
Changing the way we approach large dams
In the last decade, we’ve seen that the damage dams do to communities and ecosystems is far greater than the benefits they provide.
Read more
In the last decade, we’ve seen that the damage dams do to communities and ecosystems is far greater than the benefits they provide.
Read more
We write to express our concern regarding the use of GCF resources to support large hydropower in general, and in particular the following proposals in the GCF pipeline: Qairokkum Hydropower Rehabilitation, Tajikistan Upper Trishuli-1, Nepal Tina River Hydro Project, Solomon Islands Large hydropower is a non-innovative, last-century technology with dubious climate mitigation benefits and a long track record of exceedingly high financial, environmental, and social costs. Supporting such proposals would not be consistent with the Fund’s goal, to promote a paradigm shift toward lowemission, climate resilient development, in the context of sustainable development. Further, large hydropower projects would not meet the GCF’s selection criteria related to impact, paradigm shift potential, sustainable development, and efficiency and effectiveness. The reasons why the GCF should not support large hydropower are described in the annex, and briefly summarized here: Large dams are vulnerable to climate change: more frequent droughts make them inefficient and increased rainfall reduces their lifespan. Large dams exacerbate climate change: considerable amounts of greenhouse gasses, notably methane (30 times more potent than CO2), are emitted from reservoirs; and their construction damages carbon sinks, including forests and rivers. Large dams harm biodiversity, which in turn impairs communities’ capacity to adapt to a changing climate. Large dams can negatively affect local communities by impoverishing them, breaking social networks, and negatively affecting livelihoods and cultures. Large dams can become dangerous: climate change-related extreme weather events and earthquakes can cause dams to fail, jeopardizing lives and property downstream. Large dams are not economical and are ill suited to address urgent energy needs: recent studies clearly demonstrate that large dams typically suffer significant cost and time overruns. Better energy options are widely available and the GCF should play a fundamental role in promoting them.
Read more
There are two main reasons for the excessive contamination of the large river: increasing urbanization and government bureaucracy.
Read more
When we learned of the extent of corruption involved with Brazilian multinational Odebrecht, the news hit like a tsunami: the corporation not only swept away huge piles of money, it also destroyed the public trust.
Read more
The recent mass die-off of anchovy—a species on which birds, marine mammals, and other fish depend for nutrition—must be analyzed in detail. Upon finding the cause, an integrated solution must be implemented at the national and regional levels.
Read moreThanks to the help of our partners and supporters, AIDA achieved many important advances in the defense of human rights and the environment in 2016.
Read more
The physical participation of civil society in Board meetings is vital. They ensure the Fund takes into account the voices of the communities directly affected by or benefitting from the financing.
Read more
In a historic decision, a Puntarenas court convicted a businesswoman for shark finning. The woman had brought shark fins to port separated from the body, a practice illegal in Costa Rica, with intentions of selling them abroad.
Read more
The risk of the current fires was latent. More should have been done to prevent them, and to have been better prepared to face them.
Read more
By Laura Yaniz The International Finance Corporation, part of the World Bank Group, said “No” to the Angostura mining project in Colombia’s Santurbán páramo. What does this decision mean? It’s one step closer to the protection of this priceless ecosytem. In Santurbán, the rocks become guardians of mirrors of water that reflect the sky. Frailejones stand watch over the remains of glaciers. Condors gaze down upon tiny visitors. The world sits closer to the sky. Santurbán is a páramo, an ecosystem only found high in the Andes Mountains. The Canadian company Eco Oro Mineral has set their sights on these lands because, as rich as they are in water, they are rich too in minerals. The IFC had invested in the company’s Angostura mining project but, at the end of 2016, they made the wise decision to withdraw that investment. It was an important victory in the ongoing fight to save Santurbán, the water source of millions of Colombians. But what exactly would be saved? And what is the allure of Santurbán? Alberto Peña Kay, a local hiker and photographer, speaks through the images he captures of the many reasons this unique ecosystem must be protected: Frailejones (espeletias) are endemic plants that, because of the extreme conditions of the high-Andean climate, have uniquely adapted to protect themselves from the cold, the high levels of UV radiation, and the lack of nutrients. Their succulent leaves absorb water from the clouds, which they then store in their trunk. Some of these plants grow just one centimeter a year. “When I first came to this páramo and photographed it, I knew I had to keep coming back. This place inspired my passion for photography.” “Many don’t see this place as I do; they look upon it with economic eyes, eyes set on mining and extraction.” “At our best, we see the potential here, and recognize that it’s something we can’t lose. There are so many reasons to conserve these lands.” Why? "First, it’s my department, the great Santander. Second, the biodiversity: here live icons like the condor, the puma and the frailejone. Third, this páramo supplies water to more than half of the people who live in Santander and Northern Santander.” "[In Santurbán], I realized I could get closer to the sky." Really, Santurbán speaks for itself. We must save this piece of heaven on Earth, it's well worth the fight!
Read more