Blog

December 18 2015

Urging the Brazilian National Development Bank to Invest Responsibly

The flow of the Xingú river in the Brazilian Amazon is diminishing to a trickle, while the rainforest around it disappears. Fish and other animals are scarcely seen, and many residents of the river communities have had to leave their homes and change their way of life forever. This devastating panorama is the result of the construction of Belo Monte dam, slated to be the third-largest dam in the world. Despite the project’s many reported irregularities, construction continues to ravage the surrounding environment. And despite the corruption and seemingly endless questions surrounding the dam, the energy company building it has had no problems obtaining funding, mostly from the Brazilian National Development Bank (BNDES). In Latin America, BNDES is more active than both the Inter-American Development Bank and the World Bank in financing large energy and infrastructure projects. BNDES does not, however, have standards that guarantee its investments do no harm to the environment and vulnerable communities; nor does it have an effective system to process the claims and complaints of those whose human rights are violated as a result. AIDA is working alongside regional organizations in Brazil to draw attention to this unacceptable situation. Too few people know about the problems caused by BNDES-supported projects, which means that society at large is not demanding accountability. To raise awareness, AIDA and allied organizations created an infographic that explains the harmful effects of BNDES investments in the region. Please help us distribute this valuable tool by sharing it with your friends! “Our work aims to influence the Brazilian National Development Bank so it becomes a positive influence in the world of energy investments. We hope they begin to respect the environment and the human rights of the people who depend on it, and enable a shift towards a truly sustainable economy,” said Florencia Ortúzar, AIDA attorney. “We want the Bank to stop funding large dams. As well as displacing entire communities of indigenous and vulnerable people, they actually contribute to climate change, because rotting vegetation in dam reservoirs releases enormous amounts of methane—a very powerful greenhouse gas. Instead of building more dams, the bank should avoid socio-environmental conflicts and positively contribute to regional efforts to adapt to and mitigate the effects of climate change.”

December 10 2015 Accountability and Transparency, Climate Change

COP21: Mainstreaming Climate Change within Financial Institutions

Financial institutions are crucial players in the global fight against climate change. In order for countries around the world to successfully pursue low-carbon and climate-resilient development, significant sums of finance will need to be harnessed. The Paris Agreement – set to be finalized this week at the close of COP21 – will surely catalyze climate finance around the world. But climate finance will only represent a small percentage of overall global financial flows. Therefore, the extent to which climate change considerations are more broadly mainstreamed within financial institutions will have an important effect on the speed of the global economy’s transformation in response to climate change. AIDA co-director Astrid Puentes Riaño was part of a panel that addressed this reality on December 7 during a COP21 side event titled Mainstreaming Climate Change Within Financial Institutions. The event began with a presentation unveiling the Five Voluntary Principles that had been agreed to this year by 26 financial institutions on four continents, which collectively manage $11 trillion USD. These voluntary principles included commitments to manage climate risks, improve climate performance, account for climate action, adhere to climate change strategies, and promote climate smart objectives. Following introductory remarks by the CEO of the French Development Agency and the Vice President of the World Bank Group, the main group of five panelists was invited to discuss their actions and views related to the initiative. The importance of Puentes Riaño’s presence on the panel was immediately apparent – she was not only the only woman, but also the only voice representing civil society. Other panelists included representatives from major public and private financial institutions, such as the Development Bank of Latin America, the Vicepresident of the European Investment Bank and the head of the Ministry of the Environment and Tourism in Namibia. The presentations on behalf of the financial institutions were brief, but to a certain extent heartening. Representatives lauded the billions of dollars they were committing to the fight against climate change, as well as other steps they were taking to reduce the climate impact of their investments. The European Investment Bank Representative, for example, highlighted their new emissions performance standard for investment in new energy development, which he said didn’t discriminate against any particular energy source, but effectively excluded coal. There was also discussion about the importance of working together and building information-sharing platforms, such as a website to host information gathered by the financial institutions. The representative from the commercial banking sector said that his company had committed to investing $2 billion USD in green bonds, wouldn’t be funding any new coal plants, and would be increasing investments in renewable energy. The Minister from Namibia stressed the devastating effect climate change is already having, and will continue to have, on his country. He explained that although climate change is a priority for his government, there is a lack of resources available to address the various needs that can arise at any time. Speaking on behalf of civil society, Puentes Riaño welcomed the initiative as a good start, which projected a positive image of the financial sector. Recognizing that the effort was still in its nascent stages, she offered some recommendations regarding its implementation. First, she called for consideration of human rights and social risk to be included in project assessments. This, Puentes Riaño explained, would facilitate the selection of the right kinds of projects to invest in. Secondly, she called for an effort to ensure that there was consideration of, and agreement among financial institutions about key definitions, for example “renewable energy” and “sustainable development”, as well as thought given to which options should be excluded as false solutions. Finally, she called on these funding institutions to focus on how this initiative would be implemented. She recommended having a clear, transparent, and participatory road map that was ambitious enough to put the world on a 1.5 degrees C path. During discussions like these, it’s easy to see how important it is for civil society organizations to be present and doing their best to contribute to the dialogue. In this case, AIDA was able to join the conversation and use our position at the table to help increase awareness about and advocate for access to information, transparency and accountability, public participation, and human rights.

December 09 2015 Accountability and Transparency, Climate Change

COP21's International Human Rights Day

Programme of Events - December 10, 2015 10:00 - 10:30 Press Conference (Le Bourget, Hall 5, Press Conf. Room 2). Hosted by Office of the High Commissioner on Human Rights. 11:00 - 12:30 Side Event: Fight Climate Change, Eradicate Poverty and Ensure Access to Rights—The Challenge of a Truly Just Transition (Espace Générations Climat, Room 4). Hosted by Secours Catholique - Caritas France and ATD Quart Monde. 11:30 - 13:00 Side Event: Climate Change: One of the Greatest Human Rights Challenges of Our Time (Le Bourget, Hall 4, Observer Room 12). Hosted by the Human Rights & Climate Change Working Group, Geneva Climate Change Concertation Group, CARE International, Center for International Environmental Law, Earthjustice, Franciscans International, Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung and Human Rights Watch. 13:00 - 13:30 Civil Society Action: Stand Up for Human Rights (Le Bourget, TBD). 13:00 - 14:30 Side Event: Climate Change and Human Rights: Focus on Urban Life, Human Rights and Adaptation to Climate Change (Espace Générations Climat, Room 4). Hosted by European Association of Geographers. 15:45 - 17:00 Photo Exhibition and Film Screening: There Is No Time Left: Climate Change and Human Rights in Turkana County, Kenya (Espaces Générations Climat, Round House and Stand A28). Hosted by Human Rights Watch. 17:30 - 19:00 Side Event: Agir Contre le Climat et Promouvoir les Droits Humains: Solutions Pratiques (Espace Générations Climat, Room 1). Hosted by the Human Rights & Climate Change Working Group and Réseau Climat & Développement. 18:30 - 21:00 Human Rights Day Celebration (Point Ephemere, 200 quai de Valmy 75010 Paris). Hosted by the Tri-Caucus, Accra Caucus, Geneva Group, Human Rights & Climate Change Working Group, Indigenous Peoples Caucus, and REDD+ Safeguards Working Group.

December 03 2015 Climate Change, Human Rights

A Human Rights Based Approach to Climate in Latin America

By María José Veramendi Villa, AIDA senior attorney, and Camila Bustos, Nivela lead researcher A few days before the beginning of the climate negotiations in Paris, the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights submitted an official document to the 21st Conference of the Parties to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change on “Understanding human rights and climate change”. For many, the link between these two remains unclear. Aren’t there already other international agreements that discuss this issue in depth? What is the point of including human rights language in a climate change agreement? The link between human rights and climate change has been recognized long ago by the UN Human Rights Council, which has passed several resolutions to bring attention to this issue. Several countries are already feeling the impacts of climate change: rising sea levels, droughts, extreme weather events and floods among other disasters are becoming increasingly common. Latin America and the Caribbean is one the most vulnerable regions to climate change. People and communities across the region are suffering from devastating impacts such as the melting of glaciers in the Andes, rising sea levels, and ocean acidification. Many face the risk of losing their traditional livelihoods and being displaced. The impacts of climate change on the enjoyment of human rights in Latin America have been thoroughly documented by the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense in its 2011 report on Climate Change and Human Rights. One of the most shocking impacts includes the drastic reduction to water in the region. By the year 2025, melting glaciers, the degradation of wetlands, intense droughts and erratic meteorological patterns will limit access to water to more than 50 million people in the tropical Andean region. Other anticipated effects include flooding and changing rain patterns. In Colombia, flooding affected more than 2.2 million people and cost $300 million USD in 2010 alone. In the transition to a low-carbon and resilient economy, countries are already working to design and implement projects that reduce greenhouse gas emissions and protect citizens from climate change impacts. A reference to human rights in the operational section of the agreement can ensure that human rights are taken into account in the process of developing and implementing climate policies. This is why: It will raise the ambition and strengthen the agreement promoting an implementation that will ensure that parties comply with their already existing human rights obligations. It will support the goals of the agreement by preventing discrimination, exclusion and inequality. The affected communities have to have a say in the policies and projects designed to help them. It will not create additional obligations, but ensure that there is coherence in the international regime. Parties are already obliged to comply with other human rights instruments, including the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. As the world turns its attention to Paris, we cannot forget to humanize climate change and remember that those who have contributed to the least to the problem are and will continue to be the most affected. If we want to ensure a livable planet for the future generations the new climate agreement must include the respect, protection, promotion and fulfilment of human rights. We call on all State Parties and specially those of our Latin American region to support the inclusion of human rights protections in the agreement.

November 30 2015 Accountability and Transparency, Climate Change

COP21 Begins, as Climate Hope Grows Stronger

Hundreds of world leaders gathered in Paris today to officially kick off the highly anticipated global climate talks. This is a critical moment for the future our life here on Earth. The conference is expected to produce a new and binding global climate accord, which could shape the ways in which we live, govern, create energy, and adapt to a changing climate. The expectations are set high for this 21st Conference of Parties (COP21) of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change – because they have to be. In the next two weeks, States will have the opportunity to show their commitment to combating climate change. At the close of the negotiations, if all goes well, governments from around the world will adopt the measures necessary to ensure a better planet for present and future generations. The task at hand for this Conference is finalizing the Paris climate package, which includes a final draft of the new climate agreement and a series of decisions to be adopted by Member Parties. Both are vital to the proper implementation of the Convention. Though it has been successful in elevating climate change in policy discussions worldwide, the Convention still requires States to adopt clear and concrete actions to ensure compliance. What do we hope to achieve in Paris? There are two key tasks that AIDA will press Conference negotiators to achieve: Clarify the commitments related to climate financing after 2020. Include language requiring the respect, guarantee, protection, and promotion of human rights in all climate actions in both the preamble and the operating text of the Paris Agreement. Focus On: Climate Finance Climate finance is fundamental to ensuring that the commitments established in the Paris Agreement, as well as in the Convention itself, become a reality. Concerning climate finance, the new agreement should include the following key elements: Clarity on which countries should mobilize new and additional resources after 2020. It’s also important to reevaluate the role of developing countries that, though they have no obligation to provide financing, may be in a position do to so. Clear commitments to increase climate finance to achieve the desired outcomes. Clarity on sources of financing, ensuring that those sources implement clear and transparent methods that allow for their accounting and effective use. Collective short-term goals that demonstrate clear advances. Clarity on the institutional arrangements needed to channel resources. It will be important to strengthen the Green Climate Fund’s role in ensuring that finance supports projects and programs that are low-carbon and climate-resilient. Cycles of financial contributions, and their corresponding verification periods. Climate finance is a critical component of progress on the climate agenda. Providing clarity on this matter is essential to achieving goals and paradigm shifts in the short, medium, and long term. Focus On: Human Rights The protection and promotion of human rights is vital in the fight against climate change. The very success of the Paris Agreement depends on this element being integrated into the text and, particularly, into its objectives. A climate agreement featuring language to protect human rights will help to: Increase the ambition of the Agreement and strengthen its goals, encouraging better implementation, given that the human rights perspective may remind States of obligations that they already have. Clarify the responsibilities of States and other actors in the fight against climate change, and increase understanding of public policies related to it. This provides us the opportunity to advance and provide lessons learned, avoiding the duplication or creation of new obligations. Define a clear and acceptable pattern to prevent further socioenvironmental conflicts in the future. Having a uniform legal framework for the recognition of human rights would make it possible to improve the management of water, food, and land, which have particular resonance in Latin America. The Paris Conference is a historic opportunity for AIDA to strengthen the substantial progress made to date in the fight against climate change. Follow Along With Us!

November 24 2015 Climate Change, Human Rights

For the life and health of my children: We MUST include Human Rights in the New Climate Accord

By Astrid Puentes Riaño (@astridpuentes) Originally published by IntLawGrrls We humans have caused climate change, a real threat to humanity thus it requires human solutions. We also have lost precious time on eternal discussions about the existence of climate change, despite imminent evidence. Our efforts to deliver solutions must be inclusive and ambitious if they are to ensure that the lives and livelihoods of all people are protected. If and how to include human rights protections in new climate accord was one of the primary issues discussed during October’s Bonn Climate Conference. These protections were notably left out of the no-text presented by the co-chairs, and then added back in at the insistence of several countries, many from the Global South, and hundreds of civil society organizations. I could write a long list of legal, political, ethical, and economic arguments as to why human rights must be included in the Paris Agreement. In my opinion, however, they can all be distilled into two primary and powerful arguments: my children! At 4 and nearly 2 years old, they are already experiencing the realities of a changing climate. Some days, for example, they cannot go to the park because of increased air and climate pollution levels in Mexico City, be it black carbon or ozone, or both. Unfortunately, the worst is yet to come, as hurricanes, droughts, floods, glacier loss, and fires are all increasing. Now the question for my kids is not whether they will suffer from climate change, but to what extent. Some may say I’m exaggerating, and that my kids aren’t among the most affected. They’re right. Many others are suffering, and will continue to suffer, far worse consequences, such as: the Kunas in Panama, who are loosing their land due to sea-level rise; the 62 million people living on 52 small island states, including Tuvalu and Barbados; the 70 million people in the Andes, all of whom depend on water from glaciers and paramos, which are expected to dissapear within a few decades. Despite the evident urgency, official responses have been shamefully slow. The United Nations recently announced that current national commitments aren’t enough to prevent world temperatures from surpassing 2oC by 2100, when my children will be 89 and 87 years old. How, then, can we speed up agreements, increase ambition, and close the gap between what is needed and what is promised by States? Human Rights are an important part of this answer. If implemented, they can help to: Recognize the realities of climate change and its impact on the enjoyment of human rights of all peoples, particularly those in vulnerable situations. Remind States of their existing obligations to protect and respect human rights, obligations which are fundamentally shared by corporations and other international entities. Incorporating human rights in the climate change agreement will not create new obligations; it will instead allow us to be consistent and comply with preexisting commitments. Avoid increased threats to world stability that have been linked to climate change due to impacts such as: local resource competition, livelihood insecurity, migration, extreme weather events and disasters, volatile food prices, transboundary water management, sea-level rise, coastal degradation, and the unintended effects of climate policies. Spur effective solutions, such as the rethinking of energy. These kinds of solutions haven’t yet been achieved due to a lack of ambition and political will. For my son and daughter, and the millions of children of the world, we must accept that climate change is a human rights issue. For the health of future generations, and that of those already suffering from its impacts, we must do all we can to create effective solutions. The new climate accord, which will be signed in Paris this December, must include human rights protections in its Preamble, as well as in its operative text. Only then, with an overarching respect for the rights of all people, can begin to see the results we need in the fight against climate change. We must take the climate crisis seriously. If not, we will be trapped in short-sighted negotiations that won’t provide my children the hope of a dignified and healthy life. They will be left inside, unable to play in the park, to enjoy the world beyond our doorstep. And those in more vulnerable situations may be left with nowhere at all to find the shelter they seek.

November 19 2015 Coral reefs, Oceans

How can we save coral reefs?

By Haydée Rodríguez When I tell people I live in Costa Rica, they imagine my home on the beach, facing the ocean, waves rolling in from the endless horizon. In reality, I live in a city like any other, one hour from the Pacific coast and three from the Caribbean. Although my life hasn’t exactly been a tropical vision of paradise, I’ve been in love with the ocean since I was a girl. That love has only deepened the more I came to understand the mysteries of the sea, the services it provides and the marvelous creatures that call it home. Of all the species that live in the sea, corals are among my favorites. Thanks to my career at AIDA, I have been able to both learn a lot about these tiny animals, and work to identify effective ways to protect them. Many people don’t know about the incredible connection we have with corals. It’s a connection that exists even for those of us who don’t have the privilege of living by the sea. What are corals and what do they do for us? Although at first glance they look like large rocks, corals are actually living organisms with an exoskeleton. They have a mutualistic relationship with photosynthetic algae called zooxanthellae, which are responsible for their brilliant coloring. The algae use sunlight to produce food and some of the nutrients that the corals need to survive. In exchange, the corals provide the algae with a protected environment. A group of corals forms a reef, a highly biodiverse ecosystem, widely known as the jungle of the sea. Coral reefs provide many benefits to humanity: Reefs are spawning grounds for many varieties of fish—the fish you eat are linked, in one way or another, with a coral reef. Reefs are natural shock absorbers that protect coastal communities from storms and hurricanes. Reefs are tourist destinations that generate important national income: one square kilometer of coral reef provides services valued at up to $600,000 a year, according to the United Nations. The bad news is that these benefits could be lost if we don’t act now to preserve coral reefs. It’s estimated that 60 percent of the world’s coral reefs could disappear by 2030. That would mean that our children may enjoy them for only a brief time, and our grandchildren may know them only from photographs in their science and history books. What are the threats and how can we help fight them? Unsustainable fishing methods, such as trawling, which destroys any coral in its path. Before eating or buying seafood, it’s worth asking how it was fished. Becoming responsible consumers is our right and our obligation. We must demand in restaurants and grocery stores products that have been taken from the sea without harming corals or other species of importance. Inadequate tourism practices harm coral reefs. When exploring the wondrous corals reefs, snorkelers and divers must avoid touching or stepping on them at all costs. We must remember that corals are living creatures, which our weight and the equipment we carry into the sea can harm. When we buy souvenirs like necklaces and crafts, we should reject products that use or incorporate corals. We do not need corals to decorate our homes or bodies, but the ocean needs them to maintain its equilibrium. A recent study found that, when they come into contact with the ocean, sunscreens that contain oxybenzone (a chemical compound) could, even in low concentrations, damage the DNA of corals, deforming them and eventually causing death. We must avoid using this type of product, and instead use safe sunscreens and clothing to protect us from the sun. Here is a list of sunscreens that are safe for corals. The fertilizers used on crops leech into rivers and eventually reach the ocean, severely harming corals by increasing the production of algae, which in large quantities block the sun and prevent corals from receiving nutrients. We must opt for fruits and vegetables grown organically and demand responsible agriculture. Improving legal protection of coral reefs Another important way of saving coral reefs is by seeking change in our countries. We must urge our governments to improve the laws protecting these sensitive creatures. At AIDA, we have recently published A Guide to International Regulatory Best Practices for Coral Reef Protection. The document contains ideas to strengthen laws and promote the conservation of coral reefs around the world. I invite you to share the guide with decision-makers in your country. Or if you prefer, send me ([email protected]) the contact information of people who may be interested in implementing the recommendations contained within, and I will send them the guide directly. Corals play a more important role in our lives than many of us understand, and their future is in our hands. We must save coral reefs to ensure that our children and our grandchildren can enjoy the many benefits of these wondrous creatures.

November 06 2015 Toxic Pollution, Human Rights

Still Waiting for Justice in La Oroya

Part 1 of a 2-Part Series on the Human Rights Situation in La Oroya, Peru. By María José Veramendi Villa Juana[1] is tired. She and her neighbors have been waiting eight years for a ruling; eight years for a decision that could better their lives, clean their air, attend to their sick children and families. What began as a courageous and hopeful quest for justice has become a discouraging waiting game. Since 2007, a group of residents in La Oroya, Peru, has acted as petitioner in a case before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, Community of La Oroya v. Peru. For nearly a century, their city has been contaminated by the operation of a metallurgical complex (smelter) within its borders. The smelter has blackened the air, poisoned their bodies, and released toxic chemicals into the land and water. La Oroya was once identified as one of the most polluted cities in the world. The severe contamination has, and continues to have, grave impacts on the health of the city’s residents. Realities of La Oroya When AIDA’s co-executive director Anna Cederstav first arrived in La Oroya in 1997, women were walking around with scarves covering their faces, a vain attempt to ease the pain of breathing. Juana explained that she had felt the steady burning in her eyes and throat—the effects of contamination—since she could remember, but didn’t pay it any mind. Like most of the population, she thought it was normal. She didn’t really know what clean air was because she’d never experienced it. AIDA has worked for nearly two decades with the community of La Oroya. In 2002, we published the report La Oroya Cannot Wait with the Peruvian Society for Environmental Law. That report began to reveal to the community the severity of the pollution and health risks they were facing on a daily basis. The community realized they had to do something. Juana said it was in 2003, more than 80 years after the smelter began operating, that she became aware of the contamination. Through work with her parish, she was able to access information and learn about what was happening in her city. From there, she connected the dots—the respiratory problems in her family were, in fact, a result of her city’s extreme contamination. The quest for justice Residents submitted their case before the Inter-American Commission after their attempts at justice within Peru produced no remedy. A 2006 ruling by Peru’s Constitutional Tribunal against the State ordered it to adopt measures to protect the health of the community, but the State took no such action. In 2007, the Commission urged the Peruvian state to carry out precautionary measures—a specialized diagnosis of 65 residents and treatment for those who showed irreversible damage to their lives or personal integrity. Juana said receiving news of the precautionary measures was a happy moment because “we knew that we were winning something. At the beginning, everything went well and we believed that everything would be fixed, (but) with the passing of months—years—there were no answers.” Then, in 2009, the Commission issued a report admitting AIDA’s petition, declaring that the State’s omissions in the face of pollution could, if proven, represent human rights violations. But still, nearly a decade after the petition was first filed, the victims await a decision, the precautionary measures have yet to be enforced, and the State’s responsibility for the acts have yet to be established. “It’s taking a really long time, and not all of us have the patience or desire to keep waiting,” Juana said. Time affects the victims, wearing them out until they begin to waver and give up fighting for their right to justice. They become even more vulnerable as they face a city hostile to anyone who fights for their rights to life and health, a state that denies its responsibility and looks for any excuse to avoid assuming responsibility, and a company that wants to polish its reputation and use its economic power to manipulate the government. Where is the law in these cases? Where is justice? Juana explained that leaving La Oroya would be impossible for her family, because there they have work. She remains committed to achieving change with the lawsuit. But that’s not the case for everyone. La Oroya contains thousands of stories of families whose lives were radically changed due to the city’s contamination and the subsequent damages to their health and lives. There are those who had to abandon their homes because they did not see a future in the city, and those who have been unable to leave La Oroya because their entire lives and family are there. Then there are those who have suffered painful attacks and insults from their own neighbors in a community worried about losing jobs, but who march forward with the conviction that, one day, change will come and La Oroya will be a better and fairer place for them, their children, and their grandchildren. I trust and hope that the law will deliver justice to salvage those years of waiting. [1] The name has been changed to protect the client. This blog is based on a longer article Maria José wrote on the case entitled La Oroya: A Painful Wait for Justice. It was published as Chapter 8 of DeJusticia’s book, Human Rights in Minefields: Extractive Economies, Environmental Conflicts and Social Justice in the Global South. Read the full account here.

October 29 2015 Toxic Pollution, Climate Change

Reducing Short-Lived Climate Pollutants: A life jacket in times of climate change

By Florencia Ortuzar, AIDA attorney They’re all around you – the air conditioner hanging from your neighbor’s window, the charcoal powering your grill, the black smoke pillowing out of a passing truck, even the cows dotting the fields outside town. These familiar aspects of our daily lives are just some of the sources of short-lived climate pollutants (SLCPs). When released, SLCPs warm our atmosphere. But, compared to carbon dioxide, they have a relatively short lifespan. Consequently, their effective mitigation could provide a life jacket on the troubled waters of climate change. That’s why SCLPs are worth considering as the world moves rapidly toward the new global climate accord to be signed at the 21st Conference of Parties (COP21) of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). The meeting in Paris this December will be the most important in the global climate negotiations thus far. The new accord it produces could help us out of the planetary dilemma we’re currently in. The task is difficult. There have been 20 conferences of the UNFCCC so far, none of which has made substantial progress. Emissions have increased each year since the convention began, except for 2008 and 2009, when they decreased due the global economic crisis (not, notably, due to human will to survive). Sometimes, it’s hard to keep hope alive, but at AIDA, we never lose it. What are SLCPs? These contaminants include black carbon, tropospheric ozone, methane and hydroflourocarbons (HFC). Each one of them is different, but they share two main characteristics: they are major contributors to global warming, and, once emitted, they remain in the atmosphere briefly. The second feature is the one to which we must draw attention if we seek to mitigate climate change in the short term. Unlike SLCPs, carbon dioxide (CO2) can remain in the air for centuries. That means that even if we stopped all emissions today, the CO2 emitted would continue to warm the atmosphere for a very long time. How big of a problem are they? The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has estimated that SLCPs are responsible for more than 30 percent of global warming. More recent studies estimate between 40 and 45 percent. Mitigating carbon dioxide, responsible for the majority of the greenhouse effect, is essential to maintaining the climatic equilibrium of the earth in the long term. But the opportunity offered through the mitigation of SLCPs is much more immediate, and its effects could be felt in our daily lives. Advantages of reducing SLCPs The desirability of reducing SLCPs is much greater if we consider that, in addition to heating the atmosphere, these contaminants cause other problems that directly affect human health and the natural environment. Black carbon and tropospheric ozone, for example, are the cause of millions of premature deaths each year, since they increase the risk of respiratory and heart disease. They also damage crop yields, so their control would help improve food security worldwide. What does the Convention say? The Convention and its Kyoto Protocol do not recognize SLCPs as a concept, although the Protocol does include methane and HFCs in the greenhouse gases it seeks to combat. But this lack of recognition may change with the new climate accord. The current agreement includes a list of specific polluting gases that States must reduce. With the new agreement, however, countries will be free to decide what to include in their gas mitigation targets. Mexico has become a notable example in this regard by unconditionally committing, through its Intended Nationally Determined Contributions (INDCs), to reduce black carbon by 51 percent by 2030. This percentage has the potential to rise to 70 percent with international assistance. The work at hand At AIDA we work to inform governments of the measures they could take to effectively reduce short-lived climate pollutants in their countries. We advocate for the adoption of solutions whose effectiveness has already been tested in various parts of the world. We are preparing a report that reviews current regulation of these pollutants in three Latin American countries: Brazil, Chile and Mexico. We hope this report will facilitate progress towards a better approach to SLCPs in these countries. We will then continue working on this important issue in the rest of the region. You can find more information about SLCPs HERE!

October 14 2015 Coral reefs, Oceans

Protecting Sea Turtles in the Gulf of Mexico

By Sandra Moguel Every few years, hundreds of hawksbill and kemp’s ridley turtles glide through the warm, shallow waters of the Veracruz Reef System. There they swim and feed amongst the brightly colored corals, which stretch for miles through the Gulf of Mexico. When the sun goes down, many of the females make their way back to the very beach from which they hatched, to lay the eggs of the next generation. This ritual has happened for centuries, as the migratory turtles move and feed and breed their way through the Gulf and Caribbean waters. But it’s happening less and less. As their critical habitats are threatened by reckless human activities and a changing climate, the population of hawksbill turtles in the region has declined by 95 percent, making them a critically endangered species. The hawksbill (eretmochelys imbricata) and Kemps’ ridley (lepidochelys kempii) turtles are just two of the five neotropical species of sea turtle that spend a portion of their migratory cycles along the coast of Veracruz, Mexico, and within the confines its reefs. Now, these turtles are facing a new threat – the expansion of the Port of Veracruz. To raise awareness of the risk posed to these threatened species, AIDA and the Mexican Center for Environmental Law (CEMDA) on September 22 presented a petition (in Spanish) before the Scientific Committee of the Inter-American Sea Turtle Convention (IAC), under which Mexico has obligations to protect turtles found within its borders. In the petition, we detailed the direct and indirect impacts that the expansion of the Port would have on the various turtle species and their habitat. We also mentioned that in the project’s environmental impact statement, the Veraruz Port Authority stated that the port expansion “will never have a direct effect on protected species.” They therefore failed to present protection measures for sea turtles, particularly the hawksbill, which is listed as threatened under both the Sea Turtle Convention and Mexican law. Our petition before the IAC requests they take measures to understand the threat and urge Mexico to act, including: conduct an investigation on the impacts the port expansion would have on the turtles and their habitat; conduct a site visit; make recommendations for the protection of the species and their habitat; and urge the Mexican government to apply precautionary measures while evaluating potential environmental impacts on the turtles. Also on September 22, alongside CEMDA, we delivered more than 36,000 signatures from a citizens’ petition urging the Secretariat of Environment & Natural Resources to revoke the environmental authorization granted for the Port’s expansion. The petition argues that the expansion project would put in danger two of Mexico’s natural treasures – the Veracruz Reef System and Los Tuxtlas Reserve, a natural protected area from which basaltic rock for the construction would be extracted. The permit has been approved without considering the severe environmental impacts it would have on the unique ecosystems of the region and the creatures that call them home. The Mexican government has thus violated national and international obligations to conserve biodiversity and protect its natural heritage. As long as the Port of Veracruz expansion project threatens sensitive species and ecosystems, we will continue to advocate through national and international bodies to stop it. Thank you for supporting our work to defend the health and biodiversity of the Veracruz Reef System!