The mining industry in Latin America is one of the many extractive industries that constitute the export-driven economies of the global South, and to entertain the notion of abandoning these industries is both fiscally and socially irresponsible. Furthermore, the rise in leftist government regimes in Latin America has opened up a path for a more progressive approach to extractivism to rise to prominence, albeit, not completely abandoning extractivism in the traditional sense, this neo-extractivist approach is the necessary compromise to ensure healthy economic growth and the social well being of the citizens. Countries such as Argentina, Brazil, and Uruguay have been pushing for substantial change in these industries by advocating for a more
…show more content…
This new strategy is referred to as ‘neo-extractivism’, which unlike its predecessor is characterized by government regulation, and overall involvement in the market. Take the example of the MAS government in Bolivia headed by President Evo Morales in 2006, this government was able to renegotiate its contracts with multinational corporations in the petroleum industry, change the taxation system by raising taxes by 50%, as well as change the system of revenues for businesses. Ultimately bringing tangibility to the ‘trickle down’ theory that multinational corporations were initially claiming to be able to provide. Another key element to the success of neo-extractivist industries is the rise of state owned businesses, which unlike private corporations, were vested in the future of their own countries. Practically all of the other countries in Latin America have tried to follow suit, some more successful than others; however one thing is for certain, the social outcry is more prominent in regions where the government is less successful in the implementation of social programs, and its approach to overall wealth distribution. All in all illustrating that neo-extractivism is the most progressive, and a viable alternative to traditional extractivism within economically feasible
This new strategy is referred to as ‘neo-extractivism’, which unlike its predecessor is characterized by government regulation, and overall involvement in the market. Take the example of the MAS government in Bolivia headed by President Evo Morales in 2006, this government was able to renegotiate its contracts with multinational corporations in the petroleum industry, change the taxation system by raising taxes by 50%, as well as change the system of revenues for businesses. Ultimately bringing tangibility to the ‘trickle down’ theory that multinational corporations were initially claiming to be able to provide. Another key element to the success of neo-extractivist industries is the rise of state owned businesses, which unlike private corporations, were vested in the future of their own countries. Practically all of the other countries in Latin America have tried to follow suit, some more successful than others; however one thing is for certain, the social outcry is more prominent in regions where the government is less successful in the implementation of social programs, and its approach to overall wealth distribution. All in all illustrating that neo-extractivism is the most progressive, and a viable alternative to traditional extractivism within economically feasible