Thousands of people flooded the streets of New York City yesterday demanding a financial commitment to clean energy and climate-resilient solutions.
Read more
AIDA attended the Latin American Carbon Forum 2014 in Bogotá, Colombia. There, our lawyer Andrea Rodríguez participated as a representative of civil society in a panel on the Green Climate Fund (GCF), a mechanism that will mobilize large amounts of resources to support adaptation and mitigation of climate change. Andrea answers a series of questions about the current situation and prospects of the GCF. - What are civil society’s expectations for the Fund? - We have the same expectations as the Fund. We want it to be a transparent, inclusive institution that is constant learning, as stated in Article 3 of its governing instrument. Its focus has to be driven by each country’s determination of what priorities should be funded. It must balance funding for adaptation and mitigation of climate change. We expect the Fund to promote social, environmental, economic, and development co-benefits and taking a gender sensitive approach; men and women are affected to the same degree by climate change. In short, we want the Green Climate Fund to follow the rules of procedure it has adopted. - How can a balance in funding for mitigation and adaptation be ensured? - Financing is given mostly for mitigation projects, despite the great need to fund projects for adaptation to climate change. In Bali, Indonesia, during the penultimate meeting of the Fund’s Board, it was decided that 50% of the funding will go to mitigation and 50% for adaptation. That decision was made and we must ensure that it is followed. Furthermore, in Latin America, development plans and climate change strategies that have been advanced have set adaptation financing as a priority. - How should civil society involve itself in the Fund? - We must go beyond design to implementation. The Fund's governing instrument provides in Article 71 that the Board needs to develop mechanisms to promote the participation of all stakeholders (vulnerable groups, women, civil society and indigenous groups) in the design, development and implementation of projects and programs financed by the Green Climate Fund. There is a mandate for civil society in all stages. The issue is relevant because the Fund will become operational soon and will have to create these participatory mechanisms at the national level, particularly when countries begin to name their national designated authorities (those that collateralize the projects or activities financed by the Fund). It needs to institutionalize these participatory processes. - How can one measure the effectiveness of a project to be funded? - The definition of indicators will be among the topics discussed at the next meeting of the GCF Board, but some are particularly important. In adaptation, we need to consider whether a project can help reduce the vulnerability of a community to climate change. As for mitigation, you have to measure the amount of emissions reduced. But the most important aspect is to measure co-benefits that a project or activity can generate: if it creates jobs, improves people’s quality of life, etc. This is because the Green Climate Fund aims to contribute to a paradigm shift that promotes sustainable development. Helping to improve quality of life is a change of this nature. Many times, projects that have positive climate benefits generate social, environmental, and economic problems. So it is essential that additional benefits are evident in social, environmental, and economic terms.
Read moreIn 2007, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) asked the Peruvian State to provide medical care and institute environmental controls. These measures have yet to be implemented fully and the health of the affected people continues to deteriorate.
Read more
By Ariel Pérez Castellón, lawyer AIDA For hundreds of years, the Pilcomayo has been essential to the life of at least twenty indigenous peoples living in the river basin, which covers the territories of Bopvia, Argentina and Paraguay. Among these people are the Guarani, Weenhayek, Toba and Wichi. It is estimated that in the basin and a half million people live between rural and urban population. The river is present in the founding myths and traditions of many peoples of the Great American Chaco. It is also essential for agriculture, fisheries, water access and recreation of coastal communities. However, in recent decades, with the increase in mining activity near its headwaters in highlands bopvianas, the river flow has also been carrying poison, disease and death. Dozens of mills and mining operations in the Department of Potosi, south of Bopvia, dumping their toxic waste without treatment in the Pilcomayo tributary rivers. Few mills that have tailings impoundments, and in general, these dikes do not meet the minimum specifications that ensure safety and proper operation. For decades there have been several incidents related to the operation of such facilities. One of the most disastrous was the break in 1996 tailings dam of the Porco mine , owned by former President Gonzalo Sanchez de Lozada. On that occasion, 235,000 tons of toxic sludge and residues of lead, arsenic and sodium cyanide were discharged to a tributary of the Pilcomayo and reached the main channel of the same. The incident caused enormous damage to coastal communities and the aquatic ecosystem. Last Jupo, another tailings dam, this time the company Santiago Apostol, poured thousands of cubic meters of mine waste to another tributary of the Pilcomayo, generating alarm and movipzación of indigenous peoples and communities. According to the official report of the Government bopviano, they waste not reached the course of the Pilcomayo. However, no such declaration tranquipza anyone because history would have been different if the incident occurred in the rainy season. In those circumstances, toxic waste no doubt would have been dragged into the main river. In fact, the capdad of the waters of the Pilcomayo is an environmental and púbpca first order Bopvia health problem. Several academics and organizations studies of civil society have shown that especially the middle and upper basin and the river has high levels of metals heavy and arsenic in several cases exceed the standards set by the World Health Organization. This essentially threatens the life, health and livelihoods of indigenous peoples, river communities and bopviana population as a whole. Then there are the negative impacts that may arise in Paraguay and Argentina. Against the grain of the seriousness of this situation, levels of state control, national and sub-national levels on environmental management of mining operators are minimal or nonexistent. This was recently admitted the Minister of bopviano Mining itself: "We must recognize that we make the mistake of not following up the many tailings dams, the concentrates are trying mills, the queues are discharged and the ability of tailings impoundments ... ". Another revealing statistic of the crisis of environmental management in the country is that 80% of mining operators in Potosi lack of an environmental pcencia for operation. Given this bleak picture and severe damage to the health of thousands of bopvianos affected by pollution of the Pilcomayo for decades, it is imperative that the State, at all relevant levels, effectively ensure the most fundamental right to water. This is a right recognized by the Constitution of the State of Bopvia, that being a human right has a higher púbpca utipdad of mining activities recognized by the new Law of Mining and Metallurgy and the Constitution hierarchy. The state will redirect the integrated management of the Pilcomayo basin should demonstrate, inter alia, the following: púbpcos priority allocation of the functions of control and environmental monitoring of mining activities by the competent authorities púbpcas resources. Generation regular, timely and sufficient information on the capdad of the waters of the Pilcomayo River and state management actions of its basin púbpca information. Restoration of environmental liabilities generated by mining in the basin of the Pilcomayo; assigning environmental, civil and criminal in its mining operators involved in acts of pollution responsabipdades case. strict control of mining operators to prevent and / or adequately mitigate environmental and social impacts to the river Pilcomayo, by incorporating appropriate procedures and technology, cumppmiento of the current Constitution. Pilcomayo word comes from the Quechua words phisqu (bird) and mayu (river). It is the river of birds. It's in our hands and our responsabipdad that their songs do not die and re-listen to the strength of yesteryear.
Read morePanama NGOs have called on the National Environmental Authority to repeal a resolution that threatens watersheds and allows large-scale projects such as hydroelectric dams to use up to 90% of the water in rivers, lakes and other ecosystems.
Read more
Every day we hear a new story about a family affected by extreme changes in climate. Some suffer from severe droughts, others from serious rainfall and flooding, and still others from intense heat waves and forest fires. Local realities must be considered at the international level as governmental institutions decide how to provide finance for climate adaptation and mitigation. AIDA brings the concerns of communities most affected by this global issue to the attention of governments and financial institutions. We have the technical capacity to support governments’ decision making processes on climate change "They can rely on us to provide effective solutions based on our technical knowledge, research, work experience, and relationships with local communities. International decisions about project funding have direct impact on the national and local levels. Bad decisions will result in bad projects," explains Andrea Rodríguez, an AIDA attorney. Our commitment to protecting the interests of the most vulnerable communities has led us to follow closely development of the Green Climate Fund (GCF). This new institution is expected to channel most financial resources for climate change projects and programs in developing countries. We have participated in GCF board meetings around the world and have made local needs heard in consultations with the Secretariat. Last month we attended the annual meeting of the Climate Investment Funds (CIF) in Montego Bay, Jamaica. The CIF are multilateral climate finance funds that provide resources to 48 developing countries. We shared our experience in GCF discussions with participants and civil society observers. "It's important to share experiences of what works and what does not to ensure that civil society replicates successes and corrects failures. Civil society shares the common goal of achieving a paradigm shift in decisions that impact climate," says Rodriguez. In the first session of the CIF Stakeholder Day, Reaching into the Roots of Partnership: Experience from the Ground, panelists discussed lessons learned and next steps on effective stakeholder engagement in the CIF and other global funds. Panelist Andrea Rodriguez, Legal Advisor for the Inter-American Association for Environmental Defense-Americas, reflects on the session.
Read more
Latin American civil society organizations "strongly recommend that CODE members send the first draft back to Management. Without structural changes to the Safeguard Policy proposal, we question if the second phase of consultations and the review process will be meaningful". According to them, dilution of the current Bank Safeguards Policy is evident throughout the draft. Basic World Bank requirements to assess and manage environmental risks and impacts before approval are now relaxed by providing the unbounded deferral of appraisal of significant environmental and social risks or impacts to implementation. A second major concern is that the draft proposed Social and Environmental Policy and ESSs significantly shift responsibility for safeguards implementation to borrowers, but provides less clarity than current exists on when/how the use of borrower systems would be preferable and acceptable. It remains unclear how the proposed draft will help the Bank and Borrowers make decisions to prepare or use borrower systems to effectively implement safeguards in countries where major dilutions of national social and environmental frameworks are being proposed or recently approved. "The proposed draft misses opportunities to meet the highest international standards. The draft provides no binding language regarding international human rights standards and allows governments to "opt out" of compliance to the Indigenous Peoples Policy to protect Indigenous Peoples rights, which unequivocally undermines the international consensus regarding the specific and fundamental rights of indigenous peoples over their lands, resources and the course of their own development", the organizations argue.
Read more
Hydropower projects are on the rise in Latin America as governments seek to feed growing economies. But at what cost? The plants may harness the energy capacity of running water, a renewable resource. But poorly planned and implemented dams, especially large ones, can bring myriad harms to the environment and communities. They affect fish and water quality, and they increase emissions of methane, a gas that contributes to global warming. Flooding displaces people from their homes and communities. This costs them their jobs as farmers, fishermen and hunters – and for ethnic and peasant communities, even their cultures and traditions. AIDA works with individuals and communities to protect them from poorly conceived and developed projects by using the law to defend their right to a healthy environment. This month AIDA and other organizations submitted a brief (in Portuguese) to Brazil’s Supreme Federal Court. The information demonstrates that congressional approval of the Belo Monte Dam in 2005 is illegal because the government didn’t guarantee the affected communities in the Amazon their right to consultation and free, prior and informed consent. Some meetings were held after approval of the project, and then with just scant and incomprehensible information in foreign languages for the communities. There was also little forewarning to attend. It was like telling you that your front yard is to become a street after the diggers have already started removing the lawn. The dam – which is to be the world’s third largest – is under construction and already displacing people without anyone giving them a chance to say no to the project in their own front yard. This is the first time that our combined efforts have reached the Supreme Court for a final decision on Belo Monte, said AIDA attorney María José Veramendi Villa. If the court rules against the legality of the project, then construction will have to stop and the harms righted for failing to consult the communities beforehand. If the opposite happens, the project will continue – and so will we. We will continue to provide assistance to the Brazilian Prosecutor’s Office as it pursues more than a dozen other cases against Belo Monte. These are cases that can also advance to the highest court with the goal of protecting communities from this and other dams in the Amazon. Our efforts to help communities fight dam projects are gaining attention. The Personería of San Carlos (the municipal ombudsperson), a town in northwestern Colombia, contacted AIDA to provide expertise in international environmental and human rights law. They want help in preventing the granting of a license for construction of the El Porvenir II Dam on the Samaná Norte, the last undammed river in the area. AIDA attorney and human rights and the environment fellow, Ana María Mondragón, went there to speak at a public environmental hearing for the project. The good news is that the dam has yet to be approved, meaning that there is still time for the communities to find out what could happen and voice their concerns. The government will have to take the community input into consideration before approving the project, with the possibility that the developer may have to amend construction plans – or abandon them altogether. El Porvenir II will affect fishing, a main source of work and food for the largely poor people in San Carlos. It will also flood an area where many Colombians are seeking to recover the lands that they were forcibly displaced from as result of an internal armed conflict that started more than five decades ago. “We have entered at an early stage, before the project has been approved,” said Mondragón. “We intervened in the hearing to show the inconsistencies in the environmental impact assessment made by the company and the harms that the Porvenir II dam would have in the community. We hope this will help the authorities in their decision-making process to not grant the license.” With your help, we can keep assisting Latin American communities free of charge to exercise their right to say what happens on their land and defend themselves with the law.
Read moreThe authorization violates national and international law because the communities affected by the project were not consulted. Construction of the dam continues, causing harms to people, communities and the ecosystem of the Brazilian Amazon.
Read moreCoral reefs, the nurseries of the seas, are vital to the fisheries that provide food for millions of people. Mangrove forests also benefit people: they protect coastal communities from increasingly severe storm surges and help to mitigate climate change by absorbing huge amounts of carbon dioxide. But large infrastructure projects that ignore these benefits threaten some of these vitally important ecosystems. AIDA uses the law to protect coral reefs, mangroves and other wetlands. We have found that it’s not enough to fight at the local level, country by country. AIDA approaches defense at the ecosystem level, which is more effective. We engage in discussions with international authorities, bringing attention to the obligations that countries have to the world to preserve their marine and coastal environments. "What you get with these international legal actions is a strategy that weaves together various aspects of the case: legal, political, scientific and media. So we make the issue relevant not only to local decision makers, but also to international authorities. Public support is generated and consulting or certified experts speak out about it, "said Sandra Moguel, AIDA legal advisor. A prime example of this strategy for environmental protection is a case involving Mexico, a country rich in wetlands. In May AIDA alerted the Secretariat of the Ramsar Convention, an intergovernmental treaty for the protection of wetlands, about the possible breach of Mexico’s international obligations. Mexico’s government is considering approval of the proposed Las Cruces Dam, a hydroelectric project in Nayarit, a state in the country’s northwest. Among other damage, the project would alter the course of the San Pedro Mezquital River, which feeds Marismas Nacionales (National Wetlands), one of the most extensive mangrove systems in North America. National Wetlands are listed as wetlands of international importance under the Ramsar Convention. In 2010, diplomats from the Ramsar Convention recommended that the Mexican government advocate sustainable use of the wetland while assessing the project’s feasibility. We have alerted the Ramsar Secretariat that their recommendations would be ignored if Mexico gives a green light to a project that would irreversibly damage National Wetlands, biodiversity, and the communities that depend on that environment. By drawing the attention of international bodies, AIDA strengthens the efforts of our local partner organizations. AIDA has also employed this strategy to protect the unique Cabo Pulmo coral reef, in Baja California Sur. Since 2012, we have continually reminded the Mexican authorities that both the Ramsar Secretariat and the Unesco World Heritage Committee have asked them to consider the cumulative and indirect impacts of tourism projects proposed near the reef. Our arguments were added to those presented by our partners in Mexico to prevent authorization of Cabo Dorado, a mega-resort that would involve building a new city near the reef. This project is the third that tourism developers have attempted to build next to Cabo Pulmo. Construction would surely be fatal to the reef. In a victory that extends beyond Mexican borders, the government decided on May 29 to deny the environmental permit for Cabo Dorado. With your help, we will continue to bring the voice of local communities to international forums. We will continue to add value and support their struggle to preserve marine and coastal environments that benefit us all. Thanks!
Read more