Climate Change


Letter to Green Climate Fund Board: Improve Decision Making

Letter signed by 70 international civil society organizations:  As members of civil society following the Green Climate Fund (GCF), we are writing to express our concern about the way the Board reached some of its most important decisions during the 14th Board Meeting (B.14). We would also like to share some thoughts on how to improve upon this process in the future. We are especially referring to the practice of “package approval” that was used to approve funding proposals and new accredited entities. Weak process. The Board approved 10 proposals worth $745 million without discussing each one separately. The Board’s assessment of each of the funding proposals should be made individually and with the utmost care, to ensure that the objectives, principles, policies, and operational modalities of the Fund are respected and complied with. Furthermore, there was no opportunity for active observers to highlight individual comments for each of the funding proposals (they could merely air some concerns during the overarching discussion of all funding proposals). The same can be said with regard to the package approval of eight accredited entities. There was no public discussion of the merits and/or shortcomings of each approved applicant entity and no possibility of civil society input. Civil society has vital contributions to make, and for our engagement to be meaningful, active observers must be given the opportunity to share important points regarding each proposal and accreditation application during Board meetings. Indeed, the Board’s way of working has actually been in conflict with the GCF’s own Governing Instrument, which states that “the Fund will operate in a transparent and accountable manner”. Approval despite clear failures of GCF policy compliance. The Board repeatedly overlooked the failure of a number of proposals to comply with GCF policies and procedures. For example, public notification for a number of projects was out of compliance with the Fund’s information disclosure policy, which requires a 120-day notification period for proposals with high social and environmental risk. Mandatory gender action plans were missing from several projects, and stakeholder consultations in some cases were highly inadequate. Yet the Board approved all of the projects with one package decision. The Board even pushed through proposals without the requisite guiding policy in place. For example, programs to be implemented via sub-projects were approved, yet the GCF does not have a policy regarding whether or not high risk sub-projects must come back to the Board for approval. We believe they should, to ensure the GCF’s accountability, and to preempt some of the serious environmental, development, and social shortcomings widely seen at other multilateral institutions that finance sub-projects via financial intermediaries. Precedent-setting. While the Board stated that “the approach taken to approving funding proposals at B.14 does not constitute a precedent,” we are concerned that, at this point, the Board has taken such an approach multiple times. Steps to put a stop to these modalities becoming the de facto modus operandi must be taken in the lead up to B.15, including: Timely public disclosure on the GCF’s own website that, at minimum, follows GCF rules (i.e. 120 days for ESIAs for high risk funding proposals, 30 days for medium risk, and three weeks prior to board meetings for all other materials). All annexes and the Secretariat’s due diligence should also be disclosed for funding proposals; Publication of applications for accreditation as soon as they are filed, as well as operationalization of formal mechanisms for third party input (from affected communities, indigenous peoples, civil society, etc.); Individual consideration of each funding proposal and each applicant for accreditation during public sessions of the Board; Opportunities to consider civil society interventions during the debate on each individual proposal, rather than at the end of agenda items; Where formal (or informal) working groups are established to consider conditions to be placed on proposals, there should be a clear process to allow the consideration of civil society feedback, at a minimum in writing, but preferably through the direct participation of the CSO active observers or their alternates; Discussions on more complex and/or controversial proposals require several rounds of debate. In these cases, civil society observers should be given the opportunity to make further interventions responding to new proposals, conditions and amendments. Civil society observers are committed to working with the Board to improve the accountability and transparency of Board decisions, in particular on funding and accreditation approvals. As a learning institution, the GCF needs to take the time to look at the merits of individual proposals and applicants in order to clearly elaborate how they can support the paradigm shift in recipient countries. We therefore urge the Board to better prioritize valuable time during the upcoming Board meetings to allow for meaningful discussions.

Read more

Climate finance advances, but lacks ambition

The 22nd Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (COP22) was held in Morocco from November 7-18, 2016. The delegates made progress on issues related to finance for developing countries facing the impacts of climate change. But their decisions needed to be more ambitious. Global governments must provide adequate and predictable financial contributions so countries can plan and execute adaptation and mitigation strategies. COP22 was the first climate conference held after the Paris Agreement became binding on November 4. In Marrakech, signatory countries began to establish procedures to implement the new global accord. “The meeting sent a strong political message to the world: the commitments established under the Paris Agreement will stand above the results of the US presidential elections, whose winner has denied the very existence of climate change,” said Andrea Rodriguez, AIDA attorney and civil society participant in the climate negotiations.  Funding the fight against climate change Important progress was made at COP22 in terms of climate finance, a key component in the global fight against climate change. Developing countries presented a roadmap for mobilizing $100 billion per year by 2020, a commitment made in the Paris Agreement. Although the plan is valid, the contributions of developed nations must be even more ambitious to achieve the financial target and ensure that economic resources will be available when required. Important recommendations were made to the Green Climate Fund—the largest fund for climate adaptation and mitigation. They focused on increasing direct access to funding and simplifying the process of accessing funds. But the recommendations did not, as hoped, focus on helping to develop and implement climate plans agreed under the Convention (such as Nationally Appropriate Mitigation Actions, National Adaptation Programs of Action, and Intended Nationally Determined Contributions). Together with our allies, AIDA organized two side events to share views on progress made in the Green Climate Fund, from the perspective of several actors involved in the process. The panelists emphasized the need to strengthen national governments’ capacities to plan and design funding proposals based on each country’s priority needs. Such increased capacity would allow developing countries not to rely on outside entities to make decisions with far-reaching consequences for the environment and national economies. Emphasis was also placed on the importance of including non-governmental actors in decisions about how to use climate finance, so more comprehensive and legitimate proposals can be produced. The event educated a wide variety of participants from organizations and governments, and provided an opportunity for them to exchange views with the Secretariat and with Accredited Entities on ways to improve processes ahead. The fate of the Adaptation Fund, which was created under the Kyoto Protocol to support adaptation activities in developing countries, was uncertain throughout the two weeks of COP22 negotiations. Fortunately, Parties decided that the Adaptation Fund will also serve to implement the Paris Agreement. Its continuity was guaranteed thanks to an infusion of $81 million from four developed nations (Germany, Belgium, Italy and Sweden). In terms of long-term financing, Parties decided to prioritize the mobilization of public resources and guarantee financial support for adaptation actions, with greater participation of the private sector. We were also hoping the Parties would make new financial commitments for the post-2020 period, but this did not happen. 

Read more

Climate Change, Human Rights

Now, more than ever, it’s time to work for our planet

The results of the United States election have shocked the world. Many of us feel hurt, angry and, above all, worried. For those of us who work to protect our planet and our shared environment a Trump presidency is deeply troubling. The president-elect has called climate change a hoax and promised to back out of the Paris Agreement, to dismantle President Obama’s Clean Power Plan, and to rebuild the coal industry. In the challenging years ahead, the movement to protect Earth will be more important than ever. We must all be a part of it. Today, more than ever, we reiterate our commitment to justice—for the environment and for all those whose lives depend so intimately on it. Now is the time to act. The world needs leadership, ours and yours. Each one of us at AIDA is committed to making our planet a better place to live. We are dedicated to defending it from destructive climate policies, and to uplifting its most vulnerable populations. We know what’s coming will be difficult. That’s why your support is so important. Coming together now is imperative. We have a historic responsibility to demonstrate leadership, to find peaceful solutions, and to ensure a brighter future for present and future generations. We must react with unity, engage, and collaborate. It’s time to build hope and lay the path to a peaceful, prosperous, respectful, and tolerant future. With our valued supporters and partners, AIDA will keep working to protect the Earth, its defenders, their culture, and their way of life.   

Read more

Climate Change, Human Rights

The fight against climate change: Time to turn promises into action

The Paris Agreement on climate change entered into force today. Nations must now implement the commitments that made this global consensus possible, and work to make them even more ambitious. On October 5, the nations of the European Union ratified the Paris Agreement, the binding global treaty on climate change adopted in a United Nations conference last December. With their signatures, the treaty met the requirements needed to enter into force: it was ratified by at least 55 countries, which account for 55 percent or more of global greenhouse gas emissions. Many Latin American nations contributed to this important political achievement by ratifying the agreement early, including Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Panama and Peru. In late September, China and the United States, the world’s largest emitters, also said yes to the new climate accord. Now all the nations that have ratified the Paris Agreement must begin to implement the national contributions they laid out last year, including, among other things, reducing emissions, financing climate actions, and taking measures for adaptation and mitigation. “These contributions are legally binding and can only be improved upon by increasing ambitions,” explained Andrea Rodriguez, AIDA attorney. “Nations cannot deny or go back on their word.” For the commitments to become a reality, each country must promote actions that meet international standards and create strong institutions to implement them.  Strong national and international support systems will enable governments to succeed at the adaptation and mitigation efforts that lay ahead. The world’s most vulnerable nations depend on special climate financing to cope with the impacts of a changing climate. The enactment of the Paris Agreement may result in a stronger, more predictable and transparent international financial framework. Sufficient funding and proper financial management are key to making national commitments not only concrete but ever more ambitious. “The entry into force of the Paris Agreement is an important global milestone. We can finally begin the urgent transformation of our economy and society towards a truly sustainable future. The irrefutable evidence of the impacts of climate change requires us to exercise historical responsibility to act quickly and get results,” said Astrid Puentes, AIDA co-director. “Latin America must show global leadership by implementing appropriate solutions and staying away from outdated strategies that increase the vulnerability of our countries and negatively impact people and communities.” 

Read more

Climate Change

The Green Climate Fund: Summary of Decisions of the Board of Directors (in Spanish)

This report offers an overview of the development, evolution and current state of the Green Climate Fund.  It includes a summary of the decisions made thus far by the Board of Directors. It also highlights the progress made by the Fund, and the challenges it must overcome in order to achieve its objectives. In 2010, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change created the Green Climate Fund with the goal of contributing significantly and ambitiously to the goals set by the international community to combat climate change. The Fund will be the primary mechanism through which developing nations receive financial resources from developed nations to undertake adaptation and mitigation activites that will help them confront extreme changes in climate. The Latin America nations that are members of the Convention will be beneficiaries of the financing. That’s why a clear understanding of the objectives and operation of this institution can contribute to better use of these resources in the region.  Download the report (in Spanish)  

Read more

Climate Change, Climate Change

New study confirms large dams to be a principle source of greenhouse gas emissions

Researchers from the Washington State University found that the world’s reservoirs generate 1.3 percent of all greenhouse gases produced by humankind. The finding confirms once more than large dams are unsustainable energy sources that cause great harm to the climate.  Seattle, United States. An important new study by researchers at the Washington State University found that large dams are an “underestimated” source of greenhouse gas. The findings show that all reservoirs, not only those built in tropical zones, release far greater quantities of emissions into the atmosphere than previously believed.   According to the study, gases are released from the decomposition of organic matter after artificial reservoirs flood natural areas. In fact, over the course of a year reservoirs were found to generate 1.3 percent of the world’s greenhouse gases (more than all of Canada). Eighty percent of those emissions were methane, a pollutant 34 times stronger than carbon dioxide. “Across the Americas, governments are pushing for the construction of hundreds of new large dams, arguing that dams are clean energy and will help to mitigate climate change,” explained Astrid Puentes Riaño, co-director of the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA). “It’s become increasingly clear that large dams are more of a problem than a solution. World leaders must urgently start to plan and implement alternative energy solutions in order to achieve real progress in the fight against climate change.” Along with a coaltion of civil society organizations, AIDA, Amazon Watch and International Rivers have been insisting for years that operating large hydroelectric projects—such as the Belo Monte Dam in Brazil—causes severe damage to the environment, the climate, and the rights of affected communities. “Large dams are one of the most significant causes of environmental destruction in the Amazon,” said Leila Salazar-López, executive director of Amazon Watch. “In addition to emiting methane, they destroy biodiversity and the ancestral forest of thousands of indigenous and traditional communities that have lived for centuries from river ecosystems. It is imperative to calculate the true costs of large dams to understand all their impacts, and avoid causing more harm than good.” As organizations working to promote real solutions to climate change, we are committed to sharing scientific evidence about the harms of large dams to governments, international bodies, and financial institutions. "The new findings lay to rest the myth of hydropower as a clean source of electricity and underline why large hydropower should not receive climate finance," said Kate Horner, executive director of International Rivers. The results of Washington State University's  study must be considered in the inventory of emissions that contribute to climate change, as well as in the execution of program and plans aimed at solving energy needs. For more information consult: Washington State University's study. Washington State University’s press release on the study. Short video from Astrid Puentes Riaño, AIDA co-director, with a brief explanation of the research and why it is important. Our Manifesto on 10 reasons why climate initiatives should not include large dams. An open letter to governments, international institutions and financial mechanisms to stop considering large dams as clean energy and to implement real solutions to climate change. ​

Read more

The Olympics and the Record We Mustn't Break

By Florencia Ortúzar Greene, AIDA attorney The 2016 Río Olympics have come to an end. Over the last few weeks, the world has once again borne witness to the greatest achievements of the human body, to the forging of new world records. But, amid high levels of air and water pollution, the thousands of competitors that met in Brazil affirmed that one record must not be broken: 1.5 degrees Celsius. The Earth has been warming steadily in recent years, causing the melting of permafrost, rising oceans, increasingly dangerous storms and floods, and more intense and frequent droughts. Exceeding a global temperature increase of 1.5 °C would trigger a global catastrophe with unknown consequences. The opening message The Olympics put the issue of climate change on the table once again. Athletes from around the world called on us all to do something about it. During the opening ceremony on August 5, images of clouds of pollution filled Maracaná Stadium in Río de Janeiro. Alarming projections showed cities and regions of the world being flooded. The peace symbol, altered to resemble a tree, was projected on the ground while a voice warned that our planet’s ice caps are melting quickly. Athletes from around the world joined in a campaign to ask the world not to break the record of 1.5 degrees, implying that the union of all nations is necessary to control global warming. Each Olympian received a tree seed, which will grow into the Athlete’s Forest, cementing their legacy in Río’s Deodoro Olympic Park. Bad air and water quality In a report on water quality in Río, the World Health Organization (WHO) made recommendations to athletes competing in aquatic events. The organization told them to cover cuts and scrapes with waterproof bandages; to avoid ingesting the water; to wash as soon as possible after exposure; to stay in it as briefly as possible; and to avoid contact with all water after it rains. Clearly, water in Río carries significant health risks. Air pollution in Río has also reached dangerous levels, authorities have warned. Promises to improve air quality before the big event were not fulfilled. According to government data, since 2008 the city’s air has contained airborne particles that cause respiratory illnesses at a concentration three times higher than annual WHO-recommended limits. Another key to the planet’s health is the Amazon rainforest, of which Brazil is the principle guardian. The Amazon stores huge amounts of carbon, taking up some of what we release into the atmosphere. But this natural treasure is at risk. According to the World Wildlife Fund, over the last several years the Amazon has lost at least 17 percent of its vegetation, and deforestation has released large amounts of carbon into the atmosphere. The protection of this treasure is a responsibility humanity is failing to live up to. The fight we must win This month, nearly 11 thousand competitors from all around the world united in the world’s most important athletic competition. It was a unique occasion to reflect on the urgent challenges facing humanity. AIDA helps the nations of Latin America tackle these challenges.  We work to improve air quality, and mitigate short-lived climate pollutants, which remain in the air for a relatively short time, yet generate extreme changes in climate, degrade air quality, and damage crop yields. We believe the fight against climate change is the most critical of all fights. To truly achieve victory, we must ensure we don’t break the 1.5 °C record. Our ability to win it requires us all to work as one global team.

Read more

Six Colombian Wetlands of Global Importance

Colombia is blessed with sweeping mountaintops, rich jungles, and rivers that curve through the heart of it all. The country has three mountain chains, fertile volcanic soils, half of the world’s páramos (high-altitude wetlands), an equatorial climate with constant high temperatures, the Amazon forest, and the waters of the Caribbean Sea and Pacific Ocean. Colombia is first in the world in diversity of birds and orchids, second in plants and amphibians, third in reptiles and palms, and fourth in mammals. To this I would add a long and diverse et cetera. Colombia’s environmental heritage includes six Wetlands of International Importance listed under the Ramsar Convention, a treaty that protects these environments. Their listing indicates their value not only for Colombia, but also for humanity. Where are they? Why are they important? What dangers do they face? 1. Ciénaga Grande de Santa Marta, Magdalena River Delta Estuary System. In the department of Magdalena, the Ciénaga Grande de Santa Marta is Colombia’s largest wetland lagoon. Here the fresh water of the Magdalena River mixes with the salty waters of the Caribbean Sea. It’s a refuge for both migratory and endemic birds. It’s in danger due to infrastructure projects including 27 kilometers of dikes, the burning and clearing of plant life, and drought. AIDA has worked with two Colombia universities to advocate for the protection of the Ciénaga before the Ramsar Secretriat. 2. Chingaza Wetlands System. The Chingaza system of lagoons and páramos hosts many species of endangered plants and animals, such as the spectacled bear and the frailejón, a succulent shrub in the sunflower family. It also serves as a refuge for migratory birds. According to the Humboldt Institute, the Chingaza páramo provides 80 percent of Bogotá’s drinking water. At AIDA, we advocate for the protection of the páramos, unique ecosystems that cover just 1.7 percent of Colombia’s continental territory but provide more than 70 percent of the nation’s drinking water. 3. Otún Lagoon Wetlands Complex. The Otún Lagoon Complex in Los Nevados National Park, in the Central Cordillera of the Colombian Andes, includes interconnected lakes, bogs, marshes, glaciers, and páramos. The area supports 52 species of birds, many of them endangered. The livestock industry, litter, forest fires, invasive species, and illegal tourism activities all threaten the area. 4.  Baudó River Delta. Originating in the Serranía del Baudó, the Baudó River runs 180 kilometers through the department of Chocó and empties into the Pacific Ocean. A relatively short river, the Baudó swells from the region’s abundant rains and flows powerfully into the Pacific. The river delta’s main threats include indiscriminate mangrove removal and overfishing. 5.  Estrella Fluvial del Inírida Wetlands Complex. This complex of wetlands occupies a transition zone between the Orinoco and Amazon regions, close to the sacred indigenous site of Cerro de Mavicure. According to the Ministry of Environment, the area is home to 903 species of plants, 200 species of mammals, and 40 species of amphibians. Critically endangered species, including otters, jaguars, and pink dolphins, struggle to survive there. These wetlands face threats from the illegal mining of coltan and gold, and the accompanying mercury discharge. The buffer zone also suffers from cultivation of drug crops, the livestock industry, and deforestation. 6. La Cocha Lagoon. In the indigenous language of Quechua, cocha means lagoon. In the Department of Nariño, 2,800 meters above sea level, sits Colombia’s second-largest lagoon. On its banks live fishermen, farmers, and descendants of the indigenous Quillacinga people. Tourists come to spot unique plant and animal species on the small island of La Corota. The livestock industry, intensive agriculture, deforestation, and erosion threaten the lagoon. Valuable Characteristics The Ramsar Convention protects these sites because of their fundamental role in both regulating water cycles and providing habitat for unique plants and animals, particularly aquatic birds. Ramsar also recognizes the wetlands as important sources of fresh water, which recharge aquifers. They even mitigate climate change. The Convention calls worldwide attention to these wetlands, which have “great economic, cultural, scientific and recreational value, whose loss would be irreparable.” Despite their tremendous value, Colombia’s wetlands face a growing number of threats: overexploitation, water loss, burning, deforestation, toxic contamination, large-scale mining, large-scale agriculture, roads that disrupt the natural water cycle, and climate change, among others. In recent years, they’ve been featured in some of Colombia’s most emblematic films, including El Abrazo de la Serpiente (Estrella Fluvial del Indira) and La Sirga (Cocha Lake). It is our moral and social duty—under international environmental law and the Ramsar Convention—to care for the delicate richness of the wetlands that we are so fortunate to have in our diverse little corner of South America. 

Read more

Mexico City: Air Pollution Points to Climate Solutions

By Laura Yaniz, AIDA social media manager (originally published in Animal Político) Smog causes continuous environmental alerts in Mexico City. But did you know a legal framework exists to combat the pollutants that cause it? Mexico City nearly entered into a state of emergency due to its poor air quality. The government almost closed gas stations, ordered half the city’s vehicles off the road, suspended classes, and closed government offices. If air pollution had spiked any higher, they’d have closed restaurants and reduced certain industrial operations by 60 percent. The cause of the crisis—which hasn’t been this bad in 14 years—is ground-level ozone. Along with black carbon, methane, and hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), ground-level ozone is a short-lived climate pollutant (SLCP). The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change estimates that, overall, SLCPs are responsible for more than 30 percent of global warming, although recent studies calculate that it may actually be closer to 40 or 45 percent. The good news is, they have a relatively short lifespan in the atmosphere, ranging from a few days to a few decades. Reducing these emissions, in Mexico and wherever they’re found around the world, presents an immediate opportunity to achieve near-term mitigation of climate change while improving air quality and human health. Close to Extreme Mexico City’s Metropolitan Index of Air Quality measures the chemical components of air in whole numbers that are easy to understand. On May 5, ozone reached 192 points (the equivalent of 0.1929 parts per million). When the Index reaches around 200 points ozone can damage skin. The city was only 8 points away! The city has spent several months in and out of Phase 1 of the Environmental Contingency Plan, whose most famous measure is the “Doble Hoy No Circula” program, which restricts vehicles from circulating two days a week, instead of the habitual one. If Phase 2 had been declared, the extreme measure would have divided vehicles by odd and even plates and declared that half of them could not be driven.  About Ground-level Ozone Ozone is a gas that exists in two different layers of the atmosphere. In the stratosphere (the highest layer), ozone absorbs ultraviolet radiation and protects us from the sun’s dangerous rays. In the troposphere (the lower atmosphere, from the ground to about 10 or 15 kilometers up), ozone acts as a greenhouse gas that contributes to global warming, harms human health, and affects the growth of agricultural crops. Tropospheric ozone is not directly emitted by any one source. Instead, it’s the result of a chemical reaction between the sun and “precursor gases,” which can occur naturally or be produced by humans. The most important precursor gases in regards to ozone are carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen oxides (NOx) and volatile organic compounds (VOCs). The latter cover a wide range of substances, including methane, and are primarily generated at gas stations, in homes, and through the chemical industry. Ozone remains in the atmosphere only a few days or weeks, a very short time compared to other gases, such as carbon dioxide, that linger in the atmosphere for centuries, even millennia. This is precisely what makes the mitigation of ozone an interesting opportunity: if we reduce emissions, we could see the climatic and health benefits in the near and medium term.  Ozone contributes to such illnesses as bronchitis, emphysema, and asthma, and can scar lung tissue permanently. According to a report from the Climate & Clean Air Coalition, an international organization dedicated to reducing short-lived climate pollutants, tropospheric ozone is responsible for roughly 150 million premature deaths each year. It also affects global food security by reducing the ability of food to absorb carbon dioxide, which reduces yield.  AIDA Supports Efforts to Control Short-Lived Climate Pollutants To help governments reduce SLCP emissions, AIDA attorneys have created a report, Controlando los contaminantes climáticos de vida corta: Una oportunidad para mejorar la calidad del aire y mitigar el cambio climático. El caso de Brasil, Chile, y México (Controlling Short-lived Climate Pollutants: An Opportunity to Improve Air Quality and Mitigate Climate Change: Brazil, Chile, and Mexico). We are distributing it to key decision-makers in government agencies to help them understand the urgency of the problem and the opportunities their legal frameworks provide to facilitate emission reductions. The report reviews policies, laws, and programs on air quality and climate change as they relate to SLCPs in Brazil, Chile, and Mexico. Of the three countries studied, Mexico is currently the only one that has incorporated these contaminants into its climate change policy. The government recently went a step further by including SLCP reductions in its Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs)—the commitments made under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. As the AIDA report notes, it’s not enough to recognize the importance of reducing SLCP emissions. Greater efforts must be made to reduce emissions. Countries must improve pollutant-monitoring systems, provide sufficient funding for emission-reduction programs, and create systems to evaluate progress. Developing strategies to identify principle emissions sources and to reduce emissions should be a near-term priority not just for the Mexican capital, but also for all the governments of Latin America. AIDA is committed to supporting policymakers with legal expertise that can speed improvements in air quality, human health, and climate change.

Read more

Marcelina

Marcelina, the voice of the San Pedro Mezquital

At 57 years old, Marcelina López has a very active life. She sews her own clothes, makes beautiful jewelry, raises chickens, sells eggs, cooks, is a midwife and organizes the women of her community; all while faithfully conserving her traditions, those of the indigenous Wixárika people. Perhaps what distinguishes Marcelina most is her great character and conviction, qualities that have rooted her deeply in a grand cause: the defense of Mexico’s San Pedro Mezquital River, threatened by Las Cruces Dam. At AIDA we’re deeply moved by the commitment of Marcelina and honored to be part of the same fight. Just like her, we want the San Pedro—the only free-flowing river left in the western Sierra Madre Mountains—to run free. We’ve been inspired to know more about this incredible woman, and to understand why she does what she does. Colors of the Sierra Madre Marcelina lives in a house made of mud, built high upon a hill, in a small community in the state of Nayarit. To go anywhere from her house, she has to walk an hour and a half through the mountains. She travels everywhere on foot. There’s no doubt Marcelina is a special woman. Everyone in the region knows her; she is unmistakable. She has the look of a wise indigenous woman, the bright colors of her clothes equal only to those of the beaded necklaces she wears each day. She herself colors the beads; they are a symbol of the importance of her culture. She often wears a head wrap, which gives her an air of certainty and connotes rich ancestral wisdom. Though her profound presence can seem serious, Marcelina is a very sweet and loving person. Over the years, Marcelina has not been immune to violence and machismo, in its many expressions. She has had to fight to have her voice recognized in agrarian assemblies, and, for a time, had to provide for her children as a single mother. Her people, the Wixárika—known in Spanish as the Huicholes—are a majority group in Nayarit. They live in the western central region of Mexico, in the Sierra Madre Mountains; they primarily populate the states of Nayarit and Jalisco, but are also represented in parts of Durange and Zacatecas. In their native tongue, belonging to the family of Uto-Aztecan languages, wixárika means “people.”   For the Wixárika, ceremonies are fundamental to the social wellbeing of the group. It is through these sacred rituals that they ask for rain, give thanks for the harvest, bless its fruits, and pray for health and vitality. Their ceremonies are, in short, where they celebrate and honor life. For Marcelina and her people, the San Pedro Mezquital is the pillar of social, spiritual and economic life. Its waters support their subsistence farming and fishing activities; 14 of their sacred sites are spread along its length. What’s more, the river feeds Marismas Nacionales, one of the most important mangrove forests in all of Mexico. This important source of life and culture is threatened now by the construction of Las Cruces Dam, a project being proposed by the Federal Electricity Commission. The megaproject would be located 65 kilometers north of the city of Tepic. It would have a capacity of 240 MW, divided between three generators. The dam would effectively stand as a 188-meter high concrete curtain. Speaking for the river In her excellent Spanish, accented with clear links to her indigenous roots, Marcelina has on various occasions stood before microphones and cameras to defend the San Pedro River and the lives of those who depend upon it. “The construction of this dam will have a severe impact on our culture and our spirituality. Many of our ceremonial centers are located along this river,” she explained. “It is there that we leave our offerings of thanks; it there that we pray, not just for our own community, but for the entire world.” When asked why she decided to be part of the movement in defense of the San Pedro, Marcelina responded: “As an indigenous women, I’m hurt that they want to take away our river. What’s happening? Why didn’t they consult us indigenous people [about the project]? Where is their respect? Why are we treated this way?” Her questions remain unanswered. The construction of Las Cruces will have negative impacts on the land, its natural resources, and the way of life of the indigenous people who depend upon it. The dam will flood 4,506 hectares; the town of San Blasito, sections of communal land, at least 14 sacred sites, and one ceremonial center, will all be under water. “We are the roots of Mexico,” Marcelina concluded. “It’s not easy for us to change our sacred sites; they’re like a tree rooted deep in the soil. Down these rivers run the blood of our gods.”

Read more