Environmental Colonialism

Environmental colonialism refers to the diverse ways in which colonial practices have affected the natural environments of indigenous peoples. Colonialism concerns the exploitation of native peoples through European expansion over the past 400 years. Although many peoples engaged in expansionist practices prior to this time, the magnitude of European expansion was unprecedented. Alfred Crosby has argued that European colonists were so successful partly because of the diverse ways in which they affected the native ecosystems. Colonizers introduced the pressures of foreign markets and political powers along with exotic invasive species and diseases. This two-pronged attack undermined the ability of indigenous peoples to ward off colonial invaders. The resulting damage to the native ecosystems made recovery more difficult. The colonial powers created a global infrastructure that encouraged the extraction of natural resources from poor peripheral countries by rich core countries while at the same time undermining sustainable native cultures. It is important to note that the damage caused by colonialism was not necessarily actively intended or executed with organized forethought. Indeed, R. Nixon has noted that some Western environmentalists who hoped to remediate the environmental damages caused by colonialism unwittingly further harmed native peoples and the long-term health of local ecosystems by reintroducing traditional colonial power networks in their habitat preservation efforts.

Environmental colonialism may also be referred to as ecocolonialism or ecological imperialism, although the term imperialism refers more explicitly to the practice, theory, and attitudes of colonizers, whereas colonialism refers to its effects. Environmental colonialism is one lens that may be applied to world-systems theory analyses of colonization. Under this lens, rather than focusing primarily on the impact of foreign military powers or economic changes, the analyst pays close attention to how the colonizing power has affected the natural environment; environmental impact is taken as a central rather than a peripheral concern.

Crosby notes that successful European colonies, or what he calls “the Neo-Europes,” are located in temperate zones resembling the microclimates of Europe. This enabled colonists to raise European crops and livestock to the detriment of the diversity of native habitats. Today, these Neo-Europes are the largest exporters of grains and animal products that were utterly foreign to the colonized landscape only 500 years ago. The ecological impact of replacing indigenous species with European varieties cannot be underestimated. The famines of sub-Saharan Africa stem in part from agricultural practices introduced to the area by colonists. European agriculture requires repeated cultivation of cash crops for export to urban centers, in contrast to indigenous agricultural methods, whose emphasis on crop rotations had been traditionally successful in preventing desertification of the fragile African landscape.

Environmental colonialism continues in various guises. Companies make minor alterations to crop varieties developed by third-world farmers over centuries, and unlike the native farmers, companies have the necessary funds to patent these strains as their intellectual property. This is a contemporary manifestation of environmental colonialism. On the other hand, forced introduction of nonnative, genetically [Page 732]engineered organisms into third-world countries is yet another way in which colonial powers fundamentally alter the ecosystems of the colonized. This makes it even more difficult for native peoples to rediscover or to continue traditional sustainable patterns of living.

...