Yasuní Depends on You: Globalization, the Amazon, and Oil
Pamela L. Martin, Coastal Carolina University (plmartin@coastal.edu)
Introduction
This simulation is intended to illustrate the dynamics of conflict within the multi-layered global
governance structure of the world today in which national governments and international
governmental and non-governmental organizations, private corporations, and local citizens
negotiate for the creation of new international environmental and energy resource policy.
However, Ecuador’s situation provides an optic to the difficulties of managing the global
environmental commons of the rainforest and the oil-rich profits that come from it – essentially
we are confronting the natural resource curse and its paradox. I invite you to explore the roles
within this simulation to better understand your own role as both a global and local citizen.
Rich in bio-diversity and oil, yet debt and poverty-stricken, Ecuador presents a good example of
the paradoxes that accompany globalization. Billions of dollars exchange hands around the oil
trade, yet the benefits of the oil industry continue to elude the people of Ecuador. While South
America’s 5th largest oil producer and sixth largest exporter to the US for oil, profits from
Ecuador’s oil industry have not improved the social and economic upheaval of the country since
the beginnings of seismic testing and drilling in the Amazon in the early 1960s. In addition, oil
extraction processes in the Amazon have been controversial as this plot of rainforest has been
designated as one of the world’s most biodiverse by a group of 59 world-renowned scientists,
sponsored by two NGOs – Finding Species and Save America’s Forests (Scientists Concerned for
Yasuní). Thus, the search for profits to support its economy and the protection of its diverse
peoples and land has come into conflict. It will be your job to seek a sustainable resolution to the
Yasuní National Park dilemma, which impacts not only Ecuador, but other biodiverse countries
in the developing world that could replicate this plan.
A recent World Bank Poverty Assessment of Ecuador shows that social outcomes and access to
basic services in Ecuador have improved slowly but continuously since 1990, while monetary
poverty has increased. The illiteracy rate fell from 11.7 to 10.8 percent, and the number of years
of education of the average adult increased from 6.7 to 7.6 between 1990 and 1999. Similarly, the
infant mortality rate and the population mortality rate dropped from 30 to 18 per thousand births,
and from 5.0 to 4.5 per thousand respectively, during the same period. In contrast, as this report
shows, poverty rates have increased from 40 to 45 percent between 1990 and 2001.1
But the Yasuní-ITT international campaign is different, as Esperanza Martínez of Acción
Ecológica argues, because the world community now knows of the destruction of the rainforest
and the devastating impacts that oil extraction and industry can bring to not just plant and animal
life, but to the daily lives of indigenous peoples. The percentage of people living in poverty in the
Amazon is higher than the Ecuadorian national average: 82.42% in Sucumbíos and 80.2% in
Orellana, compared to the national average of 55%. Literacy rates are far lower in this part of the
country and clean drinking water is provided to only 13% and 14% (in Sucumbíos and Orellana
respectively) of the population of this area as compared to the national average of 48% (Martínez,
2007).
Poverty Percentages by City and Region: 1995-2006
City or Region
1995
1998
1999
2006
19.9
29.1
20.9
Poverty
Quito
27.3
Guayaquil
34.6
40.2
47.9
36.0
Coast
51.6
58.4
62.8
52.4
Highland
52.4
53.0
59.3
43.6
Amazon
71.5
63.2
Rural
76.5
77.9
81.6
72.7
Urban
36.3
40.6
47.0
35.6
National Total
52.6
56.3
61.1
49.1
66.8
Table 1 Source: Larrea, Carlos, Ana Isabel Larrea, and Ana Lucía Bravo (2008). Petróleo,
sustentabilidad y desarrollo en la Amazonía ecuatoriana: Dilemas para una transición hacia una sociedad
post-petrolera, unpublished manuscript. See also Instituto Nacional de Estadísticas y Censos (INEC),
Encuesta de Condiciones de Vida, 1995, 1998, 1999, 2006 (www.inec.gov.ec).
In 2000, Ecuador dollarized its economy, which created incentives for foreign investment into the
country – given the more stable currency. This transition, while spurring 3-4% growth in the
country over the past 3 years, has also been met with trepidation and fear of a decreasingly
valued dollar, making imports more expensive in some cases. Moreover, dollarization and an
increase in oil prices has created incentives for the government to develop its oil reserves, found
primarily in its precious Amazonian rainforest, ranked as one of the richest, most bio-diverse
places on the planet. Thus, this scenario reflects a developing country’s struggle to develop its
economy, while also preserving its natural resource gems.
In the simulation, you will take on the role of one of the parties involved in the political economy
of Ecuador or the international community, and participate in negotiations about the future shape
of the petroleum industry and rainforest in particular and the region in general. This campaign,
unlike others in the oil sector, has great global implications as it seeks to provide new options for
avoided carbon emissions from leaving oil in place in order to protect biodiversity and
indigenous cultures, not a currently accepted methodology by the United Nations Framework
Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). Each party has specific interests, local, national, and
global-based, that may be at odds with the interests of others. In addition to differences, the actors
have long-standing social histories of mistrust and suspicion about the motivations of the others.
There is also division about who should lead the fundraising of the campaign between the
national and international levels. Agreements will require not only negotiation of the specific
terms, but also the repair of relationships and coordination among the multiple levels of
governance from local, national, and global actors.
Background
In response to a call for a moratorium on petroleum extraction in this area by international and
national nongovernmental environmental organizations (NGOs), including Amazon Watch, Save
America’s Forests, Finding Species, Pachamama Alliance, Acción Ecológica, Oilwatch, and
Amazonía por la Vida, President Correa in March 2007 gave international NGOs an 8 to 10
month time period to provide $350 million dollars annually (half of the expected $700 million
dollars of profit from petroleum extraction) to the Ecuadorian government to preserve this
rainforest eco-system. Based on substantial interest from European Union member states, such as
Italy and Germany and other international organizations, that time period was extended through
January 2009 in order to continue to seek funding for the campaign. “If we don’t get the money,
we’ll exploit ITT,” said Correa in a press conference (Correa, 2007). Thus, the international
nongovernmental community, in addition to state organizations and multinational corporations,
became embroiled in the rich rainforest dilemma.
By February 2009, President Correa, having established a high level Leadership and
Administrative Council (CAD) within his administration to develop the Yasuní-ITT proposal,
lifted the time limits on the proposal and made the initiative one of the country’s hallmark foreign
policies. The president, his Foreign Minister Fander Falconí, and the CAD members travelled
throughout Europe and the United States to garner support and funding for the innovative
proposal. By fall 2009, they had agreed to form the largest environmental trust fund in UN
history with the United Nations Development Fund (UNDP) to guarantee the investments in the
initiative and assure that oil would remain underground. In December 2009, the proposal was
presented at the UNFCCC Copenhagen Climate Change talks, but no official action was taken to
adopt it as part of a post-Kyoto agreement.
After the Copenhagen talks, supporters of the initiative criticized the government for not signing
the UNDP Trust Fund agreement. In the interim, President Correa outlined a new time limit for
collection of funds to keep oil underground. If they were not collected in 10 months, Correa
threatened to extract the oil. Then, in January 2010, just as the CAD members were finalizing the
UNDP Trust Fund guidelines to officially sign, President Correa announced that they were
“embarrassing” and threatened the sovereignty of the country. On the verge of such a historic
moment, CAD leaders President Roque Sevilla and former Minister of the Environment Yolanda
Kakabadse and Foreign Minister Fander Falconí resigned from their positions in protest of
President Correa’s response to the UNDP agreement and his inaction on the initiative. This
simulation will reconvene government and international officials to try to resolve the global
controversy.
Ecuador is no stranger to oil development. In the Amazon, exploration by Royal Dutch Shell
under its affiliate Anglo Saxon Petroleum Company Limited began in 1937, but was soon
abandoned. True exploration and extraction of oil from the Northern Amazon did not begin until
1971 with Texaco Oil Company of the United States in the Lago Area region. In this same year,
the first Hydrocarbon Law was passed, creating the legal-institutional structures to support
natural resource extraction. By 1974, the Corporación Estatal Petrolera Ecuatoriana (CEPE)
was formed and was part of a consortium with Texaco-Gulf.2
Map: Ecuador’s Oil Blocks
Source: Finer M, Jenkins CN, Pimm SL, Keane B, Ross C (2008) Oil and Gas Projects in the Western
Amazon: Threats to Wilderness, Biodiversity, and Indigenous Peoples. PLoS ONE 3(8): e2932.
doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0002932
Currently, 65 percent of Ecuador’s Amazon is zoned for oil activities. Since the 1970s oil boom,
multiple partnerships have formed between the state oil company, now called Petroecuador, and
transnational oil companies. The country boasts two oil pipelines that traverse its Amazonian
rainforest over the Andes Mountains to the coast. These activities have not gone without conflict
as will be discussed in the following chapters. Most notably, the lasting environmental impact of
Texaco (now Chevron-Texaco) on the Northern Amazon is still to be determined by a court of
law in Lago Agrio, Ecuador. Suffering from oil spills and seepage into ground-water systems
that rival the Alaskan Exxon Valdez disaster, local and indigenous peoples demanding a clean-up
opened a 1993 multi-billion dollar lawsuit against Texaco-Chevron in New York. The case was
moved to Ecuador in 2003 and awaits judgment in 2010.
Oil seepage into the Northern Ecuadorian Amazon, near Lago Agrio (photo taken by author)
The Campaign
Some scholars of international relations argue that global governance is a myth and that
nongovernmental actors are nothing more than international lobbying groups seeking foundation
funding and international organization contracts, but the international campaign to save El
Parque Nacional Yasuní in Ecuador provides fertile ground to contest these cynical claims.
According to Max Christian formerly of the Sustainable Development and Conservation Biology
program at the University of Maryland and former member of a US working group on the ITT
Block, President Correa --through Ambassador Luís Gallegos and Organization of American
States (OAS) Representative Gustavo Palacio in Washington, D.C. --asked international experts
to study the options for revenue-substitution for the ITT project to finance the moratorium on
Yasuní; thus seeking governance options outside the sovereign state. In addition, the Wallace
Global Fund as part of the Clinton Global Initiative funded a World Resources Institute (WRI)
study of the viability of revenue substitution models, such as carbon trading and debt
cancellation. As Christian pointed out, these models have implications on a global scale and they
may provide new options for avoided carbon emissions from leaving oil in place in order to
protect biodiversity and indigenous cultures, not a currently accepted methodology by the United
Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). Researchers on this project are
looking to interject the idea of leaving oil unexploited in order to protect biodiversity and
indigenous cultures into the post-Kyoto framework discussions.
President Correa has placed the Yasuní situation squarely on the shoulders of the international
community by stating, “Ecuador doesn’t ask for charity, but does ask that the international
community share in the sacrifice and compensates us with at least half of what our country would
receive, in recognition of the environmental benefits that would be generated by keeping this oil
underground” (Correa 2007). He and the Amazonía por la Vida supporters of the proposal note
that Ecuador has subscribed to international treaties on climate change (Kyoto Protocol), the
conservation of biodiversity (Yasuní as a UNESCO World Biosphere Reserve), and the
protection of designated protected areas and peoples (May 2006 Inter-American Commission on
Human Rights granting precautionary measures in favor of the Tagaeri-Taromenane peoples of
the ITT and Block 31 areas). According to the former Minister of Energy and Mines, Alberto
Acosta, Block 31 (contracted by Brazilian company Petrobras) oil activities were stalled for
nearly two years in favor of precautionary measures for the protection of the uncontacted
indigenous peoples (los intangibles) in this region. After that, Petrobras returned Block 31 to the
Ecuadorian state.
In support of the Yasuní-ITT Proposal, President Rafael Correa spoke before the UN General
Assembly on 24 September 2007 to explain his support of Ecuador’s plan and ask the global
community for a global solution that is “equal and fair” for all countries. He noted that while the
issue of climate change “has no borders,” it does have unequal distribution and impacts, such as
the “6 tons of carbon generated by the United States and the 1.3 tons average generated by the
rest of the world.” The plan to leave 920 million barrels of petroleum underground in the ITT
block of Yasuní would prevent the generation of over 111 million tons of carbon, while also
preserving the bio-diversity of the peoples and environment of the region. President Correa called
the world community to support this proposal by providing $5 per barrel left underground, rather
than the market value of $10-$15 per barrel. Over a ten year period, this would mean nearly $4.6
billion to be invested in this rainforest area. The plan, according to Correa, calls the global
citizenry to change their mindset of the market for the 21st Century to one that values not only
market price, but the “generation of value” for all of humanity (Correa 2007 http://www.Yasuníitt.gov.ec/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=21&Itemid=12). Thus, even the
Ecuadorian state is basing its argument in favor of global regimes and accepted international
norms and principles that have been established – another step in the direction of global
governance.
While this step toward global governance is noteworthy and the roles of NGOs like Amazonia
por la Vida, Save Americas Forests, and Amazon Watch are significant, the Ecuadorian state is
also rearing its powerful head as a country that is willing to develop its oil reserves. The previous
granting of rights to Petrobras of Block 31, just next to the ITT block in Yasuní National Park, is
a disconcerting sign to international supporters of Yasuní. In addition, Ecuador’s re-admittance to
OPEC and President Correa’s national decree of increasing profit-sharing with foreign oil
companies to 99% of the profits demonstrate a governmental desire to concentrate on oil profits
from this biodiverse region. Possible investment from China and Russia in Amazonian oil has
also recently been reported. Furthermore, neighboring country, Peru has granted drilling rights to
US Oil Company Barrett Resources in Block 67 and Spanish oil corporation Repsol in Block
39(Environmental News Service, 2007). These two Peruvian oil blocks border Yasuní National
Park and contain populations of uncontacted indigenous peoples (see map below).
Block 67
Block 39
(Courtesy of Max Christian, the Sustainable Development and Conservation Biology program at
the University of Maryland and member of a US working group on the ITT Block.)
Yet, the global campaign to save the ITT region of Yasuní is a “bright spot” among the
Amazonian oil development projects throughout Ecuador and Peru, according to scientist Dr.
Matt Finer of Save Americas Forests (Environmental News Service, 2007).
The Plan
The Yasuní-ITT proposal calls for co-responsibility with the rest of the world (common, but
differentiated) in avoiding emissions that the nearly 900 million barrels of oil in the ITT block
could produce. The world would pay for avoided carbon emissions in order to protect one of the
most biodiverse plots of Earth. The $350 million per year that Ecuador seeks each year for 13
years would be placed in a United Nations Development Program (UNDP) Trust Fund with a
board of directors that includes Ecuadorians as well as members of the global community. If
successful, it would be one of the largest global environmental trust funds of its kind. The funds
would be directed to protecting Yasuní National Park, improving the lives of those who live
within its boundaries, and to making Ecuador the country with the largest amount of land
protected as national parks – 38% of its total land mass. The ultimate goal is to transition
Ecuador from an economy and society dependent upon fossil fuels for its development to a postpetroleum society that focuses on sustainable development and living in harmony with nature –
the politics of the good life.
The good life is not just a utopian dream. It is a concept with deep and ancient roots within
indigenous communities that weaves their lives within and around their environments. For
indigenous peoples, nature and man are not separate; rather they co-exist in harmony. Through
this perspective, equitable and sustainable living within the environment is the priority over
development driven by profits and neo-liberal markets. Ecuadorians believe so much in this way
of living that they included it in their new constitution passed in Montecristi in 2008. The term
sumak kawsay in Quichua is the backbone of the policies that outline the rest of their new
constitution. In addition, Ecuadorians granted rights to nature – a first of its kind. Overall, the
politics of the good life are the driving elements in keeping oil underground in their Amazon and
in pursuing alternative energy policies in this resource-rich developing country.
The need to protect the world’s lungs – man’s natural carbon sink – is ever greater as scientists
predict that global warming will reduce the world’s glaciers and create dry savannah out of the
moist and humid Amazonian rainforest. The planet has changed so dramatically that Nobel
Prize-winning chemists Paul Crutzen and Eugene F. Stoermer have declared that we have entered
a new geological epoch – the Anthropocene Era.3
On June 23, 1988 James Hansen of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)
announced that the greenhouse effect was a reality, yet over 20 years later we lack clear and
innovative responses to this global crisis. Since then, carbon dioxide emission from fossil fuels
has increased over 37 percent with China now outranking the United States as the world’s
greatest emitter. In addition, deforestation has contributed annually to 6.5 billion more tons of
carbon dioxide emissions and the loss of 13 million hectares of land per year. 4 The cost of
deforestation in the Amazon is irreversible and has reached record proportions as 20 percent of
Brazil’s Amazon has been destroyed and estimates as high of 30 percent in Ecuador.5 James
Hansen recently remarked, “This is the last chance.”6
Negotiation
The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), the United Nations
Development Program (UNDP), and the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees
(UNHCR) have convened these negotiations in response to international concerns over the
situation in this region. With violence being reported in this area of the Amazon due to protests
over oil production, refugees from Colombia and possible FARC (revolutionary forces from
Colombia), and illegal timber trade, an agreement over the Yasuní National Park area would be a
welcome respite to the danger in this rainforest zone. However, Ecuador’s President Rafael
Correa has expansive social spending plans that would benefit from increased dollars in the
dwindling government coffers. In addition, the government in 2007 had signed memoranda with
Enlap of Chile, Sinopec of China, and Petrobras of Brazil for development of the ITT oil fields
with the Ecuadorian state oil company, Petroecuador. It is unclear whether the original vote of
confidence for leaving oil untouched by Ecuador’s President Correa was only a façade to please
the international environmental community and his former Minister of Energy and Mines Alberto
Acosta, or whether the government is seeking true global solutions to save this biodiverse plot of
Amazonía. Confounded by these issues is the fact that Petroecuador is a state-run company with
the purpose of developing oil fields in the country. This is at direct odds with the “Save Yasuní”
campaign, but must be dealt with in this negotiation. Finally, neighboring Peru, Colombia,
Venezuela, Brazil, and Bolivia are watching Ecuador to see if the international community will
truly commit to funding such a campaign. If so, this would have grave implications for their
rainforest areas. If not, the opposite could be true.
Under the CAD leadership of 2009, Germany had pledged $50 million per year for a 13-year time
period, and Italy, Spain, France, and Belgium had reportedly agreed to funding. These promising
funds now hang in the balance as President Correa again is threatening to drill in the ITT block.
Yet, local and international NGOs have mounted a campaign to keep “oil in the soil.” This
conference has been convened to address these issues and resolve this disagreement.
The objective of the conference is to negotiate a Memorandum of Understanding among the
internal Ecuadorian parties, international actors, PetroEcuador, Ecuadorian government officials,
and other oil company officials. In previous UN-sponsored consultations, the parties have agreed
to this process, and the government has also agreed to submit the memorandum for legislative
authorization so that it will have the force of law. This process has taken two years of
negotiations among the myriad of actors in this simulation. The substantive issues at stake—
security, conservation, investment, human rights and political participation—will be the focus of
this current round of talks. Some of the key questions to be resolved are (in no particular order):
 What is the monetary limit the government and Petroecuador will accept to leave the ITT
block undeveloped?
 Who will donate these resources for its protection?
 Who will manage the donated funds and how will they be directed? (Currently the
Ecuadorian government has criticized the UNDP Trust Fund proposal)
 How will this impact future investment in the oil industry in Ecuador and what are the
consequences for future oil drilling contracts?
 Can Sinopec, Enlap, Petrobras, or other state-run oil companies, and Petroecuador
develop the ITT block in a sustainable manner that satisfies all parties
 What will happen to the uncontacted indigenous peoples (los intangibles) and how will
they be protected and represented?
 What are the implications for the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate
Change (UNFCCC)?
 Will there be a monitoring body/agency to ensure protection of Yasuní in either case – oil
drilling or protection?
 What will that body look like and who will comprise it?
 What is the role of NGOs and does that differ between Northern and Southern NGOs?
As a participant, you will assume the role of a representative to one of the parties in the conflict.
You are expected to represent the interests of your role in these negotiations. Given the actors
from the international and Ecuadorian communities, you will likely have to represent your plans
and ideas on various levels and seek support of actors from global and national arenas.
The goal of these negotiations is for the participants to develop proposals that will address the
economic, environmental, and security interests in the region. The unanimous approval of such a
proposal would be seen as the building block for stability in this region of the rainforest and
would act as a global catalyst for new conservation policies.
All actors in this simulation will have the ability to create a proposal. However, only Ecuadorian
officials will ultimately approve the final accepted proposal. This means that NGOs, oil
companies, and other state actors will need to work hard to influence each other and the
Ecuadorian government to support their ultimate proposal of choice. However, global actors are
significant in that they influence the post-Kyoto dialog and are simultaneously creating proposals
that fit both Ecuador and are transferable to the greater global community with the purpose of
keeping petroleum in the rainforest underground. Thus, Ecuadorian officials are involved in the
two-level game of international and national dialogs and goals with unique outcomes.
Participants
Negotiation Facilitator: Helen Clark (former Prime Minister of New Zealand) and director of the
UNDP who was working with former Minister of Foreign Affairs Fander Falconi and Minister of
Natural and Cultural Heritage Maria Fernanda Espinosa on the 2009 UNDP Trust Fund
Agreement.
President Rafael Correa of Ecuador: President Correa is an economist who earned his Ph.D. in
Illinois in the USA. He was a professor at La Universidad San Francisco de Quito and was active
in the political movement that ousted former president, Lucio Gutierrrez. Correa has been
controversial as he booted the World Bank representative from the country, saying that this
organization was unjust. He has publicly befriended Hugo Chavez of Venezuela, and organized
the Constituent Assembly to re-write their constitution. He agreed to extend a moratorium on the
Yasuní drilling until he could study all implications of the oil extraction. It is unclear whether he
supports a moratorium, or whether he would prefer to use the oil profits to fund his social
programs for the government.
Ecuadorian Administrative and Leadership Council on the Yasuní-ITT Initiative:

President, Roque Sevilla: Owner of Metropolitan Touring Company and former Mayor of
Quito; Sevilla has an MBA from Harvard and was the President of Fundacion Natura where he
negotiated Ecuador’s first debt-for-nature swaps.


Yolanda Kakabadse: former Minister of the Environment, and long-time member of the
environmental NGO community, including World Resources Institute (WRI), has been a
venerable force for the campaign from civil society.
Ambassador Francisco Carrión Mena - Personal Representative of President Rafael
Correa from the Ministry of Foreign Relations until he was officially appointed to the
Administrative and Leadership Council for the Yasuní-ITT proposal until December
2009. He is now Ecuador’s Ambassador to the United Nations and has vowed to work to
develop this initative with the UNDP. He was also the Minister of Foreign Relations
under the previous administration of former President Lucio Gutierrez. Ambassador
Carrion has personally been travelling through Europe to present the plan to respective
interested parties. In September 2008, he met with the Vice Minister of Foreign Affairs in
Italy, Ambassador Vicenzo Scotti, to review the details of the campaign. During the visit,
Italy pledged its support of the initiative, but has not given exact dollar amounts for that
support.
Former Minister of Energy and Mines, Alberto Acosta: Dr. Acosta is a trained economist who
has been against drilling in ITT for years. He was the initial organizer and backer of a proposal,
supported by various environmental NGOs, to stop oil development in this block. Acosta was the
President of the Constituent Assembly to re-write the Constitution as part of the Alianza País
block of President Correa until he resigned during the summer 2008 in protest against what he
argued was a hasty process. Acosta is a main player in this campaign and has facilitated much
international dialog with his European colleagues and NGO allies. He collaborated with Acción
Ecológica on a book entitled, Ecuador Post-Petrolero.
Minister of Foreign Affairs Fander Falconí – Minister Falconí is a trained ecological economist.
He has published on the issue of natural resources and Ecuador and was the Director of the
National Planning Secretariat, which has aligned the goals of the regime with public policies.
Falconí included this initiative in the National Plan.
Minister of National Heritage Maria Fernanda Espinosa: President’ Correa’s first Minister of
Foreign Affairs, María Fernanda Espinosa Garcés, was formerly the International Union for
Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Regional Director for South America. She was also Senior
Advisor on Biodiversity and Indigenous Peoples for IUCN. When President Correa announced
his official support of leaving oil underground in the ITT block in June 2007, he designated the
study of the proposal to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, headed by Minister Espinosa. Until
December 2009, Minister Espinosa was the Ecuaodorian Ambassador to the United Nations and
has been working on the UNDP Trust Fund for the Yasuní-ITT proposal.
Minister of Non-renewable Energy and Mines, Germanico Pinto Troya: Dr. Pinto is an engineer
by training and, as Minister, he meets with Petroecuador to develop and supervise petroleum and
mining extraction activities throughout the country. The success of this institution is its
continued and effective extraction of natural resources. This ministry has previously reviewed
scenarios of drilling in the ITT block with China, Chile, and Brazil.
Petroecuador, Executive President Admiral Luís Jaramillo Arias: Petroecuador is run by a
military official. Admiral Jaramillo was educated in Chile and holds a Masters in Security
Studies. His main objective is to increase production of oil drilling sites within the country.
There have been various security issues at oil sites in the Amazon as indigenous organizations
have sabotaged and vandalized the oleoducts that carry crude oil to the coast as a form of protest
against oil development in their areas.
Sinopec China
Petrobras Brazil
Enlap Chile
All three oil companies are state-owned in
their respective countries and are seeking
drilling rights with Petroecuador through a
consortium. This process began in 2007 and
Russia may be a contender as well.
German Director of the Economic Cooperation and Development Enterprise in Ecuador ,Peter
Holla has proposed that the German government support the ITT moratorium through pledging
funds to protect Yasuní National Park and its indigenous peoples.
Vice President María Teresa Fernández de la Vega, Spain: V.P. Fernandez de la Vega is working
with UNDP and the Ecuadorian government on this proposal. Spain pledged $4 million to to the
UNDP to support protect this block.
Francesco Martone, former Senator from Italy: Senator Martone has brought the ITT issue to the
Italian Parliament. He is a friend of Dr. Alberto Acosta and is seeking European Union allies for
support of a moratorium on ITT.
Government of Norway: has also pledged funds to keeping oil underground in ITT block.
Norway recently awarded Brazil $1B to protect its Amazonian region.
Acción Ecológica: This is an Ecuadorian NGO that has been very politically active in struggles
against the oil industry in the Amazon. Its campaign leader, Esperanza Martinez, is a scientist by
training and is also worked in the constituent Assembly to represent indigenous and
environmental demands in a new Ecuadorian constitution. Acción Ecológica has been very
critical of the imperialist maneuvers of Northern-based NGOs, but does coordinate with them.
They have supported President Correa’s leadership on the Yasuní-ITT proposal, even though he
has been critical of their organization.
Amazon Watch (Kevin Koenig is their representative in Ecuador): This is a strong ally of NGOs
in Ecuador for supporting the moratorium on the ITT block in Yasuní Nacional Park. Its director,
Atossa Soltani, brought Daryl Hannah and Martin Sheen to Ecuador to videotape footages of the
pristine rainforest of Yasuní. This was shown during the Live Earth concert that Al Gore hosted.
Amazon Watch has a controversial role in this campaign as it is a Northern-NGO that is
sometimes criticized for “robbing the spotlight” from the local activists and issues.
Finding Species: This Ecuadorian and US-based NGO began working on issues impacting the
biodiversity of Yasuní National Park in 2003 when it documented, through photography, the
biodiversity of the park and the effects of roads that were built for oil companies – specifically
the Auca and Maxus roads within the park. In 2004, they sponsored 25 researchers to study
Yasuní National Park and report their results in October 2004 in Mindo, Ecuador, at a conference
on tropical forests. The results from this conference and the photographs combined to form a
travelling photo documentary of Yasuní National Park that was displayed all over the country.
Their Ecuadorian representative is Veronica Quininga and their US-based scientist is Margo
Bass.
Save America’s Forests: This NGO is a scientific-community based NGO. It too is a Northernbased NGO. They support the moratorium on Yasuní due to its diverse flora and fauna and
indigenous peoples. They have conducted studies on this mega-diverse plot of the rainforest and
have appealed to the US Congress to support the Save Yasuní initiative. Dr. Matt Finer is their
staff ecologist who is responsible, in coordination with other scientists, for leading the most
significant documentation of the park’s biodiversity.
World Resources Institute: Max Christian of formerly o f the University of Maryland worked
with WRI to create new carbon trading schemes through the UN Framework Convention on
Climate Change. He and WRI (funded by the Wallace Global Fund) have been creating scientific
studies of the impacts of leaving oil underground in the rainforest. Remi Moncel and Jacob
Werksman are also current members of the WRI team organizing this campaign. While WRI has
been very supportive of the initiative, it more recently has stepped back from its initial
enthusiasm.
Resources/News about Ecuador and Oil:
www.amazoniaporlavida.org
www.liveYasuní.org
www.amazonwatch.org
www.accionecologica.org
www.saveamericasforests.org
www.wri.org
http://www.ecuador.com/news/
http://www.menergia.gov.ec/
http://www.Yasuní-itt.gov.ec
Simulation Dynamics
All participants should research their roles carefully and identify their interests, allies, and
those with whom they will work on global and national levels. Research may be conducted
on-line and should include the websites listed in this scenario description. In addition, NGO
websites and Lexis-Nexis news sources will provide further background and information on
your role and on the situation in Yasuní.
The negotiation process involves on-line and in-person discussion among parties. At all
times you are reminded to use diplomatic language and etiquette. The discussion board in
Blackboard and chat rooms are available for confidential conversations within groups as
well as for posting messages among and between groups. Preliminary proposals and
strategies should be discussed here. The instructor will be tracking these conversations and
you will be graded on your performance both on-line and in-class.
The simulation will also include 2 days of in-person negotiation, directed by our UN
representative(s). In-person negotiation will consist of each group/participant stating their
plan and agenda and breaking for caucus to negotiate details of proposals. The goal in these
in-person sessions is to convince other delegates to accept your plan and to work toward a
Memorandum of Understanding.
Proposals will be submitted via Assignments in Blackboard. Voting will take place in class
on the last day of the simulation. Any proposal requiring the outlay of money will require
that one of the parties present pay for it – there is no option for external funding from parties
not present in these negotiations (such as the United States or other countries not
represented).
Proposals must have a total of two sponsors, the author of the proposal and one additional
party, to be eligible for voting. These proposals will need to be approved (voted for) by
ALL three voting parties to be considered a total success. The voting parties are President
Correa, Minister Falconí, Minister Carrion, Minister Pinto, and Petroecuador Executive
President Jaramillo. Other groups (NGOs, oil companies, other states) are here in an
advisory capacity only, but can advocate for positions and participate in making proposals.
They can also pledge resources or other support for agreements (such as future agreements
on Climate Change and underground carbon emissions), which will need to be included in
the final proposal to be binding.
Please remember to come to class professionally dressed and ready to represent your
participant-role. Research and prior negotiations on-line will be the key to success.
Moreover, you will need to push the role of the character beyond the description based in
this simulation as negotiations and proposals will force you to think beyond the current
events of the situation in order to imagine a better solution.
Grading Guidelines
Grading Percentages:
Report 1: Goals and Tactics (Team)
20
Proposal (Team)
30
Negotiations (Individual and Team)
20
Post Simulation Reflection (Individual)
30
Total
100
Pre-Negotiation Activities
Step 1: Choose a group and collaborate/research.
Step 2: Report 1: Pre negotiation planning and tactics.
Report 1: Goals and Tactics- 1-2 pages, 12 point font and one inch margins. This is a group
report.
In your report, please refer to the following items:
a) What are your main interests?(4 points)
b) What are your alternatives to a negotiated agreement? What is your best alternative?
(4 points)
c) What elements of proposals will you accept and which will you have to forgo? (2
points)
d) What tactics have you and will you use for negotiation? (5 points)
Step 3: Negotiate and Develop Team Strategy and Goals: Send Messages to other groups. Each
group must send negotiating messages for proposal development and agreement within the group
and among the groups before the first day of formal negotiations. The facilitator must e-mail all
parties to encourage common proposals and make suggestions for negotiations.
Negotiations: Day 1 and Day 2
Day 1, Mar. 1: First day of Negotiations DUE: a first draft proposal from each group or
teams of groups that will be circulated in negotiations in class. The proposal must contain the
names of the groups and the group members and should be 2-3 pages maximum, 12 point font, 1
inch margins - must include unique proposal suggestions based on current information on Yasuní
National Park and Ecuador. Please use citations and references per the APSA format – minimum
of 3.
Proposal:
In your proposal, please refer to the following items:
 The value of the moratorium
 The payment of the moratorium with specific figures from actors
 The monitoring of Yasuní National Park and who will do this and how
 The possible oil concessions and pricing
 The oil development contract with whom and how
 The extraction standards and environmental impact plan
 The revenues generated by oil versus a moratorium, OR the value of a moratorium versus
revenue generation by oil
Grading:
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
f)
Appropriate conditions chosen
Outside research conducted and cited
New Conditions given
Organization
Grammar/Structure
Total
10
5
10
2
3
30
Negotiation: Send messages in Blackboard before and after class to encourage agreement around
one proposal (which will likely be an amalgamation of the various proposals).
Negotiations Grading:
a) clear and appropriate position
12345
b) knowledge of the group
c) plan/strategy
d) *active in negotiations/discussion in
class and on-line
e) Total
12345
12345
12345
20 points
Day 2: Second Day of Negotiations Final Proposal: By Wednesday, we must review proposals
and discuss them so that we can vote in class on Friday for the proposal that will be accepted..
Each group proposal should be 2 pages maximum, 12 point font, 1 inch margins –must include
unique proposal suggestions based on current information on Yasuní National Park and Ecuador.
This should be e-mailed to the class, the instructor, and the facilitator from our Blackboard email account.
Day 3: Final Day of Negotiations and Proposal Voting. This is our final day to discuss
relevant proposals and add any final touches to them for a vote taken in class. We will also wrap
up the negotiation and discuss the outcomes after the vote is taken. All proposals MUST BE
FINALIZED before class in order to vote. You can share proposals via Blackboard e-mail.
Please be sure to follow the proposal guidelines above to receive full credit.
Post Simulation Reflection DUE in Blackboard: Reflect on simulation and outcomes based on
our readings in the class. Format: 2 pages, 12 point font, 1 inch margins.
Please answer the following questions:
a.
What is your view of globalization and world politics after this simulation? Is it closer
to the realists, liberal institutionalists, world systems theory, Marxists, global systems
theory, transnational advocacy networks, or something else? (6 points)
b. Who were the important actors in the simulation in terms of power (hard and soft) and
why? (6 points)
c.
Refer to at least 3 of our readings thus far and explain how the simulation concurred
with or diverted from the readings. (6 points)
d. What did you learn about globalization from this simulation? Please be as specific as
possible. (6 points)
e.
What would you suggest President Rafael Correa do with the situation in the ITT block
of Yasuní National Park? (6 points)
Total = 30 points
1
World Bank, Ecuador Poverty Assessment,
http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/COUNTRIES/LACEXT/ECUADOREXTN/0,,contentMDK:2041
5456~pagePK:1497618~piPK:217854~theSitePK:325116,00.html
2
Acosta, La Maldición de la Abundancia, pp. 37-40
3
Flavin, Engelman, “The Perfect Storm”, pp. 5
4
Flavin and Engelman, “The Perfect Storm”, pp. 6-7
5
Mecham 2001
6
Flavin and Engelman, “The Perfect Storm”, pp.7