Climate Change

Paisaje desértico en La Guajira, Colombia.

September 12 2023 Indigenous Rights, Mining, Freshwater Sources

Expanding coal mining in Colombia contravenes a just energy transition

Colombia faces numerous challenges related to the just energy transition the world needs. As the main exporter of thermal coal in Latin America, one of its primary challenges is to define the future of this mineral in the country's economic and energy matrices, as well as how to align this sector with its commitments to address the global climate crisis. Certainly, the measures taken to achieve a just energy transition and meet climate commitments must respect and guarantee human rights. The State must do so with a differentiated perspective that respects the most vulnerable groups in society who are most affected by the impacts of the climate crisis and transition processes. As part of a plan to change the energy transition strategy, the current government has proposed to create a roadmap that focuses, among other things, on promoting renewable energy projects from non-conventional sources, among other initiatives. The proposal is based on four principles: equity, social and binding participation, sovereign graduality with reliability, and a principle of knowledge. Although the proposed strategy can be seen as progress towards energy transition and meeting international commitments and standards, it has some gaps: it does not focus sufficiently on fossil fuel substitution and ignores the role and impact of the coal sector in all its phases. The omission of the structural causes of the climate crisis hinders the consolidation of an energy transition, which is now a contested scenario with various claims and interests at stake. A vivid example is the department of La Guajira in the north of the country, where a high potential for renewable energy coincides with the extraction of 35% of exported coal, exacerbating the climate crisis. This has increased the region's already high climate vulnerability and aggravated human rights violations in that territory. The impacts–particularly water stress, desertification, and reduced rainfall—have been so severe that the government has declared a state of economic, social, and environmental emergency in La Guajira, where the El Niño phenomenon is expected to occur with greater intensity and duration than in previous years. The coal sector’s role in the energy transition process Combating and addressing the climate crisis requires progress in replacing fossil fuels, as well as slowing down the expansion of their extraction and exploitation with the obvious consequence of limiting their use as much as possible. In the countries of the Global South, which are highly dependent on the extraction and commercialization of fossil fuels, the debate has begun on whether and how to move forward with the substitution process. If Colombia is to move forward in meeting its climate commitments and in the process of a just energy transition, it must halt the approval of new thermal coal mining projects, avoid the expansion of existing projects, and initiate responsible exit processes for a gradual closure of mining operations in which rights are guaranteed. The energy transition roadmap should focus on avoiding, as much as possible, human rights impacts (territorial, subsistence, and environmental) on the communities most affected by the impacts of the climate crisis. The goal is to avoid further human rights violations and a lack of protection for the territories traversed by the coal sector's production chain. The debate around the energy transition and the socio-environmental conflicts associated with coal is fully exemplified in the case of the Bruno stream, in La Guajira, with an ongoing legal process. It is now in the hands of the Constitutional Court to decide between the protection of a stream vital to an area of high water stress and the exploitation of its channel to expand the mine of the company Carbones del Cerrejón (owned by the multinational Glencore). What is at stake is the guarantee of the Wayúu communities' rights of access to water, health and life. The debate about the energy transition and the socio-environmental conflicts associated with coal is exemplified by Bruno Stream in La Guajira, which is the subject of a court case. It is now in the hands of the Constitutional Court to decide between the protection of a stream vital to an area of high water stress and the exploitation of its channel to expand the mine of the Carbones del Cerrejón company (owned by the multinational Glencore). What is at stake is the guarantee of the Wayúu communities' rights to access to water, health and life. What just transition does need After analyzing the role of coal in the process of just energy transition in Colombia, it is possible to conclude that the country is not meeting its climate commitments because it has not established specific measures and actions for the coal sector in its climate policy. If Colombia wants to move forward in fossil fuel substitution, climate policy and the energy transition process cannot be separated from the monitoring and decision-making of the relevant authorities regarding specific projects in the coal sector. Climate change management and the energy transition process must recognize the claims of justice, reparation, and non-repetition raised by communities affected by years of coal extraction, such as those in the department of La Guajira. In a just energy transition scenario, progressive, participatory and inclusive processes to end mining - together with the affected communities - must be ensured, aiming to create diversification and conversion scenarios in regions with high dependence on the coal sector. Acting within this framework is desirable and possible.

Mujer y caballo en zona montañosa de Perú

August 25 2023 Climate Change, Human Rights

Climate finance and a gender perspective: two concepts that must be intertwined

By Camila Bartelega, Florencia Ortúzar and Francisco Pinilla* Women and girls are disproportionately affected by the onslaught of the climate crisis. This is because they are usually the ones responsible for fetching water and food, and for taking care of children, the elderly, and the sick. Climate change makes this unpaid care work much more difficult. Evidence also shows that women and girls are more vulnerable to natural disasters. It's estimated that they're 14 times more likely to die than men when natural disasters strike. This may be because they are caring for vulnerable people, because they are often not taught how to swim or climb trees, or because they wear inadequate clothing to respond, amongst others. On the other hand, as the climate crisis creates chaos and increases conflict, they are more vulnerable to sexual assault and domestic violence. This is fueled by the growing frustration of a world in which resources are becoming scarcer and more difficult to obtain. It is clear, then, why it is important to include a gender perspective when talking about how best to address the climate crisis. But doing so is important not only to "level the playing field" for historically disadvantaged women, but also because they have a lot of knowledge to contribute, and the additional burdens they carry affect their ability to contribute to the best solutions. Including a gender perspective in climate action is therefore both fair and desirable for more effective and beneficial outcomes. If they are excluded, women lose, and we all lose. For Maite Smet, Executive Director of the International Analog Forestry Network, when we talk about a gender approach, or even a feminist approach, we are talking about issues of power. "Working from a gender and climate justice perspective is about wanting to change systems of power that have historically oppressed and socially excluded people," she said. "It opens up the possibility of including people who have not been part of important climate conversations and decisions." Now let's look at the relationship between gender and climate finance, a critical element in the uphill battle to preserve a livable planet. Gender and climate finance Tackling the global climate crisis will require transforming the way we live on the planet, including energy and food production, infrastructure and transportation. This will require significant financial resources. The Paris Accord stipulates that developed countries must provide financial assistance to the least developed and most vulnerable countries. This brings us to the world of climate finance: The provision of funds to implement mitigation and adaptation measures. All climate finance must have a gender perspective, as the impacts of the climate crisis disproportionately affect women and girls. What does this mean? It means funding that understands and intentionally addresses these differentiated impacts. It means that funding decisions are made with the participation of women, recognizing that they have valuable knowledge of their territories and are therefore the bearers of valuable solutions. Finally, it means making funding available and accessible to women. According to Natalia Daza, gender monitor of the Green Climate Fund for Latin America and the Caribbean and member of the Women Environment and Development Organization, the gender approach to climate finance has a lot to do with understanding that inequality shapes the way social relations take place. "Women are affected differently, usually more negatively, by the impacts of climate change,” she explained. “That's why civil society has a very important role to play in ensuring that climate action includes the voices of women, LGBTIQ+ and feminist organizations, from design to implementation.” The Gender Approach in the Green Climate Fund At AIDA, when we track climate finance coming into the region, we focus on the Green Climate Fund (GCF), the world's leading climate fund, which is accountable to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change. Although far from perfect (not least because what is written is not necessarily followed), it is perhaps the most progressive fund on gender issues. The GCF's gender policy recognizes that climate change affects women and men differently and emphasizes the importance of women's participation and leadership in decision-making processes related to finance. It is considered progressive, compared to other funds, because of its cross-cutting approach, which seeks to integrate gender considerations into all aspects of financing. According to Seblewongel Deneke, the GCF’s gender specialist, any policy or strategy that emerges from the fund must take the gender perspective into account. "It is clear that both women and men contribute equally and should have equal opportunities. But we need to recognize that there are differentiated challenges for men and women, and that both are part of the solution." The policy includes capacity building, tools and materials. "The climate debate is not just about the climate agenda; it brings other elements of inequality to the table. We need to change access to education and health and ensure the basic rights that every individual should have, including women," Deneke said. What is needed? We cannot deny that we have made progress. The importance of the gender perspective in climate action and finance is discussed and recognized. There are policies to ensure it, institutions to implement it, and sometimes even staff and budgets to do so. But the job is not done. Women still have less access to climate finance and fewer positions of power. And mitigation and adaptation projects often fail to consider the disproportionate impact of climate change on women. It is not easy to change things when they move with the inertia of what has always been. But we cannot give up. At AIDA, we have integrated a gender perspective across all our work. In doing so, we have broken new ground on many fronts and improved our results, and not just for the benefit of women. As a regional node of GCF Watch, an international observatory that monitors the Green Climate Fund, AIDA is a bridge between decision-making at the Board level and the territories that receive the projects financed. Florencia Ortúzar, Senior Attorney at AIDA, says that it is not enough to have funds, there must also be adequate investments. "Civil society monitoring is key to ensure that investments in the name of climate are made with respect for human rights and with a gender focus, and to achieve the maximum potential of the funds allocated to these types of projects and programs." This was the theme of an in-person event held in Rio de Janeiro in June. Supported by the Global Alliance for Gender and Green Action (GAGGA) - and organized by CASA Socio-Environmental Fund, AIDA and Both Ends - the event aimed to train and motivate regional organizations with a feminist base to be better prepared to follow up on the Green Climate Fund. Lola Gutiérrez, director of the Bolivian Women's Fund, who attended the event, emphasizes the importance of learning more about the fund, other countries' experiences, and how to access these resources. "Women are affected in different ways by extractivism and climate change, and we are fundamental actors in the solution. It is important to be present and to problematize what is happening." One of the conclusions of the event was that with the progress in policies and with a narrative that is much more receptive to gender, we can stop being gatekeepers that prevent the passage of bad projects and become strikers that propose projects to be implemented to stop the climate crisis. Therein lies the hope that these grassroots organizations will soon be the ones accessing funds and proposing solutions. Only then can we celebrate and rest. * Camila Bartelega is a fellow with AIDA's Climate Program, Florencia Ortúzar is a senior attorney and Francisco Pinilla is a digital communications strategist.

Paisaje de la selva amazónica en el Parque Nacional Yasuní, Ecuador

August 14 2023 Indigenous Rights, Climate Change, Human Rights

Protecting Ecuador’s Yasuní National Park can bolster the global just energy transition

What the people of Ecuador decide in an August 20 referendum has the potential to not only slow oil exploitation in the Amazon, but also to generate a transformative impact at the national and international levels, recognizing the value of the key ecosystem for stabilizing the global climate and the need to transition to renewable and sustainable energy production. On August 20, in a popular consultation, the Ecuadorian people will have the opportunity to decide on a definitive halt to oil exploitation in a part of Yasuní National Park, one of the most biodiverse areas of the planet, located in the Amazon rainforest. The consultation seeks to stop oil extraction in the ITT block (Ishpingo, Tiputini, Tambococha), one of three in production within the park. Yasuní National Park is a UNESCO Biosphere Reserve. Multiple scientific studies have demonstrated its value in terms of biodiversity and its significance as the home to the Waorani people, and to the Tagaeri and Taromenane indigenous groups in voluntary isolation. The Amazon is an interconnected region shared by eight countries—Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador, Guyana, Peru, Suriname and Venezuela—and by French Guiana, a French overseas department, and what happens in one part of it affects the rest. Moreover, as a megadiverse region that serves as a global climate stabilizer, the importance of the Amazon rainforest is global. The eyes of the world will be watching to see if Ecuador chooses to protect its Amazonian territory, which would have a transformative impact not only in the country, but also across Latin America and the world. Protecting Yasuní would send a clear message that recognizes the ecological and social value of the Amazon to materialize the necessary energy transition and the protection of human rights. Javier Dávalos, AIDA's Climate Program Coordinator and Ecuadorian attorney, reflects: "After years of relentless struggle by social organizations and indigenous movements, Ecuador has the chance to make important progress in protecting an ecosystem that is key to adapting to and mitigating the global climate crisis, as well as to the survival of traditional and indigenous peoples, including those in voluntary isolation. To protect the climate for this and future generations, fossil fuel production must begin to decline immediately, and renewable energy production must be accelerated as part of a just transition. Ecuador can be a pioneer, leaving behind the environmental and social sacrifice zones promoted by the fossil fuel industry and showing the world how civil society can promote the just energy transition that the world needs. It can be an example of how to build energy alternatives based on guaranteeing human rights and the rights of nature, and how to effectively combat the triple crisis the world is facing: climate change, biodiversity loss and pollution." Context The initiative to put a definitive stop to oil exploitation in part of the Amazon is in line with the recommendations of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the International Energy Agency that one-third to two-thirds of oil reserves be left in the ground in order to keep the increase in the average temperature of the planet below 2°C, compared to pre-industrial levels, and thus avoid catastrophic effects. The popular consultation in Ecuador takes place a few weeks after the UN Secretary General, Antonio Guterres, declared the beginning of the era of "climate boiling", pointing out the need for concrete changes to face the emergency and crisis caused by global warming. In addition, this consultation comes shortly after the conclusion of the Amazon Summit in Brazil, where the eight Amazonian countries discussed how to chart a sustainable path forward for the Amazon rainforest. "It is time to phase out fossil fuels to protect the Amazon," said Gustavo Petro, President of Colombia, who recently urged Amazonian countries and their partners in the Global North to commit to phasing out fossil fuel exploitation in order to protect the right to a just transition and accelerate the transition to a post-oil economy. press contact: Víctor Quintanilla (Mexico), AIDA, [email protected], +521 5570522107

August 07 2023 Climate Change, Human Rights

Climate Litigation Platform for Latin America and the Caribbean: The road traveled

When the world was in a health crisis and COVID-19 made us turn away from everything and everyone, I came across the Climate Litigation Community of Practice in Latin America. In those days of 2020, I was an external collaborator for Greenpeace Mexico, and I was lucky enough to meet Javier, Florencia, and Veronica, who hosted this nascent community from their roles at AIDA. The community facilitated several virtual meetings to share ideas on climate litigation with people from all over the region concerned about the environment, the climate crisis, and the health of the planet and living beings. We affirmed our shared concerns and showed how we were addressing the environmental and social crises from each of our trenches, using strategic climate litigation. Some people were litigating against deforestation, coal mines, and thermoelectric power plants, or for the inclusion of climate change variables in environmental impact studies. Others were trying to stop fossil fuel policies or to improve and meet national climate commitments. It was interesting to see the breadth and versatility of how litigation is being used to advance climate action. AIDA then invited us to a series of meetings with the protagonists of some of the world's most emblematic strategic litigation cases. The experience of being in close contact with these people, in a space of trust, was unparalleled. It certainly reinforced my belief in the importance of the struggle being waged and the need to learn more about climate litigation. Then came another invitation from AIDA, this time to participate in the Advisory Committee to build a platform that would bring together in one place the cases of climate litigation in our region and in our language, as testimonies of a resistance that comes from many different fronts. The goal was to create a website where users could access information, find arguments to support the struggles, develop strategies, and have the possibility of contacting attorneys and academics. All to make visible the efforts of Latin America and the Caribbean in the face of climate conflicts. The Alana Institute of Brazil, the Foundation for Environment and Natural Resources of Argentina, the Office of the Environmental Ombudsman of Chile, and Greenpeace Mexico responded to the call to participate in the design of the tool. The collaborative efforts bore fruit, and in February 2022, the Climate Litigation Platform for Latin America and the Caribbean was officially born, with the goal of strengthening climate litigation in the region, and with it its power to promote the structural changes that are needed. The main challenge was how to collect, systematize, and update the data. The solution was to create a team of rapporteurs. Thus, volunteers—attorneys or law students from different countries with an interest in environmental, climate and human rights advocacy—began to work together virtually to maintain and update the platform and report new cases in their jurisdictions. The Platform started with 49 cases, and currently hosts 61 cases from eight countries. Another 30 are in the process of being added. The cases are identified and categorized in a user-friendly and intuitive way. The team of rapporteurs consists of 24 people from 12 countries. Without their tireless work and enthusiasm, the platform would not be possible. A year and a half after the launch of the Platform, and much longer since its inception, my memories point to the enthusiasm, dedication and commitment of many people to defend our common home, fight against devastation, and the possibility of bequeathing a greener and bluer planet to the future. We have a responsibility to future generations. We must provide tools, initiate and continue actions that will guide future legal actions to protect and care for the environment. I share with you my conviction that the goals set by the Community of Practice at its first meetings in 2020 will be achieved and that this project will continue to move forward by leaps and bounds. The challenge remains: to continue to share the success stories, the valuable lessons learned when things do not go as we expect, the successful regional and international experiences; and to continue to work to make effective the decisions that give reason to the planet. From AIDA, we invite you to learn about and use the Climate Litigation Platform for Latin America and the Caribbean to enter the world of climate litigation, which represents a great opportunity in the fight for climate justice and the protection of human rights in the region and the world. Visit the platform

August 03 2023 Indigenous Rights, Climate Change, Human Rights

Amazon Summit: 6 proposals for preserving the Amazon through regional cooperation

The Amazon is the world's largest tropical forest, a megadiverse ecosystem, and a global climate stabilizer that plays a key role in South America's water cycle. The region is also home to hundreds of indigenous, peasant and local communities. Despite its richness and cultural importance, the Amazon is threatened by colonization and land grabbing, deforestation, fires and extractive activities, among others. Because the Amazon is shared by eight countries – Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador, Guyana, Peru, Suriname and Venezuela – and French Guiana, a French overseas department, its conservation requires a regional effort. The Amazon Cooperation Treaty (ACT), signed in 1978 by the eight Amazonian countries, promotes the sustainable development of the Amazonian territories, with an emphasis on cooperation and scientific research. In 1998, with an amendment to the Treaty, the countries created the Amazon Cooperation Treaty Organization (ACTO) to strengthen and improve the cooperation process. Today, ACTO is the only socio-environmental bloc in Latin America and the most important scenario for establishing solid regional coordination for the conservation of the Amazon biome. However, this intergovernmental organization has not yet reached its potential. On the one hand, it has encountered obstacles in generating funding, and has had to rely on international sources on several occasions. On the other hand, it has not allowed the effective participation of civil society. On August 8 and 9, the city of Belém do Pará in Brazil will host the Amazon Summit 2023, the fourth meeting of the Presidents of the States Parties to the ATT. Given the opportunity that this meeting offers to revitalize the ATT for the benefit of the Amazonian territories, we present below six proposals for the conservation of this ecosystem through regional cooperation. 1. Reform ACTO bodies to allow for public participation There is an urgent need to update the ACT and reinstate ACTO to ensure broad civil society participation, including in the meetings of ACTO's governing bodies and in the drafting of its Strategic Agenda for Amazon Cooperation. The minutes of such meetings should be made public. These and other measures are essential for Amazonian states to fulfill their obligations under the Escazú Agreement, a regional treaty that recognizes the public's right to access information on environmental matters. 2. Promote involvement, dialogue and coordination with Amazonian populations The indigenous, peasant and local communities that inhabit the Amazon have played a fundamental role in its protection. For millennia, their knowledge has enabled its conservation. Therefore, efforts to conserve this ecosystem must begin by recognizing, valuing and protecting these ancestral knowledge systems, promoting their participation in decision-making, and guaranteeing their rights in accordance with international human rights frameworks. 3. Protecting environmental defenders in the Amazon Four of the Amazonian countries – Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador and Peru – are among the countries with the highest risks for environmental and territorial defenders, especially indigenous and peasant women defenders. Despite this, ACTO currently has no strategy to address this serious situation. The organization must guarantee environmental defenders a safe and conducive environment for their work, a task that should include a program for the protection of women defenders in the Amazon. 4. Effectively fight the use of mercury in gold mining The use of mercury in small-scale gold mining is devastating to communities and ecosystems in the Amazon. At the regional level, ACTO should adopt a resolution or program to address this issue directly. And at the international level, member states should act as a bloc to push for amendments to the Minamata Convention on Mercury so that the treaty prohibits the marketing of the heavy metal and its use in small-scale gold mining. 5. Promote compliance with international environmental agreements Based on a regional strategy for the recognition of international environmental law to protect the Amazon and its people, ACTO should advise States Parties on compliance with environmental treaties such as the Convention on Biological Diversity. It should also assist States in the inclusion of threatened sites, knowledge systems, traditions and cultural expressions of peasant communities and indigenous peoples on lists of priority international attention and support, such as UNESCO Biosphere Reserves and Intangible Cultural Heritage, and Wetlands of International Importance under the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands. 6. Promote a different vision of development for the Amazon ACTO should promote a vision of development that considers communities and addresses the problems of deforestation, fires and the expansion of the extractive frontier through international integration. It should also articulate regional efforts to stop the expansion of the oil frontier and advocate for the establishment of a moratorium on fossil fuel extraction in the Amazon. In addition, it should promote legal reforms that discourage the expansion of illegal mining and its impacts. Looking to the future The Amazon rainforest and the potential for regional cooperation to conserve it are at a critical juncture. The point of no return for the Amazon, the point at which the rate of deforestation nullifies its capacity to regenerate, is no longer a future scenario. But at the same time, after several years of little action within ACTO, this year's Amazon Summit and the reactivation of the Amazon Parliament in 2022 renew hope for regional cooperation to conserve the Amazon. In the same vein, the presidents of Brazil and Colombia recently announced their goals to reduce illegal deforestation in the Amazon by 2030. Given the current threats to the Amazon and ACTO's mandate to promote regional cooperation, its member states should seize this moment to provide the organization with more regular and permanent funding. This is necessary to implement effective long-term programs and, in particular, the above-mentioned proposals. Civil society should also take full advantage of opportunities for advocacy with ACTO and its bodies, including participation in the Amazon Dialogues that will take place from August 4 to 6 as a prelude to the Summit. Joint regional and transboundary efforts are powerful enough to save a vital ecosystem for the region and the world.

Vista áerea de la Fundición Ventanas en la comuna de Puchuncaví, Chile

July 21 2023 Toxic Pollution, Climate Change, Human Rights

When the energy transition isn’t just: The case of Quintero and Puchuncaví in Chile

By Cristina Lux and Florencia Ortúzar * The energy transition in Chile will inevitably occur. In fact, it is already underway. The country doesn’t have large deposits of fossil fuels, but it does have abundant renewable energy resources. It only makes sense, then, that prior dependence on coal should naturally shift to the sun, wind and other renewable sources. Today, after decades of struggle by local communities, the closure of Chile’s original 28 coal-fired thermoelectric power plants is underway as part of the Decarbonization Plan promoted by the government in 2019. Eight have closed, six others have a future closure date, six more are in the process of establishing one, and eight do not yet have a closure plan. If the government and private actors deliver as promised, the thermoelectric plants as a whole should close before 2040, freeing Chile from the energy derived from burning coal. But the history of coal dependence will undoubtedly leave a deep mark. For many years, Chile obtained more than 50 percent of its energy from thermoelectric plants, all located in just five locations, known as "sacrifice zones." The people who live in those areas have long suffered at the expense of generating electricity for the rest of the country. The story of one of the most emblematic of Chile’s sacrifice zones, the bay of Quintero and Puchuncaví, demonstrates why the transition not only must occur, but why it has to be just. A beautiful seaside resort battered by pollution With a little more than 40 thousand inhabitants, the bay of Quintero and Puchuncaví is located two hours by road from the country's capital. The families there have historically lived from agriculture, artisanal fishing and tourism, ways of life that have been extinguished by the relentless advance of intensive industrial activity. Photo: Claudia Pool / @claudiapool_foto / www.claudiapool.com Today, the site is home to more than 30 different companies: a coal-fired thermoelectric complex, gas-fired thermoelectric plants, a copper refinery and a petroleum refinery, a regasification port, a cement plant, ports that receive coal and other fuels, as well as coal and ash storage centers, among others. Public information regarding the emissions of this mix of companies is deficient and the lack of regulations governing them is abysmal. In fact, only a few pollutants are regulated. The rest are not even measured, despite the fact that several are dangerous to human health. And so, paradoxically, the monitoring stations show normal levels as people are being intoxicated in the streets and schools. In the bay there are often mass poisonings of adults and youth, many of whom end up in the hospital. In these cases, schools are closed, but businesses are not, and the wind is monitored to activate protocols in case of poor ventilation. The blame is placed on the lack of wind instead of on those responsible for the pollution. It’s also common to see coal deposits on the beaches, which stain the sands. In 2022 alone, more than 100 episodes were recorded. It’s alarming how the situation affects local children, who are particularly vulnerable to pollution due to its effects on human development. The impact on women is also disproportionate, as they are the first to be forced to leave their jobs to care for sick family members since they bear the brunt of the care work. Things have not been done well in this beautiful coastal area. Today, new projects and the expansion of industrial operations continue to be approved. But the community is rising up, demanding a truce for this area. It is time to move towards ecological restoration in Quintero and Puchuncaví. Signs of hope Some recent events are giving hope that things could improve in the bay and that this area, which for years has been sacrificed in favor of the rest of the country, could once again show its beautiful beaches and wonderful fishing and agricultural resources to Chile and the world. Although the situation is not yet cause for celebration, some things seem to be moving in the right direction. One important step was the environmental damages lawsuit filed in 2016 by local communities against the government and all the companies in the industrial corridor. The process has been long, but a final judgment is expected soon. Meanwhile, in 2019, the Supreme Court resolved several appeals for protection for episodes of mass intoxications, giving reason to the communities and issuing a landmark ruling, perhaps the most important on environmental matters in Chile. The ruling orders the State to comply with 15 measures to identify the sources of contamination and repair the environmental situation in the area. Sadly, this ruling has not yet been properly implemented. Moving forward, the Supreme Court recently issued three rulings that refer to non-compliance with the 2019 ruling and provide tools to enforce compliance. Also, two of the four thermoelectric plants of the U.S.-owned AES Andes have closed operations in the bay. Two remain. Finally, in May, after 58 years of operation, the furnaces and boiler of the Ventanas Smelter were finally shut down. Thus, the icon of pollution in the area—a 158-meter chimney that consistently expelled pollutants—ceased to operate. The search for justice is far from over Despite the good signs, there is still no secure future for the people of Quintero and Puchuncaví. That’s why we must continue to demand justice and a transition that protects the most vulnerable people. Photo: Claudia Pool / @claudiapool_foto / www.claudiapool.com Although two of the four AES Andes thermoelectric plants operating in the bay have closed, the companies that owned them have been granted "strategic reserve status," whereby they are paid to remain available to operate again if required. On the other hand, although the copper smelter of the state-owned Corporación Nacional del Cobre closed, the refinery continues to operate in the area. There was a relocation plan for the workers, but no remediation plan for the communities that for almost six decades breathed the toxic waste of that industry. In addition, projects continue to be approved without the participation of the communities. This is the case of the Aconcagua desalination plant, which intends to desalinate water to transport it through subway pipes over 100 km to supply the Angloamerican mining company. Last but not least, decarbonization in Chile seems to bring an increase in the use of gas, which has been falsely labeled as a "transition fuel." It’s expected that gas activity in the area—which hosts one of the country's two LNG (liquefied natural gas) regasification ports—could intensify and, with it, so could its environmental impacts. Chile has the opportunity to set an example of just transition Chile, located at the end of the continent, has the opportunity to do things right. There are indications they’re moving in the right direction; the only thing missing is the political will to change course. The region of Quintero and Puchuncaví deserves the opportunity to shine again and to reach its full potential as a colorful coastal town and seaside resort with an identity rooted in agriculture, tourism and artisanal fishing. In this case, a truly just transition must include the closure of polluting companies that are making people sick. But it must also involve the participation of those people affected, putting the respect of their human rights at the forefront—a respect that was so diminished over the last six decades. The injustice that has weighed on the territory and its inhabitants must be recognized—establishing reparation mechanisms, ensuring non-repetition, and involving the people themselves in the environmental recovery of the area. Only in this way will the communities recover their capacity for agency—that power to decide and to be part of the decisions that affect them—which was taken away from them so many years ago. *Cristina Lux is an attorney with AIDA's Climate Program and Florencia Ortúzar is a senior attorney with AIDA.

Transición energética justa y justicia climática

July 18 2023 Climate Change, Human Rights, Capacity Building

Session 3 of the AIDA’s 25th Anniversary Webinar Series

A dialogue to build a path toward climate justice and a just energy transition In this third and final session we discussed, starting from a place of hope, the path towards a just energy transition and climate justice in the region. We explored what both concepts mean, what is needed to achieve them, and the tools and successes at our disposal. Panelists Felipe Pino Zúñiga, lawyer and Project Coordinator at NGO FIMA (Chile). Bernie Bastien-Olvera, interdisciplinary researcher on climate change at the University of California, communicator and media producer (Mexico). Tania Ricaldi Arévalo, researcher at the Centro de Estudios Superiores Universitarios of the Universidad Mayor de San Simón (Bolivia). Moderator: Florencia Ortúzar, senior attorney, Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA). Closing: Anna Cederstav, AIDA's Deputy Executive Director and Chief Financial Officer. Recording

Pueblo tradicional en las islas flotantes de los Uros en el lago Titicaca cerca de la ciudad de Puno, Perú.

June 29 2023 Climate Change, Human Rights

Climate finance: Questions and answers

The climate crisis knows no borders. It impacts people, ecosystems and species around the world. Addressing this global crisis requires profound and innovative transformations in all facets of human life: the production of energy, food and other goods; the design and construction of infrastructure; the use and management of terrestrial, marine and freshwater habitats; the transport of people and products; and more. These systemic changes demand financial resources and sound investments. This is why we hear time and again that addressing the climate crisis is costly and requires financing. Climate finance is a complicated topic, and so we offer you a glimpse of the basics. What do we mean by climate finance? The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) describes climate finance as the type of local, national or transnational finance used to support and implement climate change mitigation and adaptation actions with financial resources from public, private and alternative sources. These resources are defined as "new and additional" and cannot include those previously committed, for example, for official development assistance. To better understand this definition, we can point out that climate finance is captured and used to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and enhance carbon sinks, or seeks to reduce vulnerability, as well as to maintain and increase the resilience of human and ecological systems to the negative effects of the climate crisis. Why is climate finance important? To echo UN Climate Change Executive Secretary Simon Stiell's message at the Sustainable Investment Forum, "We cannot achieve our climate goals without finance. Whether we are talking about transitioning to renewable energy, improving energy efficiency or protecting vulnerable communities from the effects of climate change, all of these efforts require significant investment." Climate finance impacts everything from national policies to changes occurring at the local level that make a concrete difference in people's lives. "Climate finance is ultimately about what we as societies value: the world we want to live in and the lives and hardships we can save by channeling our money into building resilience to the ravages of climate change," Stiell said in his speech. Financing by and for whom? The impacts of the climate crisis are inversely proportional to the weight of responsibility, in that the countries historically responsible for the highest levels of GHG emissions are often the least affected. This is why the UNFCCC advocates that developed countries, those with the most economic resources, should financially assist the least developed and most vulnerable countries. This is what the principle of "common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities" established in the Convention is all about. On the other hand, the Paris Agreement—a legally binding international treaty in force since November 2016—reaffirms the obligation of developed countries in addition to promoting, for the first time, voluntary contributions from other States. It further provides that developed countries should continue to take the lead in mobilizing climate finance from a wide variety of sources, instruments and channels, taking into account the important role of public funds, as well as the needs and priorities of developing countries. It’s key to note that this mobilization of finance should represent a progression from previous efforts. What climate finance mechanisms exist? Under the UNFCCC, there are three main mechanisms for climate finance to reach nations, created for different purposes and with different scopes: Global Environment Facility (GEF): Grants financial resources to developing countries or countries with economies in transition to meet the objectives of international environmental conventions and agreements. It also manages the Special Climate Change Fund and the Least Developed Countries Fund. Adaptation Fund: Created as a financial instrument for adaptation and resilience in those countries that are part of the Kyoto Protocol. Green Climate Fund (GCF): Created with the objective of financing mitigation and adaptation programs and projects aimed at low-emission and climate-resilient development. It is the main multilateral climate finance entity worldwide. How much financing do we need? In the framework of the UN climate negotiations in 2009, developed countries committed to transfer $100 billion per year to developing countries by 2020 (target extended to 2025 in the Paris Agreement). But this amount has not been achieved. For example, in 2016 they only reached $58.5 billion and, although the amount increased significantly for 2019, they only reached $79.6 billion. In that sense, to meet the goal of net zero emissions by 2050, the Climate Policy Initiative organization estimates that global financing of $4.35 trillion is needed by 2030 (when the 2020 estimate was only $632 billion dollars). What are the main challenges of climate finance today? The main challenge, as we have seen, is the need for a substantial increase in the flow of finance. Another key challenge is to measure and track this type of finance, which is not subject to a common universal definition. Along the same lines, given that developed countries’ commitment to the UN does not include official guidelines on what activities count as climate finance, it’s difficult to ensure that money is not double-counted or that it goes to efforts that will actually help reduce global warming and its impacts. There is also the need to balance the allocation of funds more equitably between mitigation and adaptation activities, as well as those related to loss and damage already suffered by communities around the world. In 2020, 90 percent of global funding went to mitigation, while only 7 percent to adaptation projects and 3 percent to dual activities. On the other hand, it’s important that the financing channeled does not result in human or environmental impacts, as often happens when there are large investments in which adequate consultation and participation processes are not implemented. An energy project, however renewable and clean it may be, can accentuate inequalities and vulnerabilities if it is poorly planned or if it is designed without the participation of local communities. Finally, it should be considered that, although a lot of money is allocated to address the climate crisis, at the same time, businesses that promote dependence on fossil fuels, and that keep us in a predatory and unjust economic system that perpetuates extractivism as a mode of development, continue to increase around the world. This, of course, counteracts the progress we can make in favor of the environment and communities. What is clear is that a specific annual amount of climate finance is not enough; what we really need at this point is that all the money mobilized contributes to the regeneration of the planet and to resolving the environmental and climate crisis, not exacerbating it. At AIDA we monitor the climate finance coming to the region because we understand how important it is to increase the possibilities of building a future where we can live well and in harmony with the environment. We also understand that the problems often caused by poorly designed financing are due to a lack of connection between the territories that suffer the impacts of the climate crisis, and the decision-making spaces where projects are proposed to overcome them. In this sense, AIDA seeks to build a bridge between these two worlds, motivating organizations in the region to be active, to follow up on projects and to participate in decisions. Only in this way can we ensure that scarce climate funds not only exist, but also reach their full potential towards the paradigm shift we all need. Join the "Observatory of the Green Climate Fund for Latin America and the Caribbean", a joint effort to better monitor the world's largest climate fund.

Vista trasera de un padre con su hija en brazos y mirando su casa con paneles solares instalados.

June 15 2023 Climate Change, Human Rights

The dilemmas of a just energy transition

Humanity has an urgent task ahead: to transform energy systems without continuing to fill the atmosphere with warming gasses and pollutants. This is a fact proven by science. Failure to do so means that our planet will no longer be a safe haven for the the many species that call it home. The problem is that the necessary transition is far from simple. In addition to the difficulty of cutting dependence on the fossil fuels that have dominated for centuries, it turns out that not just any transition will do. It’s not just a matter of stopping to burn these fuels, we must also consider other ways to leave behind the development model that has for centuries been separating humanity into winners and losers, while violating human rights. What is a JUST transition? There is currently no single concept of what it means for the energy transition to be just. At AIDA, we believe that to be just, the transition must be equitable and inclusive, recognizing that the impacts of climate change and the necessary transition are not evenly distributed. Thus, certain groups—such as those working in traditional energy sectors and/or marginalized communities—may be disproportionately affected. To get a glimpse of the problem, it’s worth understanding that humanity today is suffering from a myriad of crises that affect the lives and well being of people, especially those in the most vulnerable conditions. These crises include the climate emergency, pollution, biodiversity loss, global pandemics and democratic crises. And at the heart of it all is social inequality, that widening gap between rich and poor that generates disparities in all aspects of life, including access to health, education and economic opportunities. These crises are interconnected and mutually reinforcing. Responses to one can help solve others, but they can also aggravate them. For example, when transitioning to clean energy sources not only helps combat climate change, but also reduces air pollution and improves public health, we are solving two problems in one. An example in the opposite direction occurs when a rapid and unchecked transition to electric mobility results in the aggressive extraction of rare minerals such as lithium, which comes from fragile ecosystems on which local communities depend. Where do we start? To ensure a just transition, we must be guided by the principles of justice, equity and inclusion, and ensure that the most vulnerable populations are not disproportionately affected. As Naomi Klein said in her book This Changes Everything, to address the climate crisis we must understand that climate change is not only an environmental, but also a human rights issue. A just energy transition requires not only ending the burning of fossil fuels, but also addressing economic inequality, including a gender perspective, strengthening social safety nets, protecting workers' rights, respecting the rights of indigenous peoples, empowering communities to participate in decisions that affect their lives, and making reparations to those who have been affected by the current economic and energy model. What role can litigation play? Litigation is already moving in step with the dilemmas of the energy transition. We have seen an increase in lawsuits that appear to go against the energy transition, such as those challenging renewable energy generation projects, or pro-transition regulations, or otherwise hindering the transition. But can it be said that these are always "regressive" lawsuits? A lawsuit to challenge the environmental permitting of a wind generation venture might be blocking the transition, but it is not necessarily regressive. If it is a mega-project, for example, owned by a transnational company that will export all the energy generated without benefiting local communities, and if it intends to be located on indigenous lands without local participation, then it is a project aimed at an "unjust transition" that does not serve us because it reinforces the same model, the one that has us so badly on track. The report Litigation for a Just Transition in Latin America, published in January 2023 by the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia University, and translated into Spanish by AIDA, refers to this type of case. The report questions the purpose of just transition litigation, asking whether it promotes or obstructs an energy and climate-resilient transition. In this regard, the authors conclude that just transition litigation cannot be fully characterized as regressive or non-regressive in relation to the transition. As such, they consider that just transition litigation should be seen and understood as a new category of climate litigation, with its own diverse rationale. The issue allows us to reflect on the complexity of the longed-for transition. Faced with this type of dilemma, in AIDA we generally choose to analyze each case, without marrying a dogmatic position. But a constant and, in this sense, valuable starting point is that everything that is carried out in favor of the energy transition—whether projects, policies or actions—must have a strong and decisive focus on the environment, human rights and gender. Without that there is no justice; and without justice there is no remedy or solution. So we believe that litigation does have a role to play, not only in making the transition happen, but also in making it just.

May 31 2023 Oceans, Public Participation, Toxic Pollution

Offshore drilling: Resisting a growing threat in Latin America

Offshore drilling is expanding in Latin America and the Caribbean as part of a government and business strategy implying the continuity of the oil and gas industry, despite the role of fossil fuels in aggravating the global climate crisis. The advance of offshore hydrocarbon activity also risks serious damage to the ocean—our planet's greatest climate regulator—the vast biodiversity it harbors, and to the livelihoods of coastal communities. Worldwide, offshore areas represent 30 percent of total hydrocarbon reserves and are concentrated in surface waters up to 125 meters deep, according to academic research. The United States, Mexico, Norway, Brazil and Saudi Arabia are the main producers, accounting for 43 percent of the world total. The current expansion of drilling in Latin America is tending towards extremes with greater environmental complexity, in ultra-deep waters, with wells that exceed 1,500 meters in depth. The authorization of new offshore drilling projects deepens dependence on the use of fossil fuels, representing a step backwards in global efforts to avoid global warming with catastrophic consequences. It also constitutes an obstacle in the transition towards sustainable energy systems, based on renewable sources and respectful of people and the environment. However, there are cases in the region that demonstrate a growing collective resistance to the blind advance of offshore drilling projects. With the help of strategic litigation and citizen participation, these cases are creating an opportunity to set important precedents at national and international levels for the protection of the environment, the climate and human rights from the damages caused by offshore drilling. In defense of the Argentine Sea In May 2019, the Energy Secretariat awarded several companies a total of 18 areas (225,000 square kilometers of surface area) in the Argentine Sea—a sector of the Southwest Atlantic Ocean—for the search for gas and oil. In December 2021, the Ministry of Environment and Sustainable Development authorized a seismic exploration project in three of the awarded areas, located off the coast of the province of Buenos Aires, about 300 kilometers from the beaches of Mar del Plata, one of the country’s most popular beaches. The project includes the drilling of an exploratory well, and is being managed by the Norwegian state-owned company Equinor, the Argentine YPF and the Anglo-Dutch Shell. The governmental decision has been questioned and rejected by the scientific community and by the assemblies of several coastal cities. In January 2022–in view of the threats to biodiversity, climate and local economies posed by the prospecting and possible exploitation of hydrocarbons off the Argentine coast—scientific groups and environmental organizations filed a class action lawsuit before a Federal Court in Mar del Plata against the Argentine State, the Ministry of Environment and the Secretariat of Energy, requesting the nullity of the resolution authorizing the seismic exploration project and the process by which the 18 areas of the Argentine Sea were licensed off. The lawsuit was followed by protests in the streets and other actions, which have swelled into an ongoing legal battle. In February 2022, the court temporarily suspended seismic exploration through a precautionary measure. However, in December of that year, the Court of Appeals lifted that suspension. This decision was appealed before the Supreme Court of Justice, which has not yet ruled on the matter. Moratorium at risk in Belize In October 2017, the government of Belize established by law a permanent moratorium on oil activity in its maritime zone. This occurred after an informal referendum organized by environmental groups in 2012 resulted in 96 percent of participants voting against oil activity; and after the global outrage generated in October 2016 by the government's decision to allow seismic testing for oil exploration just one kilometer away from the Belize Barrier Reef, one of the most diverse ecosystems in the world. However, offshore hydrocarbon exploitation is still a risk for the Caribbean nation. In 2022, the Prime Minister expressed the government's willingness to allow seismic exploration without lifting the moratorium. In view of this, organizations dedicated to environmental protection seek to reinforce the prohibition by forcing a referendum on whether or not to lift the moratorium. Court victory in Guyana In Guyana, since the early 2000s there have been reports of discoveries of large offshore oil and gas reserves in the so-called Guyana Suriname Basin. Guyana is the South American nation with the most oil reserves discovered in the last decade, and has decided to expand its gas reserves as well. Offshore gas production in Guyana has also been the subject of controversy due to environmental and safety concerns. Recently, a court decision rejected an attempt by multinational ExxonMobil and the government to dissolve the written commitment that obliges the company to bear all cleanup, restoration, and damage compensation costs of any oil spill in its offshore operations. The judge in the case found that ExxonMobil is in violation of the permit issued to the Liza 1 project—which requires financial guarantees in case of oil spills and accidents—and that Guyana's environmental regulators are not enforcing the terms of the permit. Biodiversity and climate defense Carrying out offshore hydrocarbon exploration and/or exploitation projects may involve the violation of international commitments, including those undertaken by States under the Convention on Biological Diversity, the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea and the Convention on Migratory Species. Offshore seismic exploration generates sounds at levels far in excess of natural levels. Many of these overlap with the hearing and vocalization ranges of marine species (mammals, turtles, fish, diving birds and others). This can cause serious injuries, long-term physical and physiological effects and even death, explains Pablo García Borbroglu, expert and leader of the Global Penguin Society, while affirming that it can also lead to a reduction in fishing activity. The impacts of the drilling are not limited to the exploited area, but affect the entire sea and all the species that inhabit it, aggravating the precarious situation of a large number of already threatened or endangered species. The expansion of the offshore industry also implies nations are failing to comply with global commitments to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions, or adopt measures aimed at the management of key ecosystems such as marine areas, both contained in the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Paris Agreement. The cases described above, which bring together diverse voices under a common cause, have the potential to establish precedents that will force States to take responsibility for the possible environmental and social consequences of endorsing harmful industries such as offshore hydrocarbons. They are key opportunities for courts and other decision-making bodies to set exemplary precedents for the hemisphere in the protection of the environment and human rights, especially in the face of the global climate and biodiversity crises.