Project
Preserving the legacy of the Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta, Heart of the World
Rising abruptly from Colombia’s Caribbean coast, the Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta reaches 5,775 meters (18,946 ft.) at its highest points, the peaks of Bolívar and Colón. It is the highest coastal mountain system in the world, a place where indigenous knowledge and nature’s own wisdom converge.
The sheer changes in elevation create a wide variety of ecosystems within a small area, where the diversity of plant and animal life creates a unique exuberant region. The melting snows of the highest peaks form rivers and lakes, whose freshwater flows down steep slopes to the tropical sea at the base of the mountains.
The indigenous Arhuaco, Kogi, Wiwa, and Kankuamo people protect and care for this natural treasure with an authority they have inherited from their ancestors. According to their worldview the land is sacred and shared in divine communion between humans, animals, plants, rivers, mountains, and the spirts of their ancestors.
Despite this ancestral inheritance, development projects proposed for the region have failed to take the opinions of these indigenous groups into consideration. The Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta is currently threatened by 251 mineral concessions, hydroelectric projects, agriculture, urban sprawl, and infrastructure projects.
Many of these concessions were granted without the prior consultation of the indigenous communities, which represents a persistent and systematic violation of their rights.
Mining, which implies the contamination and erosion of watersheds, threatens the health of more than 30 rivers that flow out of the Sierra; these are the water sources of the departments of Magdalena, César, and La Guajira.
These threats have brought this natural paradise to the brink of no return. With it, would go the traditional lives of its indigenous inhabitants, who are dependent on the health of their land and the sacred sites it contains.
The Sierra hosts the archaeological site of la Ciudad Perdida, the Lost City, known as Teyuna, the cradle of Tayrona civilization. According to tradition, it is the source from which all nature was born—the living heart of the world.
The four guardian cultures of the Sierra are uninterested in allowing this natural and cultural legacy to disappear.
Related projects
Latest News
By Jorge Lu Palencia and Andrea Islas López*The Pantanal is a unique and rich wetland. It integrates elements of the semi-arid Amazon Rainforest, the Atlantic Forest (humid forest), the Cerrado (tropical savannah), the Chiquitano Dry Forest and the steppe savannah of the Chaco. With an extension of almost 18 million hectares, it crosses the borders of Bolivia, Brazil and Paraguay. Its biodiversity is fundamental to water conservation, food production, climate regulation, and the life and culture of millions of people: farmers, traditional communities, quilombola communities, and indigenous peoples. The Pantanal, however, is in danger of disappearing due to devastating seasons of forest fires and other threats caused by structural deficiencies in the institutional management of the ecosystem.In 2022, civil society organizations asked the Ramsar Convention to apply the protection mechanisms for wetlands of international importance to the Pantanal, warning that the number of heat sources had increased to five times the historical average. And in 2024, they reported that the fire season again exceeded historical average conditions.A few weeks after the fires, in November 2024, the Popular Water and Climate Committees—made up of small farmers from the Paraguay River basin—gathered to celebrate nature and reaffirm their commitment to water conservation through the self-affirmation of the Paraguay River / Pantanal Biocultural Corridor.These committees have been working for more than 25 years to confront the socio-environmental threats posed by mining, projects such as waterways and hydroelectric dams, and soy and sugarcane monocultures.They represent an alternative model of ecosystem management in which communities organize themselves to protect their territory and promote sustainable practices. What does self-affirmation of the biocultural corridor mean?In environmental practice, the term “corridor” is applied to ecological corridors, whose main function is connectivity, i.e., the movement of wildlife species for shelter, feeding and reproduction, as well as plant dispersal.Adding the “biocultural” element to the corridors means thinking that human beings are part of the ecosystem, that the conservation of nature does not exclude the purpose of making possible the full life of human groups, and that culture—materialized in the diverse world views, ancestral knowledge, traditional practices and forms of organization—is a fundamental element for effective conservation of nature.The self-affirmation of the popular committees of the Pantanal is a milestone that reminds us that the protection of nature does not depend only on the action of governments but is made possible by the awareness and popular initiative of communities and peoples. It shows that the exercise of public participation rights is indispensable and fundamental for public policies that make life and socio-environmental justice possible.Biocultural corridors make it possible to integrate conservation and economic and cultural activities with ecological practices, thus promoting a more sustainable future for the communities and the Pantanal region.They represent the birth of a more legitimate and effective conservation initiative, a participatory management and an organizational system in which decisions and policies flourish from the bottom up. An alternative model to poor institutional governance In the context of the climate crisis and a political and economic system that exacerbates the threats, the devastating fire seasons in the Pantanal highlight the problems of land-use change, irresponsible use of fire for agricultural and cattle raising activities, inadequate management of resources to prevent and fight fires, and the lack of coordination and transboundary cooperation.Structural deficiencies in institutional governance have led to inadequate public policies or even to habitat loss through incentives for monocultures and extensive cattle ranching, water regulation using waterways and dams that provide ecosystem services, subsistence and culture for local communities and indigenous peoples.Faced with this panorama, the self-affirmation of the biocultural corridor emerges as an alternative model of territorial management, driven by the people as a response to the lack of effective public policies.With this model, the communities promote conscious popular education to protect water and adopt ecological agricultural practices, instead of relying on a system that favors an economy of degradation at the expense of habitat destruction. Reasons to be hopeful about preserving the PantanalThe self-affirmation of the biocultural corridor allows us to be optimistic due to:The resilience of the people of the Pantanal, which allows them to overcome the devastation and open an alternative path for the conservation of the ecosystem, with the initiative and participation of the farmers.Emancipatory awareness and action that puts life at the center, based on the rights of nature, respect for human rights, and social and environmental justice.An organization that resists and builds itself democratically, based on the Pantanal’s identity, mystique, ancestral knowledge and sustainable traditional practices.A popular and participatory management model that harmonizes conservation and integral development goals, builds bridges with other communities and indigenous peoples, and has the potential to expand as a transboundary socio-environmental governance system with an ecosystem approach.Thanks to the popular committees, the Pantanal is alive and has possibilities for a more sustainable future. The creation of the biocultural corridor is a clear sign of hope for this vast and rich wetland.This model, based on popular management and respect for nature, offers a viable alternative to the threats facing the Pantanal and is a source of inspiration for other territories in crisis on the continent.* Jorge Lu Palencia is an attorney with AIDA's Ecosystems Program; Andrea Islas López is an attorney and intern at AIDA.
Read more
Latest News
No mining, fossil fuel extraction or power generation project lasts forever. Their useful life is determined by internal factors, such as the quantity of resource reserves, and external factors, such as declining demand or financial problems.But no matter how long a project lasts or how it is affected, its promoters—whether public or private—must provide for a closure and responsible exit process that considers the natural environment and affected communities, and that is desired and promoted by all stakeholders.This issue is even more relevant in the context of actions needed to address the climate crisis, largely related to the energy transition, which generally implies the substitution of fossil fuel extraction and use projects, as well as the promotion of low-emission renewable energies associated with mineral extraction. In both scenarios, closure and exit issues are of great importance.In the first, it is necessary to incorporate concrete and enforceable commitments to close down and move on from existing projects. In the second, these requirements should be built in from the planning and pre-feasibility stages and should also be included in the environmental impact assessments and subsequent stages.In all projects, the role of the promoters is essential. Likewise, the obligation of the state to supervise and monitor is of great importance in order to protect and guarantee the rights of those who may be affected. In some cases, the responsible exit also includes other key actors that are part of the value and supply chains of the projects: investors, financiers, insurers, suppliers, distributors and buyers, among others.Therefore, the discussion of project closure and responsible exit is essential to environmental protection and climate management in Latin America.What do we mean by project closure and exit?All mining and energy projects have different phases in their life cycle: initiation, planning, execution, monitoring and control, closure, and post-closure. In turn, they have supply and value chains that, as we have said, involve actors from different sectors.In this context, closure refers to the stage of a project in which it ceases to operate and is terminated. Exit, on the other hand, refers to the decision and subsequent process in which the different actors in the project's value and supply chain, in their own roles, completely disengage from the project. What does it mean for a closing and exit process to be responsible?There is currently no consensus on the definition and scope of responsible exit and fair project closure processes. Sometimes these terms are used indiscriminately, which can lead to confusion about the responsibilities of the actors involved and the scope of the processes to be carried out. However, there are elements that allow these concepts to be explained precisely:Responsible and fair project closure is a planned, upfront process that should be considered from the earliest stages of a project and continually updated as the project evolves. Responsible closure ensures a planned, coordinated and participatory cessation of activities and dismantling, and guarantees the right to a healthy environment.The planning and development of a closure plan should focus on risk management as well as impact prevention and mitigation. This will ensure a responsible closure in which the affected areas can be readapted and made safe for both nature and communities, while allowing the ecosystems to recover their functions.The general obligation of the project developer is to properly identify the impacts that the project may cause and to adequately and timely comply with the measures approved by the State in its environmental management instruments.The main obligation of the State (in addition to its general regulatory duty) is to supervise and monitor the project to verify compliance with the developer's obligations and to prevent environmental and/or social damage.The role of other actors in the value and supply chain is to act with due diligence, to use their influence to encourage the promoter to comply with its obligations and, in the event of non-compliance, to act within their role and influence to ensure that the necessary corrective measures are taken.Responsible and fair exit refers to the process undertaken by the various actors in the value and supply chain when they decide to fully divest from a project, considering the responsibilities inherent in their role, which include fulfilling their obligations with respect to human rights and due diligence.In Latin America, there has been important progress in regulating aspects related to the permitting, commissioning and implementation of mining and energy projects. However, experience has shown that there are significant challenges in ensuring that the closure and exit processes are responsible for the ecosystems and communities involved.To learn more about this issue, see our report Closure and Responsible Exit. A requirement for environmental and climate justice in Latin America (in Spanish).
Read more
Latest News
In the context of a global climate crisis that has deepened existing inequalities in Latin America, Mapuche communities in Mendoza, Argentina, face multiple threats that increase their vulnerability to climate change and violate their rights.One of these activities is hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, a method of extracting hydrocarbons widely associated with socio-environmental impacts. In Argentina, it is widely used in the Vaca Muerta mega-development, which covers an area of about 30,000 square kilometers and is considered the second largest gas deposit and the fourth largest unconventional oil deposit in the world.A significant portion of Vaca Muerta is in Mendoza Province. The megaproject covers 8,700 square kilometers. Here, Mapuche communities also face a complex political environment that is threatening their territorial rights and even their identity. Added to this are national policies that are detrimental to indigenous rights in the country. These policies aim to dispossess the communities and make it easier to carry out fracking and other extractive activities.Faced with this situation, the Mapuche people are not willing to give up in the defense of their rights, their way of life and their territorial integrity.The Malalweche Territorial Identity Organization, which represents more than 20 Mapuche communities in the province of Mendoza, has appealed to various international organizations to denounce and publicize the critical situation and to demand justice.This process of international denunciation includes communications to the UN Special Rapporteurs on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and on the Environment and Human Rights, and the submission of an amicus curiae brief to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights on climate emergency and human rights. Fracking's many impactsOil and gas extraction through fracking in Vaca Muerta takes place on the ancestral lands of the Mapuche people. Fracking is an extreme extraction technique that has significant environmental impacts, including increased greenhouse gas emissions. In the provinces of Neuquén and Río Negro, where the exploitation of Vaca Muerta is most widespread, serious environmental and human damage has been occurring for more than a decade and continues to increase.For Mapuche communities, the impact of fracking goes beyond physical damage to the environment. Extractive activities in their territories undermine their capacity for self-determination and profoundly affect their psychological and spiritual well-being, as their relationship with the land is fundamental to their identity and culture.Although fracking in Mendoza is in its infancy, with only a few active wells, the companies and the province have plans to expand it, in addition to the continued growth of activity throughout Vaca Muerta. In order to do this, they will need larger areas of land and the availability of large amounts of water. In this context, traditional practices such as transhumance – a type of seasonal migration in which shepherds move their animals between pastures at different times of the year – are seriously threatened.The growth of these activities, in the current context of water and climate crises in the region, increases the vulnerability of these communities and compromises their ability to continue living sustainably in their natural environment. Reduced human rights safeguardsThe strategy of expanding the occupation of Mapuche lands with mining and other extractive activities has led to the adoption of retrogressive policies that are undermining the framework for the protection of the rights of the Mapuche people in Mendoza and throughout the country.One of these is the declaration approved in March 2023 by the Chamber of Deputies of Mendoza, which questions the status of the Mapuche as an indigenous people of Argentina. This has raised concerns about the possibility of recognizing their territorial rights and the increase in evictions they are already suffering.Complementary measures that facilitate the development of extractive activities over the human rights of indigenous peoples are also being promoted at the national level. These include the closure by decree of the National Institute against Discrimination, Xenophobia and Racism, whose mission was to promote policies and actions aimed at achieving a society free of discrimination. This measure weakens the institutional protection of human rights.Similarly, the government announced the closure of the National Institute of Indigenous Affairs, dedicated to the promotion and defense of indigenous rights. Although this measure has not been carried out, its functional autonomy has been abolished and the areas dedicated to the recognition of communities and the regularization of their territories have been eliminated. In practice, these measures prevent these peoples from exercising their constitutional right to their ancestral lands.In addition, Law 26160, which had suspended the evictions of indigenous peoples while their territorial regularization was in process, has also been repealed. The Secretary of National Security, Patricia Bullrich, argued that there cannot be permanent laws preventing evictions, since "there cannot be a right to usurp.” Violent evictions against indigenous communities have already begun. Actions of international defenseIn response, the Mapuche communities of Mendoza have shown an enormous capacity for organization and resistance.They have turned to international bodies to expose their situation and demand concrete action from local and national authorities. A key example is the communications sent to the UN Rapporteurs on Indigenous Peoples and on Environment and Human Rights to denounce political persecution and violations of their territorial rights. These communications highlight the complacency of the authorities towards extractive interests. The focus of these denunciations has been the defense of their rights in the face of the advance of fracking and other extractive activities.Additionally, the communities were part of the advisory opinion process through which the Inter-American Court of Human Rights will clarify the continent's states' obligations to protect human rights in the face of the climate crisis.The Malalweche Organization submitted an amicus curiae brief, and its representative testified at a public hearing before the International Court of Justice to demonstrate that the extraction of hydrocarbons through fracking and metalliferous mining in their territories reduces their capacity to resist the climate crisis and exacerbates the severe water scarcity in the area, threatening their very survival.The Mapuche communities of Mendoza also presented concrete proposals for action. They called for their inclusion in all consultation and decision-making processes that affect their territories, in accordance with Convention 169 of the International Labor Organization. They stressed the importance of including their traditional wisdom in the development of public policies that benefit indigenous communities and contribute to more effective and sustainable solutions to global environmental challenges.They also called for the intervention of multilateral organizations to demand that the Argentine state guarantee free, prior and informed consultation and strengthen the national institutions responsible for protecting the rights of indigenous peoples.Supported by organizations that defend human rights and the environment, these struggles aim not only to protect the ancestral territories of the Mapuche, but also to guarantee their right to live in peace, with dignity, and in harmony with their natural environment. Their goal is to ensure the self-determination of indigenous peoples. This will allow them to manage their lands and resources in accordance with their worldview, which is deeply linked to conservation.Recognition of the rights of Mapuche communities, including the cessation of extractive activities such as fracking in their territories, is essential to protect their culture, health and livelihoods. With their ancestral wisdom, they offer a way to effectively address the climate crisis and build a more just and sustainable future.
Read more