Blog
Headed for Egypt: What can we expect from COP27?
By Javier Dávalos, Liliana Ávila and Verónica Méndez* The context in which the 27th United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP27) is taking place—from November 6 to 18 in Sharm El-Sheikh, Egypt—is not particularly encouraging. It will not be easy to address the return to intensive use of fossil fuels in several countries—largely motivated by the economic crisis from the pandemic and the conflict between Russia and Ukraine—and the growing reports of increasingly intense and frequent extreme events due to climate change. At the same time, however, the climate movement is growing stronger, along with the need for systemic and concrete changes. COP27 is a new opportunity for nations to respond with action to the demands of their citizens. At the previous COP in Glasgow, leaders decided that countries should adopt more ambitious measures to combat climate change and comply with the Paris Agreement: to limit global warming to far below 2°C, preferably at 1.5°C, above pre-industrial levels. AIDA will participate in COP27 as an accredited observer, along with our allies, to advocate once again for strong progress on climate action. What is it that most encourages us to participate? Below are some of the main advances we expect from COP27. 1. More Ambitious Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) NDCs are how national governments communicate and measure the targets they will adopt to confront the climate crisis. In his first report, Ian Fry, the UN Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights in the context of climate change, stated that "the global response to reduce greenhouse gas emissions has been wholly inadequate." In the Glasgow Climate Pact, countries reaffirmed their commitment to limit the global average temperature increase to 1.5°C and to increase the ambition of their NDCs. It is therefore imperative that all countries update their NDCs (only 24 have done so), so that they ensure the inclusion of concrete and ambitious measures and actions. Doing so ensures that countries will continue to make progress and comply with their common, but differentiated, responsibilities as established by the Paris Agreement. 2. Financing for Loss and Damage: Now! Climate change is generating widespread loss and damage. Measures to mitigate and adapt to these losses are late in arriving, leading to a global human rights crisis. States must address this situation in a committed manner. Special Rapporteur Ian Fry notes that there is a need to create a financing mechanism to help people recover from climate change impacts that are beyond their capacity to adapt. In Glasgow there was no consensus on the creation of such a mechanism. The demand for COP27 is to include the issue in the discussion and to push for the adoption of a financing mechanism with strict operating criteria, a human rights perspective, and clear accountability mechanisms. It is also vital to have measurable results on the working of the Santiago Network on Loss and Damage, created at COP25. Demands regarding loss and damage will become an increasingly relevant issue. A strong climate movement, driven mainly by the countries of the South, is arriving in Egypt to ensure progress. 3. Promoting a Just Energy Transition The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), in its sixth report on mitigation, indicated that the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions requires significant and urgent transitions, including a substantial reduction in the overall use of fossil fuels. This will perhaps be one of the most debated issues at the conference. Unfortunately, following the Russian invasion of Ukraine, countries that had made progress in the decarbonization of the energy sector have increasingly turned back to fossil fuel production in the face of high energy prices. In addition, there is increased pressure on Latin America to continue exporting fossil fuels. Energy transition is not only an urgent necessity, however, it is also an opportunity to promote justice and equity for the people and species that inhabit the planet. We must move toward decarbonization but we must do so in a just manner, with a comprehensive, democratic and pluralistic transformation process. At COP27, it’s expected that countries will be evaluated on the progress of their commitments to phase out coal-fired power generation and fossil fuel subsidies, as well as their progress toward global reduction of methane emissions. 4. A Conference Free of Corporate Control and Available to All Voices The path to climate justice and many of the issues being addressed at the climate conferences require a diversity of voices, many of which face significant barriers to being heard. Added to this is a disproportionate presence of industries and corporations with agendas aimed directly at defending business interests over the common good and the planet. This creates serious challenges toward achieving more ambitious progress. Rapporteur Fry rightly pointed out that conference venues "are increasingly expensive and difficult for indigenous peoples and civil society organizations to attend." Civil society has expressed its firm opposition to the fact that the most polluting actors are both judge and jury in the matter. The specific demand is for a review of the sponsorship guidelines so that climate conferences do without the contributions of major polluters and so that, starting with COP27, there is a truly equitable inclusion of all actors, especially those who are on the front line of the climate crisis and suffer directly from its consequences. The climate struggle is here to stay. It is a growing and vibrant movement that will not stop until real commitments are made. According to the IPCC, COP27 keeps open the "window of opportunity to ensure a livable and sustainable future." It’s the space where actors converge to defend their interests with that purpose in mind. Governments and other participants must see the climate conferences as a space to advance towards climate justice, to avoid reaching a point of no return, and to put people and the planet at the center of the climate conversation. *Javier Dávalos is coordinator of AIDA's Climate Program, Liliana Ávila is coordinator of the organization's Human Rights and Environment Program, and Verónica Méndez is an attorney with the Climate Program.
Read more
Victims of toxic contamination in La Oroya take their voice before the Inter-American Court
There’s no deadline that won’t be met. And so, after a 20-year quest for justice, the habitants of the small Andean city of La Oroya, Peru appeared before the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. On October 12 and 13, the judges of the high international court heard their complaint against the government of Peru for the serious violation of human rights derived from a metal smelter that has contaminated La Oroya for almost 90 years. The city has been documented as one of the most polluted places on the planet. "The contamination from the La Oroya Metallurgical Complex has permeated every component of its inhabitants' environment: the water they drink, the soil they walk on, the air they breathe, the schoolyards and the mountains that frame their living environment," said AIDA's attorney Liliana Avila, as she presenting closing arguments in the case. Brave Testimonies At the hearing in Montevideo, Uruguay, three affected former residents of La Oroya gave their testimony. They are just a few of the more than 80 courageous people who filed the lawsuit—those residents willing to defend their right to live in a healthy environment despite the context of harassment they have faced because of it. "The period in which the metal smelter developed was disastrous. The toxic gases emanating from the complex created a thick mist that turned into a dandruff that coated the faces of the children,” recalled Rosa Amaro, a 74-year-old mother who chaired the Movement for Health in La Oroya, where she lived until 2017. “We tried to survive, but the government was like a father who turned his back to us.” Dressed in warm clothes and a woolen hat, Rosa's face, body and voice bore the indelible marks of the passing years, deteriorating health and the fear that forced her to leave her hometown. "They call us enemies of La Oroya." In tears, Rosa expressed to the court her desire to return home and to see her name cleared of all stigmas. "Our struggle is not for one, it is for an entire population". The case represents many more residents of La Oroya who, for fear of reprisals, are not named in the lawsuit. After testifying, Rosa felt relieved of a heavy burden and with enough strength to continue. The population of La Oroya has breathed multiple toxic substances that, according to scientific evidence, cause serious risks to human health. The contamination with lead and other heavy metals has burst into their respiratory system, traveled through their bloodstream and has been deposited imperceptibly in their vital organs. "I didn’t have a childhood because I spent it locked up in four walls, not because they wouldn’t let me go out, but because of the discomfort, because our throats were itchy,” Maricruz Aliaga, 28, told the court. “When we went to school, my mother protected us [from the ashes] with a hat." The contamination has affected her memory and is the reason why, even today, her body is paralyzed several times a year. “In Huancayo, I could breathe.” As a child, Maricruz’s vacations to the neighboring city made her realize that it was not normal to watch the plants she took to school die after just 15 days. Following a lifetime of hostility due to her family’s activism, she now lives in another city, and the effects on their health were her main motivation to study nursing. The toxic elements from the smelter remain in the bodies of those who lived and grew in La Oroya. Their presence has caused health problems, many of them irreversible, and may generate new illnesses in the future. "The only thing we want, since we are no longer going to enjoy good health—that is already done, my health is already destroyed—is for future generations to enjoy good health," Yolanda Zurita added in her testimony before the court. "That will be our reward, our satisfaction; that is what we are looking for." The road to justice Reaching this point has not been easy. On behalf of the victims, and with the support of the Asociación Pro Derechos Humanos (APRODEH), in 2006 AIDA filed the international complaint against the Peruvian government. Finally, in October 2021—15 years after the process began—the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) established the government's responsibility for right violations and referred the case to the Inter-American Court. Preparation for the hearing began at that time and intensified in the weeks leading up to it. The long hours of work were reflected in the solidity with which we demonstrated that the government is responsible for violating the rights to life, health, personal integrity, children and a healthy environment of the inhabitants of La Oroya. At the hearing we presented four main arguments: The existence of serious environmental contamination, The risk and causal link with the damages derived from that contamination, The government’s knowledge of that situation, and The absence of urgent and effective measures to respond to it. In addition, we called in experts whose testimony amply supported our allegations. Two of them presented their findings at the hearing. "The duty of care does not arise with clinical harm, but with the risk of harm," emphasized Marcos Orellana, UN Special Rapporteur on the human rights implications of exposure to hazardous substances and toxic waste. In addition, Marisol Yañez, a psychosocial expert, demonstrated based on 61 in-depth interviews, four focus groups and psychometric tests the existence of "environmental suffering," aggravated by impunity and stigmatization. After the hearing, there remains the written presentation of the arguments and a potential visit to La Oroya by the judges of the Court. The sentence, which cannot be appealed, is expected within the next six months. The importance of the case goes beyond the Peruvian context and represents a historic opportunity to establish a key precedent for all of Latin America. "This is the first case before this court with the potential to develop in-depth violations of the right to a healthy environment as the result of government action regarding public and private companies,” explained Jorge Meza Flores, deputy executive secretary of the IACHR's Petitions and Cases System. Taking into account what is at stake is undoubtedly fundamental when the national debate around La Oroya has prioritized, even in these days, the possible reactivation of the metal smelter over the protection of the fundamental rights and health of an entire population.
Read more
Presentes: Here and now for climate justice
Hope, too, needs a space when we talk about the climate crisis. While it’s true that humanity is facing our greatest collective challenge, it’s also true that there are people, communities, and organizations taking action, right now, to cocreate a better future. We cannot deny that we are already living with the impacts of the climate crisis. Yet we must speak honestly and urgently about them, without paralyzing ourselves in the process. Sharing information is a means to understanding our planet and creating meaningful conversations so that today, in the present moment, our societies can begin to build a more just tomorrow. Presentes was born as a collective and collaborative effort to change the narratives around climate justice. It’s a Latin American alliance that seeks to bring the climate conversation to a wider audience while simultaneously strengthening alliances among those already working for the cause. The challenge lies in demonstrating that when we talk about the energy transition –a fundamental step towards a better future– we must also talk about respecting human rights and the rights of nature, and caring for all forms of life on this planet. What better way to show this than by telling the stories of those working for it every day? Presentes is coordinated by AIDA, with the goal of bringing together civil society organizations, local communities, environmental defenders and citizens from across Latin America. Toward a better tomorrow What can we do to address the climate crisis? What is clean energy? How can we build a more just world for all beings, and what does that look like? There are some of the questions we’ll be exploring, together, through the Presentes platforms. Our goal is to extend this conversation to people from across Latin American, in all phases of their own climate journey. As a starting point, the founding organizations signed a manifesto recognizing that, to achieve a society with climate justice, it is essential to recognize our role in this new environmental reality, and make way for a just change that leaves no one behind, that is fueled by new forms of energy, and that responds to the call of those people who, with dignity and determination, continue to fight for the defense of life on Earth. View this post on Instagram A post shared by Presentes (@presentesorg) These are the pillars of Presentes and the point from which we can, from our own focuses and starting points, begin to visualize a better future for all the beings who live on this Earth. Join your voice to Presentes! Each participant, whether an organization or an individual, helps to enrich the ecosystem of sharing and solidarity that is forming around Presentes. Beginning from where you are now, you can: Add your organization to the alliance. By doing so, you’ll work with the diverse groups that form the Presentes, amplify your own organization's work, and receive a biweekly digital newsletter with valuable information to strengthen your communication efforts. Join the conversation in our WhatsApp group to receive free content to learn more about the climate crisis and how we confront it, together. Follow Presentes on Instagram and Facebook and help the content reach beyond our network, into yours. Because now is the only time there is, it’s the time to be present.
Read more
An alliance for clean air in Latin America is born
In the face of environmental injustices, like poor air quality and its harm to human health, our societies respond together and organize in similar ways, without even knowing it. This was one of the takeaways from the Latin American Meeting for Clean Air, which in early August brought together researchers, government officials, youth leaders, civil society representatives and international cooperation agencies from Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Mexico and Peru. They met with three main objectives: to strengthen the link between air quality and climate justice, to exchange lessons learned, and to build networks for international collaboration. "Poor air quality and related health problems are a common problem in Latin America, knowing no borders or territorial boundaries," explained Anaid Velasco, Research Manager at the Mexican Center for Environmental Law (CEMDA). According to the World Health Organization, air pollution affects close to 90 percent of people living in urban areas around the world. Despite the magnitude of the problem, public actions and policies to improve the air we breathe are not fully standardized. In addition, air quality indices across the region are not uniform and do not allow people to be adequately informed of the dangers of air pollution in different environments. This represents a problem and, at the same time, an opportunity to collaboratively create and refine tools. Aware of the opportunity, meeting participants founded the Latin American Coalition for Clean Air (ALAIRE) to respond to three primary goals: To position a narrative that makes air quality a strategic priority in the public health and climate crisis management agendas in Latin America. To influence authorities and promote public policies that contribute to an improved management of the sources that contribute to poor air quality in the region. To advocate for conditions for civil society and the business sector to become involved in compliance with regulations, policies and the improvement of air quality in the continent. "The creation of this coalition is a fundamental step towards improving the air we breathe, across the region," Velasco said. "CEMDA is very proud to be part of it as clean air is a fundamental condition to guaranteeing the human right to a healthy environment." The Latin American Meeting for Clean Air was organized by AIDA, El Derecho a No Obedecer (a project of Corporación Otraparte), Trébola Organización Ecológica, Coalición Respirar, El Poder del Consumidor and the Heinrich Böll Foundation. It had open activities attended by 200 people, as well as closed meetings to reach agreements among the key organizations. The meeting served to reaffirm that the fight for clean air is also the fight to reduce greenhouse gases and confront the climate crisis, as well as a necessity to guarantee the right to health of people in the region. The event also confirmed the importance of citizen science, in which individuals are working to demonstrate the true levels of exposure to poor air quality in different cities in the region, in turn highlighting the urgency to act. The newly formed coalition will empower the efforts of citizens, academics, organizations and other actors, while contributing to the achievement of regional agreements for the development and implementation of public policies that improve air quality and protect human health.
Read more
The Mapuche: in defense of ancestral territory in Argentina
In the south of the province of Mendoza, Argentina, several communities belonging to the Mapuche people—one of the 39 self-recognized indigenous peoples throughout the country—have come together in the Malalweche Territorial Identity Organization to defend their rights, way of life and territorial integrity from extractive, energy and tourism activities and projects. One of the threats that these communities are currently facing is the advance of the exploration and exploitation of unconventional hydrocarbons through fracking. In 2018, the government of Mendoza issued Decree 248, which regulates fracking activities in the province. Before issuing the norm, it overlooked the right of the Mapuche communities in the area to be consulted and to give their free, prior and informed consent. It then made the consultation conditional on the communities having legal recognition of rights over their territory. Since then, the Malalweche Territorial Identity Organization has been fighting a court battle to have the decree declared unconstitutional. The lawsuit, initiated by the Oikos Environmental Network Association, is backed by national and international environmental organizations, including the Association for the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights-Xumek, the Environment and Natural Resources Foundation (FARN), AIDA and Earthjustice. The Mapuche communities are tireless in their struggle. The reason is simple: their strength comes from what they protect. It comes from their intimate connection to the territory and all that it holds. A broader vision of territory As in the case with indigenous peoples across the American continent, territories of the Mapuche people are rich in natural resources, which causes large interests to set their eyes on them, ignoring or wanting to ignore those who legitimately inhabit them. For the indigenous communities, territory is not limited to geographical space, but is conceived as the wider space from which human activities, such as grazing paths, emerge and converge. Rivers, mountains and animals are essential elements of the ancestral territory of the Mapuche people. They are distinctive parts of their culture. "These elements also make up the transhumance—a type of pastoralism that consists of seasonal movement along migratory routes—of the people who move, who go from one place to another," explains Gabriel Jofré, a traditional authority and spokesperson for Malalweche. "Today the territory is limited by private property, which makes you settle in a place; our parents used to say that you go where the territory takes you.” The intrusion and territorial usurpation by dominant and oppressive elites —at the beginning of the 20th century—led to the exodus of members of the Mapuche people, the dispersion of others and the silence of many more for fear of repression. In defense of community life Faced with the environmental, social and economic impacts of the intrusion of business activities in the ancestral territory of the Mapuche, the organization Malalweche promotes access to indigenous community property. Although the Argentine State recognizes in its Constitution the ethnic and cultural pre-existence of indigenous peoples and has ratified international conventions that oblige it to respect and guarantee their rights, the legal recognition of the rights of Mapuche communities to indigenous territories faces administrative obstacles and delays due to bureaucratic processes. "That is why, to avoid legal obstacles, we have developed the strategy of creating productive cooperatives," explained Gabriel. Kume Matru food products factory, a cooperative enterprise, was inaugurated on June 23, the date on which Winoj Tripantu, or the beginning of the Mapuche year, is celebrated. Kume Matru is a clear example of the versatility of these communities to walk the path of sharing and bringing together their own needs and those of others; to deliver not only food, but also the whole chain of hands that made it possible. "The people who recover these processes are a reflection of the ancestral forces that are in the territory of the pullü, the spirit of our grandparents," said Gabriel. "It is our children who begin to recover what at some point was cut off, these are processes that must be protected in order for that to happen." In line with this need, last March, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights established that, in a context of climate crisis and environmental deterioration, "the States have the duty to title, delimit and demarcate the collective ancestral territory, attending to the particular characteristics of the specific human group and avoiding granting concessions for projects that may affect the territories in titling, delimitation and demarcation processes without a process of consultation and consent". The norms are clear, both domestic and international. States must guarantee the rights of indigenous peoples, avoiding governmental acts and/or judicial rulings that could affect them, and ensuring that economic development is sustainable and respectful of environmental integrity. Let us recover the legacy of the original peoples, who teach us to live in harmony with nature, as parts of the whole, interconnected with their forces, from which our own must also emerge as a renewed impulse to defend our common home.
Read more
Lessons on protecting the right to a healthy environment
A healthy environment implies, among other things, breathing clean air, having access to clean water and quality food, and having a decent place to live. Until recently, the human right to a healthy environment was recognized only at the national level in most countries of the continent. Then, on July 28th, in a historic resolution, the United Nations voted unanimously to recognize a clean, healthy and sustainable environment as a universal human right. The decision is a significant step in the long and complex process of guaranteeing the right to a healthy environment in practice, which has been part of AIDA's story since our inception. "For nearly 25 years, we have invoked the right to a healthy environment to defend people in Latin America from environmental impacts that threaten their lives and dignity," explained Gladys Martínez de Lemos, our executive director. AIDA has always worked to highlight the link between a healthy environment and fundamental human rights such as those to integrity, life, and health. "In international law, it has taken time to assume this relationship, which for the AIDA has been undeniable from the start," added Liliana Ávila, senior attorney. "Our approach to international law begins with those affected and, based on that proximity, focuses on the communities whose rights have been most impacted by environmental degradation." What we’ve learned As an essential part of our efforts and over the years, we have learned that: The right to a healthy environment is increasingly included in Constitutions, laws and regional justice systems. This has empowered individuals and communities to demand its defense, as well as motivated judges to integrate it into their decisions. Strategic litigation—a combination of legal, communications, social mobilization and advocacy tools—is especially important in promoting the protection of fundamental human rights. The climate crisis has exacerbated the impacts of environmental degradation on the enjoyment of human rights and cases have tripled in number. This has brought with it the need to rely more on comprehensive and less on case-by-case strategies. Despite important advances, there are still large compliance debts for the right to a healthy environment to materialize in practice. The main challenge is the lack of implementation of court rulings. At the same time, the link between a healthy environment and human rights has served a variety of purposes, including the following: Demonstrating that the right to a healthy environment and other rights essential to life are indivisible. Demanding that States comply with their international human rights obligations, especially the application of the principles of prevention and precaution. Promoting the guarantee of access rights in environmental matters such as the right to information and participation. Our most emblematic cases While defending the right to a healthy environment is present in all our work, there are emblematic cases in which AIDA has helped establish key precedents by guaranteeing it. Restoration of rights for residents of La Oroya, Peru Our work as an international environmental organization began in 1998 with this case. Since then, we’ve worked to demonstrate how the violation of the right to a healthy environment—due to air pollution with heavy metals from a smelter—has violated the rights to life and health of residents of the city of La Oroya, Peru. We’ve shown how the impacts have been differentiated for women, children and the elderly. And we’ve demanded that the Peruvian State take urgent measures to guarantee the rights of the affected population. In 2005, we took the case to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, which in September 2021 brought it before the Inter-American Court after establishing the international responsibility of the State. It will be one of the first cases to centrally address the indivisible relationship between a healthy environment and other human rights. A healthy environment as a fundamental right for human existence In November 2017, in response to a consultation made by Colombia, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights established that a healthy environment is an autonomous right, "fundamental to the existence of humanity." It also recognized the impact of climate change on the effective enjoyment of human rights, especially for the most vulnerable populations such as indigenous peoples, children and people living in extreme poverty. In the framework of the consultation, AIDA presented our observations and participated in the hearing before the Court. We demonstrated that the implementation of large infrastructure projects could affect the environment to such an extent that it would put life and personal integrity, among other human rights, at risk. Our contribution made clear the link between human rights and the environment. Access to justice for people affected by environmental damage When Veracruz residents defended the Veracruz Reef in court against damage from a port expansion, AIDA presented technical and legal evidence supporting recognition of the rights to a healthy environment and access to justice. Together, these obligate the government to allow anyone whose fundamental rights are threatened by environmental degradation the possibility of achieving justice, regardless of whether their connection to the threatened ecosystem is indirect or remote. We directly contributed to the Mexican Supreme Court’s ruling in February 2022, in which the Court determined that authorities violated the right to a healthy environment of the people of Veracruz by authorizing the port project. "The UN's recognition of the right to a healthy environment as a universal human right is undoubtedly an impetus for the construction of new key precedents for its protection," said Daniela García, AIDA attorney. It’s also an impetus for states to strengthen their policies and legislation focused on environmental protection, as well as to enshrine this right in their legal frameworks. And it’s a tool for people and organizations that defend the environment and human rights to strengthen their work. At AIDA, we are clear about this, and we reaffirm our commitment to our mission of strengthening people's capacity to guarantee their individual and collective right to a healthy environment.
Read more
Brazilian court reaffirms the power of litigation to strengthen climate action
In July, Brazil's high court ruled that the government has a constitutional duty to allocate the necessary economic resources to support the operation of its Climate Fund, a tool created to combat the climate crisis, which has been paralyzed in recent years. With this ruling, the Supreme Federal Court resolved the first climate litigation in its history and set an important precedent for Brazil and the world. The decision equates the Paris Agreement—which seeks to strengthen the global response to the climate emergency—with a human rights treaty, granting it a higher status than ordinary laws and other inferior norms such as Executive Branch decrees. This may give way for courts and judges in other Latin American countries to make the same recognition. "The Supreme Federal Court created a privileged framework of protection for climate change mitigation and adaptation, one that ensures one of the fundamental pillars of climate action: financing," explains Marcella Ribeiro, an AIDA attorney. "Furthermore, it made clear that the Executive Branch, by restricting resources that by law are destined for climate action, is failing to comply with international agreements and conventions on human rights to which Brazil is a party." The Brazilian Socialist Party, the Socialism and Liberty Party, the Workers’ Party and the Sustainability Network Party filed the lawsuit over the Brazilian government’s failure to provide resources to the Climate Fund in 2020, with support from the Climate Observatory and the Alana Institute. Litigation as a strategic tool The case of the Climate Fund in Brazil demonstrates that strategic climate litigation is an effective and necessary way to help the continent's governments and companies meet their climate commitments. In its most recent report, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) highlighted that climate-related litigation is on the rise and, in some cases, has influenced the results and ambition of climate governance, understood as the way in which different actors—state, civil society, academia and the private sector—define, implement and monitor actions aimed at addressing the causes and consequences of climate change. "In the global south, Brazil is one of the countries where climate litigation is developing most strongly," highlights Javier Dávalos, AIDA senior attorney. "The country is characterized by a growing ecosystem of litigants and organizations that are taking the climate fight to court." Brazil's push for climate litigation in the region is critical because the country is home to 65 percent of the Amazon, a key ecosystem for global climate regulation and one that is at serious risk. Brazil emits the most carbon dioxide of any Latin American nation, with deforestation representing the largest source of these emissions. In this sense, it is fundamental that one of the judges who heard the Climate Fund case explicitly pointed out the large increase in deforestation in the Amazon in 2021— the highest in 15 years: more than 22 percent, and a total area of 13,235km². It is therefore essential to demand in court that the Brazilian state fulfill its obligations to protect the Amazon and the global climate. The importance of financing solutions Transitioning to a zero carbon economy and avoiding the worst physical impacts of climate change requires investing nearly $125 billion USD by 2050, according to the Net Zero Financing Roadmaps study commissioned by the United Nations High Level Champions. These resources must come from two complementary sources, private and public financing. Government financing of climate action represents a relevant public policy and thus must conform to a country's laws. In its ruling, the Brazilian Supreme Federal Court recognized the Climate Fund as the main federal instrument for financing climate action and meeting national greenhouse gas emission reduction targets. It also noted that the government kept the fund paralyzed for two years. Considering that the resources intended to fight the climate crisis seek to materialize fundamental human rights, the court concluded that the government couldn’t restrict them. "Guaranteeing the allocation of resources for climate action means setting a clear limit from which we cannot retreat," Ribeiro said. "Despite the clear violation of the Brazilian state's duties regarding the right to a healthy environment, reflected in the dismantling of environmental norms and institutions, the Brazilian Supreme Court's ruling put a brake on the erosion of the legal protection of the environment and climate in the country." Learn about this and other cases on AIDA’s Plataforma de Litigio Climático para América Latina y el Caribe.
Read more
Examining the obstacles to energy transition in Latin America
The climate crisis and its impacts on human rights require the governments of Latin America to design and implement laws, public policies, and other measures aimed at protecting the lives and integrity of their people. In the region most threatened by global warming, they must do so through mitigation, adaptation and attention to the losses and damages already caused. Given that the current energy system based on fossil fuels is the main cause of the climate crisis, as well as the inequalities that are closely linked to it, the framework for climate action in the Americas must be that of a just energy transition. The energy transition is an opportunity for the continent to abandon old energy production models characterized by large social and environmental impacts, and to move towards environmentally and climatically sustainable methods, while respecting the human rights of the communities and sectors involved. Several countries in the region are failing to integrate this perspective. The case of Colombia exemplifies a risky trend for the region—the government is currently promoting a host of climate-aggravating projects, which deepen dependence on fossil fuels, as useful to the energy transition. Such regressive measures include: the expansion of coalmines in operation or the opening of new mines under the argument that the export of the mineral will finance the transition; and the favoring of natural gas exploitation through tax benefits and the easing of environmental permitting processes, under the false premise that gas is a clean energy source. Sounding the alarm Given the worrying panorama in Colombia, AIDA will be drafting and distributing a series of Urgent Alerts that call attention to projects, public policies and regulations that hinder a just transition, and deepen dependence on fossil fuels. They will be collective alerts, supported by other international organizations that, like AIDA, seek climate justice and work in defense of environmental and human rights. Each alert will be sent to the national authorities in charge of the measure in question. Geared toward promoting reflections on how to advance in the just energy transition, each alert will include public policy and regulatory recommendations based on the State's international obligations and commitments on climate, environmental and human rights issues. In each case, the message is clear—by continuing with the promotion, extraction and use of gas and coal, the Colombian State would be failing to comply with these obligations. The first alert calls attention to the potential definitive diversion of the Bruno stream in the department of La Guajira to expand production at and revenue from El Cerrejón, the largest open-pit coal mine in Latin America and one of the ten largest in the world. The project not only implies an increase in greenhouse gas emissions—coal is responsible for 44 percent of global carbon dioxide emissions—but is also a threat to the rights to water, food security and health of the Wayuu indigenous communities that depend on the stream. A regional scope The measures adopted by the Colombian State may well reflect the situation in other countries of the region, or be replicated in them. Several alerts will refer to the exploitation of hydrocarbons through fracking, a controversial technique advancing blindly in Colombia and other Latin American countries. Another will warn of the use of hydrogen, promoted as a viable and clean energy alternative. In Colombia there is already a public policy route to advance with its implementation and two pilot projects underway. Hydrogen production results from burning coal or gas at high temperatures. Recent studies warn that this requires capturing and storing carbon dioxide, so the alternative depends on being able to store carbon indefinitely and avoid leakage into the atmosphere. In addition, hydrogen production is energy-intensive and involves the emission of gases during the heating and pressurization process, as well as the use of natural gas as fuel. As a region, we cannot afford to delay the energy transition and the achievement of climate justice, both urgent and necessary goals, with options that will only tie us more and more to fossil fuels and to an energy system that only intensifies social inequalities and environmental degradation.
Read more
What is a just energy transition?
It is possible to propose real solutions to current problems. The various crises facing humanity—climate, energy, food, environment, health—as well as the enormous inequalities that cause, and are deepened by, them can be overcome if we manage to rethink the systems in which we live. In 2021, the energy sector contributed 73.2 percent of total global greenhouse gas emissions. The current energy system, based on fossil fuels, is unequal and inequitable. It is concentrated in large private or state-owned companies, is particularly conflictive in terms of access to resources, and is closed to social participation in decision-making. For these reasons, progress on the energy transition is urgent. There is no single view of energy transition; it is a concept in dispute. Toward what? For whom? How? Conservative views focus the transition on a process of technological substitution toward a change in the energy matrix focused on renewable resources and the search for energy efficiency. On the other hand, the most complete proposals warn that a change in the energy matrix is necessary, but not enough. They see the transition as a process of integral transformation, territorially situated and plural, which implies the creation of new socio-political conditions that restructure the organization, ownership and distribution of the current production and consumption systems. The goal is advancing the right to energy. If we consider the transition as a systems change, it is essential to build another type of relationship between human beings, nature and means of production. Guidelines for thinking about the energy transition in Latin America Based on the arguments of Pablo Bertinat, an expert on the subject, to walk this path in the region requires that we: Build the right to energy as a collective right, in congruence with the rights of nature. We must: take into account the damages to territories and communities created by energy development; eradicate Sacrifice Zones by recognizing their vulnerability; and guarantee respect for human rights during the transition. Solve energy poverty problems with clean, accessible, reliable and affordable energy. Energy projects must benefit the territory in which they are installed in terms of creation, supply and work force, in order to achieve the redistribution of wealth. Advance a process of energy reduction in the face of a scenario of restriction in which resources do not cover the demand. This implies an integral transition. A new productive model based on the availability of energy must be considered, as well as rethinking transportation systems, agriculture, infrastructure, etc. Deepen the change of the energy matrix from processes of resignification of technologies to those that are adequate, that is to say, that allow social inclusion, that are built from the communities, that are oriented to solve their problems, and that take into account the processes of acceptance of new energy enterprises. Promote energy democratization processes through the participation of diverse actors, particularly excluded sectors, in decision-making regarding the transition and the creation and implementation of policies, guaranteeing the rights of access to timely and complete information, quality participation and access to environmental justice, in order to ensure energy autonomy at the local level. In conclusion, speaking of a just energy transition implies recovering energy as a tool to satisfy human needs in a context of finite resources and inequalities. We must not start from scratch. Local communities, academic institutions, non-governmental organizations, social organizations and governments have already taken important steps towards a just, democratic and popular energy transition in the region. With this momentum, the transition is not only desirable, but possible.
Read more
5 reasons to end coal extraction and use
The use of coal to generate energy began two thousand years ago. Today, its role as a fuel must come to an end: the negative impacts of its exploitation and use far outweigh the benefits. The solution to the climate crisis lies, in large part, in ending dependence on coal. Across the region, we’re seeing a growth in coal projects that conflicts with global emissions reduction targets. In a post-pandemic context, nations must commit to an economic recovery that keeps coal in the ground. As governments and companies across Latin America continue to promote the industry and ignore the true costs of coal, we’re offering them five reasons why the mining and burning of coal is a bad decision – economically, politically, environmentally, for human rights and the climate. 1. Coal is economically unviable due to the high costs of its impacts. The current production chain fails to consider the external costs derived from coal’s climate and environmental impacts, and social damages and it causes, which could double or even triple the price of electricity generated. For example, exporting a ton of coal from Colombia to Europe, the United States or Asia entails estimated external costs between $144.64 and $210.95 per ton, three times the market price of coal (which was $47.80 per ton in August 2019) (1). The exploitation and use of coal becomes economically unviable because the market price is not enough to cover the repair of the damage caused. The most serious aspect is that since the companies in the industry do not assume these costs, they are left in the hands of States, communities and ecosystems. 2. Coal projects create unemployment Arguments that coal mining stimulates development wherever it is carried out are a myth. The pollution created by coal mining impacts the health of the people exposed to it, affecting their work effectiveness and putting them at a disadvantage in accessing other work options. This results in up an unemployment rate of up to 40 percent in populations located near coalmines. In addition, the non-conventional renewable energy industry currently employs many more people than the coal industry. According to the International Renewable Energy Agency, that industry generated 11 million jobs worldwide in 2018, while the 10 countries with the most coal-dependent labor sources only generate approximately 225 thousand jobs. According to UN estimates, switching to renewable energies could generate up to 35 million additional jobs between 2020 and 2050. 3. Investing in coal is increasingly risky Both banks and insurance companies are ceasing to invest in the coal sector because of its high costs, high risks and low profitability. Today, 26 of the world's 35 largest banks have policies restricting financing for projects related to coal mining or coal-fired power generation. In fact, a group of OECD countries recently announced that they will end financial support for coal-fired power plants. Similarly, at least 18 of the world's largest insurance companies have decided to restrict activities linked to the coal industry. This shows that, thanks to public pressure, the industry is being de-financed and its market is no longer insurable. 4. Coal use aggravates the global climate crisis The extraction and burning of coal aggravates the climate crisis and causes vast human rights impacts: among them floods that displace residents, fires that destroy villages and ecosystems, and droughts that destroy crops. According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, coal is responsible for 44 percent of carbon dioxide (C02) emissions from fossil fuels. Just nine countries are responsible for 85 percent of global emissions from its combustion. Coal mining also emits methane, a gas with 67 times more power than CO2 to warm the planet over a 20-year period and whose emissions are responsible for about 25 percent of global warming. Building new coal-fired power plants implies catastrophic climate change. This is why the UN proposed urgently accelerating the decarbonization of all aspects of the economy. To stay on track toward limited warming just 1.5°C by 2050, 90 percent of coal must remain in the ground. 5. Coal mining and use violate essential human rights, such as health. The entire cycle of coal—from its extraction, transport and export, to its burning or combustion—causes irreversible damage to people. One of the main impacts of coal mining is the degradation of air quality, which in turn violates the rights to health, life and a healthy environment, generating high rates of morbidity and mortality. The damages caused by coal mining include pneumoconiosis (black lung), known as "the miner's disease", which considerably reduces the life expectancy of those who work in mines and the surrounding communities, where children are the most affected. Likewise, pollutant emissions from coal-fired power plants are mainly responsible for the formation of microscopic particles (PM10 and PM2.5) capable of penetrating the respiratory and blood systems, increasing the rates of serious diseases such as lung cancer, and causing premature deaths. These five reasons are at the same time arguments for the decarbonization of Latin America's energy matrix. The region can and should direct its efforts towards a matrix based on non-conventional renewable energies that are environmentally friendly, people-friendly and sustainable over time. For more information, see our report Carbón, un combustible condenado al entierro. El final de una era y la promesa de una transición justa. (1) Precios actualizados a 2019 tomados de Cardoso A. Behind the life cycle of coal: Socio-environmental liabilities of coalmining in Cesar, Colombia. Ecological Economics 120 (2015) 71- 82, y Cardoso A., Santamaria R,. Peñalver L. (2019). Thetrue cost of coal in Colombia.
Read more