Latin America

Paisaje de la selva amazónica en el Parque Nacional Yasuní, Ecuador

August 14 2023 Indigenous Rights, Climate Change, Human Rights

Protecting Ecuador’s Yasuní National Park can bolster the global just energy transition

What the people of Ecuador decide in an August 20 referendum has the potential to not only slow oil exploitation in the Amazon, but also to generate a transformative impact at the national and international levels, recognizing the value of the key ecosystem for stabilizing the global climate and the need to transition to renewable and sustainable energy production. On August 20, in a popular consultation, the Ecuadorian people will have the opportunity to decide on a definitive halt to oil exploitation in a part of Yasuní National Park, one of the most biodiverse areas of the planet, located in the Amazon rainforest. The consultation seeks to stop oil extraction in the ITT block (Ishpingo, Tiputini, Tambococha), one of three in production within the park. Yasuní National Park is a UNESCO Biosphere Reserve. Multiple scientific studies have demonstrated its value in terms of biodiversity and its significance as the home to the Waorani people, and to the Tagaeri and Taromenane indigenous groups in voluntary isolation. The Amazon is an interconnected region shared by eight countries—Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador, Guyana, Peru, Suriname and Venezuela—and by French Guiana, a French overseas department, and what happens in one part of it affects the rest. Moreover, as a megadiverse region that serves as a global climate stabilizer, the importance of the Amazon rainforest is global. The eyes of the world will be watching to see if Ecuador chooses to protect its Amazonian territory, which would have a transformative impact not only in the country, but also across Latin America and the world. Protecting Yasuní would send a clear message that recognizes the ecological and social value of the Amazon to materialize the necessary energy transition and the protection of human rights. Javier Dávalos, AIDA's Climate Program Coordinator and Ecuadorian attorney, reflects: "After years of relentless struggle by social organizations and indigenous movements, Ecuador has the chance to make important progress in protecting an ecosystem that is key to adapting to and mitigating the global climate crisis, as well as to the survival of traditional and indigenous peoples, including those in voluntary isolation. To protect the climate for this and future generations, fossil fuel production must begin to decline immediately, and renewable energy production must be accelerated as part of a just transition. Ecuador can be a pioneer, leaving behind the environmental and social sacrifice zones promoted by the fossil fuel industry and showing the world how civil society can promote the just energy transition that the world needs. It can be an example of how to build energy alternatives based on guaranteeing human rights and the rights of nature, and how to effectively combat the triple crisis the world is facing: climate change, biodiversity loss and pollution." Context The initiative to put a definitive stop to oil exploitation in part of the Amazon is in line with the recommendations of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the International Energy Agency that one-third to two-thirds of oil reserves be left in the ground in order to keep the increase in the average temperature of the planet below 2°C, compared to pre-industrial levels, and thus avoid catastrophic effects. The popular consultation in Ecuador takes place a few weeks after the UN Secretary General, Antonio Guterres, declared the beginning of the era of "climate boiling", pointing out the need for concrete changes to face the emergency and crisis caused by global warming. In addition, this consultation comes shortly after the conclusion of the Amazon Summit in Brazil, where the eight Amazonian countries discussed how to chart a sustainable path forward for the Amazon rainforest. "It is time to phase out fossil fuels to protect the Amazon," said Gustavo Petro, President of Colombia, who recently urged Amazonian countries and their partners in the Global North to commit to phasing out fossil fuel exploitation in order to protect the right to a just transition and accelerate the transition to a post-oil economy. press contact: Víctor Quintanilla (Mexico), AIDA, [email protected], +521 5570522107

August 07 2023 Climate Change, Human Rights

Climate Litigation Platform for Latin America and the Caribbean: The road traveled

When the world was in a health crisis and COVID-19 made us turn away from everything and everyone, I came across the Climate Litigation Community of Practice in Latin America. In those days of 2020, I was an external collaborator for Greenpeace Mexico, and I was lucky enough to meet Javier, Florencia, and Veronica, who hosted this nascent community from their roles at AIDA. The community facilitated several virtual meetings to share ideas on climate litigation with people from all over the region concerned about the environment, the climate crisis, and the health of the planet and living beings. We affirmed our shared concerns and showed how we were addressing the environmental and social crises from each of our trenches, using strategic climate litigation. Some people were litigating against deforestation, coal mines, and thermoelectric power plants, or for the inclusion of climate change variables in environmental impact studies. Others were trying to stop fossil fuel policies or to improve and meet national climate commitments. It was interesting to see the breadth and versatility of how litigation is being used to advance climate action. AIDA then invited us to a series of meetings with the protagonists of some of the world's most emblematic strategic litigation cases. The experience of being in close contact with these people, in a space of trust, was unparalleled. It certainly reinforced my belief in the importance of the struggle being waged and the need to learn more about climate litigation. Then came another invitation from AIDA, this time to participate in the Advisory Committee to build a platform that would bring together in one place the cases of climate litigation in our region and in our language, as testimonies of a resistance that comes from many different fronts. The goal was to create a website where users could access information, find arguments to support the struggles, develop strategies, and have the possibility of contacting attorneys and academics. All to make visible the efforts of Latin America and the Caribbean in the face of climate conflicts. The Alana Institute of Brazil, the Foundation for Environment and Natural Resources of Argentina, the Office of the Environmental Ombudsman of Chile, and Greenpeace Mexico responded to the call to participate in the design of the tool. The collaborative efforts bore fruit, and in February 2022, the Climate Litigation Platform for Latin America and the Caribbean was officially born, with the goal of strengthening climate litigation in the region, and with it its power to promote the structural changes that are needed. The main challenge was how to collect, systematize, and update the data. The solution was to create a team of rapporteurs. Thus, volunteers—attorneys or law students from different countries with an interest in environmental, climate and human rights advocacy—began to work together virtually to maintain and update the platform and report new cases in their jurisdictions. The Platform started with 49 cases, and currently hosts 61 cases from eight countries. Another 30 are in the process of being added. The cases are identified and categorized in a user-friendly and intuitive way. The team of rapporteurs consists of 24 people from 12 countries. Without their tireless work and enthusiasm, the platform would not be possible. A year and a half after the launch of the Platform, and much longer since its inception, my memories point to the enthusiasm, dedication and commitment of many people to defend our common home, fight against devastation, and the possibility of bequeathing a greener and bluer planet to the future. We have a responsibility to future generations. We must provide tools, initiate and continue actions that will guide future legal actions to protect and care for the environment. I share with you my conviction that the goals set by the Community of Practice at its first meetings in 2020 will be achieved and that this project will continue to move forward by leaps and bounds. The challenge remains: to continue to share the success stories, the valuable lessons learned when things do not go as we expect, the successful regional and international experiences; and to continue to work to make effective the decisions that give reason to the planet. From AIDA, we invite you to learn about and use the Climate Litigation Platform for Latin America and the Caribbean to enter the world of climate litigation, which represents a great opportunity in the fight for climate justice and the protection of human rights in the region and the world. Visit the platform

August 03 2023 Indigenous Rights, Climate Change, Human Rights

Amazon Summit: 6 proposals for preserving the Amazon through regional cooperation

The Amazon is the world's largest tropical forest, a megadiverse ecosystem, and a global climate stabilizer that plays a key role in South America's water cycle. The region is also home to hundreds of indigenous, peasant and local communities. Despite its richness and cultural importance, the Amazon is threatened by colonization and land grabbing, deforestation, fires and extractive activities, among others. Because the Amazon is shared by eight countries – Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador, Guyana, Peru, Suriname and Venezuela – and French Guiana, a French overseas department, its conservation requires a regional effort. The Amazon Cooperation Treaty (ACT), signed in 1978 by the eight Amazonian countries, promotes the sustainable development of the Amazonian territories, with an emphasis on cooperation and scientific research. In 1998, with an amendment to the Treaty, the countries created the Amazon Cooperation Treaty Organization (ACTO) to strengthen and improve the cooperation process. Today, ACTO is the only socio-environmental bloc in Latin America and the most important scenario for establishing solid regional coordination for the conservation of the Amazon biome. However, this intergovernmental organization has not yet reached its potential. On the one hand, it has encountered obstacles in generating funding, and has had to rely on international sources on several occasions. On the other hand, it has not allowed the effective participation of civil society. On August 8 and 9, the city of Belém do Pará in Brazil will host the Amazon Summit 2023, the fourth meeting of the Presidents of the States Parties to the ATT. Given the opportunity that this meeting offers to revitalize the ATT for the benefit of the Amazonian territories, we present below six proposals for the conservation of this ecosystem through regional cooperation. 1. Reform ACTO bodies to allow for public participation There is an urgent need to update the ACT and reinstate ACTO to ensure broad civil society participation, including in the meetings of ACTO's governing bodies and in the drafting of its Strategic Agenda for Amazon Cooperation. The minutes of such meetings should be made public. These and other measures are essential for Amazonian states to fulfill their obligations under the Escazú Agreement, a regional treaty that recognizes the public's right to access information on environmental matters. 2. Promote involvement, dialogue and coordination with Amazonian populations The indigenous, peasant and local communities that inhabit the Amazon have played a fundamental role in its protection. For millennia, their knowledge has enabled its conservation. Therefore, efforts to conserve this ecosystem must begin by recognizing, valuing and protecting these ancestral knowledge systems, promoting their participation in decision-making, and guaranteeing their rights in accordance with international human rights frameworks. 3. Protecting environmental defenders in the Amazon Four of the Amazonian countries – Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador and Peru – are among the countries with the highest risks for environmental and territorial defenders, especially indigenous and peasant women defenders. Despite this, ACTO currently has no strategy to address this serious situation. The organization must guarantee environmental defenders a safe and conducive environment for their work, a task that should include a program for the protection of women defenders in the Amazon. 4. Effectively fight the use of mercury in gold mining The use of mercury in small-scale gold mining is devastating to communities and ecosystems in the Amazon. At the regional level, ACTO should adopt a resolution or program to address this issue directly. And at the international level, member states should act as a bloc to push for amendments to the Minamata Convention on Mercury so that the treaty prohibits the marketing of the heavy metal and its use in small-scale gold mining. 5. Promote compliance with international environmental agreements Based on a regional strategy for the recognition of international environmental law to protect the Amazon and its people, ACTO should advise States Parties on compliance with environmental treaties such as the Convention on Biological Diversity. It should also assist States in the inclusion of threatened sites, knowledge systems, traditions and cultural expressions of peasant communities and indigenous peoples on lists of priority international attention and support, such as UNESCO Biosphere Reserves and Intangible Cultural Heritage, and Wetlands of International Importance under the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands. 6. Promote a different vision of development for the Amazon ACTO should promote a vision of development that considers communities and addresses the problems of deforestation, fires and the expansion of the extractive frontier through international integration. It should also articulate regional efforts to stop the expansion of the oil frontier and advocate for the establishment of a moratorium on fossil fuel extraction in the Amazon. In addition, it should promote legal reforms that discourage the expansion of illegal mining and its impacts. Looking to the future The Amazon rainforest and the potential for regional cooperation to conserve it are at a critical juncture. The point of no return for the Amazon, the point at which the rate of deforestation nullifies its capacity to regenerate, is no longer a future scenario. But at the same time, after several years of little action within ACTO, this year's Amazon Summit and the reactivation of the Amazon Parliament in 2022 renew hope for regional cooperation to conserve the Amazon. In the same vein, the presidents of Brazil and Colombia recently announced their goals to reduce illegal deforestation in the Amazon by 2030. Given the current threats to the Amazon and ACTO's mandate to promote regional cooperation, its member states should seize this moment to provide the organization with more regular and permanent funding. This is necessary to implement effective long-term programs and, in particular, the above-mentioned proposals. Civil society should also take full advantage of opportunities for advocacy with ACTO and its bodies, including participation in the Amazon Dialogues that will take place from August 4 to 6 as a prelude to the Summit. Joint regional and transboundary efforts are powerful enough to save a vital ecosystem for the region and the world.

July 28 2023 Human Rights

A healthy environment: what is this universal right?

The triple crisis facing the world highlights the importance of guaranteeing the right of all people to live in a clean, healthy and sustainable environment.Climate change, biodiversity loss and pollution are among the greatest threats to humanity today, seriously affecting the exercise and enjoyment of human rights. It’s enough to mention just a few examples:Air pollution is one of the main environmental threats to health, causing seven million premature deaths each year.In the last 10 years, extreme weather events have caused 220 million displacements, or about 60,000 per day. These and other impacts disproportionately affect individuals, groups and communities who are already in a situation of vulnerability.For women, for example, environmental degradation means the reinforcement of pre-existing inequalities and situations of discrimination in matters such as access to and tenure of land and natural resources. Children, for their part, suffer more intense impacts due to their less developed physiology and immune systems. And for indigenous and traditional peoples, the defense of their territories and livelihoods in the face of environmental damage represents serious threats, even to their lives.But what is the right to a healthy environment? Components of the right to a healthy environmentThe right to a healthy environment is increasingly included in constitutions, laws and regional justice systems. Although the definitions vary, the essence is the same. The general understanding is that to make it a reality requires two basic types of elements:Substantive elementsClean air.A safe and stable climate.Access to clean water and adequate sanitation.Healthy and sustainably produced food.Non-toxic environments in which to live, work, study and play.Biodiversity and healthy ecosystems.Procedural elementsAccess to information.Public participation in decision-making.Access to justice and effective remedy. The realization of this right also requires international cooperation, solidarity and equity in environmental actions (including the mobilization of resources), as well as the recognition of extraterritorial jurisdiction in damages to human rights caused by environmental degradation. Dimensions and qualitiesThe right to a healthy environment has both a collective and an individual dimension. Under the former, it constitutes a universal interest owed to both present and future generations.The individual dimension implies that violating this right can have direct and indirect repercussions on individuals due to its indivisible and interdependent relationship with other rights, such as the right to health, personal integrity or life, among others.As the Inter-American Court of Human Rights concluded, given that environmental degradation can cause irreparable harm to people, a healthy environment "is a fundamental right for the existence of humanity.”It is also an autonomous right that protects the components of the environment (forests, rivers, seas and others) as legal interests in themselves, even in the absence of certainty or evidence of risk to people.The autonomous nature of this right and its interconnection with other rights entails a series of obligations for the States, which include to:Prevent significant environmental damage; which implies regulating, supervising and overseeing activities that may generate risk or cause damage to the environment.Carry out environmental impact studies, establish contingency plans and mitigate damages.Act in accordance with the precautionary principle in the face of possible serious or irreversible damage to the environment, affecting the rights to life and personal integrity, even in the absence of scientific certainty.Cooperate with other States in good faith for protection against significant environmental damage.Guarantee access to information on possible environmental impacts.Guarantee the right to public participation in scenarios that may affect the environment and guarantee access to justice.Given the urgent need for new and better ways to protect the environment, the United Nations’ recognition of a healthy environment as a universal human right on July 28, 2022 marked a historic step forward in the long and complex process of guaranteeing this right in practice, which has been part of AIDA's history since its inception.At AIDA, we’ve long worked to highlight the link between a healthy environment and other human rights. And we’re committed to fulfilling our mission: to strengthen the capacity of the people in Latin America to guarantee their individual and collective right to a healthy environment.

July 20 2023 Human Rights

Right to a healthy environment global coalition wins UN Human Rights Prize

Manila (PHP), Geneva (CH), Casablanca (MAR), New York (US), Mexico City (MX), Buenos Aires (ARG) — Today, the Global Coalition of Civil Society, Indigenous Peoples, Social Movements, and Local Communities for the Universal Recognition of the Human Right to a Clean, Healthy, and Sustainable Environment was recognized as one of the recipients of the prestigious 2023 United Nations Human Rights Prize. The coalition is awarded for its essential role in advocating for the recognition of the right to a healthy environment by the UN General Assembly (UNGA) in July 2022. The UN Human Rights Prize is awarded once every five years to several recipients at a time. This year is the first time that it has been granted to a global coalition. The prize will be presented in New York on December 10, which also marks the 75th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, making this recognition even more special. This achievement was only possible thanks to tireless efforts that began decades ago and resulted in thousands of people from all across the globe joining forces to achieve a milestone: the recognition by the United Nations of the human right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment. First and foremost, the award highlights the importance of collaborating to advance the much-needed protection of our planet and fulfillment of human rights. Alone, no organization, movement, or person would have been able to achieve the universal recognition of the right to a healthy environment. Together, a diverse global coalition made this a reality. Furthermore, the prize recognizes the need to protect participatory spaces for everyone. As civic spaces are worryingly shrinking and many human rights and environmental defenders are under attack worldwide, the award sends a strong reminder: It is essential to respect and strengthen spaces for participation and collaboration. The protection of civic spaces and the respect and support for all human rights defenders is essential for the effective implementation of this newly recognized right. The right also is an integral component of environmental justice and democracy and provides a seamless path to protecting the rights of future generations. This announcement arrives just a few days ahead of the July 28 anniversary of the UNGA’s recognition of the human right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment. Since then, millions have continued to experience the cumulative and accelerating impacts of the triple planetary crisis of biodiversity loss, climate change, and pollution, exacerbated by systemic inequalities, that is contributing to ongoing violations of the right to a healthy environment around the world. This prize emphasizes that today more than ever, States must make this right a reality. It is both a recognition and a call to action for governments, businesses, institutions, and people worldwide to ensure that the right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment is effectively guaranteed and legally protected so that it can be enjoyed by all. Read the reactions from the members of the coalition here. press contact: Víctor Quintanilla (Mexico), AIDA, [email protected], +521 5570522107

Transición energética justa y justicia climática

July 18 2023 Climate Change, Human Rights, Capacity Building

Session 3 of the AIDA’s 25th Anniversary Webinar Series

A dialogue to build a path toward climate justice and a just energy transition In this third and final session we discussed, starting from a place of hope, the path towards a just energy transition and climate justice in the region. We explored what both concepts mean, what is needed to achieve them, and the tools and successes at our disposal. Panelists Felipe Pino Zúñiga, lawyer and Project Coordinator at NGO FIMA (Chile). Bernie Bastien-Olvera, interdisciplinary researcher on climate change at the University of California, communicator and media producer (Mexico). Tania Ricaldi Arévalo, researcher at the Centro de Estudios Superiores Universitarios of the Universidad Mayor de San Simón (Bolivia). Moderator: Florencia Ortúzar, senior attorney, Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA). Closing: Anna Cederstav, AIDA's Deputy Executive Director and Chief Financial Officer. Recording

Pueblo tradicional en las islas flotantes de los Uros en el lago Titicaca cerca de la ciudad de Puno, Perú.

June 29 2023 Climate Change, Human Rights

Climate finance: Questions and answers

The climate crisis knows no borders. It impacts people, ecosystems and species around the world. Addressing this global crisis requires profound and innovative transformations in all facets of human life: the production of energy, food and other goods; the design and construction of infrastructure; the use and management of terrestrial, marine and freshwater habitats; the transport of people and products; and more. These systemic changes demand financial resources and sound investments. This is why we hear time and again that addressing the climate crisis is costly and requires financing. Climate finance is a complicated topic, and so we offer you a glimpse of the basics. What do we mean by climate finance? The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) describes climate finance as the type of local, national or transnational finance used to support and implement climate change mitigation and adaptation actions with financial resources from public, private and alternative sources. These resources are defined as "new and additional" and cannot include those previously committed, for example, for official development assistance. To better understand this definition, we can point out that climate finance is captured and used to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and enhance carbon sinks, or seeks to reduce vulnerability, as well as to maintain and increase the resilience of human and ecological systems to the negative effects of the climate crisis. Why is climate finance important? To echo UN Climate Change Executive Secretary Simon Stiell's message at the Sustainable Investment Forum, "We cannot achieve our climate goals without finance. Whether we are talking about transitioning to renewable energy, improving energy efficiency or protecting vulnerable communities from the effects of climate change, all of these efforts require significant investment." Climate finance impacts everything from national policies to changes occurring at the local level that make a concrete difference in people's lives. "Climate finance is ultimately about what we as societies value: the world we want to live in and the lives and hardships we can save by channeling our money into building resilience to the ravages of climate change," Stiell said in his speech. Financing by and for whom? The impacts of the climate crisis are inversely proportional to the weight of responsibility, in that the countries historically responsible for the highest levels of GHG emissions are often the least affected. This is why the UNFCCC advocates that developed countries, those with the most economic resources, should financially assist the least developed and most vulnerable countries. This is what the principle of "common but differentiated responsibilities and respective capabilities" established in the Convention is all about. On the other hand, the Paris Agreement—a legally binding international treaty in force since November 2016—reaffirms the obligation of developed countries in addition to promoting, for the first time, voluntary contributions from other States. It further provides that developed countries should continue to take the lead in mobilizing climate finance from a wide variety of sources, instruments and channels, taking into account the important role of public funds, as well as the needs and priorities of developing countries. It’s key to note that this mobilization of finance should represent a progression from previous efforts. What climate finance mechanisms exist? Under the UNFCCC, there are three main mechanisms for climate finance to reach nations, created for different purposes and with different scopes: Global Environment Facility (GEF): Grants financial resources to developing countries or countries with economies in transition to meet the objectives of international environmental conventions and agreements. It also manages the Special Climate Change Fund and the Least Developed Countries Fund. Adaptation Fund: Created as a financial instrument for adaptation and resilience in those countries that are part of the Kyoto Protocol. Green Climate Fund (GCF): Created with the objective of financing mitigation and adaptation programs and projects aimed at low-emission and climate-resilient development. It is the main multilateral climate finance entity worldwide. How much financing do we need? In the framework of the UN climate negotiations in 2009, developed countries committed to transfer $100 billion per year to developing countries by 2020 (target extended to 2025 in the Paris Agreement). But this amount has not been achieved. For example, in 2016 they only reached $58.5 billion and, although the amount increased significantly for 2019, they only reached $79.6 billion. In that sense, to meet the goal of net zero emissions by 2050, the Climate Policy Initiative organization estimates that global financing of $4.35 trillion is needed by 2030 (when the 2020 estimate was only $632 billion dollars). What are the main challenges of climate finance today? The main challenge, as we have seen, is the need for a substantial increase in the flow of finance. Another key challenge is to measure and track this type of finance, which is not subject to a common universal definition. Along the same lines, given that developed countries’ commitment to the UN does not include official guidelines on what activities count as climate finance, it’s difficult to ensure that money is not double-counted or that it goes to efforts that will actually help reduce global warming and its impacts. There is also the need to balance the allocation of funds more equitably between mitigation and adaptation activities, as well as those related to loss and damage already suffered by communities around the world. In 2020, 90 percent of global funding went to mitigation, while only 7 percent to adaptation projects and 3 percent to dual activities. On the other hand, it’s important that the financing channeled does not result in human or environmental impacts, as often happens when there are large investments in which adequate consultation and participation processes are not implemented. An energy project, however renewable and clean it may be, can accentuate inequalities and vulnerabilities if it is poorly planned or if it is designed without the participation of local communities. Finally, it should be considered that, although a lot of money is allocated to address the climate crisis, at the same time, businesses that promote dependence on fossil fuels, and that keep us in a predatory and unjust economic system that perpetuates extractivism as a mode of development, continue to increase around the world. This, of course, counteracts the progress we can make in favor of the environment and communities. What is clear is that a specific annual amount of climate finance is not enough; what we really need at this point is that all the money mobilized contributes to the regeneration of the planet and to resolving the environmental and climate crisis, not exacerbating it. At AIDA we monitor the climate finance coming to the region because we understand how important it is to increase the possibilities of building a future where we can live well and in harmony with the environment. We also understand that the problems often caused by poorly designed financing are due to a lack of connection between the territories that suffer the impacts of the climate crisis, and the decision-making spaces where projects are proposed to overcome them. In this sense, AIDA seeks to build a bridge between these two worlds, motivating organizations in the region to be active, to follow up on projects and to participate in decisions. Only in this way can we ensure that scarce climate funds not only exist, but also reach their full potential towards the paradigm shift we all need. Join the "Observatory of the Green Climate Fund for Latin America and the Caribbean", a joint effort to better monitor the world's largest climate fund.

Vista trasera de un padre con su hija en brazos y mirando su casa con paneles solares instalados.

June 15 2023 Climate Change, Human Rights

The dilemmas of a just energy transition

Humanity has an urgent task ahead: to transform energy systems without continuing to fill the atmosphere with warming gasses and pollutants. This is a fact proven by science. Failure to do so means that our planet will no longer be a safe haven for the the many species that call it home. The problem is that the necessary transition is far from simple. In addition to the difficulty of cutting dependence on the fossil fuels that have dominated for centuries, it turns out that not just any transition will do. It’s not just a matter of stopping to burn these fuels, we must also consider other ways to leave behind the development model that has for centuries been separating humanity into winners and losers, while violating human rights. What is a JUST transition? There is currently no single concept of what it means for the energy transition to be just. At AIDA, we believe that to be just, the transition must be equitable and inclusive, recognizing that the impacts of climate change and the necessary transition are not evenly distributed. Thus, certain groups—such as those working in traditional energy sectors and/or marginalized communities—may be disproportionately affected. To get a glimpse of the problem, it’s worth understanding that humanity today is suffering from a myriad of crises that affect the lives and well being of people, especially those in the most vulnerable conditions. These crises include the climate emergency, pollution, biodiversity loss, global pandemics and democratic crises. And at the heart of it all is social inequality, that widening gap between rich and poor that generates disparities in all aspects of life, including access to health, education and economic opportunities. These crises are interconnected and mutually reinforcing. Responses to one can help solve others, but they can also aggravate them. For example, when transitioning to clean energy sources not only helps combat climate change, but also reduces air pollution and improves public health, we are solving two problems in one. An example in the opposite direction occurs when a rapid and unchecked transition to electric mobility results in the aggressive extraction of rare minerals such as lithium, which comes from fragile ecosystems on which local communities depend. Where do we start? To ensure a just transition, we must be guided by the principles of justice, equity and inclusion, and ensure that the most vulnerable populations are not disproportionately affected. As Naomi Klein said in her book This Changes Everything, to address the climate crisis we must understand that climate change is not only an environmental, but also a human rights issue. A just energy transition requires not only ending the burning of fossil fuels, but also addressing economic inequality, including a gender perspective, strengthening social safety nets, protecting workers' rights, respecting the rights of indigenous peoples, empowering communities to participate in decisions that affect their lives, and making reparations to those who have been affected by the current economic and energy model. What role can litigation play? Litigation is already moving in step with the dilemmas of the energy transition. We have seen an increase in lawsuits that appear to go against the energy transition, such as those challenging renewable energy generation projects, or pro-transition regulations, or otherwise hindering the transition. But can it be said that these are always "regressive" lawsuits? A lawsuit to challenge the environmental permitting of a wind generation venture might be blocking the transition, but it is not necessarily regressive. If it is a mega-project, for example, owned by a transnational company that will export all the energy generated without benefiting local communities, and if it intends to be located on indigenous lands without local participation, then it is a project aimed at an "unjust transition" that does not serve us because it reinforces the same model, the one that has us so badly on track. The report Litigation for a Just Transition in Latin America, published in January 2023 by the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia University, and translated into Spanish by AIDA, refers to this type of case. The report questions the purpose of just transition litigation, asking whether it promotes or obstructs an energy and climate-resilient transition. In this regard, the authors conclude that just transition litigation cannot be fully characterized as regressive or non-regressive in relation to the transition. As such, they consider that just transition litigation should be seen and understood as a new category of climate litigation, with its own diverse rationale. The issue allows us to reflect on the complexity of the longed-for transition. Faced with this type of dilemma, in AIDA we generally choose to analyze each case, without marrying a dogmatic position. But a constant and, in this sense, valuable starting point is that everything that is carried out in favor of the energy transition—whether projects, policies or actions—must have a strong and decisive focus on the environment, human rights and gender. Without that there is no justice; and without justice there is no remedy or solution. So we believe that litigation does have a role to play, not only in making the transition happen, but also in making it just.

May 31 2023 Oceans, Public Participation, Toxic Pollution

Offshore drilling: Resisting a growing threat in Latin America

Offshore drilling is expanding in Latin America and the Caribbean as part of a government and business strategy implying the continuity of the oil and gas industry, despite the role of fossil fuels in aggravating the global climate crisis. The advance of offshore hydrocarbon activity also risks serious damage to the ocean—our planet's greatest climate regulator—the vast biodiversity it harbors, and to the livelihoods of coastal communities. Worldwide, offshore areas represent 30 percent of total hydrocarbon reserves and are concentrated in surface waters up to 125 meters deep, according to academic research. The United States, Mexico, Norway, Brazil and Saudi Arabia are the main producers, accounting for 43 percent of the world total. The current expansion of drilling in Latin America is tending towards extremes with greater environmental complexity, in ultra-deep waters, with wells that exceed 1,500 meters in depth. The authorization of new offshore drilling projects deepens dependence on the use of fossil fuels, representing a step backwards in global efforts to avoid global warming with catastrophic consequences. It also constitutes an obstacle in the transition towards sustainable energy systems, based on renewable sources and respectful of people and the environment. However, there are cases in the region that demonstrate a growing collective resistance to the blind advance of offshore drilling projects. With the help of strategic litigation and citizen participation, these cases are creating an opportunity to set important precedents at national and international levels for the protection of the environment, the climate and human rights from the damages caused by offshore drilling. In defense of the Argentine Sea In May 2019, the Energy Secretariat awarded several companies a total of 18 areas (225,000 square kilometers of surface area) in the Argentine Sea—a sector of the Southwest Atlantic Ocean—for the search for gas and oil. In December 2021, the Ministry of Environment and Sustainable Development authorized a seismic exploration project in three of the awarded areas, located off the coast of the province of Buenos Aires, about 300 kilometers from the beaches of Mar del Plata, one of the country’s most popular beaches. The project includes the drilling of an exploratory well, and is being managed by the Norwegian state-owned company Equinor, the Argentine YPF and the Anglo-Dutch Shell. The governmental decision has been questioned and rejected by the scientific community and by the assemblies of several coastal cities. In January 2022–in view of the threats to biodiversity, climate and local economies posed by the prospecting and possible exploitation of hydrocarbons off the Argentine coast—scientific groups and environmental organizations filed a class action lawsuit before a Federal Court in Mar del Plata against the Argentine State, the Ministry of Environment and the Secretariat of Energy, requesting the nullity of the resolution authorizing the seismic exploration project and the process by which the 18 areas of the Argentine Sea were licensed off. The lawsuit was followed by protests in the streets and other actions, which have swelled into an ongoing legal battle. In February 2022, the court temporarily suspended seismic exploration through a precautionary measure. However, in December of that year, the Court of Appeals lifted that suspension. This decision was appealed before the Supreme Court of Justice, which has not yet ruled on the matter. Moratorium at risk in Belize In October 2017, the government of Belize established by law a permanent moratorium on oil activity in its maritime zone. This occurred after an informal referendum organized by environmental groups in 2012 resulted in 96 percent of participants voting against oil activity; and after the global outrage generated in October 2016 by the government's decision to allow seismic testing for oil exploration just one kilometer away from the Belize Barrier Reef, one of the most diverse ecosystems in the world. However, offshore hydrocarbon exploitation is still a risk for the Caribbean nation. In 2022, the Prime Minister expressed the government's willingness to allow seismic exploration without lifting the moratorium. In view of this, organizations dedicated to environmental protection seek to reinforce the prohibition by forcing a referendum on whether or not to lift the moratorium. Court victory in Guyana In Guyana, since the early 2000s there have been reports of discoveries of large offshore oil and gas reserves in the so-called Guyana Suriname Basin. Guyana is the South American nation with the most oil reserves discovered in the last decade, and has decided to expand its gas reserves as well. Offshore gas production in Guyana has also been the subject of controversy due to environmental and safety concerns. Recently, a court decision rejected an attempt by multinational ExxonMobil and the government to dissolve the written commitment that obliges the company to bear all cleanup, restoration, and damage compensation costs of any oil spill in its offshore operations. The judge in the case found that ExxonMobil is in violation of the permit issued to the Liza 1 project—which requires financial guarantees in case of oil spills and accidents—and that Guyana's environmental regulators are not enforcing the terms of the permit. Biodiversity and climate defense Carrying out offshore hydrocarbon exploration and/or exploitation projects may involve the violation of international commitments, including those undertaken by States under the Convention on Biological Diversity, the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea and the Convention on Migratory Species. Offshore seismic exploration generates sounds at levels far in excess of natural levels. Many of these overlap with the hearing and vocalization ranges of marine species (mammals, turtles, fish, diving birds and others). This can cause serious injuries, long-term physical and physiological effects and even death, explains Pablo García Borbroglu, expert and leader of the Global Penguin Society, while affirming that it can also lead to a reduction in fishing activity. The impacts of the drilling are not limited to the exploited area, but affect the entire sea and all the species that inhabit it, aggravating the precarious situation of a large number of already threatened or endangered species. The expansion of the offshore industry also implies nations are failing to comply with global commitments to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions, or adopt measures aimed at the management of key ecosystems such as marine areas, both contained in the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Paris Agreement. The cases described above, which bring together diverse voices under a common cause, have the potential to establish precedents that will force States to take responsibility for the possible environmental and social consequences of endorsing harmful industries such as offshore hydrocarbons. They are key opportunities for courts and other decision-making bodies to set exemplary precedents for the hemisphere in the protection of the environment and human rights, especially in the face of the global climate and biodiversity crises.

May 22 2023 Indigenous Rights

Biodiversity and indigenous languages: one heritage to protect

When we lose words, we don’t know how to name what we see. And if what we see disappears, what do we do with the words we once used? "Words that are not used, are forgotten," wrote young essayist Laura Sofía Rivero. "We say trees because we can't pinpoint what stands before us among all that vast category." Why do we lose these words? There are complex political, historical, economic and educational reasons that have led to what linguist Yásnaya Aguilar of the Ayuujk people in Oaxaca, Mexico has called a "massive death" of languages. Today, species and lifestyles that deserve unique words are disappearing and we are also losing the people who have long known those words. The loss of some is related to the loss of others. The rate at which species and languages are disappearing has accelerated since the beginning of the 20th century. Although there is a whole scientific discussion to agree on a rate of annual biodiversity loss, as there are many variables that are left out, there exists great consensus that we are entering a sixth mass extinction. The same could be said of languages. UNESCO estimates that a language becomes extinct every two weeks—implying that 3,000 languages, mostly indigenous, could be lost before the end of this century. And this is where biodiversity and linguistic diversity meet. In the most biodiverse areas of the planet, 70 percent of existing languages are spoken: 4,800 of the 6,900 spoken worldwide. In Latin America, 80 percent of natural areas encompass or converge with territories inhabited by indigenous peoples. One fact, as surprising as it is alarming, is that 3,202 languages—nearly half of all existing languages—are located in just 35 biodiversity hotspots, defined as places that require our immediate attention and action. A biodiversity hotspot is a region that is home to at least 1,500 species and has lost at least 70 percent of its habitat. Habitat destruction unleashes a chain of impacts ranging from damage to ecological cycles to drastic changes in the lives of those who inhabit these areas. And to do anything, we need to understand the interconnectedness of all the elements that make up biocultural richness. WHAT ARE WE LOSING WITH LANGUAGES? Words are born because there are fruits, plants, and animals that need to be named. There is a wealth of sounds and rules, where abundance of life is the norm and there are different lifestyles and social organization. Yásnaya Aguilar** has an example for this: in Matlatzinca—spoken in central Mexico—there are four different "we's", in Mixe (Ayuujk) there are two and in Spanish, one. The biodiversity and richness of words is easy to understand when we talk about food, as happens with corn, the essential and basic grain in the Mesoamerican diet. To begin with, the history of the word mahis, whose origin is Taino, a now extinct language spoken in what is now Haiti and the Dominican Republic, is revealing. Each stage of corn cultivation and the ways of processing it have merited their own name in the cultures of the continent. For example, in the Xhon variant of Zapotec*— a language spoken in the mountains of Oaxaca, in southern Mexico— the plant is referred to as xhu'a, corn is called za (when it is cut and fresh) and, when it is already on the cob, yez. In Nahuatl, the most widely spoken native language in Mexico, there is a similar designation. Food is an indicator of biodiversity loss. While there are more than 30 thousand species of plants that can be eaten, we only grow about 150 and almost all the calories consumed in the world come from just 30 species. Many languages have unique words for unique foods (species) that we have not even seen. Imagine what delicacies may be hidden in the 420 different languages spoken by the 522 indigenous peoples that inhabit Latin America. We are losing an understanding of the systems that sustain life on the planet. The recognition of indigenous peoples as guardians of biodiversity and generators of empirical knowledge is very recent in Western science and culture, which is not to say that it has not been valid before. Several sections of the most recent IPCC report include the importance of this knowledge as a key element for preservation and adaptation in the midst of the environmental crises we face. The knowledge exists, but for centuries we have refused to engage in dialogue with it. UNDERSTAND TO PROTECT A few years ago, researchers proposed studying biological, linguistic and cultural diversity together because of the close relationship between them. UNESCO has since introduced the term "biocultural diversity." But to protect it, we must understand its complexity. What benefits biodiversity in indigenous territories is absolutely necessary to face environmental crises. Data from the US Food and Agriculture Organization demonstrates that: Indigenous territories in Latin America store more carbon than all the forests of Indonesia or Congo, the countries with the most tropical forests after Brazil. Bolivia's Tacana and Leco Apolo indigenous territories are home to two-thirds of all their vertebrate species and 60 percent of their plant species. About 35 percent of Latin America's forests are found in areas inhabited by indigenous peoples. More than 80 percent of the area inhabited by indigenous peoples is covered by forests. In general, indigenous territories report considerably lower rates of deforestation. Unfortunately, this is not the case for Brazil. The Amazon basin has been threatened for years by different extractivist activities, which were supported by the previous government. Particularly, where illegal mining has been installed, deforestation increased 129% since 2013. This situation does not stop there, it is reflected in the very serious humanitarian crisis that was recently declared for the Yanomami people or the situation of insecurity that was revealed with the murder in the middle of the Amazon of the peoples' rights activist Bruno Pereira and the journalist Dom Phillips. Thus, to speak of protecting biodiversity and linguistic diversity becomes an exercise in speaking in defense of territory and environmental defenders; of access to justice, training and the creation of policies that truly integrate and contemplate the complexity of diverse life systems. * Special thanks for the example in Xhon Zapotec to Ezequiel Miguel of the Proyecto Jaguar podcast that explores the identity elements of indigenous communities. ** To understand more about language preservation as an action for the defense of territory, I recommend reading Ää: manifiestos sobre la diversidad lingüística, by Yásnaya Aguilar, in Editorial Almadía.