Blog

September 22 2014 Freshwater Sources, Human Rights, Indigenous Rights, Large Dams

Brazil secures Belo Monte site, but not human rights of affected people

Time doesn’t stop and, unfortunately, nor does the construction of the Belo Monte Dam. Work is advancing at an impressive rate on the Xingu River, in the Brazilian Amazon; 65% of the dam is complete. As it grows, the ecosystem—and the lives of people living in the area—deteriorates. Construction of the gigantic dam has opened an enormous gash through the thick Amazonian vegetation. Seeing it from the air creates a feeling of helplessness. And on land, it’s frustrating to see that the situation of indigenous peoples, coastal communities, and residents of the city of Altamira worsens. Recently, AIDA lawyers, María José Veramendi Villa and Alexandre Andrade Sampaio, visited the Arara indigenous community, nestled in the Big Bend of the Xingu River. Once Belo Monte dams the river, it will reduce the river’s flow so drastically that fishing, the livelihood of the Arara, will no longer be possible. Furthermore, the Arara will lose the track that leads to their sacred sites. They await the arrival of vehicles and construction of a road and a suitable well, because the quality of drinking water is not the best. In Altamira, the deteriorating situation is similar. Veramendi and Sampaio went there too. Once dam construction began, the population of the city grew massively. This boom has overwhelmed health services and the sanitation system and, worse, led to an increase in cases of sexual violence and human trafficking. Norte Energia, the consortium of government and private enterprises building the dam, has caused pisions among the affected population by paying more for some lands than for others. Many people were forced to sell their homes at a minimum price before they were evicted. And the small cinderblock cubes built for the relocation of displaced families do not qualify as adequate housing. Relocation also involves a change in lifestyle: from fishing to farming or hauling bags of cement. "This frays the social fabric,” explained Veramendi. “We work daily, along with our colleagues in Brazil, to make clear in the country and internationally that what is happening in Belo Monte constitutes human rights violations. We are constantly working to compel the government of Brazil to comply with the precautionary measures issued by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights." On April 1, 2011, the Commission issued precautionary measures that Brazil should take to protect the life, health, and personal and cultural integrity of indigenous peoples in voluntary isolation; the health of other indigenous communities affected by the project; and demarcation of the ancestral lands of indigenous peoples. Our work, like the work of the human rights and environmental defenders we support in Brazil, is not easy. State security forces guard the construction site and Altamira. "We are surrounded, intimidated and harassed; there is no guarantee for our work," said Sampaio. With your help, we will continue fighting to see that the Belo Monte case progresses with the Commission, and that the Government of Brazil complies with its international human rights obligations rather than use the dam to bolster its electoral campaign at the cost of the environment and human welfare. Follow us on Twitter: @AIDAorg "Like" our page on Facebook: www.facebook.com/AIDAorg

September 22 2014

"We want the Green Climate Fund to follow the rules of procedure it has adopted"

AIDA attended the Latin American Carbon Forum 2014 in Bogotá, Colombia. There, our lawyer Andrea Rodríguez participated as a representative of civil society in a panel on the Green Climate Fund (GCF), a mechanism that will mobilize large amounts of resources to support adaptation and mitigation of climate change. Andrea answers a series of questions about the current situation and prospects of the GCF. - What are civil society’s expectations for the Fund? - We have the same expectations as the Fund. We want it to be a transparent, inclusive institution that is constant learning, as stated in Article 3 of its governing instrument. Its focus has to be driven by each country’s determination of what priorities should be funded. It must balance funding for adaptation and mitigation of climate change. We expect the Fund to promote social, environmental, economic, and development co-benefits and taking a gender sensitive approach; men and women are affected to the same degree by climate change. In short, we want the Green Climate Fund to follow the rules of procedure it has adopted. - How can a balance in funding for mitigation and adaptation be ensured? - Financing is given mostly for mitigation projects, despite the great need to fund projects for adaptation to climate change. In Bali, Indonesia, during the penultimate meeting of the Fund’s Board, it was decided that 50% of the funding will go to mitigation and 50% for adaptation. That decision was made and we must ensure that it is followed. Furthermore, in Latin America, development plans and climate change strategies that have been advanced have set adaptation financing as a priority. - How should civil society involve itself in the Fund? - We must go beyond design to implementation. The Fund's governing instrument provides in Article 71 that the Board needs to develop mechanisms to promote the participation of all stakeholders (vulnerable groups, women, civil society and indigenous groups) in the design, development and implementation of projects and programs financed by the Green Climate Fund. There is a mandate for civil society in all stages. The issue is relevant because the Fund will become operational soon and will have to create these participatory mechanisms at the national level, particularly when countries begin to name their national designated authorities (those that collateralize the projects or activities financed by the Fund). It needs to institutionalize these participatory processes. - How can one measure the effectiveness of a project to be funded? - The definition of indicators will be among the topics discussed at the next meeting of the GCF Board, but some are particularly important. In adaptation, we need to consider whether a project can help reduce the vulnerability of a community to climate change. As for mitigation, you have to measure the amount of emissions reduced. But the most important aspect is to measure co-benefits that a project or activity can generate: if it creates jobs, improves people’s quality of life, etc. This is because the Green Climate Fund aims to contribute to a paradigm shift that promotes sustainable development. Helping to improve quality of life is a change of this nature. Many times, projects that have positive climate benefits generate social, environmental, and economic problems. So it is essential that additional benefits are evident in social, environmental, and economic terms.

August 19 2014

Pilcomayo: El río de los pájaros herido por la minería

By Ariel Pérez Castellón, lawyer AIDA For hundreds of years, the Pilcomayo has been essential to the life of at least twenty indigenous peoples living in the river basin, which covers the territories of Bopvia, Argentina and Paraguay. Among these people are the Guarani, Weenhayek, Toba and Wichi. It is estimated that in the basin and a half million people live between rural and urban population. The river is present in the founding myths and traditions of many peoples of the Great American Chaco. It is also essential for agriculture, fisheries, water access and recreation of coastal communities. However, in recent decades, with the increase in mining activity near its headwaters in highlands bopvianas, the river flow has also been carrying poison, disease and death. Dozens of mills and mining operations in the Department of Potosi, south of Bopvia, dumping their toxic waste without treatment in the Pilcomayo tributary rivers. Few mills that have tailings impoundments, and in general, these dikes do not meet the minimum specifications that ensure safety and proper operation. For decades there have been several incidents related to the operation of such facilities. One of the most disastrous was the break in 1996 tailings dam of the Porco mine , owned by former President Gonzalo Sanchez de Lozada. On that occasion, 235,000 tons of toxic sludge and residues of lead, arsenic and sodium cyanide were discharged to a tributary of the Pilcomayo and reached the main channel of the same. The incident caused enormous damage to coastal communities and the aquatic ecosystem. Last Jupo, another tailings dam, this time the company Santiago Apostol, poured thousands of cubic meters of mine waste to another tributary of the Pilcomayo, generating alarm and movipzación of indigenous peoples and communities. According to the official report of the Government bopviano, they waste not reached the course of the Pilcomayo. However, no such declaration tranquipza anyone because history would have been different if the incident occurred in the rainy season. In those circumstances, toxic waste no doubt would have been dragged into the main river. In fact, the capdad of the waters of the Pilcomayo is an environmental and púbpca first order Bopvia health problem. Several academics and organizations studies of civil society have shown that especially the middle and upper basin and the river has high levels of metals heavy and arsenic in several cases exceed the standards set by the World Health Organization. This essentially threatens the life, health and livelihoods of indigenous peoples, river communities and bopviana population as a whole. Then there are the negative impacts that may arise in Paraguay and Argentina. Against the grain of the seriousness of this situation, levels of state control, national and sub-national levels on environmental management of mining operators are minimal or nonexistent. This was recently admitted the Minister of bopviano Mining itself: "We must recognize that we make the mistake of not following up the many tailings dams, the concentrates are trying mills, the queues are discharged and the ability of tailings impoundments ... ". Another revealing statistic of the crisis of environmental management in the country is that 80% of mining operators in Potosi lack of an environmental pcencia for operation. Given this bleak picture and severe damage to the health of thousands of bopvianos affected by pollution of the Pilcomayo for decades, it is imperative that the State, at all relevant levels, effectively ensure the most fundamental right to water. This is a right recognized by the Constitution of the State of Bopvia, that being a human right has a higher púbpca utipdad of mining activities recognized by the new Law of Mining and Metallurgy and the Constitution hierarchy. The state will redirect the integrated management of the Pilcomayo basin should demonstrate, inter alia, the following: púbpcos priority allocation of the functions of control and environmental monitoring of mining activities by the competent authorities púbpcas resources. Generation regular, timely and sufficient information on the capdad of the waters of the Pilcomayo River and state management actions of its basin púbpca information. Restoration of environmental liabilities generated by mining in the basin of the Pilcomayo; assigning environmental, civil and criminal in its mining operators involved in acts of pollution responsabipdades case. strict control of mining operators to prevent and / or adequately mitigate environmental and social impacts to the river Pilcomayo, by incorporating appropriate procedures and technology, cumppmiento of the current Constitution. Pilcomayo word comes from the Quechua words phisqu (bird) and mayu (river). It is the river of birds. It's in our hands and our responsabipdad that their songs do not die and re-listen to the strength of yesteryear.

July 28 2014

Raising people's needs in tackling climate change

Every day we hear a new story about a family affected by extreme changes in climate. Some suffer from severe droughts, others from serious rainfall and flooding, and still others from intense heat waves and forest fires. Local realities must be considered at the international level as governmental institutions decide how to provide finance for climate adaptation and mitigation. AIDA brings the concerns of communities most affected by this global issue to the attention of governments and financial institutions. We have the technical capacity to support governments’ decision making processes on climate change "They can rely on us to provide effective solutions based on our technical knowledge, research, work experience, and relationships with local communities. International decisions about project funding have direct impact on the national and local levels. Bad decisions will result in bad projects," explains Andrea Rodríguez, an AIDA attorney. Our commitment to protecting the interests of the most vulnerable communities has led us to follow closely development of the Green Climate Fund (GCF). This new institution is expected to channel most financial resources for climate change projects and programs in developing countries. We have participated in GCF board meetings around the world and have made local needs heard in consultations with the Secretariat. Last month we attended the annual meeting of the Climate Investment Funds (CIF) in Montego Bay, Jamaica. The CIF are multilateral climate finance funds that provide resources to 48 developing countries. We shared our experience in GCF discussions with participants and civil society observers. "It's important to share experiences of what works and what does not to ensure that civil society replicates successes and corrects failures. Civil society shares the common goal of achieving a paradigm shift in decisions that impact climate," says Rodriguez. In the first session of the CIF Stakeholder Day, Reaching into the Roots of Partnership: Experience from the Ground, panelists discussed lessons learned and next steps on effective stakeholder engagement in the CIF and other global funds. Panelist Andrea Rodriguez, Legal Advisor for the Inter-American Association for Environmental Defense-Americas, reflects on the session.

July 23 2014 Human Rights, Large Dams

Giving People a Voice on Hydropower Projects

Hydropower projects are on the rise in Latin America as governments seek to feed growing economies. But at what cost? The plants may harness the energy capacity of running water, a renewable resource. But poorly planned and implemented dams, especially large ones, can bring myriad harms to the environment and communities. They affect fish and water quality, and they increase emissions of methane, a gas that contributes to global warming. Flooding displaces people from their homes and communities. This costs them their jobs as farmers, fishermen and hunters – and for ethnic and peasant communities, even their cultures and traditions. AIDA works with individuals and communities to protect them from poorly conceived and developed projects by using the law to defend their right to a healthy environment. This month AIDA and other organizations submitted a brief (in Portuguese) to Brazil’s Supreme Federal Court. The information demonstrates that congressional approval of the Belo Monte Dam in 2005 is illegal because the government didn’t guarantee the affected communities in the Amazon their right to consultation and free, prior and informed consent. Some meetings were held after approval of the project, and then with just scant and incomprehensible information in foreign languages for the communities. There was also little forewarning to attend. It was like telling you that your front yard is to become a street after the diggers have already started removing the lawn. The dam – which is to be the world’s third largest – is under construction and already displacing people without anyone giving them a chance to say no to the project in their own front yard. This is the first time that our combined efforts have reached the Supreme Court for a final decision on Belo Monte, said AIDA attorney María José Veramendi Villa. If the court rules against the legality of the project, then construction will have to stop and the harms righted for failing to consult the communities beforehand. If the opposite happens, the project will continue – and so will we. We will continue to provide assistance to the Brazilian Prosecutor’s Office as it pursues more than a dozen other cases against Belo Monte. These are cases that can also advance to the highest court with the goal of protecting communities from this and other dams in the Amazon. Our efforts to help communities fight dam projects are gaining attention. The Personería of San Carlos (the municipal ombudsperson), a town in northwestern Colombia, contacted AIDA to provide expertise in international environmental and human rights law. They want help in preventing the granting of a license for construction of the El Porvenir II Dam on the Samaná Norte, the last undammed river in the area. AIDA attorney and human rights and the environment fellow, Ana María Mondragón, went there to speak at a public environmental hearing for the project. The good news is that the dam has yet to be approved, meaning that there is still time for the communities to find out what could happen and voice their concerns. The government will have to take the community input into consideration before approving the project, with the possibility that the developer may have to amend construction plans – or abandon them altogether. El Porvenir II will affect fishing, a main source of work and food for the largely poor people in San Carlos. It will also flood an area where many Colombians are seeking to recover the lands that they were forcibly displaced from as result of an internal armed conflict that started more than five decades ago. “We have entered at an early stage, before the project has been approved,” said Mondragón. “We intervened in the hearing to show the inconsistencies in the environmental impact assessment made by the company and the harms that the Porvenir II dam would have in the community. We hope this will help the authorities in their decision-making process to not grant the license.” With your help, we can keep assisting Latin American communities free of charge to exercise their right to say what happens on their land and defend themselves with the law.

June 24 2014

Our fight to protect the coral reefs and mangroves of Mexico goes beyond national borders

Coral reefs, the nurseries of the seas, are vital to the fisheries that provide food for millions of people. Mangrove forests also benefit people: they protect coastal communities from increasingly severe storm surges and help to mitigate climate change by absorbing huge amounts of carbon dioxide. But large infrastructure projects that ignore these benefits threaten some of these vitally important ecosystems. AIDA uses the law to protect coral reefs, mangroves and other wetlands. We have found that it’s not enough to fight at the local level, country by country. AIDA approaches defense at the ecosystem level, which is more effective. We engage in discussions with international authorities, bringing attention to the obligations that countries have to the world to preserve their marine and coastal environments. "What you get with these international legal actions is a strategy that weaves together various aspects of the case: legal, political, scientific and media. So we make the issue relevant not only to local decision makers, but also to international authorities. Public support is generated and consulting or certified experts speak out about it, "said Sandra Moguel, AIDA legal advisor. A prime example of this strategy for environmental protection is a case involving Mexico, a country rich in wetlands. In May AIDA alerted the Secretariat of the Ramsar Convention, an intergovernmental treaty for the protection of wetlands, about the possible breach of Mexico’s international obligations. Mexico’s government is considering approval of the proposed Las Cruces Dam, a hydroelectric project in Nayarit, a state in the country’s northwest. Among other damage, the project would alter the course of the San Pedro Mezquital River, which feeds Marismas Nacionales (National Wetlands), one of the most extensive mangrove systems in North America. National Wetlands are listed as wetlands of international importance under the Ramsar Convention. In 2010, diplomats from the Ramsar Convention recommended that the Mexican government advocate sustainable use of the wetland while assessing the project’s feasibility. We have alerted the Ramsar Secretariat that their recommendations would be ignored if Mexico gives a green light to a project that would irreversibly damage National Wetlands, biodiversity, and the communities that depend on that environment. By drawing the attention of international bodies, AIDA strengthens the efforts of our local partner organizations. AIDA has also employed this strategy to protect the unique Cabo Pulmo coral reef, in Baja California Sur. Since 2012, we have continually reminded the Mexican authorities that both the Ramsar Secretariat and the Unesco World Heritage Committee have asked them to consider the cumulative and indirect impacts of tourism projects proposed near the reef. Our arguments were added to those presented by our partners in Mexico to prevent authorization of Cabo Dorado, a mega-resort that would involve building a new city near the reef. This project is the third that tourism developers have attempted to build next to Cabo Pulmo. Construction would surely be fatal to the reef. In a victory that extends beyond Mexican borders, the government decided on May 29 to deny the environmental permit for Cabo Dorado. With your help, we will continue to bring the voice of local communities to international forums. We will continue to add value and support their struggle to preserve marine and coastal environments that benefit us all. Thanks!

June 24 2014

Astrid Puentes Lectures at American University

The link between protection of the environment and human rights isn’t always immediately obvious. In fact, international law didn’t begin to establish the human right to a healthy environment until the 1990s. But these are some of the things that can happen when the natural environment is harmed: We can lose our source of food. Our health can suffer. We may lose access to clean water. Our livelihoods can be destroyed if the land we farm or the sea we fish no longer supports a harvest. If a dam floods a village, people lose their homes. In some cases, these losses lead to the loss of a way of life—a culture. International law is clear: the right to food, water, work, home, personal safety, and culture are all protected human rights. That’s why AIDA uses international law to protect the human right to a healthy environment. The relationship between human rights and the environment is gaining wider understanding in the national and international environmental and legal communities. Indeed, American University’s Washington College of Law, in Washington D.C., invited AIDA Co-Executive Director Astrid Puentes Riaño to share her expertise on the subject in June. She gave a weeklong seminar on human rights and the environment in Latin America, available for students attending the summer program. Astrid also spoke on a panel, organized by the Academy of Human Rights of American University and AIDA, about how the two are linked in the specific case of the Belo Monte Dam. Belo Monte is a large hydropower dam under construction in Brazil. The dam will destroy rainforest, kill off plant and animal species, and increase the emission of greenhouse gases, worsening climate change. The human impact is dire. More than 20,000 people will be displaced (independent estimates double this number). Already communities are being stripped of their villages, their cultures, and the cemeteries of their ancestors to make way for the world’s third-largest hydropower dam. Many river dwellers have moved to cities where they find themselves alone and struggling to find new trades. “Our work is a constant David and Goliath battle. Sharing experiences with expert colleagues from the environment and human rights departments at one of the most prominent universities in the US was an honor” said Astrid Puentes Riaño, AIDA’s co-executive director. “It gives us hope that academia is recognizing this link, and is willing to study it. We look forward to continuing this kind of exchange, and to helping train more young lawyers about these issues.”

May 14 2014

Colombia must choose between gold and water: Al Gore

Colombia faces a pivotal choice for its future. It must choose between protecting its high-altitude moors as its water source for millions of people or authorizing large-scale mining in these fragile ecosystems. AIDA, together with its allied organizations, is working to convince the authorities to choose water and this cause recently won a new ally: Al Gore. The former U.S. vice president, a Nobel Peace Prize laureate for his success at raising awareness about climate change, brought up the issue of mining in the moors, known locally as páramos, in April. “Colombia must choose between the gold in the páramo and profits for a few people, or the drinking water that supplies all of its citizens,” he said at an international summit on the environment in Bucaramanga, a city in northeastern Colombia that gets its water from the Santurbán Páramo. We’ve been calling on the Colombian government to protect this moor and others around the country from mining, given that they provide 85% of the country’s water. Will this happen? By law, the government must keep mining out of the páramos. But to do this, their boundaries must first be mapped. This poses a problem. In April, the government unveiled its map showing that the Santurbán Páramo stretches over 42,000 hectares (104,000 acres). That’s more than the 11,000 hectares of previous estimates. But it’s only about half the 82,000 hectares measured by the Alexander von Humboldt Biological Resources Research Institute, an independent state research center that used a larger scale map than the government. The larger scale provides richer details that show how the moor extends further. The government has not adopted an official measurement, leaving important parts of the moor open to mining, an industry it is promoting to spur economic growth. But at what costs? Large-scale mining will cause irreversible damage to these flora-rich moors that not only supply water to millions of people but also help mitigate the effects of climate change by capturing carbon emissions. Gore was clear on what choice he recommends for Colombia or any country facing questions of economic growth versus environmental protect. “Without a planet, there is no economy that is worth anything,” he said. You can help us spread the message by making a donation and signing our petition so that we can continue the fight to save Colombia’s moors. Thank you!

April 28 2014

Frustration to hope: Finding the drive to continue from those you help

By María José Veramendi Villa, senior attorney, AIDA, @MaJoVeramendi I can get frustrated in my work as an environmental and human rights lawyer. It is frustrating to explain that the work we do on cases of human rights violations may not produce immediate results. It is frustrating to know that our work is a struggle that can take years to find justice for victims and induce change in state policies and our societies. It is frustrating to watch programs designed to protect human rights come under the influence of political interests. The dearth of resources for pursuing these cases is also frustrating. So too are the long waits for justice – or injustice. So what do we do when we get discouraged? My answer is to return to the origins, the basics and the very reason for our struggle and commitment: the victims. I relearned this lesson in March. On a trip to Washington D.C., I met two Brazilian fighters for the cause of their communities: Alaíde Silva and Josías Manhuary Munduruku. Alaíde had traveled for days from Buriticupu, a municipality in the northeastern state of Maranhão, and Josías from Jacareacanga, a municipality in the northern state of Pará, to participate in a hearing (in Spanish and Portuguese) before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights. They came to present information on how Brazilian judges are continuing to use a law from the country’s 1964-85 dictatorship to violate their right to access to justice. The law is called Security Suspension. It allows the federal government to request the suspension of judicial rulings. The government has used Security Suspension to invalidate rulings that favor the rights of indigenous peoples and other communities against the development of mega-projects like the Belo Monte hydropower dam in the Amazon. The government can do this on the basis that any adverse rulings to “development” projects are threats to national security or to social and economic order. At the hearing, Josías described an imminent threat to the Munduruku indigenous community of 11,000 people in 118 villages. The Brazilian government plans to build a hydropower complex (in Spanish) on the Tapajós River and its tributaries—and has not followed a law requiring it to consult the Munduruku and to obtain their prior, free and informed consent. He said flooding from the project threatens to devastate his people’s land and the survival of their community and culture. He explained how a judge revoked a favorable court decision for his people, allowing the project to continue in open violation of their rights. “We want respect for our land, our river, our sacred sites, our cemetery. And want to be consulted!” Josías said. Alaíde spoke about a similar plight. He explained how Vale, a Brazilian mining company, is enlarging the Carajás Railroad to the detriment of 1.7 million people in 27 municipalities in Maranhão and Pará and in at least 100 indigenous, Afro-descendants, peasant and urban communities on the banks of the railway. The railroad stretches 900 kilometers from the Carajás mines in Pará to the Ponta da Madeira Maritime Terminal in Maranhão. It transports iron, manganese, copper and coal. With the expansion, Vale will duplicate 115 kilometers of the line to increase transport capacity and the flow of minerals. Alaíde said the impacts are vast. These range from the noise pollution caused by the grinding of the train wheels on the tracks and from the train horn, to the running over of people and animals, to the displacement of communities, villages and families without fair compensation. Alaíde provided details on how Vale terrorizes the population, co-opts leaders, intimidates people and spies on social movements, all in the name of meeting its own interests. As with Tapajós, Security Suspension was used to revoke a court ruling that had favored the communities. That decision had ordered Vale to suspend construction and conduct an environmental impact assessment with a detailed analysis of all the existing indigenous and Afro-descendant communities along the railroad. But with Security Suspension, this ruling was overturned with the argument that suspending the project would affect the economic interests of the state. These are just two examples of the impact of Security Suspension. There are many more instances in which the rights of communities and people have been affected by major “development” projects justified by “economic interest, public order and safety.” We hope that cases like these will expose the impact that Security Suspension has on the human rights of hundreds of people and communities, and we hope that this will drive international organizations to call on Brazil to change this legal instrument. Thanks to everyone who worked so hard to make the hearing possible. Thanks to our colleagues in Brazil without whose work and commitment Alaíde and Josías would never have been able to make the long journey. And thanks to these two Brazilian human rights fighters for a lesson that drives away the fog of frustration and allows the sun to shine again. I want to dedicate this post to my dear former colleague Joelson Cavalcante, who recently left this world to become a being of light. With him I visited the Xingu River in the Brazilian Amazon for the first time, and I will never forget his happiness and his big smile when, after a year outside his country, he could once again swim in those waters. In his memory, the fight continues.

April 10 2014 Accountability and Transparency, Climate Change

COP20: A chance to fight climate change

The world is poised for more poverty, hunger and disease as flooding, heat waves, storms and droughts increase. This is how the newest report of the the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change describes humanity´s near future. That’s why AIDA is helping Latin American policymakers to influence decisions about climate change responses at the highest levels of international law. We’re building their capacity for influence by developing recommendations and disseminating information. This year Latin America has the best opportunity yet to put its needs on the international climate change agenda. In December, Lima will host the main session of climate negotiations, the 20th Conference of the Parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (COP20). The event’s mission is to advance the draft of a new binding climate agreement to be signed at the Paris climate conference in 2015. To make the most of this opportunity, AIDA is supporting policymakers – government officials, negotiators and members of international financial institutions – and civil society organizations. Our objectives are to help them participate more effectively in the climate negotiations, to educate them about options for improvements in international law, and to encourage them to create solutions and press their governments to take immediate action. In March, we took part in Climate Change: Progress and Prospects, an international forum held in the Peruvian Congress. Peru is considering creating a climate change bill, and at the event we shared our experiences in international climate finance. We highlighted the need for Latin American institutions to improve their ability to access funds for climate change adaptation and mitigation projects. We’re also advocating a commitment to long-term financing as a chief component of the new climate agreement that will be discussed at COP20. If countries know that economic resources will become and remain available, they can plan viable actions to help communities most vulnerable to climate change. In February, AIDA and our partner organizations held a webinar on the Green Climate Fund (GCF), a financial mechanism of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. The GCF was founded to mobilize large amounts of public and private money to support climate change responses in developing countries. AIDA is closely monitoring the GCF to make sure that its contribution is effective. Your renewed support will help us to do even more to generate effective international actions that reduce the severity of climate change. As we actively prepare for COP20 and continue our efforts to promote sustainable energy alternatives at the regional level, we will keep you informed of our progress. Thank you!