Climate Change

Un camino seco fue lo que dejó el desvío del arroyo Bruno en la Guajira, Colombia

August 09 2019 Indigenous Rights, Mining, Freshwater Sources

Coal or life: Walking where a stream once ran

The appointment was on a hot Sunday in July. Together with Wayuu indigenous and Afro-descendant communities displaced by coal mining, of social and human rights organizations, employees of Cerrejón, and government officials, I walked for more than five hours over the barren land where the Bruno Stream once ran. What I saw in my path were the remains of snails that died of thirst, stuck to the mud, and the lifeless body of a tigrillo that showed us so clearly what mustn’t happen again. The Bruno is a vein of water that once irrigated the department of La Guajira, located in Colombia’s far north, a region hit years ago by extreme drought. It is a major tributary of the Ranchería River, one of the department’s most important water sources, and forms part of the underground water systems that have long given life to the region’s communities. It was painful to walk where the Bruno once flowed free, and to think—while doing so—that what is now a dry riverbed was once abundant with life. That Sunday, we also toured the area intended to be the artificial channel of the stream. In 2014, the National Environmental Licensing Authority authorized Cerrejón to divert 3.6 kilometers of Bruno’s flow to favor ongoing coal exploitation in La Guajira. Several things made on impact on me that day. One of them was that, although the rivers belong to us all and natural water sources are public, we were accompanied the entire time by employees of the company. While walking the stream, we entered the land “owned” by the coal-mining concessionaire. Communities that used to travel freely along the banks of the stream can no longer do so today. Although the Bruno is one of few streams in Colombia’s driest department and one of the scarce sources of fresh water for communities living there, its channel was clogged and diverted to facilitate mining. An engineering project has altered one of the most important streams for a thirsty region and created an artificial path through which not a single drop of water flows. “If they carry water, they’re rivers; if not, they’re roads,” a verse from Guatemalan indigenous poet Humberto Ak’abal teaches us. The new “channel” of the Bruno is not a river, but “a barren road” attesting to the deterioration of a sensitive ecosystem. The “road” does not recover or mitigate the damages from the stream’s diversion. On the contrary, it produces new ones. The world is facing a climate crisis, and coal mining is one of its primary causes. While many countries are replacing the use of coal in their energy matrices with cleaner options, Colombia has decided to dry up a river to exploit more and more coal. Walking paths of justice The day after the walk, the frustration of the absurd did not prevent me from embracing a glimmer of hope. On Monday, I ed representatives of indigenous communities and local organizations at a public hearing convened by several Congressmen to discuss what happened with the Bruno. The strength and dignity of their words, in which decades of resistance were encrypted, fed my soul. “This territory is ours, our rivers are our life and we care for life—for our children, for our present, for our future and that of the world.” As it has done many times before, La Guajira spoke to the country and the world. They told the Congressmen that it’s not possible to prioritize the use of water for mining over human consumption. They warned that the country must transition to an energy production that doesn’t cause the damages that coal mining has to the climate, human rights, and the species and ecosystems that sustain us. The stream must return to its channel, the snails must drink again from its waters, and no tigrillo should die due to the intentional destruction of its natural habitat. In a 2017 ruling, the Constitutional Court demonstrated that uncertainties exist as to the environmental and social impacts of the Bruno Stream riverbed modification project. The Court ordered the creation of an Inter-Institutional working group to resolve the complaints of the affected people. Communities will continue to demand compliance with that ruling and demonstrate that the uncertainties are, in fact, certain damages that will continue to undermine their lives. AIDA, along with our partner organizations, will continue to accompany this struggle to demonstrate the harms of coal mining and promote clean alternatives that respect both people and the environment.

August 02 2019 Climate Change, Indigenous Rights, Freshwater Sources

Infographic: Lakes Poopó and Uru Uru, at-risk Bolivian wetlands

Located in the central-eastern Bolivian highlands, lakes Poopó and Uru Uru are important sources of water for indigenous and rural communities and the area's planet and animal life. Both ecosystems, considered Wetlands of International Importance under the Ramsar Convention, are at serious risk due to mining activity, river diversion and the climate crisis.

July 30 2019 Indigenous Rights, Mining, Freshwater Sources

Communities request international to save Bolivia’s Poopó and Uru Uru lakes

Local communities and organizations call on the Ramsar Convention to visit the lakes and issue recommendations for their preservation. The lakes are at grave risk from mining, river diversion and the climate crisis, threatening the subsistence of indigenous communities and the region’s unique plant and animal species. La Paz, Bolivia. Local communities along with a coalition of organizations request that the Ramsar Convention, an intergovernmental treaty for the protection of wetlands, send an expert mission to evaluate the health of lakes Poopó and Uru Uru, and issue recommendations to the Bolivian government for the urgent recovery of these key ecosystems. “The Ramsar Convention’s specialized knowledge on wetlands can be of great use to save lakes Poopó and Uru Uru,” said Carlos Lozano Acosta, senior attorney with the Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA). These lakes are an important source of water for the plants and animals of the Central-Eastern Bolivian highlands, particularly for several endemic and migratory bird species. Lake Poopó is the second largest lake in Bolivia, after the iconic Lake Titicaca. Together, the lakes host the largest number of flamingos in the Bolivian highlands and, quite possibly, in the entire high Andean region of South America. These highland ecosystems are also home to unique species such as the Titicaca grebe (Rollandia microptera), an endangered species of flightless bird. The lives and livelihoods of peasant and indigenous populations—including Quechua, Aymara, and Uru Murato communities—depend on the preservation of lakes Poopó and Uru Uru. The Uru Murato are known as the “people of water” due to their dependence on the lakes, and are among the oldest native indigenous communities in Bolivia. “It was precisely to preserve the lakes that, in 2002, the government ed Poopó and Uru Uru as wetlands of international importance under the Ramsar Convention,” explained Sergio Vásquez, director of the Andean Communication and Development Center (CENDA). “As such, we ask that Ramsar the Bolivian government in the protection of these and other high Andean wetlands.” In December 2015, the water levels of Lake Poopó were reduced to such a degree that the body of water actually disappeared, in what is now considered one of the largest environmental catastrophes in the country. The causes were various: sedimentation produced by mining activity; the diversion of the lake’s tributary rivers; and natural phenomenon aggravated by the climate crisis. Although the lake’s levels have since increased in times of rain, the situation remains critical during the dry season. “We’re requesting that Ramsar experts identify measures to strengthen the surveillance and monitoring of these ecosystems,” said Angela Cuenca, of the Coordinated Collective for Socio-Environmental Actions (CASA Collective). “We’d also like them to recommend mitigation and restoration actions for the damages caused by mining activities.” The degradation of lakes Poopó and Uru Uru directly affects the wellbeing of the people who depend on them, causing harms to public health, particularly among women, girls and boys. The grave situation of the lakes forced the Uru Murato people, previously dedicated to fishing, to migrate for work in the mines, placing them among the region’s first climate refugees. “We indigenous and rural women live and feel the effects of pollution and the lake’s disappearance, because we are responsible for feeding and sustaining our families,” explained Margarita Aquino, from the National Network of Women Defenders of Mother Earth (RENAMAT). “These water sources are vital for our communities and for Mother Earth Press : Victor Quintanilla (Mexico), AIDA, [email protected], +5215570522107

July 22 2019 Oceans, Freshwater Sources, Climate Change

What we must do to preserve the planet’s biodiversity and natural heritage

Society is at serious risk of losing our natural world and all that sustains us. Our actions are provoking mass extinction and accelerating the loss of natural resources, plants and animals. Among these actions are the growth of agriculture and livestock production, the destruction of habitats, the introduction of invasive species, the expansion of urban areas, poaching and overfishing, overpopulation and pollution. That’s according to the most complete global evaluation of biodiversity yet, recently published by scientists at the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES). The report shows that the capacity of Earth’s ecosystems to provide benefits to people has diminished drastically over the last 70 years. That’s because, on average: global resources have diminished by 47 percent; 25 percent of flora and fauna species are in danger of extinction; and the climate crisis is driving higher temperatures and increased acidification of the ocean, which is causing coral reef coverage worldwide to shrink. What’s more, a third of all species in the ocean are being overfished. Despite these alarming statistics, we can still take the planet out of the grave situation we’ve put it in. But it will require radical changes to our approach. The diagnosis for Latin America Historically, the world has ed through five mass extinctions that have caused the loss of more than 70 percent of the Earth’s life forms. Currently, we seem to be living through the sixth. Although species extinction occurs naturally, it generally does so at a rate of about one species per million each year. The current rate far exceeds that, as at least 100 species per million are going extinct each year—and that rate is rising. Another way to visualize this global threat is by listing the countries with the most species in danger of extinction. Five countries in Latin America are in the top 10 for species loss, with Mexico topping the list at 665 threatened species (71 species of birds, 96 mammals, 98 reptiles, 181 types of fish and 219 amphibians). Mexico’s situation is largely being driven by high rates of deforestation, a practice aimed at increasing agricultural area to cover the country’s growing demand for food. In fact, Latin America and Southeast Asia have lost millions of hectares of terrestrial ecosystems and fresh water through increased livestock production and agriculture (which includes the use of fertilizers). Other countries in the region with high rates of species loss include Colombia (540 species), Ecuador (436), Brazil (413), and Peru (385). Species extinction alters and impedes the proper functioning of ecosystems, which rely on interactions between varied forms of life to produce food, manage water supply, regulate climate, and more. Big changes to ensure a better future Although life on our planet has existed for some 4 billion years, humanity has only been around 200 thousand of those; yet we’ve managed to disrupt the Earth’s natural balance. Although our actions have negatively affected the earth, this shows that we, as humans, have the ability to transform our environment. The IPBES report mentions the Aichi Biodiversity Targets as transformative actions that can protect biodiversity. One of those is the creation of natural protected areas, which have helped reduce the risk of extinction for species like mammals and amphibians. Nevertheless, the report emphasizes the need for a drastic change in the values and objectives of our governments so that decisions at the local, national, and international levels are aligned to combat the causes behind the planet’s degradation. To that end, and taking into the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals, nations must: Expand and coordinate the global network of natural protected areas. Invest in green infrastructure. Produce food, materials, and energy in sustainable ways. Conserve and use water efficiently. indigenous and traditional communities, who protect many of the planet’s remaining natural resources. Adequately approach population growth and global consumption levels. Create new environmental laws and better compliance with existing ones. Slow pollution and the overexploitation of our natural resources. “People shouldn’t panic, but they should begin to make drastic changes,” said Josef Settele, an IPBES co-chair and entomologist at the Helmholtz Center for Environmental Research in . “Business as usual with small adjustments won’t be enough.” Our air, water, and food depend on biodiversity—the varied forms of life on our planet and the interaction between them. Caring for this natural heritage is a shared task; it is now more important than ever.

July 12 2019 Coral reefs, Oceans, Climate Change

Why these algae-eating fish may be corals’ greatest allies

Numerous studies have shown that herbivorous fish play a fundamental role in the health and survival of coral reefs by removing the algae that robs corals of the light and space they need to grow. But populations of these small algae-eating fish are diminishing rapidly due to human activity, which puts our reefs at greater risk. In the Mexican Caribbean, for example, 60 percent of the reefs are considered in poor or critical health. There exist a diverse array of herbivorous fish in our oceans; they’re grouped into various families that are, in turn, divided into groups according to their feeding habits and roles in controlling algae growth. Parrotfish are among the most important species, as their strong beaks allow them to clean large amounts of macroalgae. Herbivorous fish live in tropical and subtropical waters, including many Latin American and Caribbean nations—Belize, Colombia, Guatemala, and Mexico, to name a few. These fish contribute to the health of key coral ecosystems like the Mesoamerican Reef System. Despite serving as fish hatcheries and natural barriers against hurricanes, coral reefs are extremely fragile and vulnerable to the global climate crisis, which is driving ocean acidification, sea level rise, and increased algae growth. Experts say that, when faced with the reduced presence of herbivorous fish, reef systems lose their capacity to recover from extreme weather events like hurricanes, which are becoming more and more powerful. But the relationship between herbivorous fish and coral reefs is at increasing risk. Dwindling herbivorous fish populations are evident in the Caribbean, where fishing communities have begun to capture parrotfish after overfishing commercial species. The destruction of mangroves and marine grassland habitats put these fish at risk, since many species of parrotfish rely on them during their life cycle. Environmental degradation also increases sedimentation and the concentration of nutrients, causing an increase in macroalgae. Algae growth and an increase in coral diseases are the result of pollution caused by inadequate wastewater management and runoff from commercial agriculture. These problems require the implementation of urgent measures aimed at preserving herbivorous fish populations and, with them, maintaining the health and regenerative capacity of coral reefs. Such measures should include the establishment and adoption of clear fisheries management and conservation strategies to ensure the recuperation of herbivorous fish, particularly parrotfish, populations. Protected marine areas or regeneration zones that prohibit fishing in key areas should also be created. To adequately protect these fish, States must also: standardize the monitoring of fish populations in the region and implement alternative management strategies; promote comprehensive, regional management that enables local authorities to share experiences and establish common conservation tools; and create and implement regulations and laws to combat overfishing and bad tourism practices, and promote low-impact coastal development. In nature, symbiotic relationships, like that of herbivorous fish and corals, are abundant. We must learn to recognize and value them. Likewise, if we take care of nature, nature will take care of us.

July 09 2019 Climate Change, Human Rights

Putting people’s fundamental rights at the core of solutions to the climate emergency

Announcing the First Ever Global Summit on Human Rights and Climate Change The People’s Summit on Climate, Rights and Human Survival – the first ever global summit on human rights and climate change – will be hosted by leading civil society groups and the UN Human Rights Office in New York on 18-19 September. The People’s Summit aims to galvanize the human rights community to urgently scale-up its efforts on climate justice, creating the most diverse movement ever assembled to tackle the climate crisis. The People’s Summit was announced in an open-letter below, which was published on the Thomson Reuters Foundation. The human rights and environmental communities must seek solutions together. It’s time for all of us to come forward as one to face the climate crisis. Our organisations seek a world where people thrive in a safe and healthy environment, where human rights come before corporate profits. To make it happen, we need to face the climate crisis united in the strongest and most diverse movement ever assembled. Only together can we make world leaders take this emergency seriously. Real solutions to the climate breakdown must place people and our fundamental rights at the core. This is an invitation to all those who value human dignity and wellbeing to fully throw their weight behind the call for global climate justice. And to those working to protect our planet to center their efforts in communities, particularly the people most impacted and least responsible for the climate crisis. The human rights community can bring key constituencies, power and skills to the fight for climate justice. The strength of a collective movement to overcome the climate crisis needs to match the gravity of the problem. Our organisations are coming together to make it happen, and we are urging the environmental and human rights communities to us. To meet the challenge we, the people, must be more connected with each other and more committed to our planet than ever before. This is a matter of survival. Rampant carbon emissions have triggered unprecedented, dangerous and destabilising changes in our climate. Corporate and governmental neglect has already exposed millions to increasingly extreme weather disasters. We must reverse course now; the window of opportunity to act is closing. Make no mistake. The impacts of climate change already hinder our rights to health, food, water, housing, work and even life itself. These impacts are even more severe for people already in vulnerable situations in places impacted by severe weather, poverty or oppression. Our societies cannot keep on like this. People need access to justice, governments must work for the people and corporations need to be able for their actions. Now is the time to act. The signs of a shared will to do so are everywhere. Students are taking to the streets to call for a safe future. Indigenous Peoples are speaking up for the defense of land, water and communities’ rights. Workers are demanding safe and well-paying jobs in better, cleaner industries. Women’s rights activists are putting forward a wealth of feminist solutions. Religious leaders are calling on us to protect communities and nature. Scientists are gathering and sharing evidence to guide us out of the crisis. We know the challenge, and the answers are there. Solutions are available now, including renewable energy sources, respect for fundamental rights and traditional knowledge, and a true focus on the needs of the people over corporate greed. All of our organisations work on climate change already, some more explicitly than others. But now is the moment for us to connect the dots between our causes and forces. A climate emergency is upon us, and we must act now. Environmental human rights defenders, Indigenous Peoples and local activists have long risked everything to fight environmental degradation. They are now ed in their struggle by growing mass movements such as the school climate strikes, Extinction Rebellion and campaigners calling for a Green New Deal. In this new era of climate activism, the human rights community cannot remain on the sidelines. It is more urgent than ever that we step up by working together to protect the communities and individuals on the frontlines of the climate struggle. That is why 150 non-governmental leaders and activists from different communities are coming together on September 18 and 19 for the ‘People’s Summit on Climate, Rights and Human Survival’. Our organisations will be there along with the United Nations Human Rights Office to people demanding immediate and ambitious climate action from their governments to protect communities. We believe in unleashing the potential of a diverse movement to safeguard present and future generations. We are united to demand climate justice. Confirmed signers: Astrid Puentes, Co-Executive Director, Interamerican Association for Environmental Defense (AIDA) Bridget Burns, Director, Women’s Environment and Development Organization Carroll Muffett, President and CEO, Center for International Environmental Law Chris Grove, Executive Director, ESCR-Net Ellen Dorsey, Executive Director, Wallace Global Fund Gillian Caldwell, CEO, Global Witness Iago Hairon Souza, Coordinator, Engajamundo Jennifer Morgan, International Executive Director, Greenpeace International Kumi Naidoo, Secretary General, Amnesty International May Boeve, Executive Director, 350.org Phil Bloomer, Executive Director, Business & Human Rights Resource Centre Philip Alston, Center for Human Rights and Global Justice Chair, New York University Sharan Burrow, General Secretary, International Trade Union Confederation Sofia Monsalve, Secretary General, FIAN International Steve Trent, Executive Director, Environmental Justice Foundation Thalita Silva e Silva, Coordinator, Engajamundo

July 06 2019 Climate Change, Human Rights

The GCF should thoroughly assess the policies and practices of the BNDES and require conditions for its accreditation

The Board of the Green Climate Fund (GCF) is considering an application for accreditation of the Brazilian National Development Bank (BNDES, Banco Nacional de Desenvolvimento Econômico e Social). The accreditation process of the BNDES is an opportunity to strengthen the Bank’s policies and procedures designed to identify, address and remediate environmental and social impacts linked to its activities and operations. With the new istration of President Jair Bolsonaro, Brazil is suffering severe setbacks in its environmental, social and climate policies and agenda. Brazilian environmental agencies are being dismantled, while renowned and effective mechanisms such as the Amazon Fund are at risk of becoming inoperative or even eliminated. In such a context, the effectiveness of the country’s environmental and social (E&S) governance and its instruments, agencies and institutions, risks being severely undermined. In order to fulfil its mandate to promote a paradigm shift towards low-emission and climate resilient development pathways within the context of sustainable developmentthe GCF should ensure that local systems and institutions are adequately equipped to deliver the sustainability outcomes intended by the Fund. The GCF should carefully assess BNDES’ existing E&S policies and procedures and ensure that approval is conditioned upon commitments and measurable steps by the Bank, with political from the Brazilian government, to further strengthen its policies and procedures to address following shortcomings related to: Disclosure of environmental and social (E&S) information; Design of E&S policies and monitoring tools; Human rights standards and the rights of indigenous peoples and other traditional communities; Grievance mechanism; Commitments concerning climate change. Read the full statement here

May 20 2019 Climate Change, Fracking, Freshwater Sources

Is the UN finally turning against fracking?

The world is divided over the issue of fracking, a fact that is (at times painfully) apparent in the United Kingdom (UK) where I grew up. Four separate countries make up the UK. Of them, England is the only nation that still allows hydraulic fracturing; Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland (along with a host of other countries worldwide) have banned the controversial process. Despite earthquakes linked to fracking in areas of the country where such things are virtually unheard of—plus waves of protests, controversy and opposition campaigns— the British government has so far refused to change its position. However, a recent United Nations recommendation to the UK may signal the beginning of the end for fracking in England and, hopefully, around the world. Fracking and the United Nations Until recently, the UN has appeared to have a complicated relationship with fracking. Several different UN bodies have made conflicting statements about the benefits of, and issues with, this means of energy production. In early 2018, the UN Conference on Trade and Development released a report that, according to one of its authors, did “not [say fracking] is good or bad,” but rather that each project’s cost/benefit analysis was dependent on a number of context-specific factors. The report cited positive aspects of fracking, calling it a useful “bridge fuel” for States aiming to move towards more environmentally-friendly renewable power sources, alongside it’s disadvantages. This argument is not viable since the environmental impact of hydraulic fracturing is even greater than that of conventional gas and oil exploitation. Over the last few months, however, it seems the UN has been hardening its position against fracking, particularly given its negative climate change impacts in the context of the Paris Agreement, the intergovernmental treaty in which nations have committed to taking ambitious steps to keep global warming below 1.5 degrees centigrade with respect to pre-industrial levels. Since October 2018, there have been 2 UN recommendations issued against fracking. In the UK, the government was urged to consider a complete and comprehensive ban on fracking; and in Argentina, the government was urged to reconsider the development of a large fracking project. The dangers of fracking Although for its promoters fracking has led to a huge spike in oil and gas production around the world—perhaps most notably in the US—its use has come at great environmental cost, particularly with regards to air quality and water supply due to the amount of water used in the process and its consequent contamination. Fracking releases large quantities of methane, a greenhouse gas whose global warming potential is 86 times greater than carbon dioxide over a 20-year period, according to the Intergovernmental on Climate Change. In addition, the release of this gas can be hugely detrimental to the air quality surrounding fracking sites. Fracking also leads to increased earthquake risks due to the high pressure used to fracture layers of shale rock and extract oil and gas from it. In its recommendations to the UK and Argentina, the UN has clearly stressed the dangers of fracking. The key reason behind its recommendation to Argentina to reconsider the fracking project was its effect on climate change, especially in light of the Paris Agreement, and “the negative impact [that the project would have] on global warming and on the enjoyment of economic and social rights by the world’s population and future generations.” In its recommendation to the UK, it was noted that women in the UK are “disproportionately affected by the harmful effects of fracking, including exposure to hazardous and toxic chemicals, environmental pollution, and climate change.” Stopping the spread of fracking While operational in certain areas of the world, and being banned in others, fracking is advancing rapidly in Latin America. In the face of increasing global energy demand, it is crucial that the region, and the international community as a whole, commits to developing only truly sustainable energy projects. Fracking is not one. I believe the UN’s recent change in tone on fracking is a positive advance that should inspire both Argentina and the UK to react accordingly. From a personal point of view, I hope the UK heeds the growing evidence about the dangers of fracking and abandons the practice immediately. For Latin America, and other regions facing fracking’s blind advance, there are many countries to hold up as examples of how to confront the controversial practice. That’s why AIDA recently published a report highlighting the arguments and mechanisms that have been used around the world to restrict fracking and avoid its negative impacts on people and the environment. It is crucial that these impacts be properly considered as we take the ambitious steps needed to create an energy matrix that can solve the world’s energy needs without violating human rights, destroying our common goods, or worsening the catastrophic impacts of the climate crisis.

May 15 2019 Climate Change, Human Rights

Protests Challenge Hydropower Companies at Global Event in Paris

Civil society organizations denounce corporate attempts to label hydroelectric dams as “green energy,” citing human rights abuses and environmental damage. Paris, —A coalition of activists, organizations and indigenous leaders convened a series of events this week in light of the opening of the World Hydropower Conference, calling attention to the socially and environmentally destructive nature of hydroelectric dams, as well at their climate-aggravating impacts. From May 14-16, the International Hydropower Association (IHA) is hosting its biannual World Hydropower Congress in central Paris. The industry seeks to portray hydroelectric dams as a clean source of renewable energy, which they claim are essential for delivering the Paris Climate Agreement and the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals. However, a broad coalition of environmental and human rights organizations, together with social movements, argue that the dam industry’s claims amount to greenwashing, and are aimed at capturing new sources of finance from institutions like the Green Climate Fund. They point to numerous cases where hydropower projects have provoked disastrous consequences for people and the environment. Citing mounting scientific evidence that dams are a significant source of greenhouse gases—CO2and, particularly, methane—civil society groups also highlight the role of dams in aggravating climate change. A t statement signed by more than 250 civil society groups from 70 countries calls attention to the false promises of hydropower and the urgent need for truly sustainable energy solutions. It is available in five languages. These and other issues—including the impacts of hydroelectric dams on natural and cultural heritage sites—were debated by scientists, activists and representatives of affected communities from Brazil, Colombia, Myanmar and Turkey in a parallel event to the IHA Congress, held at the Town Hall of the 6thArrondissement of Paris on May 13. The conference was organized by the NGOs Planète Amazone, GegenStrömung / CounterCurrent, Rivers without Boundaries, International Rivers, and AIDA. Myint Zaw, an activist and researcher from Myanmar who was awarded the 2015 Goldman Prize, was one of the speakers at the conference. “The food security of millions of people is threatened by dam projects planned for the Irrawaddy River that would impact important farmlands needed for rice production along the river and in delta region,” Zaw said. During Tuesday’s opening of the World Hydropower Congress, representatives of indigenous communities, social movements and non-governmental organizations protested together with activists from Extinction Rebellion in front of the Espace Grande Arche in La Défense. A focus of the protest was to call attention to the growing number of human rights and environmental activists murdered in dam-related conflicts. “Miguel Ángel Pabón Pabón disappeared as a result of his activism against the Hidrosogamoso Dam in Colombia, which has continued despite severe human rights violations,“ said Juan Pablo Soler from Movimiento Ríos Vívos of Colombia, mentioning one of many defenders lost. In Gabon, the Kingélé and Tchimbélé dams are adversely affecting populations living beside rivers. “During heavy rains, some villages are flooded when reservoirs overflow. Rivers turn into lakes, water becomes polluted and fish die intoxicated. There is no structure to help us on the ground, nor does the government hear our complaints, which is why we look abroad to issue a distress call,” proclaimed Assossa, a Pigmy leader. Three representatives of the Munduruku people from the Brazilian Amazon—Chief Arnaldo Kabá, Alessandra Korap and Candido Waro Munduruku—participated in both the parallel conference and the protest. After the protest, the Munduruku attempted to hand deliver a letter to the corporate headquarters of Électricité de (EDF), majority-controlled by the French government. EDF is involved in the controversial Sinop dam on the Teles Pires River, a tributary of the Tapajos, and has contributed to studies that promote the São Luiz do Tapajós mega-dam, which would flood Munduruku territory. EDF representatives refused to speak with the Munduruku leaders. “EDF invades our territory, destroys our rivers, our territory and our sacred places. And when we come here to deliver a letter to this huge company, we’re barred,” stated Alessandra Munduruku. “We’re sad, but we’re determined to continue our struggle to defend our territory.” Press s: Gert-Peter Bruch, Planète Amazone, [email protected] (French, English), + 33 (0)7 81 23 92 91 Brent Millikan, International Rivers, [email protected] (English, Portuguese), +55 61 8153-7009 Thilo F. Papacek, GegenStrömung – CounterCurrent / Forum Umwelt und Entwicklung, [email protected] (German, Portuguese, Spanish, English), ++49 151 412 145 19 Eugene Simonov, Rivers without Boundaries, [email protected](Russian, English, Chinese), +79 (0) 165 491 22 Resources: Further information about the parallel event from May 13: http://www.transrivers.org/2019/2634/ The t statement, available in Chinese, English, Portuguese, Russian and Spanish can be ed here: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1pgS3YHm4zy5_LFSSjRe0KH-DMK773DQI Link to the Munduruku letter of protest to EDF: Électricité de (Portuguese and English):https://drive.google.com/file/d/1TxqIiOuJDxNUI2YKPtUBrE_wucJLFl-E/view?usp=sharing Press photos available free of charge (Credit: Todd Southgate): https://tinyurl.com/y34b2g7u Clip reel of protest at opening of IHA Congress and Munduruku attempt to deliver letter at IHA headquarters: https://youtu.be/9BrI3AqVnXE Fact sheet from CounterCurrent on hydroelectric dams and UN Sustainable Development: tinyurl.com/y6mbjqj2

An aerial view of the Amazon jungle surrounding the Belo Monte Dam in Brazil.

May 13 2019 Climate Change, Freshwater Sources, Large Dams

The False Promises of Hydropower

How dams fail to deliver the Paris Climate Agreement and UN Sustainable Development Goals A t Statement by Civil Society Organizations on occasion of the 2019 World Hydropower Congress in Paris, We live in an age of urgency. Scientists have warned that we have little time to act to bring climate change under control and protect the integrity of life on our planet. Confronting the climate crisis requires creative solutions that both protect nature and respect human rights. Facing these challenges, we cannot remain silent onlookers while corporate profiteers, financiers, and their allies peddle false solutions for addressing climate change and implementing sustainable development. A flagrant example of such deception is the attempt to portray large hydroelectric dams as a ‘clean and green’ source of energy, as can be seen at the 2019 World Hydropower Congress. Organized in Paris by the industrial lobby of the International Hydropower Association (IHA) in partnership with UNESCO, the conference’s title reads, “Delivering the Paris Climate Agreement and the Sustainable Development Goals.” Such glossy portrayals of hydroelectric dam projects—with an eye toward capturing financial incentives through mechanisms like Climate Bonds and the Green Climate Fund—conveniently ignore a long legacy of social and environmental catastrophes, economic waste and, all too often, massive corruption schemes that are the antithesis of truly sustainable development. ... A Call for Action The undersigned civil society organizations call on the of the International Hydropower Association, governments and international financial institutions to implement the following urgent actions: Steer priorities, investments and financial incentives away from additional hydroelectric projects and towards energy efficiency and truly sustainable renewable energy options (solar, wind and biomass and, when appropriate, micro-hydro). Special attention should be given to opportunities for technological innovation, decentralized generation and improving energy access among isolated, off-grid communities. Eliminate financial incentives for new hydroelectric projects within climate change mechanisms, such as the Green Climate Fund and Nationally Determined Contributions, and within programs to promote implementation of the UN Sustainable Development Goals (with the possible exception of micro-hydro projects). Commission independent audits of controversial existing dam projects and basin-wide cascades in of their social and environmental consequences, identifying steps to mitigate impacts and ensure just reparations for affected communities, based on direct consultations. When such measures are prohibitively expensive or otherwise inviable, the de-commissioning of dam projects should be promoted. Ensure the alignment of operational procedures for existing hydroprojects with relevant territorial plans at the basin level, such as integrated water resource management and protected areas that ensure key ecological processes and the rights of local communities, based on the concepts and tools of participatory, adaptive management. Ensure that renewable energy policies and projects adopt, across the board, robust guidelines to safeguard human rights and environmental protections, such as ILO Convention 169 and the UN Principles on Business and Human Rights. No energy facilities that potentially impact the territories and livelihoods of indigenous peoples and other traditional communities should be authorized without obtaining the free, prior and informed consent of the community and ensuring the cooperative design of co-management strategies. Among the benefits of such a paradigm shift in energy strategies and development planning will be major contributions toward protecting the world’s last free-flowing rivers, vital for climate resiliency, biodiversity conservation and sustainable livelihoods. Energy companies and governments must halt all efforts to dam the world’s remaining free-flowing rivers and concentrate instead on: i) improving efficiency and the sustainability of existing hydropower projects and cascades; and ii) investing in energy efficiency and truly sustainable renewables. Moreover, governments must urgently promote the permanent legal protection of the world’s last free-flowing rivers, including transboundary watercourses, with due respect for the territorial rights of indigenous peoples and other traditional communities, who play fundamental roles as the guardians of healthy rivers. Read the Full Statement Here