262
A. Fabri and D. Floriani
The GL is a concept in construction that brings together ideas and antagonistic
practices to the ideas disseminated by the conventional development, blindly aimed
for the economic growth and mass consumption and that over time, ends up resulting
in violence, social inequality and environmental degradation. The GL is also a critical
reflection of Latin America and it is based mainly on ontologies and worldviews of
the indigenous peoples from Abya Ayla (the name that replaces America, indicating
that it is not just another name, but the presence of another subject as the discourse
speaker, who until now has been silent and subalternized in political terms: the
autochthonous peoples).
The GL is a concept in construction that can be adjusted to each locality and
socio-environmental circumstance. For Alberto Acosta, the GL cannot be reduced to
Western welfare, it must be supported by Indigenous cosmovisions in which material goods are not the only determinants (Acosta 2008). For David Choquehuanca,
intellectual aymara, the GL means to “recover the culture of life in complete harmony and mutual respect with nature, where everything is life and there is nothing
separate” (Choquehuanca 2010). For Gudynas, there are three plans to address the
construction of the GL concept: the ideas (radical questioning of the conceptual bases
of development), the discourses (the construction of other ways of speaking, writing
or thinking about the world, people and nature) and the practices (concrete actions,
political projects, governmental initiatives, regulatory frameworks) (Gudynas 2011).
From the imaginary of the GL, as it has settled itself in the life of the Andean
and Amazonian peoples—the imaginary of a community life within an ecological
community-derives another imaginary, that of the rights of nature. In the postulation
of nature as a subject of law, the imaginary derived from phenomenology and existential ontology is expressed in the philosophical revolution that operates facing the
rationalism of modernity (Leff 2010).
The GL has had one of its first formal appearances in 2008 in the new constitution of Ecuador as Sumak Kawsai (living and cohabiting—Quechua), where nature
appears as the subject of law and in the new constitution of the Plurinational State of
Bolivia of 2009, which offers ideas of good living as moral ethical principle according
to several autochthonous peoples, such as the suma qamaña (vivir bien—Aymara)
and ñandereko (harmonious life—Guarani).
For Huanacuni (2010) intellectual Aymara the GL cannot be equated with Western
development because “development is inappropriate and highly dangerous to apply
in indigenous societies, as it is conceived in the Western world. The introduction of
development among Indigenous Peoples slowly annihilates our own philosophy of
good living, as it disintegrates the communal and cultural life of our communities
by wiping out the foundations of both subsistence and our abilities and knowledge
to satisfy our needs ourselves” (Huanacuni 2010).
According to Torres (2001), GL is a well-being space where people, animals and
crops coexist harmoniously, where there is no modern duality that separates society
from nature, since one complements the other, so they are inseparable.
The manifestation of GL aims to show the world that “other ways of life are possible” and that they are intrinsic parts of their ways of being cultural, at a time when
global problems (climate change) continue to be managed within the strategies gen-
A. Fabri and D. Floriani
The GL is a concept in construction that brings together ideas and antagonistic
practices to the ideas disseminated by the conventional development, blindly aimed
for the economic growth and mass consumption and that over time, ends up resulting
in violence, social inequality and environmental degradation. The GL is also a critical
reflection of Latin America and it is based mainly on ontologies and worldviews of
the indigenous peoples from Abya Ayla (the name that replaces America, indicating
that it is not just another name, but the presence of another subject as the discourse
speaker, who until now has been silent and subalternized in political terms: the
autochthonous peoples).
The GL is a concept in construction that can be adjusted to each locality and
socio-environmental circumstance. For Alberto Acosta, the GL cannot be reduced to
Western welfare, it must be supported by Indigenous cosmovisions in which material goods are not the only determinants (Acosta 2008). For David Choquehuanca,
intellectual aymara, the GL means to “recover the culture of life in complete harmony and mutual respect with nature, where everything is life and there is nothing
separate” (Choquehuanca 2010). For Gudynas, there are three plans to address the
construction of the GL concept: the ideas (radical questioning of the conceptual bases
of development), the discourses (the construction of other ways of speaking, writing
or thinking about the world, people and nature) and the practices (concrete actions,
political projects, governmental initiatives, regulatory frameworks) (Gudynas 2011).
From the imaginary of the GL, as it has settled itself in the life of the Andean
and Amazonian peoples—the imaginary of a community life within an ecological
community-derives another imaginary, that of the rights of nature. In the postulation
of nature as a subject of law, the imaginary derived from phenomenology and existential ontology is expressed in the philosophical revolution that operates facing the
rationalism of modernity (Leff 2010).
The GL has had one of its first formal appearances in 2008 in the new constitution of Ecuador as Sumak Kawsai (living and cohabiting—Quechua), where nature
appears as the subject of law and in the new constitution of the Plurinational State of
Bolivia of 2009, which offers ideas of good living as moral ethical principle according
to several autochthonous peoples, such as the suma qamaña (vivir bien—Aymara)
and ñandereko (harmonious life—Guarani).
For Huanacuni (2010) intellectual Aymara the GL cannot be equated with Western
development because “development is inappropriate and highly dangerous to apply
in indigenous societies, as it is conceived in the Western world. The introduction of
development among Indigenous Peoples slowly annihilates our own philosophy of
good living, as it disintegrates the communal and cultural life of our communities
by wiping out the foundations of both subsistence and our abilities and knowledge
to satisfy our needs ourselves” (Huanacuni 2010).
According to Torres (2001), GL is a well-being space where people, animals and
crops coexist harmoniously, where there is no modern duality that separates society
from nature, since one complements the other, so they are inseparable.
The manifestation of GL aims to show the world that “other ways of life are possible” and that they are intrinsic parts of their ways of being cultural, at a time when
global problems (climate change) continue to be managed within the strategies gen-