
Publications

International Principles for Responsible Divestment from Fossil Fuels
Against the backdrop of an ever-worsening climate emergency, companies must rapidly withdraw from the extraction of coal, oil, and gas as well as associated fossil energy industries and ancillary facilities for transport, storage, refining, and processing. The urgent need to quit fossil fuels, however, does not justify irresponsible divestment by fossil energy companies. Rapid closure and responsible closure of the fossil fuel industry are not mutually incompatible agendas. Both are vital to achieve climate and environmental justice and a just energy transition.In the absence of responsible divestment policies and practices, communities are left facing legacy pollution, as well as the long-term health risks that come from abandoned infrastructure that is not properly decommissioned and a lack of proper ecosystem restoration. Many communities also confront significant loss of livelihoods and financial hardship as the fossil fuel industry divests with no regard for the local economic consequences, particularly where economic dependencies have been built up over time.Rooted in the lived experiences and demands of communities and workers affected by fossil fuel activities around the world, and in line with existing international obligations of states and international frameworks for corporate accountability, including the responsibility to respect human rights, these International Principles for Responsible Divestment from Fossil Fuels set out a positive agenda that all companies and states must follow to advance a just transition. They are designed to shift the power imbalance currently favouring powerful companies and states in order to ensure that affected communities and workers have agency and control over how fossil fuel divestment occurs. They are intended to be followed by companies and made obligatory by the states. Read and download the document
Read more
Trade rules for a living planet: reforming the WTO for economic and environmental justice
Contemporary global trade can be understood as a form of multilateral cooperation and capital mobilization that enables global economic flows. However, the current configuration of global trade risks perpetuating historical inequalities and accelerating natural capital degradation , since it does not adequately address the urgency of the threats described. The imbalance between economy and environment is not primarily a technological or capital constraint, both are widely available; though unequally distributed among the countries, but rather a problem of rules and institutions that incentivize intensified extraction of energy and materials, as well as labor exploitation, without accounting for long-term consequences. As civil society organizations, we view the 14th Ministerial Conference and its reform process as a pivotal historical moment: an opportunity to shape a future in which the trade rules become a tool to address inequality and environmental degradation rather than deepen them. This requires respect of consensus, Special and Differential Treatment, and genuine Member-driven governance, that effectively includes the voices of developing and least-developed countries. It is also an opportunity to initiate meaningful change in the power structures that have developed through decades of economic inequality and environmental harm. To advance these objectives, we propose that WTO Members consider some reflections during the 14th Ministerial Conference: Read and download the document
Read more
Justice for Andean Wetlands and Indigenous Peoples in Climate Action
The growing global demand for transition minerals—including lithium, copper, and nickel—driven by the current energy transition model, but also by the expansion of the digital economy, data infrastructure, and the military and aerospace industries, is causing irreversible ecological damage and violating fundamental human rights across the territories of the Global South. Latin America is the most biodiverse region on the planet and one of the most culturally diverse regions in the world. It is home to numerous Indigenous peoples who inhabit and safeguard these territories.At the same time, the region holds significant mineral deposits, placing it at the center of the growing global interest in mineral extraction. This demand intersects with fragile ecosystems, unique biodiversity and the territories of traditional and Indigenous communities, including the Amazon and the high Andean wetlands, which are crucial for climate adaptation due to their role in water regulation, and in mitigation, as they act as carbon sinks.Intensive mining in these ecosystems exacerbates climate vulnerability and fosters socio-environmental conflicts, compromising the ecological and cultural integrity of these ecosystems and communities. The push to expand extraction contradicts multilateral environmental protection frameworks and the climate and biodiversity commitments adopted by the States Parties. This trend jeopardizes the possibility of a just and equitable transition, reproducing the same patterns of inequality and climate harm that current policies claim to overcome. In this context, the Alliance for Andean Wetlands calls on States Parties to the UNFCCC to ensure: 1. Human rights and justice must be at the center of any transition and of all strategies for climate change adaptation and mitigation, including the rights of communities living in territories where the transition minerals are located.Human rights are essential to ensuring a just, equitable and people-centred process. States must guarantee the right to self-determination of Indigenous peoples, recognized worldwide as guardians of natural systems. This must encompass their right to define their own development priorities and to exercise Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC), as well as the unequivocal obligation of States to respect their decisions, particularly their right to say “no” to projects that threaten their integrity and that of their territories. States must also ensure protection of environmental defenders, and guarantee public access to information, participation and justice on decisions about transitions that might affect the environment and human rights. These guarantees are crucial for the case of so-called transition minerals, like lithium and copper, found in the high Andean wetlands, ecosystems that are fundamental to life, ecological and climate balance, and the livelihoods of the communities that inhabit them. 2. Respect of planetary boundaries and the protection of the integrity of ecosystems, particularly those that play essential roles in climate adaptation and mitigation.Keeping ecosystems such as Andean wetlands, which are of high ecosystemic and cultural value, free from high-impact activities is a priority for climate and ecological justice. Because lithium mining is water mining, it drains already scarce water sources and severely affects surrounding ecosystems, leaving lasting environmental damage.To preserve the high Andean wetlands and their contributions on which life in the region and on the planet depends, States must fully respect and comply with international environmental law; adopt and strengthen effective protection measures (including the establishment of “no-go zones”, protected areas, ICCAs); and apply robust and science-based environmental planning instruments that seek to prevent environmental damage (i.e. environmental strategic and cumulative impact assessment, environmental impact assessment).Effective environmental protection also requires up-to-date knowledge of ecosystem structure, functioning, and contributions, developed through collective and democratic processes, integrating traditional knowledge and practices of Indigenous Peoples and local communities. Parties should systematically incorporate scientific advances and traditional knowledge into climate-related decisions, including the design and implementation of their Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) and related roadmaps, to ensure commitments reflect the realities of the territories they aim to protect. 3. Support for socio-ecological transitions for the Global South.Countries in the Global South need enough fiscal and policy space to devise pathways out of fossil fuels that do not reproduce existing asymmetries and inequalities, or further extractivism. This calls for socio-ecological transitions that protect local economies while ensuring economic diversification, energy access, and energy sufficiency, respect for biodiversity, and human rights.These transition paths should be planned, implemented and monitored in a participatory manner, ensuring intersectional, intercultural and intergenerational participation. The Just Transition Work Programme (JTWP) under the UNFCCC provides a crucial space to integrate these concerns into global climate governance. It must ensure that the transition towards decarbonization also addresses material demand, territorial justice, and the rights of affected communities. Incorporating the realities of mineral extraction and socio-ecological transitions from the Global South within this programme is essential to achieve a truly just transition. 4. Traceability of the projections and uses of mineral demand and commitment of Global North countries to rapidly adopt policies aimed at reducing the consumption of primary minerals and energy.The current production and consumption model of industrialized countries disproportionately affects territories in the Global South by exacerbating environmental degradation and the violation of human rights, deepening North– South inequalities. In order to tackle the triple planetary crisis, unsustainable demand for raw materials and energy has to be addressed by binding targets on demand reduction that take into account planetary boundaries. Parties have the opportunity to include them in policy instruments such as Nationally Determined Contributions (NDC) and Long Term Strategies (LTS).These must be implemented through sufficiency and efficiency measures, as well as global and fair circular economy policies. This should involve considering alternatives to mobility beyond individual EVs. 5. Adequate, quality, accessible and additional financial and technical support, based on needs and priorities, so that the energy and socio-ecological transitions of the Global South are truly just and equitable.Such financing must be sustainable in time and of quality, that is, non-debt-creating and aligned with countries’ priorities, and accessible to enable progressive and sustained climate action. It should also address opportunities and conditions for instruments that foster fair transitions, including debt relief mechanisms and debt swaps. Furthermore, it remains important to discourage the use of trade regimes (including ISDS mechanisms) as pressure tools against countries in the Global South when they seek to regulate their mineral resources and establish no-go zones and other safeguards to protect human rights and environmental integrity. Download the document
Read more
Call for a paradigm shift in EU Raw Materials Policies from a Latin American perspective
The growing global demand for transition minerals—including lithium, copper, and nickel—driven by the current energy transition model, but also by the expansion of the digital economy, data infrastructure, and the military and aerospace industries, is causing irreversible ecological damage and violating fundamental human rights across the territories of the Global South. Latin America is the most biodiverse region on the planet and one of the richest regions in cultural diversity. It is home to numerous indigenous peoples who inhabit and safeguard these territories. At the same time, it contains significant mineral deposits, creating an intersection between the growing global interest in mineral extraction and fragile ecosystems and territories of traditional and indigenous communities, such as the Amazon and the Andean wetlands. This scenario exacerbates climate vulnerability and creates the conditions for the emergence of socio-environmental conflicts, compromising the ecological and cultural integrity of these territories. The push for scaling up extraction contradicts multilateral frameworks as well as climate and biodiversity commitments that the EU has subscribed to. This tendency bears the risk of reproducing the same patterns of global inequality and climate damage these policies claim to overcome. The Alliance for Andean Wetlands calls on the European Union to adopt measures for a paradigm shift towards Raw Materials Policies that do not perpetuate inequalities and harm people and ecosystems, by: 1. Ensuring full compliance with its binding international human rights obligations and maintaining its high standards of human rights and environmental due diligence. The current debates on deregulation raise concerns about the EU's seriousness in implementing human rights and environmental safeguards along minerals value chains and in global gateway projects. In this context, the EU should not support: (i) the weakening of the provisions of the Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD), an essential lever for holding EU companies accountable for their activities within and outside the region; and (ii) the privatisation of the implementation of international human rights and environmental standards. All forms of corporate self-regulation, such as multi-stakeholder initiatives, industry schemes, or third-party audits, are insufficient to demonstrate compliance with these standards and may undermine states' and companies' obligations. In this regard, legal frameworks should be sufficient to guarantee that corporations are held liable throughout the supply chain of critical minerals according to EU directives. This is a particularly sensitive question as it also challenges the existing regional human rights system, represented by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, which has produced valuable precedents and jurisprudence on the matter for the past 45 years. 2. Guaranteeing maximum transparency, access to information, and inclusive participation of affected communities and civil society in the Global South. Ensuring early and effective involvement of civil society and indigenous and local communities affected by strategic projects, strategic partnerships, global gateway, and other initiatives. This involves guaranteeing the right to self-determination; to free, prior, and informed consent (FPIC) of indigenous peoples, and the respect for their right to say ‘no’ (RTSN). Undermining the voices from local communities and civil society increases social, ecological, and operational risks, especially mining projects likely to entail cumulative or long-term environmental impacts, particularly those involving extraction methods with potentially significant adverse effects on water, such as direct lithium extraction (DLE) or evaporation techniques. In contrast, including them is not only ethical but also essential for a just transition, the long-term viability of projects, and for preventing companies from facing future legal liabilities. 3. Challenging the projections of transition raw materials demand and rapidly adopting policies to reduce the production and consumption of primary minerals in the EU. The EU should set binding, ambitious, and measurable targets on energy and material reduction, taking into account planetary boundaries. In addition, conducting a prior, comprehensive, and independent strategic assessment of minerals needs and of alternatives to their extraction is essential to uphold the principle of proportionality, achieve climate objectives through less harmful means, and avoid irreversible damage to communities and ecosystems. Moreover, the EU should also foster more comprehensive circular economy strategies that take into account local economies and the biophysical limits of the ecosystems. Download the document
Read more
Climate Justice and Human Rights: Legal Standards and Tools from the Inter-American Court’s Advisory Opinion 32/25
On July 3, 2025, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR) delivered its Advisory Opinion OC-32/25 on Climate Emergency and Human Rights (Advisory Opinion), marking a historic legal and political milestone in the global fight for climate justice. It is the first advisory opinion issued by an international court to find that both States and non-State actors, such as business enterprises, have obligations rooted in international human rights law to address the causes and consequences of the climate emergency.The Court articulates clear and binding obligations to act urgently in protecting the global climate system, preventing human rights violations resulting from its alteration, and securing climate reparations. The Advisory Opinion will guide climate litigation in local, regional, and national courts, and provide a foundation for climate policymaking, grounding local legislation and global negotiations not in voluntary commitments, but in legal duties. It will also serve as a testament to the lived experiences and expertise of those on the frontlines of climate harm and at the forefront of climate justice, affirming the peril that climate change represents for human rights and the promise of human rights-based climate action and remedy.This Advisory Opinion is not an isolated development but rather part of an unprecedented global movement for climate justice. It stands alongside the recent climate advisory opinions of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) and the International Court of Justice (ICJ), and may be joined by one from the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights (AfCHPR) in the near future. Together, these proceedings mark a decisive moment in consolidating a more comprehensive and human rights-based legal framework to confront the climate emergency— what the IACtHR deems an exceptional threat that endangers life on the planet and severely undermines the enjoyment of human rights. Moreover, these advisory opinions may help cut through the political inertia that has long stalled progress in international climate negotiations and national climate policymaking. This publication compiles fourteen thematic documents developed through the collaborative efforts of a coalition of environmental, human rights, and academic organizations, alongside experts who have actively participated in the advisory proceedings from the outset. The topics reflect the main thematic areas articulated by the Court in the Advisory Opinion and are organized into four sections: (i) Foundational Rights and Knowledge; (ii) State and Corporate Obligations; (iii) The Rights of Affected Peoples and Groups; and (iv) Environmental Democracy and Remedies.Each brief was prepared by a lead organization and subjected to rigorous peer review to ensure accuracy and consistency. Together, they provide an in-depth analysis of the Advisory Opinion’s key contributions, its legal and practical implications, and the gaps and opportunities this landmark decision presents across the selected thematic areas. They also present arguments, standards, and practical recommendations aimed at strengthening climate litigation and advocacy strategies.This series serves as a resource for legal and advocacy networks, enhancing understanding of the scope of the Court’s decision and encouraging legal and political action to advance the structural changes necessary for communities and ecosystems to achieve climate justice.Read and download the publication
Read more
Small investments with great impacts. Territorial gender-just climate solutions
Since 2016, the Global Alliance for Green and Gender Action (GAGGA), together with other actors, has promoted a series of initiatives to strengthen the inclusion of a gender perspective in climate finance, particularly within the projects and financial flows of the Green Climate Fund (GCF).The GCF is the first international climate finance fund to incorporate a gender perspective as a central pillar of its operations, becoming a key framework for advancing equity in the access, use, and allocation of climate resources globally.However, international climate finance that reaches countries is often disconnected from the actual needs of the local communities it is meant to benefit— especially women. This poses a critical issue that demands urgent attention— communities have the right to participate in decisions that directly affect them. At the same time, it misses the opportunity to incorporate local knowledge into solutions— knowledge that could make them more relevant and effective in addressing the climate crisis. In its special report on climate change and land, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC, 2022) highlights that incorporating women’s knowledge of land management helps mitigate degradation and supports the adoption of integrated adaptation and mitigation measures.Gender-responsive climate finance goes beyond allocating resources to women and promoting gender equality—it requires rethinking how financial and climate solutions are designed and implemented. This means acknowledging the diversity of women, removing barriers to resource access, defunding so-called ‘false solutions’, and supporting initiatives that tackle the structural causes of climate change.In Latin America and the Caribbean, many local climate solutions remain unknown to decision-makers. As a result, they struggle to receive support, be replicated, or serve as inspiration for other initiatives benefiting the same communities. This publication presents five case studies of successful, locally developed climate solutions with a focus on gender and climate justice. The goal is to strengthen collaboration between those responsible for providing and implementing GCF resources and civil society organizations.The case studies show the efficiency that can be achieved when resources are channeled directly to civil society organizations and communities. All the projects were carried out with budgets under USD 50,000 and made significant contributions to transforming the structural conditions that heighten the vulnerability of territories, women, and other marginalized groups in the face of the climate crisis. Read and download the publication
Read more
Reimagining the circular economy from territories of extraction. Proposals from Latin America
Among the various global commitments to address the current climate crisis, international governance bodies — such as the United Nations — have highlighted the need to double renewable energy production and expand electromobility to decarbonize the global energy mix, calling this process the "energy transition." However, this transition entails intensifying the extraction of minerals essential for developing these technologies. Each region of the world plays a distinct role in the supply chains of minerals used in decarbonization processes. Latin America has been identified as one of the regions with vast mineral reserves capable of fueling this transition. Yet, in this context of growing mining interest, there is a tendency to render invisible the populations who inhabit these territories, as well as the hydrogeological systems of local, regional, and global significance that exist there.Lithium is one of the minerals whose commercial demand has grown significantly in connection with progress toward energy decarbonization. It is in the Gran Atacama region — located in the border area of Argentina, Bolivia, and Chile — where the largest global reserves are found. Nevertheless, for lithium to become available, it must pass through a complex international supply chain, which includes mineral extraction, refining, production of battery electrodes, battery manufacturing, and, finally, the production of electric vehicles.This surge in mineral demand within complex global supply chains raises concerns for the region about the risk of reproducing a new cycle of extractivism, unless public policies are devised and implemented that effectively integrate environmental, social, and territorial development standards.The circular economy, closely linked to the energy transition, emerges as a key strategy to overcome the logic of the traditional linear economic model ("take–make–consume–dispose"). Its aim is to reduce pressure on territories and common goods by incorporating sustainability criteria into supply chains and promoting more rational management of extracted mineral resources.However, this vision of the circular economy — when applied to minerals for the energy transition — can also perpetuate extractivism, particularly in the Global South. Decarbonization options often require vast quantities of minerals for energy storage, extracted at the cost of high environmental and social impacts. This threatens the resilience of the ecosystems from which they are taken and poses risks to the populations that inhabit them.Given these limitations, a circular economy proposal — from the perspective of Latin American extraction zones and applied to transition minerals — should contribute to ensuring that changes in the energy mix toward technologies with lower greenhouse gas emissions (commonly referred to as the energy transition) are truly just throughout all stages of the process. This entails avoiding the creation, expansion, and/or deepening of sacrifice zones; ensuring environmental restoration; guaranteeing the protection of human rights; and securing reparation where rights have been violated. It also requires respecting biophysical boundaries and the resilience capacity of ecosystems. Read and download
Read more
Cetaceans and salmon farming: Challenges for the conservation of marine biodiversity in Chilean Patagonia (executive summary)
In 2018, the environmental organizations Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA), Greenpeace, and the NGO FIMA joined forces to confront the threat of the expansion of salmon farming in the southern waters of Chilean Patagonia. Since then, we have been actively working to expose and stop the impacts of intensive salmon production in pristine ecosystems, including special protected areas. In 2021, a scientific study of whale-ship interactions in Chilean Patagonia was published, including a video of a blue whale navigating a high-traffic area. According to the study, the world’s largest and most endangered mammal shares space with up to 870 vessels daily in Chilean Patagonia, one of its main feeding grounds. The study confirmed that 83% of the vessels were involved in the aquaculture industry.This finding shed light on a new facet of the environmental issues facing Chilean Patagonia, home to nearly 30% of the world’s cetacean species, including the endemic Chilean dolphin. This led us to commission a scientific report from a multidisciplinary team of experts to make the information publicly available. The results provided evidence of the impacts of salmon farming on cetaceans in Chilean Patagonia and highlighted the lack of studies and information needed to understand the magnitude and consequences of these impacts, as well as the true risk involved.In addition to complementing the efforts of civil society to demonstrate the urgency of halting the expansion of salmon farming in the country’s southern seas, we hope that this report will specifically draw attention to the real and potentially irreversible problem affecting these emblematic species. We also hope that the report’s recommendations will encourage the development of conservation measures for cetaceans, even in a context of insufficient knowledge, in accordance with the Precautionary Principle — recognized in the General Fisheries and Aquaculture Law, national legislation, and international law — which establishes the obligation to act in favor of environmental protection, even in the face of uncertainty. Finally, we hope that this report will motivate further research necessary to implement concrete and effective protective measures to make our waters a safe space for whales and dolphinsRead and download the executive summary
Read more
The role of critical minerals in the energy transition: policy implications at the local, national, regional and global level
2023 was the hottest year: 1.45 ºC above pre-industrial values. The trend points to an increase of 3º C. Consequently, climate events are becoming more extreme, frequent and long-lasting, affecting particularly vulnerable populations in the Global South. These countries not only lack financing to face losses and damages, and to propose mitigation and adaptation measures, but also bear the brunt of increased extraction of minerals needed for the energy transition in the Global North. The G20 countries, responsible for 76% of GHG emissions, should lead ambitious climate action, particularly in the energy sector, which accounts for 86% of global CO2 emissions (UNEP, 2023).In the outline of plans and policies for the energy transition, the demand for minerals considered critical, such as lithium, is increasing rapidly, exacerbating the global climate and ecological crisis by threatening Andean wetlands´ contribution to climate adaptation and mitigation. Also, this pressure to extract is affecting the rights of the indigenous communities who inhabit the salt flats in Argentina, Chile and Bolivia, which together concentrate over 50% of the world’s reserves. Additionally, geopolitical competition for technological control of the energy transition hinders countries in the region from advancing in the battery production value chain. Tensions emerge between technicaleconomic positions that prioritize the security of supply and friend-shoring and those that integrate the relationship between energy, ecological and socio-economic systems and challenge power asymmetries.This policy brief discusses lithium´s challenges for energy transition debates and calls the G-20 to ensure commitment to improved global cooperation that involves material reduction targets in the Global North, benefits for producer countries and a strong respect for planetary boundaries and human rights. Read and download the policy brief
Read more
Closure and Responsible Exit
A requirement for environmental and climate justice in Latin America No natural resource (material or energy) extraction project lasts forever. Its useful life is subject to many variables, including endogenous factors -such as the amount of resource reserves or the extraction rate- and exogenous factors -such as decisions to address the climate crisis, the decrease in demand, financial problems, etc.- that condition the moment in which the project must close or the moment in which an actor in its value and supply chain must leave. Regardless of the length of the project's useful life or how it may be affected, a responsible closure process with the natural environment and society must be contemplated, which must be desired and promoted by all the stakeholders involved.This issue is even more relevant in the context of the climate crisis we are experiencing, which makes it urgent to implement measures to manage it in the short, medium and long term. Many of the actions required to meet greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation targets are related to energy transition, which implies, in general terms, at least two things: 1) the substitution of fossil fuel extraction and use projects and 2) the promotion of low-emission renewable energies, which are associated with mineral extraction. In both scenarios, closure and exit issues are of great importance.In both extraction and generation projects, the role of their promoters, whether public or private, is essential. Likewise, the obligation of supervision and oversight of the States is very important for the protection and guarantee of the rights of those who may be affected. On occasions, the responsibility of the exit includes other key actors that are part of the value and supply chains of the projects: investors, insurers, distributors and buyers, among others.In Latin America, there have been important advances in regulating aspects related to the authorization, start-up and implementation of mining and energy projects. In these phases, environmental principles such as prevention and precaution, as well as rights such as prior consultation and free, prior and informed consent, and access rights, have played a crucial role in determining the viability and progress of projects, as well as in protecting and guaranteeing the rights of communities in the region. However, experience has shown that there are significant challenges for the closure and exit processes to be responsible with the ecosystems and communities involved. Indeed, the lack of a closure process, as well as the lack of clarity about the obligations surrounding the social transition processes and overcoming the conditions of economic dependence, are complex obstacles that can exacerbate environmental and social impacts. This report arises from the idea of proposing approaches based on law and science to address the closure and responsible exit of projects. To this end, we at the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA), in the period 2022-2024, interviewed various stakeholders1 and systematized 12 cases that exemplify the problematic situation of multiple fossil fuel extraction, mineral and power generation projects, which are in the closure phase or in exit processes in different countries of the region. These cases highlight the current challenges and legal, technical and administrative gaps regarding closure and exit in specific contexts.With this publication, we seek to provide answers to the following questions: what is meant by project closure and exit, what is the basis for closure and exit obligations under international law, what should closure and exit look like, who should be involved in these processes, and how should the social, environmental, economic and human rights challenges and impacts that arise from them be addressed? Read and download the report
Read more