Can an energy transition be just if it repeats the harms of traditional extractivism?
That was one of the central questions of “Articulando Territorios: Meeting of Defenders from the Southern Cone”, an event held on June 9 and 10 in Santiago, Chile, that brought together environmental defenders from Argentina, Bolivia, and Chile.
Environmental law in Latin America is currently facing a paradox.
The continent has recently seen historic progress in developing binding legal standards to protect the environment and those who defend it. However, this progress coexists with the weakening of legal and institutional frameworks for protecting the environment and the rights of communities in various countries.
One argument made by supporters of fracking as a step toward the energy transition is that the technique buys time while alternatives to fossil fuels reach maturity and stability.
Behind this line of reasoning lies the possibility of extracting more gas and the myth that it is a natural resource—when in fact it is a fossil fuel—and that it allows for the safe generation of energy without causing as much pollution as oil and coal.
In a landmark ruling for climate justice in Latin America, on June 16, Costa Rica’s Constitutional Court ordered the government to include a climate impact analysis in the assessment of any project, construction, or activity that could affect the environment.
The decision builds on similar achievements in other countries on the continent, resulting from strategic climate litigation.
This article was originally published on Verfassungsblog.
By Florencia Ortúzar Greene and Karla Maass*
The world has been negotiating on climate change for 30 years. For 30 years, governments have been meeting annually, accompanied by increasingly alarming scientific reports. The multilateral process has matured; it now has implementation rules and mechanisms in place to drive global climate action, but that action remains limited and discretionary.
What's going on? How can we breathe new life into this very important global process?
A river is always a path, sustenance, and memory.
At the Volta Grande (or Great Bend) of the Xingu River, deep in the Brazilian Amazon, the water did more than just flow: it taught people when to plant, when to fish, and when to celebrate.
There, life moved to the rhythm of the river.
The First International Conference on the Transition Beyond Fossil Fuels has concluded in Santa Marta, Colombia. And all signs point to this initiative being here to stay.
Many aspects deserve attention in this process launched by Colombia and the Netherlands. Are we witnessing the first step toward a new era?
While the world is still processing what has happened and awaits the official report from the co-hosting countries in the coming months, we offer an early analysis.
Ten years after its inauguration, the Belo Monte Hydroelectric Plant (UHE) in Pará returns to the center of public debate, this time under the scrutiny of the Inter-American Human Rights System. More than an anniversary, this milestone reinforces the urgency of an effective institutional response:justice cannot continue to be postponed.
On May 5, 2016, the first turbine of Belo Monte began operating on the Xingu River. Ten years later, the Indigenous, riverine, and artisanal fishing communities along the middle Xingu River—who were never properly consulted—continue to suffer systematic violations of their rights. The balance of this decade is not one of development; it is one of documented harm and denied reparation.
