Search

My first visit to La Oroya

By Rodrigo da Costa Sales, AIDA attorney  “What do you think of La Oroya?” a local resident asked me the first time we met. Honestly, I wasn’t quite sure how to respond. Quickly sensing my discomfort, he joked, “It’s very beautiful, there’s so much biodiversity, and the sky is so blue...” Relieved, I laughed along with him and, since that moment, I’ve been searching for the words to describe La Oroya. La Oroya is a city of 33,000 people on the Mantaro River in central Peru, at an altitude of nearly 5,000 meters. This was my first time there, and I stayed only two days. The trip from Lima takes five hours, winding along painfully curvy roads with breathtaking views of the mountains all around. In La Oroya, however, the landscape changes drastically. The city is covered in a sheet of grey, with little to no natural life, streets full of trucks transporting iron and other heavy metals... and not much else of note. My greatest wish for my time in La Oroya was to meet the people we are representing in our case before the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights. After working on it for six months, I wanted finally to put faces to the names I had come to know so well on paper. Our meeting was scheduled for the evening, when residents could find time free from work and family commitments. There, we introduced them to students from Yale University, who were developing an important report on the relationship between La Oroya’s air quality and the health of city residents. Although interested in the study, and happy to hear about it, residents quickly peppered us with questions about the case. The main thing they wanted to know—an answer they have been waiting for since our petition was filed seven years ago—was when the Commission will make its decision.  They explained the many offensive comments they’ve had to endure, both from workers at the metal-smelting complex and from their own neighbors, during the long wait for a ruling. They’ve suffered threats from fellow residents of La Oroya, who wrongfully believe that the purpose of the case is to close the complex, which would leave many people without jobs. In one especially disturbing instance, a “doctor” spoke on television claiming that lead contamination does not cause any health problems. He claimed the residents of La Oroya as proof that, while contaminated by lead and other heavy metals, people could still lead normal lives. We reminded them that a process before an international organism involves years of waiting, and that we sympathized with them for everything they had been through in the past few years. But the truth is that I felt such intense frustration. It was the first time that I saw, up close, such personal desire for an international decision. I understood then that a decision on paper could actually constitute a form of reparation. The long-awaited Commission report will show the world that the effects of heavy-metal pollution on a population actually violate their personal integrity and right to health. The goal of this case is not to close the metallurgical complex, but instead to force the adoption of measures that guarantee a certain quality of life for the residents of La Oroya. The Commission’s report will be the instrument in this case by which international and human rights law becomes real, effective and transformative.  I returned from La Oroya almost a week ago, and I’m still searching for the words to describe such a place. Truthfully, La Oroya didn’t seem very nice at first. But I quickly came to realize that the beauty of a place comes not only from its natural and man-made attractions; it comes also, and perhaps more importantly, from the beauty of its people. In that sense, I’ve never seen a city quite as beautiful as La Oroya. This blog is dedicated all the victims of the case in La Oroya. I hope that they will achieve justice, and that because of them, a case like this is never repeated around the world. It is also dedicated to Astrid Puentes and Maria José, AIDA’s attorneys in charge of the La Oroya case, who inspire me daily to work for a more just world. 

Conserving the Ciénaga Grande de Santa Marta

Brazilian Court overturns suspension of Belo Monte’s operating license

The Federal Regional Court of the First Region overturned the preliminary decision suspending the operating license of the Belo Monte Dam.

Coral Reefs and the Unintended Impacts of Tourism

By Camila Cossio, former AIDA intern During my internship in AIDA’s San Jose office, I met up one day with a friend from the States for lunch. She told me about her trip visiting the beaches of Costa Rica. Everything she described sounded beautiful: the clear, blue water; hermit crabs that left their shells to eat breakfast in the early morning hours; sweet fruits that fell down onto the smooth sand; and the cool, green trees that provided shade from the hot Costa Rican sun. But her mood changed suddenly, from bliss to concern, when she explained how her co-worker swam too close to a coral reef one afternoon and badly cut his thigh. She was concerned with how unprepared their tour guide was to handle the situation, and how irresponsible it seemed that tourists were allowed – with no diving experience – to swim that close to the reefs. Leaving aside the physical dangers to humans, accidents like his, though they may seem inconsequential, have a severe impact on sensitive marine ecosystems like coral reefs.  Coral reefs are a unique and complex ecosystem, vital to the health of oceans. Yet 93 percent of the reefs in Costa Rica are in danger, and tourism is a significant factor in their degradation. Tourism’s threats to corals When tourists accidently touch, pollute, or break parts of the reef, corals experience stress. The coral organisms try to naturally fight off pollutants, but this process often leads to coral bleaching – when corals lose their bright colors and become completely white. Once corals are bleached, they can no longer contribute to the biodiversity of the reef community, which depends upon symbiotic interactions between fish, invertebrates, and their habitats. Additionally, since the disruption of one ocean ecosystem gravely impacts others, sea grass and mangrove communities – shallow-water plant species vital to health of the marine ecosystem – are also severely threatened by coral stress. Another significant problem facing coral reefs is sedimentation. When solid residues are deposited into the depths of water bodies, they pollute marine ecosystems and block light needed for photosynthesis. When light is blocked, immobile coral reefs bleach and die. In Costa Rica, sources of sedimentation include dredging, logging, agriculture and coastal development driven by the tourism sector. A Reef Under Siltation Stress: A Decade of Degradation, a study by Costa Rican biologist Jorge Cortés, documents the negative impacts of tourism on coral reefs in the Cauhita region of Costa Rica. Another case study on the reefs of Bahía Culebra found that coastal development related to the tourism sector was essentially unregulated. Because of this, coral reefs in the Pacific continue to suffer. Sedimentation will continue to destroy reefs if better management principles are not enacted. In 1994 in Bahía Culebra, for example, a reef was burned due to sediments leftover from construction of a tourist center. Eighty percent of the reef was completely destroyed.  Scientific literature predicts that 50 percent of all coral reefs in Latin America are at risk of degradation in the next five to 10 years. Studies show that, globally, 30 percent of reefs are already seriously damaged and 70 percent of all coral reefs are expected to disappear by 2030 if corrective measures are not taken to stop the negative anthropogenic impacts on coral reef communities.  Building a future for coral reefs Sustainable tourism is a great concept on paper, but hard to enforce in reality. Construction of coastal properties requires waters to be dredged. It creates pollutant runoff from roads and parking lots and airports. Sewage is dumped into the ocean, and more intensive agriculture to support all the people increases sedimentation. Although it’s difficult for an individual to stop massive projects like these, it’s easy to take small but powerful steps: not picking up wildlife for souvenirs (shells, coral rubble, plants); being conscious of what you bring with you – reusable water bottles instead of plastic bottles, a backpack for your trash in case there isn’t an area nearby to dispose of waste properly; taking the bus instead of a car; and – if possible – doing research on the hotels or hostels in which you stay. Many coastal hotels dump their graywater – wastewater from laundry, cooking, and non-toilet related household processes – into the ocean, contributing to sedimentation and contaminating coral reef ecosystems.  It’s important to be aware that many land-based activities may directly harm the marine eco-system. Being an environmentally friendly tourist is not about being perfect, but individual actions, though they may seem small, really can have a big impact. AIDA provides much-needed recommendations for effective laws and practices to preserve and protect reefs.  Check out our new "Best Practices" guide  

IACHR opens case against Brazil for human rights violations related to Belo Monte Dam

Four years after civil society organizations filed their original petition, the Commission opens the case, asking the Brazilian government to respond to allegations of human rights violations stemming from the hydroelectric project under construction in the Brazilian Amazon.

5 Recommendations for Integrating Climate Action into the Financial Sector

by Astrid Puentes Riaño This blog was produced in collaboration with Andrea Rodriguez, AIDA’s lead climate change attorney. During the Paris climate talks, I had the honor of participating in a panel on climate and the financial sector. We discussed the importance of ensuring that the fight against climate change is consciously integrated into all finance decisions. Financing is one of the primary challenges that has delayed effective worldwide progress on climate change, because many countries do not have the resources they need, and those that do have the resources haven’t contributed as much as they should. Currently, financial institutions are not providing sufficient funding to combat climate change. In fact, the majority of global resources are still invested in fossil fuels or other activities that have negative impacts on the climate. AIDA has been advocating at the highest levels to make climate finance more effective for more than five years. Our focus has been on ensuring that the allocation of climate finance is transparent, participatory, respectful of human rights, and responsive to the needs of the Global South. We have advocated for inclusion of and compliance with these principles before international and national financial institutions, as well as in a new global mechanism, the Green Climate Fund. To advance the discussion, AIDA requested a side event at the climate talks in Paris. As it turns out, a regional financial institution simultaneously requested a side event to present its voluntary principles for integrating climate change into the financial sector. Since there are thousands of requests for side-events and limited space, the Secretariat of the Convention merged the two events. This is how AIDA came to co-organize an event with a coalition of financial institutions. Although the institutions hadn’t planned to include comments from civil society in their presentation, they agreed to collaborate. This twist of fate created a great opportunity for the institutions to present their principles, and for us to provide early feedback from the point of view of civil society. Twenty-six institutions have supported the voluntary principles so far, including the Development Bank of Latin America (CAF), the European Investment Bank, the World Bank Group, and the Inter-American Development Bank. The Five Voluntary Principles, as described by the institutions, are: COMMIT to climate strategies MANAGE climate risks PROMOTE climate smart objectives IMPROVE climate performance ACCOUNT for your climate action​ An initial assessment Is not my intention to make a thorough analysis of the principles at this point. My goal, for the time being, is simply to ensure the principles are known, and to share with you a preliminary analysis, including our initial observations and the five recommendations that I presented at the panel. As a civil society organization, AIDA welcomes initiatives intended to advance climate action, accountability and participation. We therefore consider the voluntary principles a positive initiative from the financial sector, and a good place from which to start looking for concrete ways to integrate climate change fully into their activities. We consider mainstreaming climate finance an ongoing process, and view these principles as just one element of it. From AIDA’s perspective, the principles will actually benefit the sector, and help to decrease financial and other risks to financial institutions. If effectively implemented, the principles can help to increase climate actions while protecting communities and ecosystems, and fight poverty and inequality, two of the most important challenges facing the world. That said, improving access to information is fundamental to ensuring the principles positively impact climate change. Essential information should be made publicly available, including amounts of resources, types of activities or sectors, and projects in which financial institutions are investing. 5 Recommendations for Better Integration 1. Include a human rights perspective and incorporate social risk in assessments Financial investments that don’t incorporate human rights and social perspectives can contribute to rights violations and have severe impacts on communities. In addition to the consequences such investments have on people, they become a financial risk for the institution. Incorporating a human rights perspective in risk assessments can also help to advance goals related to fighting poverty and inequality, which are particularly applicable to public financial entities. 2. Define common concepts  Concepts such as sustainable development, climate change, and climate finance can be interpreted very broadly and generate confusion. Additionally, the lack of agreement on what those concepts mean can lead, for example, to one institution considering an activity as clean or sustainable, when it is not. The definition of renewable energy is a good example. While several major financial institutions agree that large hydropower cannot be considered renewable energy, there are still some institutions that include hydropower, and even nuclear energy, projects in that definition. The inclusion of experts from the non-financial sector—particularly non-state actors—can help increase understanding of what the needs are and where investment should be enhanced or directed. 3. Create a clear, transparent and participatory road map The manner in which the voluntary principles are implemented is crucial. Therefore, a clear and measurable implementation plan is essential. It’s a good thing that the financial institutions highlighted the need to avoid duplication, and incorporate lessons learned. However, to ensure that the principles are as effective as possible, it is also important to at least incorporate experiences from existing accountability mechanisms and applications of safeguards. The current initiative considers a planning group that, as far as we understand, hasn’t been created, although there is a suggestion of how it should be formed. Aligning with the intention of the institutions to include other stakeholders, this planning group should also engage participants outside of the financial sector to increase the impact of investments. The work plan should include effective mechanisms to measure advancement, and be flexible enough to make necessary improvements. It should be seen as a dynamic process that incorporates lessons learned, not as a rigid mandate. 4. Embrace the opportunity in low-carbon economies The financial sector has a unique role to play in encouraging climate actions by helping clients avoid the same old carbon-intensive development. Financial institutions have the power to leapfrog this type of development and implement real, effective solutions for the 21st Century. They can be proactive by enhancing the capacity of other actors interested in fully integrating climate strategies into their operations. The financial sector naturally thrives from risk-taking and innovation. Low-carbon economies represent an important opportunity for growth. 5. Elevate accountability One question posed during the panel was whether or not the principles should be binding. If there is a strong willingness to implement the principles, and adequate mechanisms to measure advances and make adjustments, having a binding agreement isn’t the most important aspect. Accountability is key in this process, thus the importance of Principle Five. Climate change is the most important threat to human kind. It is an urgent matter that most profoundly impacts the world’s most vulnerable populations. There is no more time to lose. Effective actions must continue to be implemented, and the financial sector has an important opportunity to contribute to the solutions, rather than the problem. It’s time for financial institutions worldwide to walk the talk – it’s time for them to seriously commit to fighting climate change, and to start delivering results. The opportunity for us as members of civil society to sit beside representatives when they publically presented their five principles was an interesting start. Now we must follow up so that financial institutions put these principles into practice, especially Principle 5: being accountable. Building upon these comments, and providing recommendations from other stakeholders in the field, will be an important next step. 

Urging the Brazilian National Development Bank to Invest Responsibly

The flow of the Xingú river in the Brazilian Amazon is diminishing to a trickle, while the rainforest around it disappears. Fish and other animals are scarcely seen, and many residents of the river communities have had to leave their homes and change their way of life forever. This devastating panorama is the result of the construction of Belo Monte dam, slated to be the third-largest dam in the world. Despite the project’s many reported irregularities, construction continues to ravage the surrounding environment. And despite the corruption and seemingly endless questions surrounding the dam, the energy company building it has had no problems obtaining funding, mostly from the Brazilian National Development Bank (BNDES).  In Latin America, BNDES is more active than both the Inter-American Development Bank and the World Bank in financing large energy and infrastructure projects. BNDES does not, however, have standards that guarantee its investments do no harm to the environment and vulnerable communities; nor does it have an effective system to process the claims and complaints of those whose human rights are violated as a result. AIDA is working alongside regional organizations in Brazil to draw attention to this unacceptable situation. Too few people know about the problems caused by BNDES-supported projects, which means that society at large is not demanding accountability. To raise awareness, AIDA and allied organizations created an infographic that explains the harmful effects of BNDES investments in the region. Please help us distribute this valuable tool by sharing it with your friends! “Our work aims to influence the Brazilian National Development Bank so it becomes a positive influence in the world of energy investments. We hope they begin to respect the environment and the human rights of the people who depend on it, and enable a shift towards a truly sustainable economy,” said Florencia Ortúzar, AIDA attorney. “We want the Bank to stop funding large dams. As well as displacing entire communities of indigenous and vulnerable people, they actually contribute to climate change, because rotting vegetation in dam reservoirs releases enormous amounts of methane—a very powerful greenhouse gas. Instead of building more dams, the bank should avoid socio-environmental conflicts and positively contribute to regional efforts to adapt to and mitigate the effects of climate change.”

COP21: Mainstreaming Climate Change within Financial Institutions

Financial institutions are crucial players in the global fight against climate change. In order for countries around the world to successfully pursue low-carbon and climate-resilient development, significant sums of finance will need to be harnessed. The Paris Agreement – set to be finalized this week at the close of COP21 – will surely catalyze climate finance around the world. But climate finance will only represent a small percentage of overall global financial flows. Therefore, the extent to which climate change considerations are more broadly mainstreamed within financial institutions will have an important effect on the speed of the global economy’s transformation in response to climate change. AIDA co-director Astrid Puentes Riaño was part of a panel that addressed this reality on December 7 during a COP21 side event titled Mainstreaming Climate Change Within Financial Institutions. The event began with a presentation unveiling the Five Voluntary Principles that had been agreed to this year by 26 financial institutions on four continents, which collectively manage $11 trillion USD. These voluntary principles included commitments to manage climate risks, improve climate performance, account for climate action, adhere to climate change strategies, and promote climate smart objectives. Following introductory remarks by the CEO of the French Development Agency and the Vice President of the World Bank Group, the main group of five panelists was invited to discuss their actions and views related to the initiative. The importance of Puentes Riaño’s presence on the panel was immediately apparent – she was not only the only woman, but also the only voice representing civil society. Other panelists included representatives from major public and private financial institutions, such as the Development Bank of Latin America, the Vicepresident of the European Investment Bank and the head of the Ministry of the Environment and Tourism in Namibia. The presentations on behalf of the financial institutions were brief, but to a certain extent heartening. Representatives lauded the billions of dollars they were committing to the fight against climate change, as well as other steps they were taking to reduce the climate impact of their investments. The European Investment Bank Representative, for example, highlighted their new emissions performance standard for investment in new energy development, which he said didn’t discriminate against any particular energy source, but effectively excluded coal. There was also discussion about the importance of working together and building information-sharing platforms, such as a website to host information gathered by the financial institutions. The representative from the commercial banking sector said that his company had committed to investing $2 billion USD in green bonds, wouldn’t be funding any new coal plants, and would be increasing investments in renewable energy. The Minister from Namibia stressed the devastating effect climate change is already having, and will continue to have, on his country. He explained that although climate change is a priority for his government, there is a lack of resources available to address the various needs that can arise at any time. Speaking on behalf of civil society, Puentes Riaño welcomed the initiative as a good start, which projected a positive image of the financial sector. Recognizing that the effort was still in its nascent stages, she offered some recommendations regarding its implementation. First, she called for consideration of human rights and social risk to be included in project assessments. This, Puentes Riaño explained, would facilitate the selection of the right kinds of projects to invest in. Secondly, she called for an effort to ensure that there was consideration of, and agreement among financial institutions about key definitions, for example  “renewable energy” and “sustainable development”, as well as thought given to which options should be excluded as false solutions. Finally, she called on these funding institutions to focus on how this initiative would be implemented. She recommended having a clear, transparent, and participatory road map that was ambitious enough to put the world on a 1.5 degrees C path. During discussions like these, it’s easy to see how important it is for civil society organizations to be present and doing their best to contribute to the dialogue. In this case, AIDA was able to join the conversation and use our position at the table to help increase awareness about and advocate for access to information, transparency and accountability, public participation, and human rights. 

To cool the planet, fracking must be prohibited, organizations say

By emitting large quantities of greenhouse gases, the process itself goes against the central objective of the climate negotiations: stopping global warming.