Source
doi:10.1007/s44168-022-00022-5 — original publication (opens in a new tab; the file is not redistributed)
Summary
Fonseca et al. (2022) present a perspective essay positioning ecovillages within the “pluriverse” of community-led alternatives — a plural set of counter-hegemonic social and environmental possibilities grounded in decolonial and post-development theory. Drawing on the Buen Vivir paradigm (Kichwa sumak kawsay; Aymara suma qamaña) and scholars including Escobar, Kothari, and Quijano, the paper argues that ecovillages function as prefigurative communities challenging Western development premises, and that confluences across diverse community-led alternatives can contribute to just climate action aligned with the Paris Agreement and 2030 Agenda. The paper explicitly cites the GEN 2022 canonical four-dimension ecovillage definition.
Key thesis insights
-
GEN (2022) canonical ecovillage definition — GEN 2022 defines ecovillage as “intentional, traditional, or urban community that is consciously designed through locally owned participatory processes in all four dimensions of sustainability (social, culture, ecology, and economy) to regenerate social and natural environments.” The four-dimension framework (social, cultural, ecological, economic) independently cross-validates the SSI framework’s multi-domain scope and provides an institutionally authoritative definition for the thesis’s use of the ecovillage concept. LIT_026
-
Ecovillages as prefigurative communities — The paper synthesises multiple theoretical framings: “niches of grassroots innovation” (Roysen and Mertens 2019; Boyer 2015), “demonstrative centers in sustainable practices” (Salazar 2013), “alternative development paradigm” (Veteto and Lockyer 2008). This plurality positions ecovillages as communities that embody future social organisation in the present — not merely sustainable housing projects — and supports the thesis argument that community-scale self-sufficiency is a social movement with political implications beyond technical implementation. LIT_026
-
Buen Vivir as decolonial counterpoint to Western self-sufficiency — Buen Vivir (Kichwa sumak kawsay; Aymara suma qamaña) foregrounds communal wellbeing, ecological belonging, and relational sufficiency rather than individual accumulation and growth. Provides a decolonial challenge to interrogate whether “self-sufficiency” as a concept carries Western individualist assumptions that need qualifying in community settings — particularly relevant for the thesis’s engagement with Māori community models alongside the SSI framework. LIT_026
-
Pluriverse framing: ecovillages as one among many alternatives — The “pluriverse” (a world where many worlds fit) positions ecovillages not as the singular alternative but as part of a plural set of counter-hegemonic possibilities alongside indigenous territorial practices, solidarity economies, and traditional communities. Supports the thesis position that Neobiome is one manifestation of a generalisable framework, not a prescriptive model. LIT_026
-
Triune ethics of Buen Vivir communal practice — Cultural identity, social equity, and ecological sustainability are identified as the three co-equal dimensions of Buen Vivir communal ethics — an alternative to techno-economic sustainability framing. The triune structure parallels the SSI framework’s inclusion of I03 (Culture and Traditional Wisdom), I04 (Human Development), and I09 (Environmental Sustainability) alongside economic and technical indicators, reinforcing the thesis argument that self-sufficiency cannot be reduced to technology. LIT_026