not the environmentalimpact and risks of cyanide use met acceptable standards.89 Furthermore, thereport claimed that cyanide use in gold mining in developed countries such asCanada and the U.S. does not pose significant environmental risks.90 But theseclaims contradict findings by the Mineral Policy Center in the U.S. that cyanide-leach gold mining is responsible for serious environmental degradation and publichealth problems.91 The TUBITAK report claimed that the addition of thedetoxification system at Ovacik could minimize the risks to underground water ifthe tailings pond cracked in the future. It also claimed that human health andenvironmental risks were within acceptable limits92 and that the tailings pond wasconstructed according to sufficiently high standards (which also exceededCanadian standards).
Hayri Ogut, Eurogold’s public relations manager, insists that a detoxificationprocess renders the cyanide solution harmless. ‘‘There will not be any otherpoisonous substances in the water,’’ he says. Echoing the claims of numerouspolluters before him, he says: ‘‘You can even drink it.’’93 That assertion alarms GlennC. Miller, Professor of Environmental and Resource Sciences at the University ofNevada, Reno:
If a person from the mining industry suggests that the water is drinkable after theINCO process, ask him if he would drink it or if he would allow his children todrink it. The waste water is still highly contaminated and requires careful
management and regulation over the long term.94
Korte had previously analyzed this detoxification system in 1995�1996 andconcluded that the toxins released after detoxification exceed the levels in thestandard proposed by the World Health Organization.95 Furthermore, measure-ments show that this detoxification technology is not capable of purifying cyanidecompounds and heavy metals in tailings pond waste. Toxic waste combined withvarious heavy metals and cyanide compounds will stay in the open tailings pondwaste and remain an ecological and social threat. In addition, other chemicals areutilized during the detoxification process. Korte and others point out that because thenature and characteristics of chemical reactions are complicated, the end product isdifficult to predict. ‘‘The INCO-process does not detoxify heavy metals,’’ Korte haswritten. ‘‘In addition, it brings into the atmosphere sulfur oxides and nitrogen
89TUBITAK, Eurogold Ovacik Gold Mine Commission Assessment Report, 1999, p. 6.90Ibid., p. 7.91C.D. Da Rosa, J.S. Lyon, and P.M. Hocker, 1997, op. cit.92TUBITAK, op. cit., p. 8.93Udesky, 1997, op. cit.94Ibid.95Yeni Asir, ‘‘Hukuk Savasiyla Birlikte Avrupa’dan Buyuk Destek,’’ December 6, 1996.
ECOLOGICAL MODERNIZATION/ECO-MARXIST PERSPECTIVES 123
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Mon
ash
Uni
vers
ity L
ibra
ry]
at 0
3:00
26
Nov
embe
r 20
14
compounds.’’96 Some other scientists contend that while detoxification may improvethe situation over a gold mining operation without any environmental controltechnology, specific risk-benefit evaluations are not yet available, thus it is notpossible to accurately measure the improvement they provide.97 Geochemist Moranevaluates this detoxification as follows:
This process is often used to treat ores containing iron sulfides, or where iron
cyanide complexes are present in the effluents in significant concentrations. Itinvolves the addition of SO2, air, and a copper catalyst to breakdown cyanide.While this process does greatly reduce free cyanide concentrations, it results in theformation of several other by-products that may be toxic to aquatic organisms,
such as: cyanate, thiocyanate, sulfate, ammonia, nitrate, some free cyanide, andelevated copper concentrations. Such treated effluents may also contain elevatedconcentrations of other metals. The INCO process also results in the formation of
large volumes of calcium sulfate-rich sludges, which increase the process anddisposal costs (Yarar, 1999). Most Canadian gold sites that use the INCO processare able to generate effluents that meet the discharge standards. However, many of
these effluents are still toxic to organisms in bioassay tests . . . Thus, thesecomplex solutions produce toxicity effects we don’t understand, probably as aresult of synergistic effects, or they contain toxic constituents that are not being
detected or regulated.98
In conclusion, in contrast to Eurogold/Normandy’s claims, the independentscientific community maintains that water with solid waste, heavy metals, andcyanide breakdown compounds such as free cyanides and cyanates will remain in thetailings pond and pose ongoing environmental and social risks, and the ultimatebehavior of these compounds is unknown due to a lack of scientific study andunderstanding. Thus, the debate over the Ovacik mine seriously challenges one of thepropositions of ecological modernization theory, namely, that science and technologyplay the most significant role in environmental protection. On the contrary, theevidence suggests that as long as scientific uncertainty exists, science and technologyperpetuate environmental deterioration.
Disciplinary Neoliberalism, Constitutionalization, the Turkish State, andthe Bergama Environmental Movement
In 2001, the Turkish Council of Ministry allowed gold mine production andrisked violating the 1997 Court of Appeals decision by permitting Eurogold/Normandy to begin its one-year trial production. In Turkey, Prime Ministry
96Korte, 1995, op. cit., T.M.M.O.B., Chemistry Engineering Institution, Aegean Region Special Ihtisas CommissionAssessment Report, 1997.97R. Moran, 2002, op. cit.98Robert Moran, ‘‘More Cyanide Uncertainties Lessons From the Baia Mare, Romania, Spill*Water Quality
and Politics,’’ Mineral Policy Center, 2001, published online at: http://www.miningwatch.ca/updir/
mcu_final.pdf.
124 NAHIDE KONAK
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Mon
ash
Uni
vers
ity L
ibra
ry]
at 0
3:00
26
Nov
embe
r 20
14
circulars cannot officially overrule Court of Appeals decisions. Yet that is preciselywhat occurred. An analysis of why that happened is in order.
Gill’s concept of new constitutionalism offers an explanation. New constitu-tionalism is defined as the political-juridical complement to the disciplinaryneoliberal process of accumulation. According to Gill, the fundamental purpose ofnew constitutionalism is to prevent future governments from counteracting commit-ments to a disciplinary neoliberal pattern of accumulation. Gill says:
Worldwide, new constitutions were being enacted and old constitutions werebeing amended. Often, under the guidance of the International MonetaryFund (IMF), the World Bank and other agencies of capitalist world economy,
new institutional arrangements were being devised in ways similar to theEuropean architecture of economic governance*to separate politics fromeconomics. What was occurring was the gradual institutionalization of a
framework of constitutional constraints theoretically designed to maximize theefficiency of a now potentially global capitalism. In other words, what wasbeing constructed in a range of contexts*national, regional, and international
(e.g., through the IMF, the World Bank, and the World Trade Organization(WTO))*was a de facto constitution for global capitalism.99
As the eco-Marxist perspective argues, the Turkish state has supported economicgrowth to fuel its need for tax revenue. ‘‘The current financial crisis [in 2001] inTurkey has worked in Eurogold/Normandy’s favor, as calls have been made for thecountry to fully exploit its gold reserves*estimated at around 6,500 tons*to helppay for the large domestic debt.’’100 Melda Keskin, Greenpeace Mediterranean co-coordinator, states that:
We’ve seen in Turkey many instances where a local court*or even a nationalone*makes a good decision, but then this is simply ignored by the state. Eitherthey continue to operate installations that have been ordered closed, or privatecompanies operating under their protection continue to work.101
Turkey’s acceptance of international arbitration law between foreign firms andthe Turkish state in this case reflects how new constitutionalism works. The maingoal of the adoption of international arbitration law is to send a clear message to theforeign investors that they are guaranteed a proper investment environment inTurkey. Turkey is one of the leading countries that has been willing to adopt theMultilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI) in order to attract more foreign
99Stephen Gill, ‘‘Constitutionalizing Inequality and the Class of Globalizations,’’ International Studies Review,
Vol. 2, No. 2, 2002, p. 49.100Jon Gorvett, ‘‘Turkish Court Bans Cyanide Gold Process Near Ancient Town,’’ Environment News Service,2001, p. 1, published online at: http://www.warprofiteers.com/article.php?id�193.101Ibid., p. 2.
ECOLOGICAL MODERNIZATION/ECO-MARXIST PERSPECTIVES 125
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Mon
ash
Uni
vers
ity L
ibra
ry]
at 0
3:00
26
Nov
embe
r 20
14
investment to generate revenue for external debt payment. By playing a central rolein MAI negotiations, Turkey announced that it was ready, though with somereservations, to adopt the MAI.102
The MAI is the creation of the Organization for Economic Cooperation andDevelopment (OECD). If adopted by various countries, it would have the authorityof an international treaty and thus take precedence over the domestic laws ofcountries that sign it. Basically, it is the continuation of international commercialarbitration, which has become harmonized through international conventions andregulations as a widely accepted method for settling international commercialdisputes.103
MAI negotiations in 1995 were intended to provide a multilateral framework forinternational investment with the liberalization of investment regimes, the protectionof investment, and effective settlement procedures. If adopted, the MAI would haveallowed foreign investors to sue national and local governments, seek compensationfrom the state for an investor’s loss of income and reputation, and challenge statelegislation.104 It is similar to NAFTA, yet the MAI has not yet been allowed to comeinto effect due to strong opposition from different groups. All over the world, tradeunions, NGOs, and environmental groups have been opposing the MAI in favor ofstronger labor rights and consumer and environmental standards.
In mid-1999, Turkish governmental bodies and business sectors began arguingthe necessity of including key MAI principles into national legislation to furtherliberalize, deregulate, and restructure the economy in order to attract more directforeign investment.105 That year Turkey unilaterally adopted some of the MAIprinciples, with the Turkish parliament passing three constitutional amendments.With the amendment to Article 125, Turkey accepted national and internationalarbitration for settling disputes between foreign investors and the Turkishgovernment. An amendment to Article 47 eliminated all legislative obstacles forprivatizing public assets and services. An amendment to Article 155 limited the scopeof the domestic administrative law in favor of the private law (arbitration law),bypassing the sanction of the Council of State regarding these concessions. In 2001,the Turkish parliament passed the International Arbitration Law, which remains ineffect today. The IMF played an important role in transforming Turkey’s laws, bybasically bribing the Turkish government to adopt the international arbitration law.
102Hazine Mustesarligi, The Turkish Ministry of Treasury Report, Ankara, Turkey, 1998.103Y. Dezalay and B. Garth, ‘‘Merchants of Law as Moral Entrepreneurs: Constructing International Justice
from the Competition for Transnational Business Disputes,’’ Law and Society Review, Vol. 29, No.1, 1995, pp.
27�64; D.E. Wagoner, ‘‘Arbitration: Preparing for the 21st Century*The Mandate for Harmonization of
International Arbitration Procedures,’’ Arbitration: The Journal of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrator, Vol. 65,
No. 1, 1999, pp. 17�23.104O. Hoedeman, ‘‘MAIgalomania: The New Corporate Agenda,’’ The Ecologist, Vol. 28, No. 3, 1998, pp.
154�161.105Cumhuriyet, May 28, 1999; June 2, 1999; July 7, 1999; Hurriyet, June 7, 1999; Milliyet, June 4, 1999.
126 NAHIDE KONAK
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Mon
ash
Uni
vers
ity L
ibra
ry]
at 0
3:00
26
Nov
embe
r 20
14
In exchange for substituting international arbitration for the sovereignty of Turkishcourts, the IMF gave Turkey an additional credit loan.106
According to Turkish Constitution Article 90 ‘‘international agreements duly putinto effect carry the force of law. No appeal to the Constitutional Court can bemade with regard to these agreements, on the grounds that they are unconstitu-
tional.’’ The constitutional status of international agreements leads us to suggestthat Turkey has already adopted arbitration for settling investment disputes sincewhen the Washington Convention . . . was duly put into effect in 1988 . . . The
corollary of the approval of the Convention is that Turkey recognizes thejurisdiction of the International Center for Settlement of Investment Disputes(ICSID), established by the Convention, to settle any legal dispute arising directlyout of an investment, between a contracting state and a national of another
contracting state.107
The written statement by the Under-Secretariat of the Prime Ministry instructedsix ministries to make the necessary changes to allow Eurogold/Normandy to resumeits operation. The justification was as follows: Eurogold’s investment is a foreigninvestment, which is subject to international arbitration.108 The Turkish dailynewspaper, Milliyet, also reported that Eurogold/Normandy would file a compensa-tion claim for US $300 million if it were forced to forgo its gold mine operation.109
Thus, the adoption of international arbitration law on investment usurped theright of individuals and groups to make use of national judicial systems and judicialremedies. Litigation is one of the most common tools that environmental andcommunity movements all over the world use for redress of their complaints.110
The constitutional amendments and new legislation regarding the internationalarbitration law in Turkey abolished the right to administrative judicial review ofenvironmentally unfriendly investment by the Turkish state. Under this condition, ifarbitration is approved for a possible dispute, environmentally concerned citizens canno longer bring a case to administrative courts or the Council of State, which hasmade landmark decisions devoted to environmental protection, such as the Aliaga
106Cumhuriyet, February 6, 1999.107Aykut Coban, ‘‘International Arbitration, Sovereignty and Environmental Protection: The Turkish Case,’’ in
Frank Biermann, Rainer Brohm and Klaus Dingwerth (eds.), Proceedings of the 2001 Berlin Conference on theHuman Dimensions of Global Environmental Change, Global Environmental Change and the Nation State(Potsdam: Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, 2002), p. 218.108Cumhuriyet, June 23, 2000.109Milliyet, January 16, 2001.110Al Gedicks, ‘‘International Native Resistance to the New Resource Wars,’’ in B.R. Taylor (ed.), EcologicalResistance Movements: The Global Emergence of Radical and Popular Environmentalism (New York: State
University of New York Press, 1995), pp. 89�108; I. Kaboglu, Cevre Hakki ( Ankara: Imge, 1996); N. Turgut,
Cevre Hukuku (Ankara: Sava Yayinlari, 1998), pp. 291�299.
ECOLOGICAL MODERNIZATION/ECO-MARXIST PERSPECTIVES 127
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Mon
ash
Uni
vers
ity L
ibra
ry]
at 0
3:00
26
Nov
embe
r 20
14
decision111 and the Bergama case. All laws*and environmental laws in particular*as well as the Turkish constitution, which guarantees the right to life and right to livein a healthy environment for every citizen, have been reduced to a ‘‘non-tariff barrierto trade’’ or an ‘‘illegal trade barrier.’’112
Bergama activists and lawyers argue that this is a violation of not only the rightto recourse through judicial review, but also of Article 10 of the Turkish constitution,which reads: ‘‘all are equal before the law . . . No privilege shall be granted to anyindividual, family, group or class.’’ Izmir Bar Association’s Ahmet Okyay argues that‘‘the Prime Ministry’s actions do not suit a state of law. Furthermore, a court verdictcannot be ignored with the excuses of having to comply with the internationalarbitration law and having to attract foreign investment.’’113 The quotation belowbest summarizes the situation:
Reeling from an economic crisis, Turkey has embraced the IMF-WTO recipes of
privatization, deregulation, and unconditional surrender to foreign investors. TheTurkish Parliament has been frantically passing legislation to remove obstaclesbefore foreign companies and render the country’s environmental and agriculturallaws ineffective. The peasants of Bergama led by Oktay Konyar have been in the
front of the resistance to this frenzied neoliberalism in Turkey.114
Conclusion
The case study of the cyanide-leach Ovacik gold mine in Turkey challenges theassumptions of the ecological modernization perspective; the eco-Marxist perspectiveoffers a more satisfactory analysis. By concentrating on the interactions among thestate, market, and civil society, this case study offers three main challenges to theecological modernization perspective. They are the following:
First, contrary to what ecological modernization suggests, there is no compellingevidence that the environment has been emancipated from economic factors indecision-making criteria. In Turkey since the 1980s, economic policies in generaland mining policies in particular, have been gradually restructured according toneoliberal economic globalization. Furthermore, the Turkish nation-state hasrestructured its institutions, reformed its policies, accepted some free tradeagreements, and amended its constitution to facilitate the expansion of the globalcapitalist market. At the same time, in line with the ecological modernizationperspective, the Turkish nation-state has revised its environmental policy accordingto E.U. environmental policy standards and signed numerous international
111K. Anadol, Termik Santrallere Hayir (Ankara: Verso Yayincilik, 1991).112Kenny Bruno and Joshua Karliner, EARTHSUMMIT.BIZ: The Corporate Takeover of SustainableDevelopment (Oakland: Food First, 2002), p. 9.113‘‘Ovacik Gold Mine Continues to Spark Reaction,’’ Turkish Daily News, June 23, 2000.114Ustun Reinhard, ‘‘Life Against Gold,’’ Canadian Dimension, Vol. 35, 2002, pp. 17�20.
128 NAHIDE KONAK
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Mon
ash
Uni
vers
ity L
ibra
ry]
at 0
3:00
26
Nov
embe
r 20
14
environmental agreements. However, as Wapner points out, compliance to theseenvironmental policy standards is poor, with the Turkish government violating theorders of its own courts since 1997.115 The outcome of the Ovacik gold mineconflict shows that environmental regulations have had almost no impact on Turkishstate behavior. This challenges one of the core premises of the ecologicalmodernization perspective: that E.U.-based environmental regulations would helptame global capitalism and ensure environmental protection. On the contrary, as theeco-Marxist perspective suggests, the adoption of neoliberal economic growthpolicies to attract direct foreign investment resulted in the transfer of ecologicallyrisky cyanide-leach technology to Turkey. There is no compelling evidence thateconomic development and environmental protection are compatible in this case; asthe eco-Marxist perspective proposes, economic growth and capital accumulationhave superseded environmental protection.
Second, the story of the Ovacik gold mine struggle demonstrates that theTurkish state ignored the demands of civil society to shut down the mine and stopusing cyanide leach technology.116 Contrary to the hypothesis of ecologicalmodernization theory, rather than strengthening the voices of civil society, thesynergy between the market and the state suppressed them. Market criteriadominated the agenda even in the face of strong grassroots organization, local andnational court rulings, and E.U. demands for ecological protection.
Third, instead of banning cyanide-leach technology, the Turkish state allowed itto continue with the addition of new detoxification technology. However, manyindependent scientists maintain that advanced pollution control technology such asthe detoxification system used in the project does not reduce environmental andhealth risks as long as cyanide is used in the mining process.117 This challenges one ofthe core hypotheses of ecological modernization theory: that the design, perfor-mance, and evaluation of processes of production are based on ecological criteria aswell as economic criteria. Eco-Marxist analysis argues that they are predominantlybased on economic not ecological criteria.
The ecological modernization perspective posits that economy and environmentcan be reconciled under a global capitalist system with reforms brought by civilsociety and the state. The story of the Bergama environmental conflict belies thisclaim. The ecological modernization perspective proposes that economic growth isnot the problem, but the solution to environmental problems. The Ovacik gold minecase demonstrates the opposite: neoliberal economic growth policies to attractforeign direct investment resulted in the transfer of ecologically risky technology*cyanide-leach technology*to Turkey. The goal of the Bergama environmental
115P. Wapner, ‘‘The State and Environmental Challenges: A Critical Exploration of Alternatives to the State
System,’’ Environmental Politics, Vol. 4, No. 1, 1995, p. 48.116S. Taskin, 1998, op. cit., p. 11.117R. Moran, 2001, op. cit.
ECOLOGICAL MODERNIZATION/ECO-MARXIST PERSPECTIVES 129
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Mon
ash
Uni
vers
ity L
ibra
ry]
at 0
3:00
26
Nov
embe
r 20
14
movement remains to convince the mining industry and the Turkish state to bancyanide-leach technology in mining altogether. But neither the industry nor theTurkish state has considered a ban, which supports the eco-Marxist claim that thereis an inherent conflict between economic growth and environmental protection.
The ecological modernization perspective assumes that supra-national institu-tions such as the E.U. and the WTO would play an important role in taming globalcapitalism and solving environmental problems. This case study demonstrates thatinstead of taming it, the policies and practices of the IMF, the World Bank, and theWTO are designed to expand global capitalism. Some critiques argue that even actorswho are widely perceived as adopting a proactive stance toward sustainabledevelopment, such as the E.U., have prioritized the economic and commercialdimensions of sustainability at the expense of ecological and social ones.118 So, ifTurkey eventually becomes a member of the E.U., it is debatable whether or not itsenvironment will improve.
Finally, this case study illustrates that local examples of environmentalconsciousness and strong environmental movements can be overwhelmed by nationalinterests in economic growth and capital accumulation. As the global ecological crisisworsens, global civil society needs to understand clearly the mechanics involved incorporate globalization’s usurpation of citizens’ rights, resources, health, andenvironment and come up with more effective ways to resist. Eco-Marxism canoffer a way forward.
118Susan Baker, Sustainable Development (London: Routledge, 2006); Baker, 2007, op. cit.
130 NAHIDE KONAK
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Mon
ash
Uni
vers
ity L
ibra
ry]
at 0
3:00
26
Nov
embe
r 20
14
