Climate Change

January 20 2025 Climate Change, Human Rights, Indigenous Rights

Let's talk about project closure and responsible exit

No mining, fossil fuel extraction or power generation project lasts forever. Their useful life is determined by internal factors, such as the quantity of resource reserves, and external factors, such as declining demand or financial problems.But no matter how long a project lasts or how it is affected, its promoters—whether public or private—must provide for a closure and responsible exit process that considers the natural environment and affected communities, and that is desired and promoted by all stakeholders.This issue is even more relevant in the context of actions needed to address the climate crisis, largely related to the energy transition, which generally implies the substitution of fossil fuel extraction and use projects, as well as the promotion of low-emission renewable energies associated with mineral extraction. In both scenarios, closure and exit issues are of great importance.In the first, it is necessary to incorporate concrete and enforceable commitments to close down and move on from existing projects. In the second, these requirements should be built in from the planning and pre-feasibility stages and should also be included in the environmental impact assessments and subsequent stages.In all projects, the role of the promoters is essential. Likewise, the obligation of the state to supervise and monitor is of great importance in order to protect and guarantee the rights of those who may be affected. In some cases, the responsible exit also includes other key actors that are part of the value and supply chains of the projects: investors, financiers, insurers, suppliers, distributors and buyers, among others.Therefore, the discussion of project closure and responsible exit is essential to environmental protection and climate management in Latin America.What do we mean by project closure and exit?All mining and energy projects have different phases in their life cycle: initiation, planning, execution, monitoring and control, closure, and post-closure. In turn, they have supply and value chains that, as we have said, involve actors from different sectors.In this context, closure refers to the stage of a project in which it ceases to operate and is terminated. Exit, on the other hand, refers to the decision and subsequent process in which the different actors in the project's value and supply chain, in their own roles, completely disengage from the project. What does it mean for a closing and exit process to be responsible?There is currently no consensus on the definition and scope of responsible exit and fair project closure processes. Sometimes these terms are used indiscriminately, which can lead to confusion about the responsibilities of the actors involved and the scope of the processes to be carried out. However, there are elements that allow these concepts to be explained precisely:Responsible and fair project closure is a planned, upfront process that should be considered from the earliest stages of a project and continually updated as the project evolves. Responsible closure ensures a planned, coordinated and participatory cessation of activities and dismantling, and guarantees the right to a healthy environment.The planning and development of a closure plan should focus on risk management as well as impact prevention and mitigation. This will ensure a responsible closure in which the affected areas can be readapted and made safe for both nature and communities, while allowing the ecosystems to recover their functions.The general obligation of the project developer is to properly identify the impacts that the project may cause and to adequately and timely comply with the measures approved by the State in its environmental management instruments.The main obligation of the State (in addition to its general regulatory duty) is to supervise and monitor the project to verify compliance with the developer's obligations and to prevent environmental and/or social damage.The role of other actors in the value and supply chain is to act with due diligence, to use their influence to encourage the promoter to comply with its obligations and, in the event of non-compliance, to act within their role and influence to ensure that the necessary corrective measures are taken.Responsible and fair exit refers to the process undertaken by the various actors in the value and supply chain when they decide to fully divest from a project, considering the responsibilities inherent in their role, which include fulfilling their obligations with respect to human rights and due diligence.In Latin America, there has been important progress in regulating aspects related to the permitting, commissioning and implementation of mining and energy projects. However, experience has shown that there are significant challenges in ensuring that the closure and exit processes are responsible for the ecosystems and communities involved.To learn more about this issue, see our report Closure and Responsible Exit. A requirement for environmental and climate justice in Latin America (in Spanish).

December 04 2024 Climate Change, Human Rights

Session 2 of the 2024 GCF Watch International Webinar Series

Best Practices for Effective Climate Action: Insights from the GCF and Lessons for other Funds For the fourth consecutive year, we invite all civil society members following the GCF and other funds under the UNFCCC to attend two dynamic sessions on October 9th and December 4th.This year, we are excited to introduce a more interactive format, featuring presentations and live interviews between a moderator and CSO representatives. This second and final session reflected on the outcomes of COP29, focusing on key decisions related to climate finance. We also discussed lessons learned from GCF monitoring, with a spotlight on gender, indigenous peoples, information disclosure and redress, among other critical issues. PresenterBertha Argueta, Germanwatch: Climate finance under the UNFCCC and the Paris Agreement after COP29. What's next for the NCQG? IntervieweesNatalia Daza, GCF Gender Monitor for Latin America.Tunga Rai, member of the GCF Indigenous Peoples Advisory Group (IPAG).Florencia Ortúzar, regional node for the GCF Watch.Bertha Argueta, alternate active observer for the GCF. Moderation: Daan Robben, Both ENDS. Recording

December 04 2024 Climate Change, Human Rights

COP29: Climate target disappoints and invites us to look elsewhere for hope

The twenty-ninth United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP29), held in Baku, Azerbaijan, was dubbed "the COP of finance" because the most anticipated decision was the establishment of the New Collective and Quantifiable Global Climate Finance Goal (NCQG), the amount that developed countries would pledge to finance climate action in developing countries. This issue grabbed all the attention, overshadowing everything else.In addition, the recent re-election of Donald Trump as President of the United States, accompanied by his threat to abandon the Paris Agreement and reverse the country's climate action, set the tone for the event.The negotiations, which took place from November 11 to 22, were intense and ended almost two full days late, with the approval of a text that caused great disappointment.However, the invitation is not to be blinded by disappointment. As much as we want, demand and hope, the international climate negotiations are not delivering what we so desperately need. Let us look for hope in what is happening and working, such as local, community-led projects and the work of civil society that is not giving up.Here is a review of COP29 based on what was agreed on climate finance and other relevant issues. A new climate finance targetThe mandate was clear: the new target should exceed the previous one of $100 billion per year and respond to the needs and priorities of developing countries. But while developing countries demanded $1.3 trillion per year, the offer was a mere $300 billion (less than a third and just 12% of the global military budget in 2023) by 2035. "Is this a joke?" exclaimed the head of the Bolivian delegation at a press conference.Developing countries also demanded that financing be adequate, i.e. based mainly on public resources, in the form of grants and highly concessional instruments that would not add to the heavy debts they already carry. They also called for the explicit inclusion of loss and damage as one of the objectives of financing (along with mitigation and adaptation), as well as a specific target for adaptation.None of this was achieved. The target was left open to private financing, further diluting the responsibility of developed countries. There was no specific target for adaptation, nor was there any mention of loss and damage. In case there was any doubt, all references to human rights were removed from the final text.The only saving grace was a call to mobilize $1.3 trillion in climate finance annually from a broad base of sources through the so-called Baku-Belem Roadmap, with a view to achieving this goal by 2035. However, this is a "call" and not a binding commitment, the concrete results of which will depend on political will in the coming years. Global stocktaking and gender issuesNo significant progress was made on the results of last year's Global Stocktaking on the implementation of the Paris Agreement, particularly on the transition away from fossil fuels. The issue was deferred to COP30, which will be held next year in the Brazilian city of Belém do Pará.While there has also been insufficient progress on gender issues, some progress should be recognized, such as the extension of the Lima Work Program to 10 years, which lays the groundwork for the development of a Gender Action Plan and provides an opportunity to further deepen the integration of gender into climate action, particularly as countries develop updates to their Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs).In addition, the text of the NCQG recognizes women as beneficiaries of funds but fails to ensure that the specific circumstances and intersectional discrimination that many women face are addressed. Carbon marketsWhat did see advances during the negotiations were carbon markets, with the approval of the rules for a global market. Carbon markets are trading systems where carbon credits are bought and sold. Each credit represents one ton of CO₂, or its equivalent in other greenhouse gases, removed from the atmosphere. The credits are generated by projects that reduce emissions (such as forest conservation, renewable energy, or energy efficiency). The buyers are polluting companies that want to offset their emissions in order to remain in compliance.The issue has been under discussion for more than a decade due to the difficulty of ensuring the credibility of the system to reduce emissions. Although it is the last outstanding issue of the Paris Agreement, signed more than 10 years ago, civil society is not celebrating. These markets allow companies to continue polluting if they pay for carbon reductions elsewhere in the world. Methane emission reductionsA promising development was the signing of the Declaration on Methane Reduction from Organic Waste by more than 30 countries. The signatories, representing nearly half of global emissions, committed to setting sector-specific methane reduction targets in their future NDCs, underscoring the importance of organic waste management in the fight against climate change. Closing thoughtsIn the end, the results are not surprising. Conventions on climate change are often not much to celebrate, but we must not forget that they are a unique space where all countries sit down to seek consensus to advance a common goal. Its very existence reflects an intention to acknowledge historical responsibilities in favor of justice and a world where we can live together in harmony. It is a platform from which to push, even if it brings more frustration than results.On the other hand, it is very encouraging and motivating to see civil society in action. Hundreds of representatives from different organizations and movements are doing their best to achieve results that reflect the fulfillment of international commitments of developed countries towards their developing counterparts, the climate and the natural balance of our planet.Finally, the side events that take place parallel to the negotiations are a source of inspiration. On the sidelines, without much fanfare, there are people from communities and indigenous peoples who are implementing climate solutions in their territories, with concrete, successful results. These people, like seeds silently germinating, are a powerful source of hope.

Cosecha de sal en el Salar de Uyuni, Bolivia

November 13 2024 Climate Change, Human Rights, Freshwater Sources

Organizations and communities alert to human rights impacts of mineral extraction for the energy transition

A public hearing before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights will focus on the impact of the expansion and intensification of extractive operations for transition minerals like lithium and copper on communities in Latin America. Washington DC. On November 15, at a public hearing before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, representatives of national and regional organizations, as well as members of communities and indigenous peoples, will present updated information on how the exponential increase in the demand for and extraction of transition minerals has caused serious human rights violations as part of a transition process that is proposed only as a change in the energy matrix and is incapable of addressing inequalities in energy production and consumption, particularly in the Global South.Transition minerals like lithium, copper, cadmium, and cobalt—also called “critical” minerals—have been proposed in many global discussions as one of the main solutions to the climate crisis, as they are used in the development of technologies for the production of renewable energy, thus reducing or replacing the use of fossil fuels. A large part of these minerals are located in Latin America, in areas of great biocultural diversity.At the hearing, participants will present the main threats that mining for energy transition poses to the rights of indigenous peoples and local communities, the right to a healthy environment, access to environmental information, citizen participation, and justice. In addition, concrete cases of human rights violations in the context of mining for energy transition will be presented through testimonies.These impacts are already occurring in countries such as Argentina, Bolivia and Chile, which concentrate about 53 percent of the world's known lithium deposits in their Andean wetlands, extremely fragile ecosystems confronting water scarcity; in Chile and Peru, where 40 percent of the world’s copper is mined; and in the Colombian Amazon, where concessions, mining claims and illegal extraction of transition minerals are violating the rights of indigenous peoples.Several international organizations have spoken out about human rights abuses related to climate crisis response, particularly energy transition processes. In September, the UN Panel on Critical Minerals for Energy Transition issued a set of recommendations and voluntary principles for governments, industry and other stakeholders to ensure equitable, fair and sustainable management of these minerals. These guidelines aim to ensure that the transition to renewable energy is based on fairness and equity, and that it promotes sustainable development, respect for people, and environmental protection in developing countries.The hearing will take place during the 191st period of sessions of the Inter-American Commission. It was requested by the Due Process of Law Foundation (DPLF), the Gaia Amazonas Foundation and the organizations that are members of the the Alliance for Andean Wetlands (Alianza por los Humedales Andinos): the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA), a regional organization; the Fundación Ambiente y Recursos Naturales (FARN) and the PUCARÁ Assembly, of Argentina; the Centro de Documentación e Información Bolivia (CEDIB) and the Colectivo de Derechos Humanos Empodérate, of Bolivia; ONG FIMA, Defensa Ambiental and Fundación Tantí, of Chile.The hearing will be held from 9:00 a.m. to 10:30 a.m. (Washington DC time) and will be broadcast via Zoom, which requires prior registration at the following link: https://www.zoomgov.com/webinar/register/WN_dsEZdrDqSyOA8-i7ikveJQ#/registration. Quotes from representatives of organizations and communities Verónica Chávez, representative of the communities of Salinas Grandes and Laguna de Guayatayoc, Argentina:"All of us who are part of the Salinas Grande watershed are living a situation in which our rights are being affected. We hope that the IACHR can resolve this situation because it is very serious; they are damaging our territories, living beings, and nature itself." Liliana Ávila, director of the Human Rights and Environment Program at the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA):"The energy transition in our countries should be an opportunity to move towards more just and equitable energy production and distribution processes. The human rights framework and the role of the international protection system are fundamental in this regard. It is very important that the Inter-American Commission closely follows this process and promotes the protection of human rights." Verónica Gostissa, attorney with Asamblea Pucará of Catamarca, Argentina:"In our territory, the province of Catamarca, Argentina, we are living a serious violation of our rights, which is reflected first and foremost in the visible environmental impacts. Since 1997, lithium mining has caused significant environmental damage, including the drying up of a branch of the Trapiche River, a damage that persists to this day. Water continues to be taken from this damaged river, despite recognition of the damage by the company and government authorities. Access to public information, participation and consultation, and access to justice are also affected. For years, extractive projects have been approved without adequate procedures, and although a lawsuit filed by the Atacameños del Altiplano indigenous community resulted in a regulation, it does not meet the standards for effective indigenous consultation. In addition, more than 10 lithium projects are being developed in the same territory, the Salar del Hombre Muerto, without any cumulative and comprehensive impact assessment to date." Vivian Lagrava Flores, coordinator of the Colectivo de Derechos Humanos Empodérate, Bolivia:"Indigenous communities reject mining projects, they can even issue their resolutions and say no in the mining consultation process, but their decisions are not binding for governments. International standards are not respected, and the subjugation of territories and the imposition of mining rights are legitimized with discourses of progress and development, but it is not development from the vision of the indigenous peoples, nor from ours." Lady Sandón, representative of the Environment Unit of the Consejo de Pueblos Atacameños, Chile:"There is a lot of ignorance of the law for the native/indigenous people, which favors the state, and that is why the inhabitants of the land, by not knowing, do not enforce their guarantees. The state institutions violate the social, environmental, and cultural aspects; sometimes they use the indigenous people themselves to create divisions and to have supporters or political and mining operators who promote the change of the thinking of the genetic memory that we have as native people. I hope that we can revisit the situation of ancestral indigenous justice as a mechanism that previously established corrections so that the values and principles of ‘Buen Vivir’ are respected." Daniel Cerqueira, program director of the Due Process of Law Foundation (DPLF):"This hearing is an opportunity for the Inter-American Commission to clarify the parameters of action for both States and companies in the management of transition minerals. It is imperative to have specific obligations in this area, as human rights violations resulting from the extraction of these minerals are a reality that tends to worsen in several countries in the region." Juan Sebastian Anaya, advocacy advisor at the Gaia Amazonas Foundation (Colombia):"The indigenous governments of the Amazon exercise their territorial and environmental authority in accordance with the Law of Origin, which guides their knowledge systems and principles of relationship with the elements of the territory, such as minerals. The decarbonization of the energy matrix to maintain consumption standards in the global north should not be done at the expense of indigenous territories and the communities that protect them, govern them and make them flourish with their daily practices."Press contactsVíctor Quintanilla (Mexico), AIDA, [email protected], +52 5570522107Rocío Wischñevsky (Argentina), FARN, [email protected], +54 91159518538 Karen Arita (Mexico), DPLF, [email protected], +52 442 471 9626

Declaración para la protección de los páramos y el bosque montano

October 30 2024 Climate Change, Indigenous Rights, Freshwater Sources

Declaration for the protection of the páramos and montane forests of the Tropical Andes

The undersigned civil society organizations, gathered in the framework of the 16th meeting of the Conference of the Parties (COP16) to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) in Cali, Colombia: 1.URGE States Parties to the CBD to adopt domestic regulations and make international commitments to:recognize the crucial role of the páramos and the montane forest that protects them in global water regulation, mitigation and adaptation to the climate crisis, as well as in the conservation of biocultural diversity;protect the human rights, traditional knowledge and sustainable practices of indigenous peoples and peasant and traditional communities that inhabit the páramos and montane forest; andprohibit large-scale mining or similar practices in paramos and montane forests in terms of their socio-environmental impacts, in accordance with the principles of precaution and prevention. 2. REQUEST the States to include in their national biodiversity strategies and action plans indicators and monitoring mechanisms before the CBD that allow them to adequately measure and report compliance with the commitments they assume to advance in the conservation of these ecosystems under the terms of this declaration, as well as to guarantee the rights of the peoples and communities that inhabit them. 3. REQUIRE States and multilateral financial institutions to mobilize sufficient resources and technical capacities to guarantee the conservation of these ecosystems, as well as the protection of the indigenous peoples and peasant and traditional communities that inhabit them. We submit these requests to the States Parties to the CBD: Taking into account that there is a scientific consensus on the water regulatory power of the páramo and montane forest ecosystems[1] because they not only host endemic flora that captures freshwater from rain and fog, supplying it to the Andean cities located downstream; but also soils, lake and peatland systems that have a high concentration of organic matter and an enormous capacity to retain the liquid. In addition, the páramos wetlands are high Andean wetlands[2] under the protection of the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands of International Importance.Recognizing that páramos and their montane forests are fundamental in the carbon cycle; that due to low temperatures and the slow rate of decomposition of organic matter present in them, their soils, vegetation and wetlands capture and retain carbon dioxide (CO2)[3], contributing to climate change mitigation and adaptation and reducing the impact of meteorological events; and that these ecosystems are carbon sinks under the terms of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).Reminding that, due to their biological and climatic characteristics, these ecosystems provide essential services for the population and contain biodiversity that is subject to special protection[4] and are home to endemic and native species of flora and fauna such as frailejones, pajonales, epiphytes, the chivito hummingbird, the Andean condor and the Andean bear, among others.Considering that the indigenous peoples and peasant and traditional communities of the region manage and protect the páramos and montane forests, ensure the preservation of common goods in their territories and are guardians of ancestral knowledge that is crucial for the conservation of biodiversity; that the integrity of the páramos is fundamental for the conservation of these ancestral practicess[5]; and that the páramos and montane forests are reserves of biocultural diversity within the framework of the CBD.Reiterating that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC)[6] warned of the impact of the climate crisis on páramos; and that they face other anthropogenic pressures such as fires, monocultures, livestock and invasive species[7].Warning that despite being strategic and sensitive ecosystems, deserving of the greatest protection, some of them are currently under strong pressure to develop large-scale mining projects, while others are at risk of being subject to mining concessions due to non-compliance with regulations and public policies that protect them or the lack of them.Bearing in mind that indigenous peoples and peasant and traditional communities have rejected these mining projects in their territories, even winning by majority vote "popular consultations" with which they have succeeded in defending the use of the land for traditional activities in their territories.Insisting that the removal of vegetation cover and the fragmentation of ecosystems generated by large-scale mining can affect the ecological balance, biocultural diversity and the provision of ecosystem services essential for life; acidify and reduce the amount of freshwater available for life systems; and break ecological and spiritual interconnectivity with other biomes and ecosystems, ending their capacity to capture carbon[8] and causing impacts in perpetuity.Following the warnings made by several UN rapporteurs and working groups on the negative impacts of mining on the environment and on human rights[9].Warning about certain dynamics recently employed by some mining companies in the countries of the region, particularly multinationals -such as the splitting of large mining titles, the change of exploitation method from surface to underground mining, as well as the formalization of small-scale miners in the area to outsource their activities by requesting multiple smaller areas-, which threaten to disguise large-scale mining processes with cumulative and synergistic environmental impacts on páramo ecosystems and montane forests that can be equal or more serious than those of a large-scale mining concession.Recalling that under the CBD States are required to: (i) monitor activities that have or are likely to have significant adverse effects on the conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity[10], such as mining; (ii) establish protected areas for biodiversity conservation[11] based on the traditional knowledge of indigenous peoples and peasant and traditional communities[12]; and (iii) adopt emergency measures when there are serious and imminent risks to biological diversity from natural or other events[13], such as risk from extractive activities. Signed byCentro Sociojurídico para la Defensa Territorial Siembra (Colombia)Colectivo Socio-Ambiental Juvenil de Cajamarca COSAJUCA (Colombia)Comité para la Defensa del Agua y el Páramo de Santurbán (Colombia)Consejo Territorial de Cabildos de la Sierra Nevada de Gonawindua CTC (Colombia)Corporación Ecológica y Cultural Penca de Sábila (Colombia)Movimiento Socioambiental Kumanday (Colombia)Natural Seeds Alliance (Colombia)Proyecto Dulcepamba (Ecuador)⁠Acción Ecológica (Ecuador)Latinoamérica Sustentable (Ecuador)Unión de Defensores del Agua - UNAGUA (Ecuador)Federación de Organizaciones Indígenas y Campesinas del Azuay - FOA (Ecuador)Alianza de Organizaciones por los Derechos Humanos del Ecuador (Ecuador)Legal Defense Institute - IDL (Peru)Red Muqui (Perú)Red Internacional de Forestería Análoga - RIFA (Costa Rica)Mining Watch Canadá (Canada)Both ENDS (Netherlands)Redes del Agua Latinoamérica (Regional)Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense - AIDA (Regional)[1]Buytaert W. et al. Hidrología del páramo andino: propiedades, importancia y vulnerabilidad. Lovaina, U. de Lovaina, s.f.,, p. 10, 11, 23.[2] COP del Convenio de Ramsar, Resolución VIII.39. Los humedales altoandinos como sistemas estratégicos. Valencia, 2002.[3] Robert Hofstede et al. “Los páramos del Ecuador: Pasado, presente y futuro”, capítulo 12, págs 328 – 330, 2023[4] Robert Hofstede et al. págs 158 – 163, 2023.[5] IPBES (2018). The IPBES Regional Assessment Report on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services for the Americas. Recuperado de: https://www.ipbes.net/assessment-reports/americas[6] IPCC (2013). Panel Intergubernamental de Cambio Climático, Quinto Informe de Evaluación, Recuperado de: http://www.ipcc.ch/home_languages_main_spanish.shtml[7] Ochoa-Tocachi et al., 2016, Tomado de IPBES (2018).[8] Madriñán, S., Cortés, A. J., & Richardson, J. E. (2013). Páramo is the world's fastest evolving and coolest biodiversity hotspot. Frontiers in genetics, 192.[9] Asamble General de la ONU, (i) Relatoría Especial sobre derechos humanos y sustancias y desechos peligrosos. Asamblea General de la ONU. A/HRC/51/35, 8 de julio de 2022, (ii) Relatoría Especial sobre el derecho humano a un medio ambiente limpio, saludable y sostenible. A/79/270, 2 de agosto de 2024, (iii) Grupo de Trabajo sobre la cuestión de los derechos humanos y las empresas transnacionales. Asamblea General de la ONU. A/78/155, 11 de julio de 2023.[10] Convenio sobre la Diversidad Biológica, Art. 7.C.[11] Ibid. Art. 8.C. CDB.[12] Ibid. Art. 8.J CDB.[13] Ibid. Art. 14.E. CDB.

October 24 2024 Coral reefs, Climate Change, Toxic Pollution

To defend the ocean's biodiversity is to defend human well-being

Statement by civil society organizations at COP16 of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) The ocean is one of the world's main reserves of biodiversity, as well as a source of food, renewable energy and our main ally in combating the global climate crisis. Human populations, in addition to having their livelihoods in the ocean, maintain cultural connections around the ocean that define their past, present and future. However, this immense source of life continues to suffer increasingly significant damage and impacts, while efforts to protect and restore it are not increasing at the same rate.The intrinsic connection between ocean and climate itself embraces the balance of the planet. On the one hand, the ocean regulates weather patterns and, on the other, its characteristics are seriously altered by the climate crisis. The main indicators of these changes are the increase in temperature and sea level, acidification, deoxygenation, modifications in ocean currents, and a greater intensity of hurricanes and meteorological events. This affects marine biodiversity, causing the loss of particularly vulnerable species and habitat fragmentation. Coral bleaching associated with changes in climate, for example, alters the dynamics of many other species that depend on them, generating consequences for tourism, fisheries, climate resilience and biodiversity, as well as socioeconomic and cultural impacts.Overfishing puts commercial target species and coastal-marine ecosystems in general at risk. Some of the fishing practices of greatest concern are the extraction of vulnerable or endangered species; the non-compliance with or non-existence of closed fishing areas, the demarcation of fishing zones, permitted sizes and volumes; as well as the abandonment of fishing gear, which contributes to the problem of marine debris and causes the death of many animals that are trapped in them. Intensive aquaculture, such as salmon farming, directly destroys the marine ecosystem through contamination due to the constant incorporation of nutrients and the high use of antibiotics, producing anoxia and harmful algae blooms.Marine pollution from land-based sources continues to be a major stress factor for the marine environment and poses particularly serious problems in developing countries, where integrated waste management is extremely deficient. This has resulted in the introduction of polluting substances and materials into the ocean (untreated sewage, solid waste, including plastics, and agricultural runoff), causing changes in the quality conditions of the water column and sediments, often fatal to marine biodiversity and affecting human health.Likewise, maritime sources of pollutants require particular attention, as the ocean is the main means of transporting goods globally. Maritime traffic involves the transport of substances harmful to the marine environment - such as hydrocarbons, toxic chemicals, sewage, ballast water, garbage, and other hazardous substances - that are discharged into the sea in routine operational tasks and in maritime incidents. Hydrocarbons pose a particularly complex problem because they are not only transported as cargo but are also used to propel ships, thus representing a latent risk scenario with impacts on air quality due to atmospheric emissions of carbon dioxide, nitrogen oxides, sulfur oxides and methane, mainly in ships that use liquefied natural gas (LNG) for propulsion. In addition, the negative impact on marine fauna of collisions with ships and underwater noise from various sources cannot be ruled out; these factors still lack sufficient and effective public policies and regulations.Additionally, oil spills in the marine environment cause suffocation and intoxication of marine species, bioaccumulation of harmful substances, and even the functional destruction of important habitats. These impacts in turn affect relevant social and economic activities - such as shipping, fishing, tourism, and port activities - as well as endangering the health and the right to a healthy environment of coastal communities. Spills from offshore oil and gas exploration and exploitation are not adequately controlled and regulated by governments, being authorized activities in the vicinity of vulnerable areas such as coral reefs. These operations face serious limitations to prevent and provide timely response to spills with mitigation, restoration, and compensation actions for the damage caused. Environmental impacts from related activities, such as seismic exploration, dismantling of underwater infrastructures and platforms, and associated maritime traffic, are rarely evaluated.Finally, although there are no exploitation efforts yet, underwater mining poses risks that are impossible to assess in their magnitude, including habitat destruction, which could be irreversible, and species extinction. This is especially worrisome considering how little is known about the ecological and physicochemical dynamics in deep-sea and deep-sea ecosystems. The development of these intrusive activities - without having the technical and scientific base information that would allow us to objectively identify the potential impacts, as well as the possibility or not of preventing, mitigating or restoring damages - would doubtless cause the alteration of a highly sensitive and complex ecosystem.In consideration of the above - in our role as civil society organizations working for the protection and sustainable use of the ocean and for the defense of the right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment - WE URGENTLY CALL ON THE STATES PARTY TO THE CONVENTION ON BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY TO: Incorporate the ecosystem approach - which notes the interdependence between the atmosphere, land, and ocean - into their national biodiversity policies, strategies, and action plans, considering the provisions set forth in the Advisory Opinion of the International Tribunal on the Law of the Sea, which notes that anthropogenic greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions meet the definition of marine pollution under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. Use environmental impact and cumulative impact assessment tools to promote transparency and citizen participation with a gender focus and with emphasis on the consultation and consent processes of groups in vulnerable situations, such as indigenous peoples and local communities, so that the traditional and cultural knowledge that comes from the territories is included and valued to promote the implementation of projects and human development activities in a responsible and fair manner, weighing the right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment over short-term economic benefits. Sign, ratify, and commit to the effective implementation of the Regional Agreement on Access to Information, Public Participation, and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters in Latin America and the Caribbean (Escazú Agreement) for these rights, and establish mechanisms for transparency and accountability in any environmental proceedings. Apply the precautionary principle in the absence of certainty or scientific information and recognize technical knowledge, science, and local wisdom as the basis for decision-making processes focused on the protection of the environment and biodiversity. Sign, ratify, and commit to the effective implementation of the Agreement on the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Biodiversity beyond National Jurisdiction (BBNJ Agreement), an instrument that will make it possible to advance in the protection of at least 2/3 of our planet. This will allow for: the equitable sharing of benefits derived from the use of marine genetic resources; the use of area-based management mechanisms, including the designation of marine protected areas; the development of environmental impact assessments prior to offshore activities; as well as capacity building and the transfer of marine technology for the benefit of the ocean. Continue to apply moratoriums on underwater mining activities based on the lack of sufficient technical and scientific information to foresee, prevent, control, and mitigate the potential impacts on the biological diversity of unknown ecosystems in deep waters and on the seabed. Sign, ratify, and commit to the effective implementation of the Agreement on Port State Measures (MERP Agreement) - to prevent, deter, and eliminate illegal, unreported, and unregulated fishing - as well as the Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies, to promote fishing practices that recognize the relevance of ocean sustainability. Strengthen and harmonize regulations on fishing and aquaculture, also advancing in their correct control, with the objective of ensuring the sustainability of these activities; avoiding illegal, unreported, and unregulated fishing; minimizing negative impacts on marine ecosystems and vulnerable species. Implement the Guidelines for Achieving Sustainability in Small-scale Fisheries in the Context of Food Security and Poverty Eradication (SSF Guidelines) in order to: recognize the contribution to the fishing economy of men and women working in all activities of the fisheries value chain; guarantee food security and the right to food; contribute to the development of communities engaged in this type of fishing; achieve sustainability of fishery resources; as well as promote culture and ancestral and traditional knowledge around fishing. Advance quickly and effectively in the process of negotiating a legally binding instrument on plastic pollution through the application of the circular economy model and responsible management throughout the entire cycle of these products. Plan mitigation and adaptation actions in the short-- and medium-term to address the effects of the climate crisis on the ocean and protect its carbon sinks through strategies and policies that contemplate the just and equitable energy transition in ocean-dependent sectors, in addition to the conservation and restoration of key ecosystems such as mangrove forests, seagrasses and coral reefs with a holistic and socio-ecological approach. The obligation of States Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) to submit updated Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) by 2025 is an opportunity to include, as climate commitments, measures aimed at mitigating impacts on the ocean and their restoration. These measures should not be limited to the creation of carbon markets in the ocean, but rather ensure the comprehensive protection of marine and coastal ecosystems, especially considering their fundamental role in climate regulation. Sign, ratify, and commit to the effective implementation of the Convention for the Protection and Development of the Marine Environment of the Wider Caribbean Region (Cartagena Convention); prioritize the creation and application of national regulations on standards and permitted thresholds for the discharge of polluting substances into the sea, harmonized with international law, and based on follow-up and monitoring programs that respond to the dynamics of each country. Adopt relevant domestic measures to reduce anthropogenic pressures currently affecting coral reefs, slowing the processes that are causing their degradation and allowing coral cover to be maintained at minimum levels that guarantee their permanence and connectivity. These measures include: Regulating environmental impact studies and management plans for offshore hydrocarbon extractive and prospective activities and other activities carried out near coral reefs and areas sensitive to coral bleaching.Avoid authorizing offshore hydrocarbon exploration and exploitation activities near coral reefs.Regulate the transit of ships near marine protected areas and particularly sensitive marine zones in terms of ballast water pollution and other polluting technologies for the marine environment that may affect the state of coral reefs. This will also reduce the possibility of accidents and groundings. Guarantee the rights and meet the needs of coastal and island communities that live from fishing - especially artisanal fishing - and local tourism that are being affected by the climate crisis and environmental problems, seeking to protect them from the degradation of marine-coastal biodiversity. Increase governmental efforts to create and implement programs and activities for capacity building and transfer of marine technology to reduce the gaps between developing and developed countries. This will enable ocean protection to be embraced globally as a pathway to climate and environmental justice. Guarantee the financing of policies, programs, plans, studies, and regulations, ensuring the necessary budgetary allocations to safeguard and manage coastal-marine ecosystems. To this end, they should target the use of all available means within countries, as well as international climate finance funds, cooperation projects and multilateral instruments dedicated to addressing the climate crisis and the mechanisms that have been agreed upon in the framework of the UNFCCC and the Paris Agreement, including the Green Climate Fund (GCF), as well as available resources from the private sector. Similarly, blue finance mechanisms that benefit vulnerable groups and have a positive impact on ocean health should be prioritized. Effective protection of our ocean is not possible without the commitment of the States Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity. We therefore call for action and the definition of urgent national and international interventions to strengthen ocean governance.The risks of ignoring the accelerating impacts are too great. It is time to prioritize the health of the ocean and with it our own health. Signatory organizations:Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA).Mexican Center for Environmental Law (CEMDA)Center for Marine JusticeMesoamerican Reef Fund (MAR Fund)Cethus FoundationMarViva FoundationHealthy Reef Initiative (HRI)Coral Reef AllianceFoundation for Eco-development and Conservation (FUNDAECO)High Seas Alliance (HSA)

Ciénaga Grande de Santa Marta in Colombia

October 09 2024 Climate Change, Human Rights, Capacity Building

Session 1 of the 2024 GCF Watch International Webinar Series

Operating the financial mechanism of the UNFCCC and Paris Agreement: Applying lessons learned from the GCF experience for strengthened CSO engagement For the fourth consecutive year, we invite all civil society members following the GCF and other funds under the UNFCCC to attend two dynamic sessions on October 9th and December 4th. This year, we are excited to introduce a more interactive format, featuring presentations and live interviews between a moderator and CSO representatives. In this first session, relevant CSO representatives discussed the architecture of financial mechanisms under the UNFCCC, with the GCF at the center, exploring their similarities and differences, and the opportunities for civil society engagement in each. Presenters Erika Lennon, Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL): The GCF as the center of the architecture of the financial mechanisms under the UNFCCC and its relationship with the other funds. Ira Guerrero, Institute for Climate and Sustainable Cities (ICSC): The GCF Watch and its resources. Interviewees Kairos Dela Cruz: ICSC. Faizal Parish: Global Environment Centre; Chair 2024-2030, GEF CSO Network. Julia Grimm: Germanwatch. Liane Schalatek: Heinrich Böll Foundation. Moderation: Camila Bartelega, Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA). Recording

August 20 2024 Climate Change, Human Rights

The Manaus Declaration on Human Rights in the Climate Emergency

Indigenous Peoples, local communities, Afrodescendants, tribal and rural communities, children and adolescents, women, LGBTQI+, non-governmental organizations, platforms, institutions, and individuals urge the Court and States to adopt minimum standards for the protection of human rights in the context of the climate emergency, as elaborated during the public hearings of the Advisory Opinion, particularly the one held in Manaus, Brazil, from May 25-29, where communities, peoples and civil society of the region met in an unprecedented judicial setting.We notice that the overall balance, after more than 30 years of international discussions regarding the climate emergency, is regrettable, as there is no evidence of an effective commitment by States to avoid greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, to grant reparations to those who have suffered climate damage, and to ensure that changes in their internal laws and policies, including economic policies, are compatible with the average global temperature limit set in the Paris Agreement.We highlight that several international courts, including the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, have the historic opportunity to formally clarify the human rights obligations of States in the context of the climate emergency through its advisory function, and in that sense, to set robust standards for the protection of rights based on current international standards relating to the protection those populations that have been historically excluded and discriminated against, and that are significantly more vulnerable to the climate emergency. Read and download the declaration

Audiencia pública de la Corte IDH en Manaos, Brasil.

August 20 2024 Climate Change, Human Rights

Declaration of Manaus urges the Inter-American Court to clarify State obligations in climate emergency

San Jose, Costa Rica - Today, a coalition comprising over 400 communities, Indigenous and Tribal Peoples, and representatives of civil society presented the “Declaration of Manaus on Human Rights in the Climate Emergency” to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR). The widely endorsed declaration calls on the Court to articulate, in its forthcoming Advisory Opinion on the Climate Emergency and Human Rights, minimum standards for respecting and protecting human rights in the context of the climate crisis. It draws upon the insights of more than 150 participants who contributed during the public hearings on the process of the Advisory Opinion mentioned.The hearings, conducted in Bridgetown, Barbados (April 22–25), Brasilia (May 24), and Manaus (May 25–29), Brazil, served as a forum for the presentation of compelling testimonies from individuals and entire communities impacted by the climate emergency. In Manaus, in the heart of the Amazon, there was a strong emphasis on the expectation that the Court would issue a robust advisory opinion aimed at ensuring the protection of both people and the planet.The Declaration urges the Court to clarify the human rights obligations of States and reinforce the accountability of corporations and financial actors for their role in the climate crisis."The role played by the IACtHR Advisory Opinion is strategic at a historic moment for climate justice globally. The Court’s decision can reinforce and expand on what has already been established by the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) on the obligations to protect the oceans from climate change. It will undoubtedly influence the subsequent interpretation of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on the duties of States to protect communities and the planet in the face of the climate crisis," said Marcella Ribeiro, senior attorney with the Human Rights and Environment Program of the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense. "The standards set by the Court will set new paradigms for access to justice in the context of the triple planetary crisis, influencing pending and future cases, as well as laws and policies inside and outside the continent. Lastly, this decision has great potential to help overcome the political impasse in the international climate negotiations."The Declaration, signed by over 400 parties, requests the Court to:Acknowledge that in the face of the climate emergency, all human rights, including the right to a healthy environment, must be upheld by all States. This obligation should be interpreted under the principle of Common but Differentiated Responsibilities and in line with the average global temperature increase limit established by the Paris Agreement and informed by the best available science.Specify that States need to transition to fossil-free economies without harming local communities and causing environmental impacts that exceed planetary limits.Ensure public access to information and participation, as well as the right to climate justice. This includes providing legal and institutional mechanisms for communities affected by the crisis to seek legal recourse, as well as raising awareness and training the judiciary on climate-related issues.Protect and facilitate the work of environmental defenders in the context of the climate emergency and energy transition.Guarantee adaptation measures to address the effects of climate change, ensuring the protection of all human rights, especially for vulnerable or historically discriminated groups.Uphold the right to self-determination of Indigenous and Tribal Peoples by obtaining their consent for measures directly affecting them in the context of climate change and energy transition.Ensure that victims and survivors of climate-related harm are granted comprehensive and just reparations and that climate judgments have financial resources for their implementation. "The Manaus Declaration also addresses corporate responsibility for the crisis. We urge the Court to reinforce States’ obligations to regulate corporate actors and ensure that those responsible for human rights violations related to the climate crisis are held accountable," adds Luisa Gómez Betancur, senior attorney at the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL). "Consistent with the polluter pays principle in international law, fossil fuel and agribusiness companies that are the primary drivers of climate change must cover the costs of mitigation and adaptation, as well as provide full reparation to victims for climate harm."Those supporting the Declaration are urging the IACtHR, as a guardian of human rights, to take a strong and forward-thinking stance. This approach should hold those who have had the most impact on the climate crisis responsible, guide inter-American policies towards environmentally sustainable economies, and establish a foundation for climate, environmental, and social justice worldwide, starting with Latin America."We hope that by listening to the testimonies of those of us who suffer the worst consequences of the climate emergency, the IACtHR will heed our call and order the States to respect our right to self-determination and the way in which we relate to our territories, prioritizing their care and conservation. For this reason, we join our voices in the Manaus declaration to remind the Court of the unique opportunity it has to mark a before and after in the fight for climate justice and the protection of our rights," said Everildys Córdoba Borja, legal representative of the Community Council of Black Communities of the Tolo River Basin and Southern Coastal Zone (COCOMASUR), Colombia.Read and download the declaration Press contactsNiccolo Sarno, CIEL, [email protected] Arista, EarthRights International, [email protected], +51 941 242 447Karina Saravia, CANLA, [email protected], +505 84331292

July 24 2024 Climate Change, Human Rights

Let's talk about NDCs, countries' commitments to the climate crisis

Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) are the plans developed by each country to address the climate crisis under the Paris Agreement. In them, countries commit to meeting targets for reducing their greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and making progress in adapting to the climate crisis, including - ideally - how they will finance these actions. The Paris Agreement, from which NDCs are derived, is a legally binding international agreement to combat climate change that entered into force in 2016 after being signed by 195 countries. As such, NDCs are the pathway to achieving the Agreement's goals, which are to: Ensure that the global average temperature increase is well below 2°C, preferably 1.5°C, above pre-industrial levels. Strengthen the capacity to adapt to the impacts of climate change. Align financing with the needs of countries to achieve these goals. Each country is free to decide and commit in its NDCs how it will adjust to and alleviate the impacts of the crisis, based on its unique abilities and circumstances. In this sense, NDCs reinforce the agreed-upon global goals to address the climate crisis and contain specific commitments by countries to achieve them. They also provide short- and medium-term plans, with political backing, in key areas not only to stabilize the climate, but also to promote sustainable development and address other global crises such as pollution and biodiversity loss. Countries that have signed the Paris Agreement must submit their NDCs to the Secretariat of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and update them every five years with increasingly ambitious targets based on their own capabilities. The Conferences of the Parties (COPs), the decision-making body of the Convention, will provide guidance to countries on how to meet these commitments. The first NDCs were presented in 2015, when the Paris Agreement was adopted, and their first update occurred in 2020. Next year, countries must update them again with targets for 2030 and 2035. Given their relevance for global climate action and the proximity of the second update, we will dig deeper into relevant aspects of the NDCs. The content of the NDCs In their NDCs, countries present a projected analysis of climate risks and impacts, as well as specific commitments to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and adapt to the impacts. This results in quantitative or qualitative targets, deadlines and actions in priority sectors such as agriculture, water, biodiversity, forests, energy, risk management, industry, infrastructure, fisheries, health, transport, tourism and coastal zones, among others. Most countries include indicative budgets for achieving their targets, and many developing countries indicate the support they will need—financial, technology transfer, and/or capacity-building—to implement some or all their actions. In an NDC, targets that can be achieved without external support are called "unconditional" and those that depend on such support are called "conditional." Examples of NDC commitments include: Reduce 22 percent of its GHG emissions with its own resources by 2030 (unconditional mitigation target). Increase GHG reduction to 36 percent, but subject to a global agreement that includes technical cooperation and technology transfer, as well as access to low-cost financial resources (conditional mitigation target). Increase, by 2030, the adaptive capacity of the population to climate change and reduce the high vulnerability of 160 municipalities (unconditional adaptation goal). Progress on NDCs According to the World Resource Institute, current NDC emission reduction commitments submitted by countries fall far short of the ambition needed to meet the Paris Agreement's goals, as they would result in a temperature increase of between 2.5 and 2.9°C even if fully implemented. On a more optimistic note, data from the United Nations Development Program's Climate Promise initiative, which is supporting 85 percent of countries in the preparation of their NDCs, shows that the most vulnerable countries are making tangible progress in terms of ambition. For example, African countries are more committed than the global average to their climate resilience goals, increasing transparency efforts, and incorporating just transition, while the NDCs of Latin American and Caribbean countries show high levels of stakeholder engagement and accountability compared to the global average. Although most Latin American countries have plans to reduce GHG emissions, adapt to climate change and promote renewable energy in their NDCs, they remain dependent on oil, gas and coal, making their current climate commitments insufficient. Human rights and gender approach in NDCs While the global crisis is a threat to humanity, its impact is disproportionately felt by vulnerable populations who are less able to cope. This is the case for indigenous and Afro-descendant peoples, as well as peasant and rural populations. Furthermore, according to the UN Human Rights Council, "women are particularly vulnerable to the risks associated with climate change due to gender discrimination, inequalities and gender roles that constrain them. One of the main negative impacts of the climate crisis on women is that it exacerbates the burden of unpaid domestic and care work, thereby deepening existing structural inequalities. Considering the above, it is essential that States incorporate the human rights framework and the gender perspective in the formulation of their climate policies, as recognized by various international instruments and treaties. This implies that States - in the elaboration, implementation and monitoring of NDCs - comply with their obligations to promote, respect, protect and fulfil human rights without discrimination and with a gender and intersectional approach, thereby strengthening the capacity of people and communities to act effectively in the face of the climate crisis, particularly those who have been historically marginalized. NDCs must also ensure the rights of future generations and the long-term integrity of ecosystems. What's next Next year's round of NDCs should focus on delivering on the commitments made at the 28th United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP28) to phase out fossil fuels in energy systems, set specific methane emission reduction targets, triple renewable energy and double energy efficiency. Given that this new round will cover targets up to 2035 - the midpoint between 2020, when countries began implementing their NDCs, and 2050, the year agreed for achieving the global goal of zero net emissions - the commitments presented are critical to aligning near-term actions with long-term goals. In the face of accelerating climate impacts with increasingly severe consequences, there is an urgent need for NDCs with sufficient ambition to contribute to deep emission cuts, enhanced adaptation, adequate attention to loss and damage already caused, and a significant increase in climate finance. Learn more To learn more about the progress of each country's climate commitments, you can: Consult the UNFCCC database, which contains the list of countries that have submitted their NDCs and the date they did so. Consult the information generated by the Climate Action Tracker, which tracks governments' climate actions and compares them to the Paris Agreement targets. Learn about NDC LAC, a digital tool that provides information on progress in implementing and updating NDCs in Latin America and the Caribbean. sources - United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, "Nationally determined contributions (NDCs). The Paris Agreement and nationally determined contributions". - United Nations, "All about NDCs." -World Resources Institute, "Next Generation NDCs. Accelerating climate action under the Paris Agreement". - United Nations Development Programme, “What are NDCs and how do they drive climate action?”. - Verónica Méndez Villa and Daniela García Aguirre, "Human Rights and Gender Perspective in Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) in Latin America," Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA). - Inter Press Service, "Latin America arrives at COP28 with insufficient ambitions for its goals".