Environmentalism in Latin America

Today, about 75% of Latin Americans reside in urban areas. This has not always been the case. In Table 1, we show the changes in the urban percentage of the population between 1950 and 1990. In 1950, less than 50% of the population lived in urban areas.

Country	%Urban 1950	%Urban 1990	%change
Argentina	65.3%	86.5%	21.2%
Bolivia	37.8%	55.8%	18.0%
Brazil	36.0%	74.6%	38.7%
Chile	58.4%	83.3%	24.9%
Colombia	37.1%	70.0%	32.9%
Costa Rica	33.5%	47.1%	13.6%
Dominican Republic	23.7%	60.4%	36.7%
Ecuador	28.3%	54.8%	26.5%
El Salvador	36.5%	43.9%	7.4%
Guatemala	29.5%	39.4%	9.9%
Honduras	17.6%	40.7%	23.1%
Mexico	42.7%	72.6%	29.9%
Nicaragua	34.9%	59.8%	24.9%
Panama	35.8%	51.7%	15.9%
Paraguay	34.6%	48.9%	14.3%
Peru	35.5%	69.8%	34.3%
Puerto Rico	40.6%	71.3%	30.7%
Uruguay	78.0%	88.9%	10.9%
Venezuela	53.2%	90.4%	37.2%

(source: United Nation, World Urbanization Prospects: 1994 Revision, Population Division, NY, 1995)

A great deal of the population shift has been due to rural-to-urban migration. Such shifts occurred for a variety of economic and social reasons: growing rural populations, more jobs and better wages in the cities, easy transportation, support networks, armed conflicts in the countryside, wars, and so on. The rapid, unplanned growth of the urban population led to a host of problems, of which environmental problems are perhaps the most visible. These include:

These problems incur vast economic, social and health costs. For example, in 1991, the cholera epidemic in Peru caused over 320,000 cases, 2,600 deaths and $1 billion in direct economic losses, when a smaller investment in water, sanitation, sewerage treatment and food safety might have prevented the epidemic. Compared to a cholera epidemic, environmental pollution may be less dramatic, but the consequences may be more severe.

Some major Latin American cities (for example, Mexico City, Santiago and São Paulo) are among the most polluted in the world. Size is not always the dominant factor. Mexico City's problems are exacerbated by its location in a basin at high altitude, where thermal inversions trap cold, stagnant air. Rio de Janeiro may contain many automobile and industrial plants, but there are sea breezes to clear the air. Table 2 shows some standard air quality measures.

City	Sulfur Dioxide	Suspended Particulates	Airborne Lead	Carbon Monoxide	Nitrogen Dioxide	Ozone
Mexico City	Serious	Serious	Above guideline	Serious	Above guideline	Serious
São Paulo	Low	Above guideline	Low	Above guideline	Above guideline	Serious

(source: UNEP/WHO (1992), Urban Air Pollution in Megacities of the World, Blackwell, Oxford)

What does the 'serious' classification in the above table mean? For example, in the case of Mexico City, this meant the production of an estimated 451,000 metric tons of suspended particulate matter and 206,000 metric tons of sulfur dioxide in 1990. Suspended particular matter are smoke, soot, dust and liquid droplets from combustion which are associated with a wide range of chronic respiratory diseases, heart diseases and other ill heath conditions among humans. Sulfur dioxide emissions lead to acid rains, which cause serious defoliation and other environmental damages.

What does the citizenry think about all this? For most people, the presence and effects of environmental pollution are evident everywhere. The real question is their level of concern. In the Los Medios y Mercados de Latinoamérica study, we asked whether or not people agree with the statement: "I am very concerned that pollution is affecting people's health". It turned out that 82% of the people agreed with the statement. In Table 3, we break down the answer by various geo-demographic subgroups.

Geo-demographic group	%Agree
Argentina	54
Brazil	90
Chile	65
Colombia	85
Mexico	78
Puerto Rico	89
Venezuela	89
Balance Central America	88
Balance South America	77
Male	81
Female	83
Age 12-17	89
Age 18-24	89
Age 25-34	85
Age 35-44	84
Age 45-54	82
Age 55-64	83
Education less than 6 yrs	86
Education 6 to 11 years	90
Education 12 or more years	85
Socio-economic Level A	81
Socio-economic Level B	83
Socio-economic Level C	82
Socio-economic Level D	82

There does not appear to be much difference by age, sex, education and socio-economic level. In fact, the biggest differences are that Argentina and Chile are lower than the other countries. Unfortunately, our study does not allow us to determine the reason(s). Are these two countries actually less polluted? Do the people in these countries perceive their countries to be less polluted? Are they less aware of the effects? Or are they simply less concerned?

In as much as environmental pollution comes from multiple sources, the reduction of the problem has to be tackled by governments, non-government organizations, corporations and individuals alike. The largest single role has to be played by the government, which must regulate and enforce anti-pollution measures. These are not simple decisions, as there must be a balance struck between reducing environmental pollution and disruption of commerce, and between conservative fiscal policies and ambitious spending programs. Sometimes, even the best of intentions may lead to contradictory results. For example, the Hoy no circula program in Mexico City was intended to reduce traffic by forbidding driving one day per week depending on the license number, but the program was easily subverted and may have contributed to increased vehicle sales.

It would be nice for the private sector to act as responsible citizens and spontaneously do their own share. Now, corporations are driven by the profit motive, and one might suppose that their current modes of operation maximize short-term corporate profits irrespective of any long-term costs to society at large. This might mean that they would not be motivated to change anything.

In the Los Medios y Mercados de Latinoamérica study, we asked whether or not the respondents agree with the statement: "I would pay more for a product made by a company which respects and improves the environment". Overall, 75% of the respondents agreed with this statement. In Table 4, we have broken down the answer by geo-demographic subgroups. Again, there is not much difference by age, sex, education and socio-economic level. Argentina appears to be significantly lower than the other countries, but still more than half its people agreed with the statement.

Geo-demographic group	%Agree
Argentina	52
Brazil	80
Chile	72
Colombia	71
Mexico	67
Puerto Rico	84
Venezuela	87
Balance Central America	84
Balance South America	71
Male	78
Female	72
Age 12-17	72
Age 18-24	75
Age 25-34	78
Age 35-44	77
Age 45-54	72
Age 55-64	69
Education less than 6 yrs	75
Education 6 to 11 years	74
Education 12 or more years	77
Socio-economic Level A	73
Socio-economic Level B	78
Socio-economic Level C	77
Socio-economic Level D	71

Corporations have the opportunity to make environment-friendly products without necessarily sacrificing profits. They also have the responsibility to act as good corporate citizens.