Blog
Brazil and the example that should be followed
In an apparent turnaround, the Brazilian government has signaled an end to the construction of large dams in the Amazon. If materialized, it will be a step worthy of imitation. Then the region, and the world, can move towards truly sustainable energy generation that respects the environment and human rights. 2018 began with encouraging news for the energy sector, and for rivers and human rights in Latin America. A senior official with the Brazilian government signaled, in an interview with the newspaper O Globo, the beginning of the end of large dams in the Amazon nation. That statement is backed up by the notable absence of several of these projects in Brazil’s new Ten-Year Plan for Energy Expansion. The about-face is particularly significant since Brazil is a world leader in the construction of large hydroelectric projects, which until a few months ago were relied on to meet the nation’s rising energy demands. Between corruption and lack of financing The decision is a response to various factors, including the social conflicts and environmental impacts that large dams have caused in the Amazon, and major opposition from indigenous communities and civil society organizations. In addition, these projects have involved high costs from the start and, as Edvaldo Santana, former director of the National Electric Energy Agency (ANEEL) told O Globo, they “end up costing much more, despite the licenses.” Large dams have also been at the center of the largest corruption scandal in the history of Brazil, uncovered by the Lava Jato investigation, which went beyond borders to involve politicians and businessmen from 11 Latin American nations. The evidence gathered then prompted the initiation of Leviathan, a special investigation into the Belo Monte Dam due to the signs of high payments of bribes related to its construction. All of the above is in addition to the requirements for environment licenses with which several projects have failed to comply. This is the case of Belo Monte, whose license has been suspended for months, and of the Tapajós Dam, who license was denied last year. On the other hand, the Brazilian government announced the privatization of Electrobras, a public company with a fundamental role in the construction of these large infrastructure projects. With this and the economic crisis that has affected the ability of the Brazilian National Bank for Economic Development (BNDES) to support these mega-projects, the large dams have lost their primary sources of funding. Therefore—and in the face of technological advances and clean energy alternatives—Brazil is beginning to leave behind large dams and take and important step towards truly sustainable energy, and development that respects human rights. This advance could have an important impact on the entire American continent. It could begin a wave of change toward a more modern energy matrix, further removed from the increasingly obsolete large dams. A necessary change In the Amazon basin alone, more than 275 new large dams are planned, the majority in the Andean region. And hundreds more are lined up in Central America and Mexico. To echo Brazil’s announcement, these initiatives could incorporate adequate and comprehensive energy planning with serious cost and risk assessments. In these terms, Pablo Pedrosa, Executive Secretary of Brazil’s Ministry of Mines and Energy, told O Globo, “We are not willing to make moves to disguise the costs and the risks.” Even global entities such as the International Finance Corporation (IFC), part of the World Bank Group, have experienced first-hand the financial, reputational and socio-environmental costs of inadequately evaluating large dam projects. In 2012, the IFC, through the Latin American Fund for Renewable Infrastructure, provided $15 million USD to fund the Santa Rita Dam, which was to be built on the Ictobay River in Alta Verapaz, Guatemala. At the end of last year, the entity’s accountability mechanism concluded that the investment had breached the IFC’s operational policies. The project had failed to comply with the affected community’s right to free, prior and informed consent. Although IFC management denied the findings of its accountability mechanism, the project has been suspended since 2013 and the indigenous communities of the area maintain their opposition to it. Brazil’s recent decision reinforces the global trend of moving away from large dams. Over the last several years in the United States, large dams have been removed to rescue rivers and the benefits they provide, like wild salmon runs on the Snake River in Washington State. Given this good start to the year, it will be essential to ensure the effective implementation of Brazil’s decision. And, following that example, perhaps other Andean-Amazonian countries will also move towards modernity, consider the real costs of large dams, and begin to promote better, cheaper energy alternatives that don’t sacrifice natural ecosystems and the communities that depend on them.
Read more
Eight key themes for Colombia’s environmental agenda in 2018
For Colombia, 2017 was a year marked by debate on the right of communities to be consulted about decisions that affect their territories and ecosystems. We saw it through the organization of popular consultations and mobilizations that questioned mining and fracking projects and, in short, the continuity of extractivism. It was also evident in the decision of the Constitutional Court, the highest court in the country, to invalidate the delimitation of the Santurbán páramo, a water source for millions, because the government’s decision did not take into account the population. On the other hand, Colombia joined the global debate on climate change and the need to promote a model of economic development free of fossil fuels. Now, in the face of the presidential elections and the implementation of the peace accord, environmental participation, territorial autonomy and fracking remain particularly important issues. What follows are eight topics key to Colombia’s environmental agenda in 2018: Environmental participation: Popular consultations, as an expression of empowered communities seeking to have a say on projects that will affect them, will continue holding a privileged place in public debate. Territorial autonomy: Although constitutionally recognized, the ability of departments and municipalities to govern themselves autonomously in various areas, including the environment, is not entirely defined. It remains to be answered: Who should decide? And about what can they decide? Indigenous authorities: Following on the heels of the above, the autonomy and decision-making ability of indigenous authorities in relation to environmental issues will give us much to discuss this year. Fracking: The key question is, faced with fracking’s expansion throughout the region, will Colombia adopt the position of social organizations on the application of the precautionary principle to avoid the health and environmental damages associated with fracking? Decarbonization: As an energy producer, will Colombia join France, the United Kingdom and Italy, nations that recently signed an alliance to close coal plants before 2030 and comply with the Paris climate agreement? La Niña: The strong winds and rains of the La Niña climate phenomenon will return to the country this year. Adequate measures to mitigate the risk will be fundamental, as will the application of lessons learned in 2010, when the phenomenon left hundreds dead and the loss of millions of pesos. Páramos: Following the decision of the Constitutional Court to invalidate the delimitation of the Santurbán páramo, this year promises to be full of controversies about the new delimitation of this important ecosystem. Also key will be the issue of community participation in the demarcation of the rest of Colombia’s páramos, a measure oriented to protect them against harmful projects like mining. Principle 10: The negotiation of a regional agreement on the access to information, to justice and to public participation on environmental issues, remains underway. The agreement seeks the application of Principle 10 of the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, key to guaranteeing the right to a healthy and sustainable environment for present and future generations. At AIDA, and through the Network for Environmental Justice in Colombia, we will continue to promote solutions to the country’s environmental conflicts based on the effective application of national and international standards.
Read more
Sea turtle populations show sign of a comeback
Before 2008, hawksbill turtles had virtually disappeared from the Eastern Pacific. But small-scale conservation efforts enabled their return to the shores of El Salvador and Nicaragua, where researchers found them again laying eggs and slowly beginning to rebuild their population. Sea turtles are migratory animals. They spend most of their lives at sea, nesting on the beaches of various countries along their route. Among the main threats to their health are unsustainable fishing practices (they often get trapped in fishing nets) and inadequately developed projects in marine and coastal areas. The appearance of these turtles on Central American beaches, among other such events, demonstrates the success of small-scale conservation efforts, and the need for them to continue. Signs of recovery According to the recent study, Global sea turtle conservation successes, over the last decade sea turtle hatcheries have helped some populations rebound after historic declines. That’s the case of olive ridley turtles in the northeast Indian Ocean and of green turtles in the South Central Atlantic. After years of implementation, the protection of beaches, the regulation of fishing, and the creation of marine protected areas have helped improve sea turtle populations in waters around the world, according to researchers. The study also shows that, with adequate protections, even small populations of sea turtles have a chance of survival. Researchers found, for example, that in the area of Hawaii called French Frigate Shoals, the population of nesting green sea turtles increased from around 200 in 1973 – when the Endangered Species Act was created – to upwards of 2,000 in 2012. Green turtles are now considered a species of “minor concern” by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature. Our contribution Sea turtle conservation, like that of other animals and plants, requires that organizations, communities, and governments work together. Such collaboration is a main tenant of AIDA’s work. In 1998, we organized a campaign to get the signatures needed for the negotiation of an international treaty to promote the protection, conservation and recovery of sea turtle populations. We are currently working to ensure that governments who signed the treaty are operating in compliance with it. We also helped save green turtles in Costa Rica, and are currently working to protect the Veracruz Reef System in Mexico, in whose warm and shallow waters hundreds of hawksbill and Atlantic ridley turtles swim. Both species are at risk due to the expansion of the Port of Veracruz, a project that would cause serious damage to the expansive reef system. Much work remains Despite the impressive recovery of several species of turtle, there are others that remain in need of protection, as their numbers continue to decline worldwide. This is the case, according to the study, of both the leatherback turtle in the eastern and western Pacific and of the flatback turtle in Australia. A new beacon of hope for turtles can be found in the development, before the United Nations, of a treaty to protect the high seas, those international waters that belong to no country (but make up two-thirds of the world’s oceans). Sea turtles, sharks, whales and birds live in these waters or travel them as part of their migratory routes. Through our active role in the treaty’s development, we seek to create Marine Protected Areas to ensure the high seas remain a safe home for not just sea turtles, but for the many species of plants and animals that contribute to the health of the oceans and support the global food supply.
Read more
Celebrating 7 Advances to Close Out 2017
As the year comes to a close, we're happy to share with you several recent advances we've made in the name of environmental protection in Latin America. Each project we launch or case we win is a step toward a more just region, and a healthier planet for our children. Because of your support, we: 1. Saved Colombia’s Largest Coastal Wetland We successfully petitioned Colombia to list the Ciénaga Grande de Santa Marta among the world's most at-risk wetlands, opening up the resources needed for its recovery. Learn More 2. Launched the Bolivian Environmental Justice Network We founded a coalition of environmental and human rights organizations in Bolivia to support citizens’ efforts to defend the environment and those who depend on its health. 3. Campaigned to Protect Patagonia from Salmon Farms We petitioned Chile to investigate damage being done by salmon farm operations in Southern Patagonia, and launched a citizens’ campaign to raise awareness of the growing threat. Learn More 4. Secured Healthcare for Victims of Toxic Pollution We secured specialized medical care for residents of La Oroya, Peru, whose lives and health have long been affected by a heavy-polluting metal smelter that operates beside their homes. Learn More 5. Protected Sea Turtles on the High Seas We represented Latin American citizens and organizations in the development of a United Nations treaty to protect the shared parts of our ocean and the rich life within. Learn More 6. Stimulated Divestment from Mining in a Protected Wetland We convinced the World Bank to withdraw support from a gold mine in the Santurbán páramo, a protected ecosystem and water source for millions of Colombians. Learn More 7. Advised Rural Town in the Lead-Up to a Mining Ban We provided legal advice and scientific analysis to the people of Cajamarca, Colombia, who then voted by a margin of 98% to ban all mining activities from their territory. Learn More
Read more
Why I’m joining the fight for justice for Belo Monte’s victims
On April 1, 2011, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights granted protective measures to the indigenous communities affected by a large dam in the heart of the Brazilian Amazon. It was then I first heard of Belo Monte. I was working as a human rights defender in my native country of Colombia. The Commission ordered the suspension of all permits and work related to the dam until the protection of indigenous rights was guaranteed. I remember clearly the excitement generated by the decision, followed swiftly by Brazil’s rejection of it and the imposition of their diplomatic power. Other governments of the region supported Brazil’s position with unusual solidarity, questioning the competence of the international organization to grant such measures in relation to “development” projects. Due to the overwhelming pressure, the Commission, for the first time in its history, modified its decision: it said Brazil must guarantee the life and integrity of affected populations, but that construction could continue. I’ve never understood the governments’ reaction in this case. The Commission had simply fulfilled its mandate: to avoid irreparable harm to the rights of a group of people. The project had not consulted affected indigenous communities, and lacked adequate social and environmental impact studies. It has gone on, as predicted, to cause serious damage to both the environment and human health and wellbeing. The indigenous and riverside communities, which have for generations cared for the Xingu River, have been left to deal with the impacts of a project that interrupted the flow of the river, irreversibly altering their way of life and means of subsistence. The hope continues More than six years have passed since the case was taken before the Commission, which, as an organ of the Organization of American States, is called to protect human rights on the continent. Over this time, Belo Monte has progressed as planned and the threats of social and ecological harm have become a reality. The dam has: caused the forced displacement of more than 40 thousand people, aggravating poverty and social conflict in the area; saturated the health, education, and public safety systems in Altamira, the nearest city; violated the right to adequate housing for thousands of families; and increased violence against human rights defenders. It caused and continues to cause damage to the Amazon rainforest, worsening climate change and its impacts. Despite the setbacks, the hope of achieving justice for affected people has grown over time as well. In September, I became the Senior Attorney for AIDA’s Human Rights and Environment Program. As such, I’m involved with our case before the Commission. I’m honored to have joined an organization that, in alliance with local organizations, has dedicated years to ensuring that the people of the Xingu get reparation for the damages they’ve suffered, and is working to create new standards for environmental and human rights protections in the region. In 2010, AIDA and our allies requested precautionary measures from the Commission. One year later, we filed a formal complaint against Brazil regarding the human rights violations related to Belo Monte. In December 2015, the Commission opened the case for processing. On October 31 of this year, the Commission gave new impetus to the litigation process against Brazil: it decided to unite two stages that, as a rule, are processed separately. In the first, the necessary aspects regarding admissibility of the case are verified. In the second, a fundamental decision is made that analyzes whether a State failed to comply with the international obligations it undertook when signing the American Convention on Human Rights. The petitioners must present the allegations of human rights violations, and the State their responses to them. The Commission will then issue a decision on the case’s admissibility as well as its merit. Their recent exception will expedite the process of reaching that decision. We’re working for the Commission to issue recommendations to Brazil to repair the violations committed. If those recommendations are unfulfilled, the case may be referred to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, which has the power to issue a ruling condemning Brazil and recommending reparation measures. Valuable lessons Belo Monte is, without a doubt, a lesson for the continent. The case shows that projects of this type are environmentally unviable and generate irreparable damage to human rights. Belo Monte also shows that States must rethink their energy models and turn their efforts toward promoting truly clean and sustainable energy. It’s a warning sign for financial institutions to avoid investing in projects with negative socio-environmental impacts. Finally, it’s an opportunity for the Inter-American Human Rights System to establish a valuable precedent that will hopefully help avoid a similar situation from happening again. On behalf of AIDA, I’m proud to be contributing to the fight for a healthy environment in this and many other cases. Our journey is just beginning.
Read more
When nature is your best client
AIDA’s attorneys both hail from and live in Latin America, fostering a profound respect for the region’s natural environment and those who depend so intimately on it. They’re turning their knowledge into action, and working to protect communities and ecosystems vital to their national heritage. Uniting the environmental community in Bolivia Claudia believes in environmental justice. “If people are not guaranteed quality of life and an adequate natural environment, their basic human rights are being violated,” she said. This belief led her first to study law and then to work on behalf of civil society to promote the production of healthy, pesticide-free food. Small-scale agriculture, with less environmental impact and more community benefits, is what Claudia remembers best when she thinks of her childhood in Cochabamba, Bolivia. There were gardens behind every house. From a very young age, she grew berries and always had apples, figs, guava, and other fresh fruit on hand. But with urbanization, the valley where she grew up became a city, and buildings replaced the lush green landscape. “It was a complete shock to see these changes made in the name of progress.” Claudia knows that her contribution to a better world will come from environmental law, and that she will have a greater impact by reaching more people. That’s why she joined AIDA’s Freshwater Program, where she offers free legal support to governments, communities, and local organizations. One of Claudia’s greatest achievements has been to successfully unite isolated efforts across Bolivia to confront common environmental problems. This year Claudia oversaw the formation of the Environmental Justice Network of Bolivia, a space for organizations and individuals to develop joint strategies for environmental protection. As their first big event, the Network organized a two-day forum on how to achieve justice for damages caused by mining operations. “I’ve seen the ways that Bolivia’s indigenous peoples understand the world, and how they relate with Mother Earth. In cities, nature is seen as an object; for the indigenous, it’s the common house we must care for because it provides us with everything we have. I’ve made this vision my own.” Protecting coral reefs in Mexico Camilo’s first interaction with the ocean took place in Boca del Cielo, a remote beach on the coast of Chiapas, Mexico where a stream meets the sea. There, he played in the waves and ate seafood, saw his first sea turtle, and watched the monkeys and birds play in the tall mangroves. During his childhood in San Cristobal de la Casas, his father taught him to swim against the current in the Cascadas de Agua Azul, an important natural reserve. “My father loves nature and has always transmitted that feeling to my brothers and me,” said Camilo, who now lives with his son Emiliano en La Paz, Baja California Sur. Living in a coastal city has given him a newfound appreciation for the ocean and its vital connection to our land. Camilo applies this understanding to his work as an attorney with AIDA’s Marine and Coastal Protection Program. He is working, for example, to save the Veracruz Reef System, the largest coral ecosystem in the Gulf of Mexico, which serves as a natural barrier against storms and hurricanes and is a source of livelihood for fishing communities. The site is seriously threatened by the expansion of the Port of Veracruz. Camilo is working so that the Mexican government respects the international treaties it has signed, which obligate the preservation of the site and the biodiversity found within. Camilo remembers, when he studied law in Chiapas, exploring caves in his free time, to which local farmers guided him. “Being in touch with nature often leads you to small communities who care for and revere their connection with the natural world, values you quickly come to understand and share.” Seeking the rain in Brazil If anyone knows the value of the rain, it’s the people of Paraíba State in northeast Brazil, who have for years been hit by an extreme drought. There, according to official information, the number of cities without water nearly doubled between 2016 and 2017. “The drought has shaped our customs, our eating habits, and our culture,” says Marcella, who was born in the State’s capital city of João Pessoa. Now living in Recife, she is a fellow with AIDA’s Human Rights and the Environment Program. Through her role as an environmental and human rights attorney, Marcella seeks to soften the effects of the drought in Paraíba. The way she sees it, she’s helping to do so through her work on the case of the Belo Monte Dam. “Large dams are dirty energy, and they’re damaging the Amazon rainforest, a key ecosystem that regulates climate and helps ensure it rains not just in Brazil but around the world. By working on this case, I’m fighting for the existence of rain in my State,” she explained. Last June, Marcella paid her first visit to Altamira, the city closest to Belo Monte. She spoke with people whose way of life had been destroyed by the dam. “I met someone who used to fish, grow his own food, and sell what was left in the city; because of the dam, his island was flooded and he lost everything.” For Marcella, there is no better way to understand the severity of the impacts of these inadequately implemented projects than to listen to those affected by them. “It gives me a notion of reality. Helping to get justice for these people is an obligation for me. It’s the best I can do, using the tool I know best: the law.”
Read more
The hidden mine that threatens Colombia’s water
For me, a living thing like water can never be replaced by a non-living thing like gold. Gold should never be worth more than the water that gives us life. While those who defend mining often argue for it by saying that all human activity causes impacts, that line of thinking fails to address the underlying problem. When will we start recycling instead of extracting new resources? When will we stop assigning value to something as scarce but futile as gold? When will we treat the natural environments on which we depend with the respect they deserve? Taking these questions into account is critical not just for Colombia, my home, but also for all Latin American nations. In September I learned of the latest threat to one of our most important natural ecosystems, the Santurbán páramo. For centuries it has stood high in the Andes, keeping watch over the water of millions of us Colombians. For the last decade, mining companies have overlooked its ecological importance and angled to exploit the páramo’s lands for mineral wealth. For years, we’ve worked successfully to stop them. Now an international corporation has submitted the Environmental Impact Assessment for a new underground mining venture there. Located in the municipalities of Suratá and California, in northern Colombia, the mine would involve an intricate system of tunnels at least 2,000 meters long, 900 meters wide and 780 meters deep (only slightly shorter than the tallest building in the world, in Dubai). It would be built in two sections—traversing two river basins and two different municipalities—united by two immense 5,800-meter tunnels (nearly the expanse of the Colombian city of Bucaramanga from north to south). Previous attempts at mining near Santurbán have been rejected due to the potential damage they would cause to this unique natural environment, which serves as a key water source, a carbon sink, and shelters many endemic species of plants and animals. The risks of the project, examined The Company claims the new project will be different—no permanent accumulation of debris, no hazardous substances, no toxic sludge, and no mass infrastructure development. If this sounds too good to be true, that’s because it probably is. Could their venture really be different than the mega-mines that came before, or is it just dressed up that way? Let’s see: The company says the project’s only dump will be located near the mine and the waste will be dry. But dry waste in one site would require perpetual maintenance of the drainage network and other factors that, after the mine closes, it’s likely neither the company nor the State will be able to control. They say the project’s design would involve retro-filling all mining tunnels. But the impacts of drilling on the direction and volume of groundwater are unpredictable. It would be impossible to guarantee that the quality and quantity of water in the subsoil is conserved. They say that because the mine is technically outside the Santurbán páramo, it won’t affect the sensitive ecosystem. But technicalities aside, the mine would be only tens of meters below the páramo. Because it is an underground mine located in crystalline rocks, drilling could cross the multiple fractures through which water is transported to rivers, ravines and soils. They say the project will not use mercury or cyanide to obtain gold and other metals. By selling and exporting those metals to other companies in the form of ready-to-process concentrates, the company hopes to lessen the socio-ecological cost of the activity. But while it’s true Colombia may be spared the negative effects of toxic chemicals, that cost might be transferred to other countries, where the processing will take place. As Colombians we must begin to acknowledge the external impacts of our extractive industries, and stop ignoring our nation’s ecological footprint. The responsibility for the damages caused outside our borders by the mining that is done in Colombia is not only that of the buyer, but also of the Colombian State. Large-scale damages It’s important to understand that a hidden mine is not necessarily a better mine. What is done under the ground, especially on such a large scale, can do extensive damage to a much wider area. It’s a reality we must be keenly aware of in one of the most biodiverse countries in the world. We must think about the impact the mine would have on the quality and quantity of groundwater in the area, and the risks we’re taking by not having an adequate buffer zone for the páramo. Hiding the trash under the carpet does not mean you’ve cleaned, not in terms of the economy and certainly not in terms of mining. The protection of Santurbán, and that of other freshwater sources in Latin America, is one of the pillars of AIDA’s work. We’re proud to continue standing alongside our allies in Colombia and fighting to maintain the health of Santurbán.
Read more
5 ways our governments can confront climate change
As individuals, we know about the small actions we can take to help reduce the emissions that cause climate change. But what can and should our governments do, seeing as their large-scale actions are fundamental to the welfare of their people? Earth, we have a problem: we’re essentially melting. High rates of greenhouse gas emissions, paired with environmental degradation and the overexploitation of natural resources, have us in a race against time. Ninety-seven percent of scientists agree that climate change is a result of human activities. And if we fail to stop global warming soon, the changes will be catastrophic. Each year, at the United Nations climate conference, global leaders meet to discuss actions we can take to help prevent, and be better prepared for, climate change. At COP21 the first binding global climate accord, the Paris Agreement, was born. This year, during COP23, delegates seek to establish rules to allow for its proper implementation. As individuals, most of us understand what we can do to reduce emissions: save energy, use the car less, recycle more, make better consumption choices, and engage in family planning. But what can our governments do? To discuss their contribution is to talk about large-scale measures that are vital to ensuring a better future for all. 1. Protect and restore key ecosystems Respect for nature is fundamental. Governments must protect ecosystems key to the fight against climate change: rivers, wetlands, oceans, forests and mangroves absorb large quantities of carbon, slowing warming. Mangroves also serve as a barrier against tropical storms, and wetlands absorb excess water from floods, both extreme weather events exacerbated by climate change. “Healing the natural system is the most feasible, realistic and fair option, since it would benefit humanity and all species,” said Florencia Ortúzar, an attorney with AIDA’s Climate Change Program. “In terms of conservation and restoration, we’re in a race against time, and we’re already beginning to witness alarming natural phenomena, like forests so degraded they’re losing their ability to absorb carbon.” 2. Support small agricultural producers According to the FAO, the meat industry is responsible for 15 to 18 percent of all greenhouse gas emissions, exceeding even those of the transportation sector. In addition, it is the most significant source of water use and contamination in the world. Today, 80 percent of all agricultural production goes toward feeding animals not people. The expansion of land for livestock, and the crops to feed them, is the most significant cause of deforestation in the Amazon. Governments can make a difference by supporting small local producers who, unlike large factory farms, employ sustainable practices, care about land restoration, benefit nearby communities, and make animals and crops more resilient to climate change. It’s less about everybody becoming vegetarians, but more about supporting those who produce our food with a respect for nature. 3. Promote green energy Thirty-five percent of all global emissions come from energy production. But as countries bet on more development, they’re also betting on more energy production. But as countries bet on more development, they’re also betting on more energy. While thermoelectric and hydroelectric energies were long considered the cheapest options, technological developments have allowed us to find better, cheaper, more efficient alternatives. With proper long-term planning, nations can avoid old climate-aggravating energy sources (hydropower is not green) and opt for small wind, solar, geothermal, oceanic and other projects that adapt to a place’s unique characteristics. “When thinking about energy, it’s best to bet on a diversified matrix, prioritizing projects that are close to places where people need energy, saving on losses and infrastructure,” Ortúzar explained. “We must give absolute priority to the protection of nature. Every action, public policy, or strategy should be analyzed with nature in mind, and the production of energy is a good starting point.” 4. Combat short-lived climate pollutants Carbon dioxide (CO2) is the most infamous greenhouse gas. Since it remains in the atmosphere for centuries (even millennia), even if we stopped all its emissions sources today, the effects of climate change would continue. The good news is that other contaminants exist that contribute to climate change and only last a few days or years in the atmosphere. They’re known as short-lived climate pollutants, and they’re responsible for 30 to 45 percent of the emissions that cause global warming. These pollutants include black carbon (soot), methane, ozone, and the hydro fluorocarbons found in refrigerants. Their effective control, through national policies and regulations, could accelerate the fight against climate change in the short term. In addition, because they cause serious air pollution, measures to mitigate them would directly benefit human health. 5. Bet on adaptation, not just mitigation In the fight against climate change, work aimed at reducing emissions, stopping their effects and diminishing future consequences is known as mitigation. It is important. However, some communities are already experiencing tragic consequences due to changes in climate over a short period of time. So we also must act to prevent catastrophes, increase resilience, and reduce vulnerability, which is known as adaptation. Projects to mitigate emissions are more attractive financially than those designed for adaptation, which are generally focused on the most vulnerable communities. But it is important to give adaptation the significance it deserves in recognition of the fact that the impacts of climate change are already a grave reality for many. At this year’s COP, representatives are discussing a “loss and damage” mechanism, referring to the compensation that developed countries – the main causes of climate change – must make to developing countries, which suffer significant losses due to adverse climate effects, Ortúzar explained. Our governments must support these discussions and commit to the effective use of resources, so all the world’s people can be better prepared for, and help to prevent, greater changes to our climate.
Read more
Honoring the indigenous connection to the San Pedro Mezquital River
In Northwest Mexico, the Western Sierra Madre Mountains rise like giants from the coastal wetlands of the Gulf of California to the Central Mexican Plateau. Indigenous communities have long found shelter in these isolated lands, and the space to maintain their culture and way of life. The region’s last free-flowing river cuts smoothly through the mountains, carving out fertile valleys, carrying fresh water and life downstream to the wetlands of Marismas Nacionales. The Nayeri and Wixárika people venerate the San Pedro Mezquital River. It brings life to their lands, and many of their sacred sites are dotted along its winding path. Despite its importance, the river—and with it the rights of more than 15,000 indigenous peoples—are at risk from the proposed Las Cruces hydroelectric dam. The dam’s reservoir would flood 14 sacred ceremonial sites, and threaten their culture and way of life. I was honored to walk alongside the Nayeri and Wixárika people last May, and participate in a joint ceremony intended to show their commitment to defending their rights in the face of this government-sponsored megaproject. It’s a commitment that was recently and formally manifested again, when representatives presented their case before the United Nation’s Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples. The images I captured of that pilgrimage are a testament to the beauty and strength of the living indigenous cultures of the Western Sierra Madre. We left from the town of Rosamorada in Nayarit State on a pilgrimage to Keiyatsita, a ceremonial site along the San Pedro Mezquital River. We walked single file, winding up into the mountains and then down, again, to the river’s edge. When we arrived to the river, we performed a ritual, and were marked with ashes and creole corn flour to protect us on the journey. Walking beside so many indigenous people, of all ages—mothers and fathers, children and elders—was an enriching and inspiring experience. This particular pilgrimage was historic, as it brought together two different indigenous communities—the Náyeri and the Wixárika—to honor the sacred spaces they share. In a joint declaration, they wrote that, beyond the spiritual reasons for the ceremony, they came together: "to unite against the hydroelectric project Las Cruces and thus show the Mexican government that we are not alone and we are not isolated… After this historic ceremony, both indigenous groups will further strengthen our cultural, spiritual, political and legal struggle and defense against the aforementioned dam, as well as strengthen our ties with other indigenous peoples of Mexico and the world.” They walked to honor the river, to nurture the earth, and to demonstrate their commitment to protecting their sacred spaces. Both indigenous groups see themselves as the guardians of these sites—places like Keiyatsita that provide them with the knowledge and wisdom of how to care for their mother earth. These sites are vital not just to their historical memory, but to their culture and identity. The ceremony at Keiyatsita began in the afternoon. Through prayer, song and dance they expressed their devotion to their native corn gods, Tatei Niwetsika, or mother Maíz, in her five colors—yellow, blue, pink, white and red. In the middle of the night, the animals that walked beside us through the mountains were offered up to the gods amidst the river’s running water. The prayers, songs and ceremony lasted all through the night. These sacred sites along the San Pedro Mezquital river are living spaces, and part of what makes Mexico so rich. They are a reflection of the indigenous cultures and traditions that remain very much alive in the Western Sierra Madre Mountains. They are places that, because of their cultural and spiritual importance, must be honored and protected as part of our international heritage. Indigenous peoples are the best guardians of our planet. And now, they are called on again to protect this unique and precious place—the last free-flowing river in Northwest Mexico and the lands it travels through, from the peaks of Durango to the mangroves of Nayarit along the Gulf of California. Representatives of the indigenous communities of Nayarit stood this week before Victoria Tauli-Corpuz, the United Nationals Special Rapporteur on the rights of indigenous peoples, and voiced their opposition to the dam that threatens their territory and way of life. They explained that they have not given, and will not give, their consent for the advancement of a project that would destroy their sacred sites and the river that provides them with life. Learn more about our fight to protect the San Pedro Mezquital
Read more
After the Mexico City earthquake, a call to create a better city
About a month ago, on September 19, a 7.1 magnitude earthquake struck near the heart of Mexico City. In the quake’s aftermath, on top of all the tears and fear and aguish, I was overcome with solidarity and love, by the signs of an awakened and united citizenry. I’ve been living here for more than 13 years, and never before have I felt so proud to call this place home. Everyone who could went out to the streets to help. It was impressive to see how we employed our professions, our skills, and our pastimes in the service of others: medicine, engineering, architecture, cooking, masonry, carpentry, psychology, therapy, advocacy, education, communications, acting, and art. Every bit of knowledge was useful in a million different ways. The support of neighbors and local businesses was essential. Restaurants and cafes provided food, drinks, and bathrooms to anyone in need. Internet networks and electricity were offered up free of charge. Thousands of people set to work in the wreckage of collapsed buildings, in collection and aid-distribution centers. We became a real, alive, awakened, tireless, connected and supportive city. With all that has happened over the last month, it is this spirit of citizenship and support that has remained with me. Friends and strangers alike were inspired to help and to share; they were proud of their actions but not seeking any spotlight. I hope we can keep this spirit alive in the months and years to come. Instead of going back to being anonymous, disconnected residents of this monstrous city, people skeptical of the unknown and afraid of the shadows, we can be more. We can reinvent ourselves, remain active and involved citizens; we can be better. It’s the least we can do to honor the people who died, and those who lost their homes and their ways of life. Only then will all this pain be for something greater. If we maintained these habits of generosity, we could drastically improve the quality of life in our city. Perhaps we would be removed from The Economist’s list of the worst cities to live in Latin America. And, most importantly, perhaps we could all live safer, more peaceful and happier lives. What if, in the face of corruption, instead of just complaining, we formed a human chain to denounce it, find solutions, and implement them? Can you imagine the difference we would make? What if, in the face of environmental pollution, we sought to better understand the causes and solutions, and demanded effective action from both the government and those responsible for the damage? What if, in the face of the irregularities of urban development—made evident by the earthquake—we supported citizen-oversight initiatives to ensure that complaints are followed up, and codes and norms are complied with? What if, in the face of inequality, we formed another human chain for the more balanced distribution of resources, to ensure they get where they’re most needed? We’ve seen what we can achieve together, and we know that we can all give more than we normally do. We know now that when there is trust and time, the greatest gift we can give is ourselves. So, a month after the earthquake, I invite you to continue being part of our human chain—for our city, our country, our region, and our planet. By becoming protagonists and finding solutions, instead of being victims and complaining, we can truly make a difference. We’ve seen that the government doesn’t cut it, and that we can do more with our own hands. For my part, I will continue my work as an environmental attorney with AIDA. But I will also commit to remaining connected to my neighbors and community, and to contributing to the reconstruction of our city. And what about you? What human chain did you join the day of the earthquake, and what connections will you choose to form and strengthen now?
Read more