Human Rights

February 27 2019 Mining, Freshwater Sources, Accountability and Transparency

World Bank Arbitration Tribunal Refuses to Listen to Those Affected by Mining in Santurbán, Colombia

The World Bank’s International Center for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) has declined to accept an Amicus Curiae that was to be presented by the Committee for the Defense of Water and the Páramo of Santurbán and allied international organizations. Bucaramanga, Bogotá, Washington, Ottawa, Amsterdam. National and international civil society organizations rebuffed the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes’ (ICSID) refusal to accept an Amicus Curiae within the process of the ongoing international arbitration brought forth by Canadian mining company Eco Oro Minerals Corp. against Colombia. The arbitration centre is hearing the ongoing international arbitration put forth by the Canadian company in question against the Andean nation. The company is attempting to pursue its Angostura gold mining project in the Santurbán páramo, located in the northeast of the country. The arbitration questions the decisions taken by the Colombian State to protect its páramos, high mountain wetlands that are a natural source of water for 70% of its inhabitants. The arbitration is being heard at the ICSID, an organization dependent on the World Bank that is in charge of the resolution of disputes between investors and States. Colombia could be condemned to pay $746 million US dollars, an unprecedented sanction for the country. “At a time when Latin American countries are embracing the principles of environmental democracy with the adoption of the Escazú Agreement, ICSID is going in the opposite direction. It is regrettable that in the midst of the regional movement for transparency and participation, ICSID has opted to constrict itself even more. In doing so, it is only generating more anger and distrust, not only in the face of this mechanism, but also in the face of the whole system of Investor-State Arbitration worldwide,” stated Carla García Zendejas, Senior Attorney at the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL). “The communities affected by mining in Santurbán have to be heard and can provide crucial elements for the case,” said Carlos Lozano, Senior AIDA Attorney. The organizations consider that the Committee for the Defense of Water and the Páramo of Santurbán has a significant interest in the outcome of the process and that they could have provided expertise to the arbitration tribunal, which would have been helpful for a better decision in the case. In the same way, they urge ICSID to expand citizen participation and make its decision-making processes more transparent. This is transcendental for the public interest of the countries whose governments are subject to its jurisdiction. Find more information on the case here. PRESS CONTACTS: Alix Mancilla, Comité para la Defensa del Agua y el Páramo de Santurbán, [email protected], +57 311 2439273 Carla García Zendejas, CIEL, [email protected], +1 202 374 2550 Carlos Lozano Acosta, AIDA, [email protected], +57 300 56 40 282 Kirsten Francescone, MiningWatch Canada, [email protected], +14373459881 Kristen Genovese, SOMO, [email protected], +31 65 277 3272, Manuel Perez Rocha, Institute for Policy Studies, [email protected] +1 240 838 6623

January 30 2019 Capacity Building, Indigenous Rights, Human Rights

How supporting women is linked to environmental justice

Although women lead struggles for the conservation of nature around the world, they are often excluded from decisions about the use of land, water and other natural resources. They’re disproportionately affected when inadequately implemented projects pollute air and water, or cause forced displacements and other damages. And they’re often more seriously impacted by climate change. In all of these cases, women—particularly indigenous women—are highly vulnerable to losing their way of life, their income, and their homes. At AIDA, we incorporate a gender perspective into our defense of the environment and human rights, recognizing that combating inequalities and differentiated harms is fundamental to achieving environmental justice in Latin America. “The gender approach allows us to defend the rights of women in an integral way, understanding that the risks and harms, as well as the policies needed to confront them, are different for men and women,” explained Senior Attorney Liliana Ávila. “Making this visible helps break through discrimination scenarios and effectively guarantee the right to equality.” Uplifting women’s voices Working with a gender focus, Liliana explained, has been a fascinating professional experience that has allowed her to understand how environmental damage affects men and women differently. She has listened to women explain how they view their territory, and what happens to it, distinctly from the men in their communities. In Northwest Guatemala, in the micro-region of Ixquisis, the construction of the Pojom II and San Andrés dams has damaged water sources. It has spread diseases and harmed fishing and agriculture, subsistence activities for local communities, largely made up of indigenous Mayan women. “It’s necessary to promote methodologies and spaces that make women’s voices heard, that enable and strengthen their participation, that demonstrate the differentiated harms they face, and that promote change to guarantee their rights,” Liliana said. AIDA legally supports the resistance of the women of Ixquisis to the dam projects, both in national courts and before the Inter-American Development Bank, which finances the projects despite obvious conflict with its operating policies. Our work in Guatemala is possible thanks to the Global Alliance for Green and Gender Action (GAGGA), which supports collaboration between movements and grassroots organizations to strengthen their role in the defense and promotion of women's rights and environmental justice. Since 2016, GAGGA has provided funds to women's movements and environmental organizations at the national, regional and global levels in more than 30 countries across Latin America, Africa, Asia and Europe. Women’s role in environmental defense By working hand in hand with communities across Latin America, AIDA attorneys have a close knowledge of the fundamental role that women play in protecting the environment and building equitable societies. “In Nayarit, Mexico indigenous women are playing a key role in defense of their land, water and the San Pedro Mezquital River,” said Camilo Thompson, AIDA attorney in Mexico. “And in the Gulf of California, women are leading efforts toward proper fisheries management.” Claudia Velarde, an AIDA attorney in Bolivia, says that her country has recognized that peasant women produce more food, so their experiences, visions, and knowledge must be incorporated into public food policies. “Personally, it has been very enriching for me to work both with and from the perspective of women,” she explained. “I’ve have had the opportunity to meet incredible women fighting to defend their territories from extractive activities like fracking. It’s helped me understand that the impacts of a single activity are experienced quite differently according to socially assigned gender roles.”

December 18 2018 Coral reefs, Fracking, Indigenous Rights

10 environmental successes from Latin America in 2018

This year was characterized by triumphs such as the creation of legal protections and the establishment of policies favorable to the environment and human rights in the region. Rarely in a single year do we see so many precedent-setting institutional advances. What follows are 10 stories we applaud from 2018: 1. For the first time, the Inter-American Court recognized a healthy environment as “fundamental” In its first time speaking on the subject, the Court concluded that a healthy environment is an autonomous right, “fundamental to the existence of humanity.” The relationship between the environment and human rights may sound obvious, but until February of this year, when the Court’s opinion was made public, there were no precedents of this magnitude recognizing the link. The opinion responds to a query made by Colombia. In it, the Court also recognizes that climate change impacts the enjoyment of human rights, especially among the most vulnerable populations. The OC-23, as it is known, established a historic precedent for the protection of human rights in the Americas and will be an important tool for environmental justice in the region. Learn more 2. Nations adopt the first regional treaty on environmental issues Over the course of the year, 16 nations have signed the Escazú Agreement. Not only is it the first treaty on environmental issues in Latin America and the Caribbean, it is also the first in the world to include provisions on human rights defenders in environmental matters. Its main objective is to guarantee the rights of access to environmental information, public participation in environmental decision-making processes, and justice in environmental matters. Learn more 3. Parrotfish receive special protection in Mexico Schools of colorful parrotfish feed on the macro algae that compete with coral for light and oxygen, helping to improve coral health. But overfishing and other factors have caused parrotfish populations to decline, placing corals at greater risk. In an effort to protect this key ally of the reefs, 10 species of parrotfish are in the process of being included in the Mexican government’s list of protected fauna. Learn more 4. Indigenous peoples recognized in climate finance Following years of work by indigenous peoples around the world, the Green Climate Fund approved an Indigenous Peoples Policy with the objective of protecting, recognizing, respecting and promoting their rights within the financing of climate projects. The decision was received with hope in a world that requires immediate actions to mitigate and adapt to climate change. This sort of policy helps to prevent climate finance from violating the rights of the most affected populations. Learn more 5. A regional plan to protect jaguars Conservation organizations teamed with 14 nations to launch Plan Jaguar 2030 with the intention of protecting corridors, or natural routes, linking populations of the largest carnivore in Latin America without natural predators. Jaguar populations extend through 18 countries, but are rapidly diminishing due to poaching, habitat fragmentation, and conflict with human activities. In El Salvador and Uruguay, they have been declared extinct. The plan provides hope for jaguar protection across borders. Learn more 6. Colombia says no to fracking pilot tests The Colombian Environmental Licensing Authority (ANLA, for its initials in Spanish) denied permission for ConocoPhillips to carry out the first hydraulic fracturing pilot tests for the extraction of hydrocarbons in San Martin and Aguachica, in the department of Cesar. ANLA argued that the information presented by the corporation was “insufficient” to understand the management and availability of water, and also questioned its environmental evaluation and contingency plan. For now, the initiative is archived. Continuing to bet on fossil fuels moves nations further away their climate goals; it is important to commit to a clean energy transition. Learn more 7. A region fight against fracking reaches the Inter-American Commission Organizations and communities from across the region joined forces to bring before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights cases of human rights violations and threats to the environment caused by fracking. After various local struggles, this was the first time that the damages documented in nations across the Americas were presented before a regional organization. The Commissioners responded with great interest to the testimonies presented. Regarding this issue, the new government of Mexico said there will be no more fracking in the nation. Learn more 8. A treaty to protect two-thirds of the ocean Following a decade of discussions, negotiations began at the United Nations for a legally binding treaty to protect biodiversity on the high seas, those marine areas outside of national jurisdictions. Negotiations will take place until 2020. Although the high seas represent 64 percent of the total surface area of the ocean, and the ocean absorbs 90 percent of the heat caused by global warming, no overarching treaty exists to protect this ecosystem, only fragmented regulations. Learn more 9. Chile closes the Pascua Lama mine In October Chilean authorities confirmed the definitive closure of Pascua Lama, a gold mining project on the border of Chile and Argentina. Barrick Gold, the company in charge of the project, was fined for 33 violations of Chilean environment regulations. Pascua Lama caused great damage to native plants and animals. Indigenous peoples of the region—who had documented the contamination of a river and impacts on glaciers, an important water source—celebrated the decision. Activists are now seeking to stop the project on the Argentina side of the border. Learn more 10. Argentina’s creation of National Parks breaks record Just before the end of the year, Argentina announced the creation of two marine protected areas: Yanganes, south of Tierra del Fuego, and Namuncurá-Burdwood Bank II, in the south Atlantic. Both are important sites for the breeding and spawning of fish with high commercial value. With this pair, the country added six natural areas declared as national parks in 2018 alone, a truly historic effort. The other parks include: Traslasierra, Aconquija, Ciervo de los Pantanos and Iguerá. Argentina has proposed the protection of 10 percent of its seas by 2020. Learn more

December 13 2018 Climate Change, Human Rights

Why we’re working for climate justice in Latin America

“The world has many problems, but to me none seem as ubiquitous or as dangerous as climate change,” says AIDA attorney Florencia Ortúzar. “It really is the great challenge of our generation.” At AIDA we understand the magnitude of the problem. That’s why we incorporate climate justice as a key concept in all our lines of work. It’s why we advocate for sustainable development that respects the environment and the rights of vulnerable communities and, at the same time, why we work to stop climate-aggravating activities. “What motivates me to fight climate change is my awareness of the huge problem we’re facing, and my steadfast determination—I know we can’t give up,” Florencia says. She shares that motivation with AIDA’s entire team of attorneys, scientists, communicators, fundraisers and administrators. When she was a child, Florencia received a very special gift from her father: a badge that said “world saver.” That very day, on a beach in her native Chile, Florencia hooked the badge to her clothes and began picking up trash, cleaning the beach. That small gift jumpstarted her life’s mission. Florencia went on to study law, with the goal of working for the protection of forests, rivers, animals, and all the elements of the natural world. “Luck was with me when I found AIDA, the organization that has trained me and has enabled me to make my contribution to a better world,” she says. Florencia is part of AIDA’s Climate Change program. Our objective is to help Latin America—one of the regions most vulnerable to the climate crisis—be a leader in the type of changes required on a global level to avoid catastrophe. In partnership with allied organizations and hand-in-hand with communities, we work to stop the blind advance of fracking and large dams, mega-projects which imply significant emissions of methane, a greenhouse gas 34 times more powerful than carbon dioxide. We also work to raise awareness and educate public policy makers on the importance of controlling short-lived climate pollutants. We seek to protect terrestrial and marine ecosystems that capture carbon emissions—such as coral reefs, mangroves, wetlands and páramos—which, in turn, helps to mitigate climate change. We monitor international climate negotiations, advocate for Latin American nations to have the necessary economic resources to deal with climate change, and work to ensure that climate finance respects human rights. “Although many of the effects of climate change are inevitable, and may already be occurring, the efforts we make to stop the problem and to adapt to it will help future generations, who had nothing to do with causing the problem,” Florencia explains. She shares her message wherever she goes, encouraging others to join the fight. “I refuse to be part of the last generation to enjoy the natural wonders of our planet.”

December 10 2018 Indigenous Rights, Toxic Pollution, Human Rights

Leydy Pech, the guardian of the bees

“They’re part of my very being,” Leydy Araceli Pech Martin says of her bees. She feeds them pumpkin candy, and she identifies with them. Seeing how they organize and work together to produce honey reaffirms her confidence in collective action. In her native town of Ich Eq, a name that in Maya means “Star Eye,” families live in the same way: united and supporting each other. Of all the objectives that Leydy shares with her community, perhaps the most vital is the defense of their territory and traditional ways of life—threatened now by growing deforestation and the toxic contamination of industrial agriculture. The expansion of soy cultivation in Leydy’s town—located in the municipality of Hopelchén, in the Mexican State of Campeche—is killing large areas of tropical forest and indiscriminately spreading toxic pesticides through the land and water. It is harmful to both human health and the natural environment, particularly those ecosystems that depend on bees and, thus, beekeepers. Knocking down obstacles With a sweet look and a soft voice, Leydy is an agile woman. She does many things in a day, dividing her time between beekeeping, housework, caring for her mother and uncle, and keeping an eye on her son Diego Alberto, 17. She also manages the shop of Koolel-Kab (“women who work with bees”), an organization she founded with other women from Hopelchén in 1995. Together they breed and work for the preservation of melipona beecheii, a wild bee species that has been domesticated by the Maya people for hundred of years. Using what the bees produce, the women make and sell honeys, soaps and creams in the organization’s store. For Leydy, dedicating herself to beekeeping, a trade she learned from grandfather, which in the area is done mostly by men, has not been easy. She’s had to break down barriers. “We live in a world where only men have been able to speak and make decisions,” Leydy explained. “I’ve broken with that and they’ve questioned me.” At the beginning, the community underestimated the women’s potential. “They told us we wouldn’t achieve anything,” she said. “But little by little we demonstrated our abilities. The men saw the results of our work and publically recognized that the organization is an example of struggle, and success.” The women of Koolel-Kab work for the recognition of and respect for indigenous rights in the region. Leydy says their struggle began when they realized that other people were making decisions about the territory and natural resources of their town, about job opportunities and quality of life for their youngest members. Mennonites and industrial agribusiness have been cultivating genetically modified soybeans in Hopelchén, leading to mass deforestation and public health risks. The Mexican government authorized the cultivation without consulting affected communities. Although Mexico’s Supreme Court has recognized this human rights violation, the illegal planting of GMO soy has not stopped and the sowing of traditional soy has expanded. In addition, the aerial fumigation of crops is causing a harmful mixture of chemicals to reach houses, water sources, and the flowers the bees rely on. “I cannot sit idly by when I know what is happening,” explained Leydy, with the firmness that characterizes her. “It has become my responsibility. Not doing anything would be like betraying my own identity.” Leydy is motivated by the search for justice. Her organization of Maya women is part of the Collective of Maya Communities of los Chenes, which has presented national and international legal actions to stop the damages of agroindustry. AIDA, together with partner organizations, supports their efforts and has taken the case, on behalf of the communities, before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights. The strength of unity Leydy is convinced that the strength of the Collective is its unity. Those in the Collective work for the needs of their own communities, but are also in the process of seeing themselves as one—something that applies not only to the people of Campeche, but also to those of the nearby States of Yucatan and Quintana Roo. “The Maya people are many, and everything that we’ve achieved is not for only one person, it is for all.” Leydy shares her leadership and her natural ability for teamwork. Her son, Diego Alberto, is part of that effort. “He’s happy, he understands a lot about bees and has his own projects,” she says. Like Diego Albert, other young members of Leydy’s family are choosing to dedicate themselves to beekeeping. “That tells me I’m doing something right,” she says, proudly.

December 10 2018 Human Rights

Open Letter to States and Development Financiers

On the anniversaries of the United Nations Declaration on the Right to Development (December 4th), the Declaration on Human Rights Defenders (December 9th), and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (December 10th), civil society groups around the world are drawing attention to the unique threats faced by human rights defenders in the context of megaprojects and other development interventions. Human rights defenders are a critical force for the protection of human rights and integral to the achievement of sustainable development. They are vital to protecting the land and the environment, securing just and safe conditions of work, combating corruption, respecting traditional cultures, and holding governments accountable. Yet those who voice their opinions or seek to shape development and investments are routinely stigmatized as “anti-development,” and subjected to judicial harassment, threats, and violent attacks. Since the adoption of the Declaration on Human Rights Defenders 20 years ago, an estimated 3,500 human rights defenders have been killed because of their peaceful work defending the rights of others. In 2017 alone, at least 312 human rights defenders were murdered, 67 percent of whom were working in defense of land and territory in the context of large investments, extractive industries and big business. Today, the same governments who adopted these important human rights instruments may actually be undermining those efforts through the actions of their national development banks or bilateral and multilateral development cooperation. Where development interventions ignore human rights, or are imposed upon communities without their consent or participation, they often fail to deliver development or alleviate poverty, and instead end up contributing to rights abuses and putting defenders at risk. That is why the Defenders in Development Campaign is calling on development banks, States, and other development actors to honor these human rights anniversaries by highlighting the important role that defenders play in sustainable development and making a public commitment to: Ensure that development interventions support the realization of human rights and avoid abuses, Promote an enabling environment for public participation within development processes, and Take necessary measures to safeguard defenders in the context of development activities. Read the Open Letter signed by over 200 groups Find more information here

November 26 2018 Fracking, Human Rights

The first time fracking was discussed before the Inter-American Commission

We heard the news at an exceptional moment. The Latin American Alliance on Fracking had organized a conference; activists, lawyers, NGOs, community organizers, and scientists from seven Latin American countries were meeting face to face in Colombia to work against hydraulic fracturing in the region. It was there we learned that the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights had accepted our request for a hearing. We erupted in collective joy! Not only would we have a new audience, but also fracking would be discussed for the first time before the Commission. Immediately, we channeled our excitement into hard work. We had just 20 days to prepare a 20-minute case that would summarize every negative impact fracking has had in the Americas. We worked day and night to prepare our case for the October 3 hearing in Boulder, Colorado. It was so little time that Gabriel Cherqui, spokesperson for Mapuche communities affected by the Vaca Muerta mega-project in Neuquén, Argentina, couldn’t obtain a visa in time to travel to the United States. Years of work, converted into minutes Perhaps the most difficult aspect of preparing our case was summarizing thousands of documents and stories into such a short amount of time. It had taken years to systematize our specialized research on fracking in the region and to have our case before the Commission—requested with more than 120 supporting signatures—accepted. Another challenge was to demonstrate the solid connection between fracking and human rights violations, an argument we knew the Commission would be interested in addressing, given the scale and complexity of the problem. So we developed a strategy: Roberto Ochandio, a geographer and former petroleum engineer, presented the technical details necessary to understand how fracking works; AIDA attorney Liliana Ávila explained how the technique has violated the rights to a healthy environment, to life, health, and the informed consent of the affected communities; Alejandra Jiménez from the Mexican Alliance Against Fracking presented case studies from Mexico, where communities’ access to water had been compromised by fracking operations; Santiago Cané, from Argentina’s Environmental and Natural Resources Foundation (FARN), exposed the pollution, direct harms, lack of consultation with, and persecution of the communities of Neuquén; and Doris Estela Gutiérrez, president of the Corporation for the Defense of Water, Territory, and Ecosystems (CORDATEC), spoke about the promotion of public consultations in Colombia, as well as the criminalization of and threats to environmental defenders in the country. We emphasized that betting on hydrocarbons and promoting fracking undermines the fight against climate change, since fracking emits methane and other greenhouse gases that accelerate global warming. It was a challenge, to be sure. But we wanted to ensure everyone’s voice was heard. To listen, and learn: a window of hope Based on the response of the Commissioners, it was clear that our case had opened a window of hope. The multifaceted character of fracking—including aspects of development, pollution, climate change and human rights—had captured their interest. Not only was this the first time that fracking had been discussed before of the Commission, it’s worth noting that five speakers had summarized the concerns of more than 120 petitioners, all of whom shared one common cause. What came next was a dialogue in which we responded to the Commissioners’ questions about the technique, their concerns about development in the region, water quality, harms to public health, and concerns about fracking moving nations further away from their climate goals. We requested that the Commission urge States to: adopt measures to avoid human rights violations caused by fracking; generate public, truthful and impartial information based on scientific evidence; and protect human rights protections in cases where the technique is advancing blindly. Going forward, we asked that the Commission follow up on the issue, particularly on the negative impacts fracking has on economic, social and cultural rights; on the lives of women, children and adolescents; and on the lives and territories of indigenous peoples. We requested that the Commission follow up on the attacks against human rights defenders and seek protective measures for those at risk. Of course, questions remain, and at the Alliance we’ve identified many more concerns for the region. But this moment has strengthened us. The hearing set regional precedents and made use of the arguments of Advisory Opinion 23, which the Inter-American Court of Human Rights issued on human rights and the environment. It is clear that this moment was a small, but vital, step forward, and that there are ears willing to listen. For our part, we will continue doing everything in our power—making use of all available international legal tools—to protect the communities of the Americas that are and could be affected by fracking.

October 22 2018 Climate Change, Human Rights

The IPCC climate report: science has spoken and we must act now

The international scientific community has spoken: the only thing that can save us from a climate catastrophe is a radical and immediate change. The next 11 years are the most important in the history of the planet, in terms of climate change. Our response to their message will determine our future. In its most recent analysis, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) of the United Nations establishes the impacts that could occur if the planet’s average temperature increases by more than 2°C, and compares those with what would happen if we stop warming, or at least keep it below 1.5°C. The 2016 Paris Agreement, an international accord to curb climate change, aims to keep warming well below 2°C with respect to pre-industrial levels, and to continue global efforts to limit it to 1.5°C. The impacts of global warming The IPCC experts’ conclusions are piercing. Those extra 0.5°C would be lethal for millions of people and their ways of life. If the Earth warms 2°C or more, we would experience: more frequent and intense heat waves, droughts and floods; sea level rise of an extra 10 centimeters, implying coastal flooding and filtration of salt water into agricultural areas and freshwater sources—a matter of life and death for roughly 10 million people; double the risk of habitat loss for plants and vertebrates, and triple the risk for insects, considering more than 100 thousand species which were studied; the disappearance of more than 99% of coral reefs, while 10 to 30 percent of what remains could be saved if we were to stabilize the planet’s temperature below 1.5°C; an increase in the range of mosquitoes that transmit diseases such as malaria and dengue; and the devastation of crops and livestock, severely affecting global food security. So, how are we doing now? Not so well. The planet has already warmed 1°C since preindustrial times, and in 2017 the emissions responsible for warming increased again. The commitments nations made to comply with the Paris Agreement are insufficient. Settling on that level of ambition would take us to 3°C warming by 2030, a reality with unimaginable consequences. Changing our climate destiny Let’s talk about solutions. Ensuring that the planet’s warming doesn’t exceed 1.5°C is possible, but it will require unprecedented action. Emissions must lower by 45 percent between 2010 and 2030, and we must achieve carbon neutrality by 2050. That means not emitting more than what the world’s forests and natural carbon sinks can absorb. This will require that: the most polluting industries, particularly those producing fossil fuels, implement radical changes; renewable energy is the norm by 2050, accounting for between 70 and 85 percent of total energy production; coal-fired power plants disappear; transportation runs with clean, renewable electricity; and we expand, maintain, and care for forests and other natural carbon sinks, which are responsible for removing emissions from the atmosphere. The IPCC report also recognizes a monumental opportunity: the mitigation of short-lived climate pollutants (SLCPs)—including black carbon or soot, methane, hydrofluorocarbons and tropospheric ozone. More climatically intense than carbon dioxide, SLCPs are responsible for half of global warming. Because of their short duration in the atmosphere, they could play a key role in reducing warming in the short term. In addition, the reduction of SLCPs brings important benefits for human well-being, including the reduction of pollution that affects public health and better yield of crops. But few countries have included the reduction of short-lived climate pollutants in their national commitments on climate change. At AIDA we’re working so that Latin American nations advance in the control of these emissions. As the region with the greatest potential for renewable energies, Latin America has the opportunity to be an example for the rest of the planet. The threats facing the region are great and avoiding them is well worth the effort. Climate change threatens to shake us from our very roots—melting Andean glaciers, increasing droughts and floods, diminishing freshwater supplies, driving species to extinction, increasing wildfires, favoring the spread of invasive species, losing corals and marine biodiversity, affecting food security, and wreaking havoc on people’s health and livelihoods. The outlook is clear: maintaining global warming below 1.5°C is not an easy task, but science holds it’s possible. We have the scientific knowledge, and the technological and financial capacity to achieve this goal. The responsibility now lies with governments, decision-makers and the private sector—together they must drive unprecedented changes. We must remember that implementing these changes is not just possible, it’s desirable. A world with fewer emissions is a cleaner and a fairer world for us and for future generations. What’s not to like?

October 03 2018 Human Rights, Fracking

Civil society warns Inter-American Commission of human rights violations caused by fracking in Latin America

Boulder, Colorado. Representatives of communities and organizations from across Latin America testified before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights this week on the impacts that hydraulic fracturing (fracking) has on human rights and the environment. The hearing—responding to a petition signed by more than 126 organizations from 11 countries of the Americas—was held in Boulder, Colorado this week as part of the Commission’s 169th period of sessions. The principal requests to the Commission, and the Rapporteurs from various countries, were to urge the States to adopt efficient and opportune measures to prevent human rights violations resulting from the exploration and exploitation of hydrocarbons, and to apply the precautionary principal in the face of fracking’s environmental damages. “In Latin America, fracking been carried out without informing or adequately consulting the affected populations, thereby violating their right to information, participation, prior consultation and consent,” explained Liliana Ávila, Senior Attorney with the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA). “Fracking’s demand for water competes with the use of water for human consumption, and the contamination it causes in the water, soil and air seriously impacts the right to a healthy environment and compromises the effective enjoyment of other rights—including a dignified life, personal integrity, health, food, water and adequate housing.” At the hearing, it was emphasized that women disproportionately suffer the impacts of fracking due to potential harm to their reproductive health, and since women are traditionally responsible for collecting water for use in their homes. Referring to the experience of the Mapuche communities of Argentina, Santiago Cané of the Environment and Natural Resources Foundation (FARN) stressed, “Fracking produces acts of violence against those who defend the environment and their rights.” “Institutionally, we can talk about the criminalization of social protest as one form of intimidation to eliminate the resistance to fracking projects,” he explained. “The prosecution of criminal cases against communities leaders that oppose the development of fracking has become an institutional media campaign that seeks to promote the idea that Mapuche communities are part of a terrorist group.” In Mexico, “specifically in the municipality of Papantla, Veracruz—which according to freedom of information requests is the city with the greatest number of fracking pools in the country—where the population is primarily the Totonac people, this exploitation technique has led to the diversion of springs and the drying up of artisanal wells. Many communities have lost their natural sources of water and have seen their health compromised and their living conditions deteriorate,” explained Alejandra Jiménez of the Mexican Alliance Against Fracking. Dorys Gutiérrez, of the Colombian organization Corporation for the Defense of Water, Territory and Ecosystems, noted that: “In Europe, 18 nations have applied the precautionary principle to prohibit or restrict this practice and in Australia, four of the eight territories have bans or moratoria in place. If fracking is so beneficial, why has it been so widely rejected in so many places?” According to data compiled by the Latin American Alliance on Fracking, roughly 5,000 fracking wells exist across the region. About 2,000 of those wells are found in Argentina; more than 3,350 are found in Mexico; and in Chile, according to official data, 182 wells have been approved, primarily for the island of Tierra del Fuego. Despite the technique’s expansion across the region, there has also been progress in banning or imposing restrictions on fracking in three states of the United States, in Uruguay, in the Argentine province of Entre Ríos, and in more than 300 municipalities in Brazil. Fracking’s advance is harmful to human rights, and represents a threat to the consolidation of the legal framework promoted by the Inter-American Human Rights System, which includes the obligations of States and the international protection of human rights and the environment. PRESS CONTACTS: Victor Quintanilla (MExico), AIDA, [email protected], +521 5570522107 Arturo Contreras (in Boulder, Colorado), +521 5533320505

September 25 2018 Large Dams, Climate Change, Human Rights

Say no to large dams: 3 reasons to opt for alternative energy sources

By Florencia Ortúzar and Monti Aguirre* Hydroelectric energy has been one of the largest drivers of development in many Latin American nations, and still represents a large portion of the region’s energy matrix. But is it really the best option? In response to a blog by the Inter-American Development Bank reflecting on the future of the hydroelectric sector in Latin America, we’d like to reflect on what it means to continue betting on large dams in Latin America. What follows are three reasons why we must say no to more large dams: 1. Better alternatives to hydroelectricity exist, and should be considered in project planning Before selecting an alternative energy source, governments and companies should develop a strategic plan that analyzes energy needs and the best way of achieving them. In this analysis, all options must be considered. It’s worrysome that this doesn’t already happen. For example, in the case of the Hidroituango dam—thought to be the largest in Colombia and associated with serious socio-environmental damages—the government decided to not conduct a prior evaluation of alternatives. Although the law did not require it at the time, the evaluation was recommended and is an international standard that large financial institutions should apply when investing in projects of this type. Today, other energy sources—like wind and solar—are proven to be economically competitive, can be constructed more quickly, and do not aggravate climate change. Innovations in smart grids, power storage and batteries also solve intermittency problems and make hydroelectric plants unnecessary. Geothermal, tidal, and wave energy are alternatives, the potential of which we have not even glimpsed. The promotion of large dams only delays adoption of the truly clean energy solutions that Latin America and the planet desperately need. According to the Bank’s own studies, Latin America has the largest quantity and most varied sources of renewable energy in the world. The region's renewable resources could provide almost seven times the installed capacity worldwide, excluding hydroelectric power. Therefore, although the region still holds great potential for untapped hydroelectric power, it’s necessary to conduct a comprehensive evaluation of the situation, taking into account the costs and benefits as compared to other energy options. Only then can governments decide whether it’s worth continuing to invest in hydropower, or whether it’s better to opt for other types of energy—thus avoiding the social, environmental and financial impacts that come with large dams. 2. Large dams cause socio-environmental damage and are not profitable It has been demonstrated repeatedly that the socio-environmental impacts of hydroelectric plants are greater than initially considered. In addition to forced displacement and the criminalization of those who oppose them, large dams flood land, reduce river flows, and change the ecosystems of downstream wetlands, destroying habitats and contributing to species extinction. All this impacts the lives of nearby communities, limiting their ability to adapt to climate change. In economic terms, a study by the University of Oxford concluded that “even before accounting for the negative impacts on human society and environment, the actual construction costs of large dams are too high to yield a positive return.” In it, researchers show that the budgets and timeframes of large dam projects are consistently underestimated. Brazil’s Belo Monte Dam, for example, ran two times over its original budget, making it the most expensive public works project in the Amazon region. The budget of Chile’s Alto Maipo Dam has doubled four times over since the project was approved in 2009. Recognizing that the costs far outweigh the benefits, some countries have opted for dismantling large dams. And private companies have scrapped hydroelectric projects altogether because they are neither economically viable nor profitable. The United States government has adopted a policy to refuse any loan, donation, strategy or policy supporting the construction of large dams. 3. Large dams contribute to climate change Climate change must be considered when discussing the relevance of hydroelectricity. Reservoirs generate significant quantities of greenhouse gases, particularly methane, which is 30 times more effective at trapping heat than carbon dioxide. Likewise, the construction of dams endangers valuable carbon sinks like rivers and forests. For that reason, a proper analysis of carbon dioxide and methane emissions should be conducted before choosing a dam project—a process that usually doesn't occur. Another aspect to consider is the vulnerability of dams to climate variations. Extreme rainfall increases sedimentation, which can cause structural problems and reduce the dam's lifespan. Droughts, now increasingly frequent, can render dams inefficient. As more dams lose efficiency, Latin America—now highly dependent on hydroelectricity—will be more vulnerable to energy shortages. Even more serious is the threat posed by large dams in extreme weather events. In a dam gave way during bad weather, erasing entire villages. In Laos earlier this year, mass evacuations were ordered after heavy rains threatened a dam collapse. In Kerala, India, torrential rains, coupled with the mismanagement of several dams, have caused unprecedented flooding. In certain countries, the risk of dams overflowing or collapsing has already been recognized as a serious problem. Over time, more hydroelectric plants will begin to deteriorate and will require large investments to safeguard the communities living downstream. As civil society representatives working for a more just and sustainable Latin America, we urge financial institutions like the Inter-American Development Bank to support the change we as a region need. We call on them to stop investing in large dams, which have been demonstrated time and again to be dangerous to the environment and local communities, costly for countries, and unsuited for our rapidly changing climate. It’s time for a better energy plan. And it’s time to invest in non-conventional renewable energy based on thorough, independent and high-quality social and environmental impact assessments, the planning and implementation of which respect human rights. * Monti Aguirre is the Latin America Program Coordinator for International Rivers.