Mining

Neither AngloGold Ashanti nor Mineros S.A.: Cajamarca is a municipality free of large-scale mining

Even if the companies change, the decision of Cajamarca's citizens remains the same: to defend their territory against large-scale mining. Bogotá / Cajamarca. Following the announcement by Mineros S.A. that it has signed an agreement to acquire 100% of the shares of AngloGold Ashanti Colombia S.A.S. in the La Colosa mining project in Cajamarca, the Legal Coalition for the Defense of Cajamarca (1) reiterates a clear message: Cajamarca has already decided, and its territory must remain free of large-scale mining. For more than a decade, we have been engaged in mobilization, legal defense, and advocacy efforts to protect Cajamarca from the La Colosa mining project promoted by AngloGold Ashanti. Thanks to this collective defense of the territory and environmental regulations, exploration activities for this project are currently suspended. Since 2017, the citizens of Cajamarca have spoken out emphatically through a public consultation, in which 98% of voters rejected mining activities in the municipality. This result has full legal effect, as confirmed by two Colombian judges, and represented a milestone in participation and environmental democracy in Colombia, as well as a clear expression of the territory's desire to protect water, the municipality's agricultural vocation, and the region's strategic ecosystems.   In this context, the change of ownership of the project from AngloGold Ashanti to Mineros S.A. does not change the reality of the territory or the position of the communities. Although the companies may change, Cajamarca's decision remains the same: to defend its territory against large-scale mining. Furthermore, neither of these two companies has the necessary environmental permits to reactivate the La Colosa project, yet they insist on disregarding the community's autonomous and legitimate decisions.    The announcement of this transaction comes just days after the Cajamarca City Council approved a municipal agreement initiated by citizens that declared 33 properties belonging to AngloGold Ashanti as areas of public utility and social interest. This decision reaffirms the municipality's institutional commitment to protecting the territory. The organizations that have signed this statement reiterate that Cajamarca is not and will not be a mining territory. Whether it be AngloGold, Mineros S.A., or any other company, large-scale mining has no place in the municipality. We will continue to take all necessary social, legal, and political actions to defend the territory and ensure that Cajamarca's decision is respected. #LaConsultaSeRespeta (1) The Coalition is made up of the Cajamarca Youth Socio-Environmental Collective (COSAJUCA), the SIEMBRA Socio-Legal Center, the Mining Studies Research Group at the University of Antioquia, the Inter-American Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA), the Public Action Group Legal Clinic (GAP) of the Faculty of Jurisprudence of the University of Rosario, the Legal Clinic on Law and Territory of the Javeriana University, the Colombian Commission of Jurists (CCJ), and Sibelys Mejía Rodríguez (independent researcher).Press contactsRobinson Mejía | COSAJUCA | [email protected] | 300 218 36 41 Sara Sofia Moreno | SIEMBRA | [email protected] | 300 568 33 33 | Lorena Zárate | AIDA | [email protected] | +52 553902 7481Laura Becerra | CCJ | [email protected] | 313 475 5815  

Coal, a dirty and obsolete fuel

Historically, coal has been identified as an important source of non-renewable energy. It was the fuel that powered the Industrial Revolution, transforming the world's production methods, and for a long time, it was the main fuel for transportation, electricity generation, and heating.But it is time to leave that era behind. Today, we know that coal is the fossil fuel that generates the highest carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, one of the main greenhouse gases driving global warming, with effects such as melting glaciers and rising sea levels.In addition to climate and environmental arguments, there are economic, political, and human rights reasons to end the extraction and burning of this fuel.To better understand why coal is so polluting and what its impacts are on the environment and health, we have taken a closer look. Getting to know coalCoal is a rock formed from plant remains that were buried in layers of sediment and did not decompose due to the absence of oxygen.Over millions of years, through geological processes, this organic matter was exposed to high temperatures and pressures. The result was a material composed mainly of carbon.The energy in coal is released during combustion. When burned, coal generates heat. In thermoelectric plants, this heat is used to generate steam and produce electricity.When coal is burned to produce heat or electricity, it releases large amounts of carbon dioxide and, in smaller amounts, methane and nitrous oxide into the atmosphere.All these gases harm the environment and human health. Why is it so polluting?Coal has an impact from the moment it is extracted, as open-pit coal mining involves excavating and removing large amounts of earth to reach the coal-rich layers.This means destroying landscapes, razing vegetation and animals, and even causing the forced displacement of populations.Coal mining also pollutes water and soil at extraction sites, both through mining the mineral and through the waste it generates.But the chain of impacts does not end there. During coal combustion, large amounts of CO2 are generated, the main gas responsible for global warming.At the same time, other gases are released during its extraction, handling, and combustion:Methane, which has a global warming potential up to 30 times greater than CO2 over a 100-year period.Nitrous oxide, whose global warming potential over a 100-year period is up to 273, and whose lifetime in the atmosphere extends up to 109 years. In addition to greenhouse gases, coal combustion also releases other pollutants, such as nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide, and black carbon (soot), which affect air quality and have indirect effects on the climate, including altering precipitation patterns and contributing to acid rain. What damage does it cause to health?Despite the known environmental and health impacts of coal, for many economies it remains a reliable and cheap energy source.Following the decline in coal consumption during the COVID-19 pandemic, global demand for coal has grown by more than 1.2 billion tons since 2020, according to the International Energy Agency's Coal 2024 analysis.Despite increased electricity generation from renewable sources, major consumers such as China and India continue to rely on coal.In Latin America, the future of coal is uncertain. On the one hand, the region continues to extract coal for export or for burning to generate energy. The most emblematic case is Colombia, the world's fifth-largest coal exporter.On the other hand, there are efforts towards decarbonization, such as in Chile, where coal-fired power generation has caused serious health and environmental impacts in so-called “sacrifice zones.”The government proposed a plan to have the entire National Electric System generate 100% clean energy by 2050. However, the recent accelerated burning of surplus coal at a thermoelectric plant, as part of its closure process, has put the spotlight on how this decarbonization is being carried out.As a coal-producing and consuming region, Latin America has a share of responsibility in global efforts to curb coal mining and burning and instead promote energy systems based on non-conventional renewable sources that are sustainable over time and respectful of the environment and people.Ending the coal era is possible. It is time to do so. 

The importance of the “how” in the energy transition

Of the global carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from fossil fuels, one of the main causes of the climate crisis, nearly half come from coal use.  Latin America is no stranger to the problem because it participates in both coal burning and the extraction of the mineral, which, after export, is used as a fossil fuel source in other parts of the world.In this context, the closure of coal-fired power plants—as is happening in Chile—is both great news and an opportunity to steer the energy transition toward justice.But in a just energy transition, the "how" matters: every step toward defossilization must ensure energy systems based on non-conventional renewable sources, respect for the environment and human rights, and responsible closure and exit processes.    Thus, the Chilean case, which we explain below, is an important example of why the region needs to implement responsible decarbonization.     When decarbonization causes more pollutionIn early 2024, AES Andes SA closed the Norgener thermoelectric power plant in Tocopilla, a coastal city in northern Chile.    As part of the closure process, the company rapidly burned the 94,000 tons of coal it had stored at the plant, affecting a city already saturated with pollution and publicly recognized as an environmental sacrifice zone.The population of Tocopilla was exposed to potential health effects, including impacts on the respiratory system, increased risk of heart attacks, and—in children—perinatal disorders, developmental disorders, and impaired lung function, among others.The forced burning of coal was authorized by the National Electricity Coordinator (CNE)—the agency responsible for managing the various energy sources that enter the national electricity system—and displaced the use of renewable energy.    To stop the burning, AIDA, Greenpeace, and Chile Sustentable, together with local communities, filed an appeal with the Santiago Court of Appeals to halt it, but the court's decision came after the coal had already been burned. Furthermore, the court ruled that the case should be reviewed by a specialized court in a more lengthy proceeding. A bad precedent for Chile and for the continentBy authorizing the burning of the remaining coal from the Norgener thermoelectric plant, the National Electricity Coordinator made an exception to the law governing the order of energy dispatch. Shortly thereafter, in September 2024, the agency issued an internal procedure to order the early closure of power plants.  Although it is an attempt to streamline the closure process, the measure opens the door for other companies with coal-fired power plants in the process of closing to replicate what happened at Norgener: burn their remaining coal under the argument of “emptying stock” and generate energy that enters the national electricity system with priority, once again displacing energy from renewable sources.  In Chile, the National Electricity Coordinator decides which unit dispatches its energy to the system at any given time based on a criterion of increasing economic merit, according to which the energy with the lowest variable cost enters first. However, the internal procedure stipulates—without sufficient regulatory backing—that the agency may authorize dispatching energy outside economic order so that coal-fired power plants consume their remaining fuel before closing.    In response, AIDA, Greenpeace, Chile Sustentable, and MUZOSARE (Women in Sacrifice Zones in Resistance) filed a complaint on February 6, 2026, with the Superintendency of Electricity and Fuels against the Coordinator and his advisors for approving and implementing the measure.  The complaint represents an opportunity to do things right: for the sector's regulatory body to ensure that the planning for the closure of thermoelectric power plants does not end up rewarding poor coal inventory management at the expense of communities' health and a just energy transition. What the energy transition needsIn 2019, the Chilean government committed to closing all coal-fired power plants in the country by 2040. Since that public announcement, the timeline has been accelerated. But the urgency of decarbonization should not be used to favor companies operating thermoelectric plants or to harm communities near polluting industries.    Doing so weakens Chile's climate leadership and sets a bad example for any decarbonization process in the region.    In a just energy transition, companies along the entire coal and other fossil fuel supply chain have an obligation to ensure the responsible closure and exit of their operations.    The energy transition is not merely a change in technologies; it is an opportunity to rethink energy and development models and to correct injustices. This requires clear and appropriate rules that promote energy system security, competition, and a healthy environment. 

5 key facts about “rare” earth elements

In recent weeks, you have probably read or heard the term "rare" earth elementsContrary to what their name suggests, they are more common in everyday life than you might think. In fact, many of the technological innovations we use daily would not be possible without them.So why are they being talked about so much right now?Because today, "rare" earth elements and other minerals considered "critical" are at the center of disputes over their control, given their usefulness in the manufacture of technologies for the energy transition and for the military industry.But aside from the geopolitical tensions surrounding the issue, there are basic questions that arise when we hear this term, which is why we answer them here.By understanding where the raw materials behind the technologies we use come from, we can also rethink the kind of future we want. What are "rare" earth elements?There are 17 metallic elements, similar in their geochemical properties, used in many of today's technologies, from cell phones to electric cars.They include the 15 lanthanides of the periodic table of chemical elements—lanthanum, cerium, praseodymium, neodymium, promethium, samarium, europium, gadolinium, terbium, dysprosium, holmium, erbium, thulium, ytterbium, and lutetium—as well as scandium and yttrium.Promethium is usually excluded from this group because under normal conditions its half-life is short. Are they really rare?Contrary to what one might think, they are not "rare" in abundance, but rather in concentration. In other words, deposits with high concentrations are rare, making their exploitation and processing difficult. As a result, most of the world's supply comes from a few sources.But when they were discovered (in the 18th and 19th centuries), they were less well known than other elements.  The most abundant "rare" earth elements are similar in concentration in the Earth's crust to common industrial metals (chromium, nickel, copper, zinc, molybdenum, tin, tungsten, or lead). Even the two least abundant rare earth elements (thulium and lutetium) are almost 200 times more common than gold. What are "rare" earth elements used for?They have unusual fluorescent, magnetic, and conductive properties, making them attractive for a wide range of applications.They are present in everyday objects such as smartphones, screens, and LED lights.In renewable energy, they are used to manufacture wind turbines and electric cars.Its most specialized uses include medical devices and military weapons. Where are they?They exist in various parts of the world, but just because a country has reserves does not mean that it exploits them. The countries with the largest reserves are:China: 44 million tons.Brazil: 21 million tons.India: 6.9 million tons.Australia: 5.7 million tons.Russia: 3.8 million tons.Vietnam: 3.5 million tons.United States: 1.9 million tons.Greenland: 1.5 million tons.In Latin America, besides Brazil, other countries where "rare" earth elements have been identified are Argentina, Chile, Bolivia, Colombia, and Peru. Why is there so much talk about them now?The energy transition is intensifying competition for access to raw materials—including rare earth elements—needed for renewable energy technologies.To promote and facilitate access to these and other resources, some countries and international organizations refer to them as "critical."But they are not only important for renewable energy. "Rare" earth elements are also key to the military industry.Because global supply is concentrated in a few sources, there is growing interest among some countries in the Global North in controlling access to these resources. What are the impacts of their exploitation?The extraction of "rare" earth elements is mainly carried out in open-pit mines, which have serious environmental and social impacts:Water, air, and soil pollution.Heavy use of water and toxic chemicals.Radioactive waste.Loss of biodiversity.Health risks.Forced displacement of communities.Increased risk of economic inequality. "Rare" earth elements and other minerals considered "critical" are at the center of current debates over who controls their exploitation and production.As these are natural resources, often found in indigenous territories and critical ecosystems, a more urgent discussion is what kind of progress we want: one that encourages the excessive exploitation of resources, or one that respects the environment and people? If you would like to learn more about this topic, here are the links to the sources we consulted: USGS, Rare Earths Statistics and Information: https://www.usgs.gov/centers/national-minerals-information-center/rare-earths-statistics-and-inform… USGS, "Fact Sheet: Rare Earth Elements-Critical Resources for High Technology": https://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2002/fs087-02/  Science History Institute, History and Future of Rare Earth Elements: https://www.sciencehistory.org/education/classroom-activities/role-playing-games/case-of-rare-earth…  USGS, "The Rare Earth Elements-Vital to Modern Technologies and Lifestyles": https://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2014/3078/pdf/fs2014-3078.pdf Institute for Environmental Research and Education, "What Impacts Does Mining Rare Earth Elements Have?": https://iere.org/what-impact-does-mining-rare-earth-elements-have/#environmental_impact_studiesLatin America’s opportunity in critical mineralsfor the clean energy transition: https://www.iea.org/commentaries/latin-americas-opportunity-in-critical-minerals-for-the-clean-ener…U.S. Geological Survey, Mineral Commodity Summaries, January 2025 : https://pubs.usgs.gov/periodicals/mcs2025/mcs2025-rare-earths.pdf pg 145 

Justice for Andean Wetlands and Indigenous Peoples in Climate Action

The growing global demand for transition minerals—including lithium, copper, and nickel—driven by the current energy transition model, but also by the expansion of the digital economy, data infrastructure, and the military and aerospace industries, is causing irreversible ecological damage and violating fundamental human rights across the territories of the Global South. Latin America is the most biodiverse region on the planet and one of the most culturally diverse regions in the world. It is home to numerous Indigenous peoples who inhabit and safeguard these territories.At the same time, the region holds significant mineral deposits, placing it at the center of the growing global interest in mineral extraction. This demand intersects with fragile ecosystems, unique biodiversity and the territories of traditional and Indigenous communities, including the Amazon and the high Andean wetlands, which are crucial for climate adaptation due to their role in water regulation, and in mitigation, as they act as carbon sinks.Intensive mining in these ecosystems exacerbates climate vulnerability and fosters socio-environmental conflicts, compromising the ecological and cultural integrity of these ecosystems and communities. The push to expand extraction contradicts multilateral environmental protection frameworks and the climate and biodiversity commitments adopted by the States Parties. This trend jeopardizes the possibility of a just and equitable transition, reproducing the same patterns of inequality and climate harm that current policies claim to overcome.   In this context, the Alliance for Andean Wetlands calls on States Parties to the UNFCCC to ensure: 1. Human rights and justice must be at the center of any transition and of all strategies for climate change adaptation and mitigation, including the rights of communities living in territories where the transition minerals are located.Human rights are essential to ensuring a just, equitable and people-centred process. States must guarantee the right to self-determination of Indigenous peoples, recognized worldwide as guardians of natural systems. This must encompass their right to define their own development priorities and to exercise Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC), as well as the unequivocal obligation of States to respect their decisions, particularly their right to say “no” to projects that threaten their integrity and that of their territories. States must also ensure protection of environmental defenders, and guarantee public access to information, participation and justice on decisions about transitions that might affect the environment and human rights. These guarantees are crucial for the case of so-called transition minerals, like lithium and copper, found in the high Andean wetlands, ecosystems that are fundamental to life, ecological and climate balance, and the livelihoods of the communities that inhabit them. 2. Respect of planetary boundaries and the protection of the integrity of ecosystems, particularly those that play essential roles in climate adaptation and mitigation.Keeping ecosystems such as Andean wetlands, which are of high ecosystemic and cultural value, free from high-impact activities is a priority for climate and ecological justice. Because lithium mining is water mining, it drains already scarce water sources and severely affects surrounding ecosystems, leaving lasting environmental damage.To preserve the high Andean wetlands and their contributions on which life in the region and on the planet depends, States must fully respect and comply with international environmental law; adopt and strengthen effective protection measures (including the establishment of “no-go zones”, protected areas, ICCAs); and apply robust and science-based environmental planning instruments that seek to prevent environmental damage (i.e. environmental strategic and cumulative impact assessment, environmental impact assessment).Effective environmental protection also requires up-to-date knowledge of ecosystem structure, functioning, and contributions, developed through collective and democratic processes, integrating traditional knowledge and practices of Indigenous Peoples and local communities. Parties should systematically incorporate scientific advances and traditional knowledge into climate-related decisions, including the design and implementation of their Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) and related roadmaps, to ensure commitments reflect the realities of the territories they aim to protect. 3. Support for socio-ecological transitions for the Global South.Countries in the Global South need enough fiscal and policy space to devise pathways out of fossil fuels that do not reproduce existing asymmetries and inequalities, or further extractivism. This calls for socio-ecological transitions that protect local economies while ensuring economic diversification, energy access, and energy sufficiency, respect for biodiversity, and human rights.These transition paths should be planned, implemented and monitored in a participatory manner, ensuring intersectional, intercultural and intergenerational participation. The Just Transition Work Programme (JTWP) under the UNFCCC provides a crucial space to integrate these concerns into global climate governance. It must ensure that the transition towards decarbonization also addresses material demand, territorial justice, and the rights of affected communities. Incorporating the realities of mineral extraction and socio-ecological transitions from the Global South within this programme is essential to achieve a truly just transition. 4. Traceability of the projections and uses of mineral demand and commitment of Global North countries to rapidly adopt policies aimed at reducing the consumption of primary minerals and energy.The current production and consumption model of industrialized countries disproportionately affects territories in the Global South by exacerbating environmental degradation and the violation of human rights, deepening North– South inequalities. In order to tackle the triple planetary crisis, unsustainable demand for raw materials and energy has to be addressed by binding targets on demand reduction that take into account planetary boundaries. Parties have the opportunity to include them in policy instruments such as Nationally Determined Contributions (NDC) and Long Term Strategies (LTS).These must be implemented through sufficiency and efficiency measures, as well as global and fair circular economy policies. This should involve considering alternatives to mobility beyond individual EVs. 5. Adequate, quality, accessible and additional financial and technical support, based on needs and priorities, so that the energy and socio-ecological transitions of the Global South are truly just and equitable.Such financing must be sustainable in time and of quality, that is, non-debt-creating and aligned with countries’ priorities, and accessible to enable progressive and sustained climate action. It should also address opportunities and conditions for instruments that foster fair transitions, including debt relief mechanisms and debt swaps. Furthermore, it remains important to discourage the use of trade regimes (including ISDS mechanisms) as pressure tools against countries in the Global South when they seek to regulate their mineral resources and establish no-go zones and other safeguards to protect human rights and environmental integrity.  Download the document 

“Choose Europe”: Prioritizing minerals, not rights

The Raw Materials Week in Brussels, Belgium, has come to an end. This annual event, organized by the European Commission, aims to discuss how to ensure "sustainable and secure" access to raw materials in and for Europe, with the goal of strengthening international alliances to meet its defense, digitalization, and security goals.The European Commission emphasized that Europe is highly dependent on mineral imports from Latin America, which deepens the region’s historical pressures and the resulting need for stronger socio-environmental protections. However, from the Andean Wetlands Alliance, we  maintain the week’s debates revealed an approach increasingly disconnected from human rights, community voices, and the global socio-environmental crisis.This shift in priorities is part of a broader political turn marked by geopolitical tensions around access to critical minerals and new energy sources, as well as by the rise of conservative forces and authoritarianism. A trend is emerging within the EU toward the privatization of human rights and environmental standards, along with the weakening of social and environmental safeguards through deregulatory processes. An example of this is the debate on the possible weakening of the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive.The dominant narrative this week was shaped by concepts such as “competitiveness” and “defense” as the guiding axes of European policies. Within the framework of a geopolitical rivalry between China and the United States, Europe seeks to reduce its dependence on its long-standing Western ally under the slogan “Choose Europe,” which titled this year’s edition. In this context, the European Commission continued to promote access to minerals through an approach centered on the security of its supply chains, without assessing its policies in light of planetary boundaries or human rights. This approach contradicts the commitments associated with the energy transition that originally motivated the discussions on “critical minerals.” Today, we ask to what extent the cost of “choosing Europe” will continue to be borne by local communities in Latin America and other peripheral regions affected by mining expansion.Today, we ask to what extent the cost of "choosing Europe" will continue to be borne by local communities in Latin America and in other peripheral regions affected by mining expansion.This edition had the least debate compared to the last years on the need to integrate human rights into European mineral policies. Indeed, accreditation for access to the official event was limited, and the forum's official agenda lacked a space for communities and civil society from the Global South to express their perspectives on mineral value chains like lithium, and to influence the debates that will shape the decisions affecting them. Instead, discussions focused primarily on investment opportunities for corporations and governments.From the Andean Wetlands Alliance, we highlight that the expansion of the extractive frontier contradicts the climate and biodiversity commitments endorsed by the EU and risks deepening existing asymmetries between the two regions. For this reason, we reaffirm our position on the need for a paradigm shift in EU raw materials policies, so that they become inclusive, transparent, and sustainable, ensuring the participation of communities and organizations located at the extractive frontier of transition minerals. Likewise, in the context of the ecological and democratic polycrisis, we stress the need for the EU to adopt concrete targets to effectively reduce mineral demand and to strengthen compliance with international human rights and environmental treaties.Press KitPress contactsVíctor Quintanilla, AIDA (regional), [email protected], +521 5570522107Rocío Wischñevsky, FARN (Argentina), [email protected], +541159518538Manuel Fontenla, Asamblea PUCARÁ (Argentina), [email protected], +54 9 3834790609Oscar Campanini, CEDIB (Bolivia), [email protected], +591 70344801Juan Francisco Donoso, Formando Rutas, [email protected], +4915780743628 

StoryMap: Environmental Impacts of Lithium Extraction in an Argentine Wetland

Call for a paradigm shift in EU Raw Materials Policies from a Latin American perspective

The growing global demand for transition minerals—including lithium, copper, and nickel—driven by the current energy transition model, but also by the expansion of the digital economy, data infrastructure, and the military and aerospace industries, is causing irreversible ecological damage and violating fundamental human rights across the territories of the Global South. Latin America is the most biodiverse region on the planet and one of the richest regions in cultural diversity. It is home to numerous indigenous peoples who inhabit and safeguard these territories. At the same time, it contains significant mineral deposits, creating an intersection between the growing global interest in mineral extraction and fragile ecosystems and territories of traditional and indigenous communities, such as the Amazon and the Andean wetlands. This scenario exacerbates climate vulnerability and creates the conditions for the emergence of socio-environmental conflicts, compromising the ecological and cultural integrity of these territories. The push for scaling up extraction contradicts multilateral frameworks as well as climate and biodiversity commitments that the EU has subscribed to. This tendency bears the risk of reproducing the same patterns of global inequality and climate damage these policies claim to overcome.    The Alliance for Andean Wetlands calls on the European Union to adopt measures for a paradigm shift towards Raw Materials Policies that do not perpetuate inequalities and harm people and ecosystems, by: 1. Ensuring full compliance with its binding international human rights obligations and maintaining its high standards of human rights and environmental due diligence. The current debates on deregulation raise concerns about the EU's seriousness in implementing human rights and environmental safeguards along minerals value chains and in global gateway projects. In this context, the EU should not support: (i) the weakening of the provisions of the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD), an essential lever for holding EU companies accountable for their activities within and outside the region; and (ii) the privatisation of the implementation of international human rights and environmental standards. All forms of corporate self-regulation, such as multi-stakeholder initiatives, industry schemes, or third-party audits, are insufficient to demonstrate compliance with these standards and may undermine states' and companies' obligations. In this regard, legal frameworks should be sufficient to guarantee that corporations are held liable throughout the supply chain of critical minerals according to EU directives. This is a particularly sensitive question as it also challenges the existing regional human rights system, represented by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, which has produced valuable precedents and jurisprudence on the matter for the past 45 years.  2. Guaranteeing maximum transparency, access to information, and inclusive participation of affected communities and civil society in the Global South. Ensuring early and effective involvement of civil society and indigenous and local communities affected by strategic projects, strategic partnerships, global gateway, and other initiatives. This involves guaranteeing the right to self-determination; to free, prior, and informed consent (FPIC) of indigenous peoples, and the respect for their right to say ‘no’ (RTSN). Undermining the voices from local communities and civil society increases social, ecological, and operational risks, especially mining projects likely to entail cumulative or long-term environmental impacts, particularly those involving extraction methods with potentially significant adverse effects on water, such as direct lithium extraction (DLE) or evaporation techniques. In contrast, including them is not only ethical but also essential for a just transition, the long-term viability of projects, and for preventing companies from facing future legal liabilities.   3. Challenging the projections of transition raw materials demand and rapidly adopting policies to reduce the production and consumption of primary minerals in the EU. The EU should set binding, ambitious, and measurable targets on energy and material reduction, taking into account planetary boundaries. In addition, conducting a prior, comprehensive, and independent strategic assessment of minerals needs and of alternatives to their extraction is essential to uphold the principle of proportionality, achieve climate objectives through less harmful means, and avoid irreversible damage to communities and ecosystems. Moreover, the EU should also foster more comprehensive circular economy strategies that take into account local economies and the biophysical limits of the ecosystems.  Download the document 

New European Union policies for mineral supply: What are the implications for Latin America?

Amid the global race for minerals for the energy transition, digitalization, and the defense and aerospace industries, the European Union (EU) has adopted an industrial policy to secure its access to "critical" raw materials, including lithium. According to the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean, 25 of the 34 raw materials the EU considers essential are found in Latin America's indigenous territories and strategic ecosystems. Civil society warns that the Critical Raw Materials Act (CRMA) and other recent policies aimed at deregulation and promoting the defense sector (Omnibus I and II) could deepen historical inequalities between Europe and Latin America.In this webinar, we addressed the threats to Latin America by the European Union's new policies and what the region's states and civil society can do to address them. To this end, we focused on the significance of the "strategic partnerships" that the EU has signed with Chile and Argentina, and explained what the so-called "strategic projects" that the EU intends to consolidate at the global level to maintain the flow of minerals from South to North consist of. Indigenous leaders denounced how excessive water use in lithium mining has already degraded Andean wetlands and caused the loss of biodiversity and culture.In this session, we debated the justice of the "European green transition," which, in the name of decarbonization, threatens to open up new sacrifice zones in the Global South, while erasing ancient knowledge and causing irreversible damage to carbon sinks that are essential for tackling the climate crisis. PanelAlejandro González, Senior Researcher and Advocate in SOMO's Climate Justice team and member of the EU Raw Materials Coalition.Pía Marchegiani, Deputy Executive Director and Director of the Environmental Policy area of the Environment and Natural Resources Foundation (FARN).Joám Evans Pim, Coordinator of the Confederal Mining Area at Ecologistas en Acción and Director of the Montescola Foundation.Ramón Balcázar, Director of the Tantí Foundation.Román Elías Guitián, Community Atacameños del Altiplano, Argentina.Moderator: Yeny Rodríguez, Senior Attorney and Area Coordinator, Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA). Recording (in Spanish) 

Circular economy: what is it and what role does it play regarding the climate crisis and energy transition?

Life on the planet, including our own, depends on nature.To create more sustainable ways of life and keep global warming under control, we need to ensure healthy, resilient, and productive ecosystems.The climate crisis, as well as the pollution and biodiversity loss crises, stem from human activities that exploit nature beyond its limits, without giving it a chance to recover, degrading ecosystems and pushing them to points of “no return.”These activities are based on the conventional economic model, which is linear and follows the logic of extracting, producing, using, and discarding resources.A more sustainable use of natural resources requires a different economic model.One option among many is the circular economy, an economic model of production and consumption traditionally described as a combination of reduction, reuse, and recycling activities.However, most current approaches to the circular economy, incorporated into various public policies, focus on extending the life cycle of products that have already been manufactured. They do not comprehensively incorporate the processes of extracting the materials needed to manufacture the products or their final disposal. This considerably reduces the protection of nature and territories during the economic cycle.That is why it is important to understand what the circular economy is and what it should include, in theory and in practice, so that it can truly contribute to a more sustainable and fair world. Circular economy: Definition and challengesAs an alternative to the linear economic system, the circular economy involves closing the economic cycle through various mechanisms. These include reducing the use of virgin natural resources, increasing the use of recycled materials, and minimizing waste through the repair and reuse of products, keeping them in circulation for as long as possible.It also means creating additional value for products whose useful life has ended when their materials are used again and again.  In the face of our continued and unsustainable use of resources, the concept of the circular economy is becoming increasingly prevalent in different areas.Although it is a living and evolving concept, when it becomes public policy, most definitions of the circular economy consider its main objective to be economic prosperity, with environmental care as a secondary result.In 2020, a legal definition of the circular economy in the European Union considered it to be “aneconomic system whereby the value of products, materials and other resources in the economy is maintained for as long as possible, enhancing their efficient use in production and consumption, thereby reducing the environmental impact of their use, minimising waste and the release of hazardous substances at all stages of their life cycle” …This and other definitions show that the positive effects of the circular economy on nature tend to be taken for granted, when certain theories or practices associated with the concept may actually hinder the protection of ecosystems and the people who depend on them.This is happening with the type of circular economy promoted to make extractive processes linked to the energy transition, designed to address the climate crisis, environmentally friendly. Circular economy and energy transitionHistorically, extractive activities such as mining have degraded ecosystems and violated human rights in Latin America, creating so-called “sacrifice zones.”Today, to address the climate crisis, several international organizations have positioned an energy transition that requires doubling the production of renewable energies and electromobility to decarbonize the global energy matrix.This also implies intensifying the extraction of so-called "critical" minerals for the development of clean technologies. One of these is lithium, a mineral of which the region has large reserves.Thus, far from putting an end to it, the energy transition promoted by the Global North is renewing the historical extractivist trend, generating great pressure on Latin American territories rich in minerals for the transition, affecting ecosystems and populations near extraction areas.In this context, the circular economy is promoted as a tool to make mining an environmentally responsible process. However, international proposals in this regard do not guarantee the resilience of ecosystems or the well-being of communities.This is evident in countries such as Argentina, Bolivia, and Chile due to the growing global demand for minerals such as lithium.Currently, the circular economy applied to mining in Latin America focuses on the internal processes of mining companies, but not on the consequences that their interactions with ecosystems and communities generate in the extraction territories, without stopping the expansion of extractivism or the high socio-environmental impacts caused.Obtaining lithium for electromobility, for example, involves a complex, transnational supply chain. This includes mineral extraction, refining, the production of electrodes for batteries, battery manufacturing, and finally, the manufacture of electric vehicles.From a global northern perspective, the circular economy is mainly applied here to battery recycling and industrial improvements for mining. However, it does not include measures to protect the biophysical limits and resilience of the ecosystems where lithium is extracted, ensure environmental restoration, prevent damage to local economies, guarantee human rights, and repair those that have already been violated. Proposals from Latin America for a just circular economyTo ensure that the energy transition does not become a new extractive process that generates the same conflicts and environmental impacts that it has systematically caused and that are precursors to the current climate crisis, it is essential that the circular economy comprehensively integrates the mineral extraction territories.Circular economy schemes must avoid the creation, expansion, and/or deepening of “sacrifice zones.” They must also recognize the strategic value of ecosystems as natural capital for countries and communities, given the ecosystem functions they provide, including freshwater supply and carbon capture.To move towards a just circular economy in the extraction territories, the following principles must be respected:Protection of the human rights of local populations, guaranteeing their permanence in the territory and the continuity of their economic activities, linked to their livelihoods and their relationship with ecosystems.Promotion of environmental balance in accordance with the biophysical limits of ecosystems, recognizing their intrinsic values, which favor the conservation of their functions.Internalization of environmental costs in mineral value chains, incorporating the value of ecosystem services used for extraction into prices.Learn more in our policy brief Reimagining the circular economy from the extraction territories. Proposals from Latin America.