Mapping Environmental Justice Event report 19 March 2014, from 9.00 -13.00h As global consumption of resources increases exponentially, the search for energy and materials cause the “commodity frontiers” to expand. Along the entire global chain of production - from extraction, to processing, to disposal - the fast increasing impacts are most often distributed highly unequally among populations. Those most heavily impacted are usually the already most marginalized sectors of the world population, who usually depend much more on local natural resources for their livelihood. A new Atlas of Environmental Justice – based on a database of almost 1000 cases (and growing) of ecological conflicts – illustrates the fast spreading turmoil. The event was organised by the European Environmental Bureau (EEB) and United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). The EEB is Europe's largest federation of environmental organisations with 140+ member organisations. The UNEP Liaison Office to the EU Institutions is focused both on closely following environmental policy-making at the EU level and contributing to policy shaping for sustainable development. The aim was to bring attention to the increasing number of environmental conflicts in the world and connecting the dots on a global scale. Overconsumption in Europe is fuelling the aggressive expansion of the commodity frontiers. If Europe takes this seriously, then an urgent shift towards more sustainable lifestyles needs to be promoted – for example in the Post 2015 Sustainable Development Agenda. The Atlas of Environmental Justice launched at the event is an outcome from The Environmental Justice Organisations, Liabilities and Trade project. This project is supported by the European Commission and runs from 2011 till 2015. The project supports the work of Environmental Justice Organisations (EJOs), uniting scientists, activist organisations, think-tanks, policy-makers from the fields of environmental law, environmental health, political ecology, ecological economics, to talk about issues related to Ecological Distribution. The EJOLT team works in a consortium of 23 organisations based across the world and coordinated by the Autonomous University of Barcelona. Information about the project can be found at: www.ejolt.org Twitter hashtag during & after the event: #environmentaljustice
1
1. WELCOME WORDS by Jeremy Wates European Environmental Bureau Jeremy Wates, Secretary General of the EEB, welcomed the audience and stressed the importance of this event. He expressed his satisfaction that the EEB is the new partner of the EJOLT program, due to the effective merging of ANPED with the EEB. ANPED has already worked for years within this program and the predecessor of this project. ANPED is now the new “Global Policies and Sustainability” unit of the EEB, that will focus on international processes (UN, OECD), based on the environmental justice approach, and with close ties with Southern (environmental) activists. Mr. Wates outlined how the scarcity of resources means that there is more stress on land, minerals, oil etc. This leads to more conflicts and that poses a huge challenge. This, however, often goes unnoticed here in Brussels, because in terms of impacts on environmentalists, “the EU is on the soft end of the scale”. At least one activist is killed per week globally, but hardly any of these casualties occur in Europe. He stated that, “The EU is fuelling these conflicts with our USCP: Unsustainable consumption and production”. In that sense, our way of life is on the account of the Global South. To correct this imbalance, it is essential for the developed world to go beyond mere improvements in efficiency and embrace a sufficiency approach in relation to production and consumption. He went on to emphasize the importance of strengthening (inter)national environmental legal frameworks and to use the existing ones fully. In order to do that, we need to connect grass roots organisations or Environmental Justice Organisations (EJOs). EJOs are civil society groups involved in conflicts over resource extraction or waste disposal, which increase as the world economy uses more materials and energy. Costs of economic growth and development are disproportionately borne by the most socially and economically vulnerable sections of society, who often lack the political power to resist displacement, dispossession or exposure to environmental health risks. By giving these people a voice, EJOs practice "environmentalism of the poor". Presenting the programme for the day, Mr Wates explained that EJOLT is an FP7 program that connects 23 organisations, from scientists, advocacy NGOs and activists worldwide. The two cases presented today are not EJOLT cases but one brought by Friends of the Earth on land grabbing, and one by the NGO Platform on shipbreaking. After that we’ll witness the launch of the Map of Environmental Justice. Then, Barbara Ruis will shed light on the UNEP approach on this. Finally, the panel will discuss what can be done at European and International level. After his introduction Mr. Wates gave the floor to Leida Rijnhout (Director for Global Policies and Sustainability - EEB), who was the moderator of the day.
2
2. KEYNOTE by Dr. Godwin Ojo – Co-founder and Director of Environmental Rights Action / Friends of the Earth Nigeria For close to two decades he has been involved in the establishment of community resource centres (CRCs) in the Niger Delta communities, Nigeria. He hold an MSc in Environment and Development studies (University of East Anglia, UK), and recently obtained his PhD (King’s College, UK). Dr. Godwin Ojo shared his experience with environmental injustice in his home country Nigeria. His organization recently went to the ICC with a case against Shell, for pollution in the Niger Delta. He explained that the emergence of an environmental justice movement in his country is a response to violations against regulations and the failure to fulfill obligations by oil companies. He continued to illustrate how growing energy demands and extraction of new fossil fuels leads to increasing violent conflicts, human rights violations and poverty at the sites of extraction. As a counter measure his organization is asking Shell to “publish what you pump”. Currently, the only volume measured is the volume of oil exported while the actual volume of oil produced remains unknown. The difference between the two figures would immediately show how much oil is lost by leaks and oil theft. The key demands of ERA and local communities are restoration of the environment and the prevention of future oil spill. In reality, however, local communities are often fobbed off with inadequate compensations while restoration is largely ignored. A 2011 UNEP Report recommends an initial 1 billion $ for immediate clean-up in a particular area – but ERA calculates that over time, a 100 billion $ remediation will be needed to restore all the damage. Dr. Ojo stressed that it is very important to install binding environmental laws on a global level in order to sentence CEOs for crimes against humanity or ecocide. After that he drew attention to the increased violence in fights against oil spills and described how local communities increase capturing refined products. He ended the talk with an urgent appeal for companies to respect environmental justice and to pay up the true costs of oil production. Check here for the ppt of his presentation.
3. CASE: Land grabbing by Anne van Schaik Friends of the Earth Europe Mrs. van Schaik`s talk was concerned with land grabbing, presenting a representative case from Indonesia, where a palm oil company (Bumitama Agri) produces palm oil on a plantation that does not have the right permits-thereby bringing illegal palm oil into the supply chain. After giving a broad definition of land grabbing she described the recent developments in this conflict area: While initially land grabbing was done by northern countries, targeting southern ones, nowadays southsouth grabbing is increasing, for example African government signing contracts with Asian palm oil companies. Overall the scope of land grabbing is raising - large-scale land deals have risen 20 3
million hectares between 2005 and 2009, according to the International Food Policy Research Institute/ IFPRI (2009).
Subsequently Mrs. van Schaik addressed the most important reasons for land grabbing. Land is a limited resource and therefore regarded a good investment by banks and investors. Due to consumption patterns, but also EU policy, the demand for commodities is rising. For example, EU biofuel policy has guaranteed markets for ethanol and biodiesel, so that financial investors and corporations from the energy sector have been investing huge amounts of money into farming operations for biofuel. Most importantly in this debate, she stressed, is the fact that land grabbing is happing as key players, like the World Bank, create the impression that there is ‘empty’ land available for agricultural and forestry products. Following this, she presented a short video of a representative case from Indonesia, which documented the activities of the Indonesian palm oil company Bumitama Agri. This company manages a ghost estate which does not have the required permits, thereby bringing illegal palm oil into the supply chain. International palm oil companies, in this case Wilmar International, then buy the illegal palm oil to produce biofuels. Finally, she made the link between the EU biofuel policy and land grabbing in the South. "The rise in demand in palm oil in the past years in Europe is caused for 80% for biofuel production�. She presented some measures that should be adopted in order to reduce land grabbing. The EU needs to measure its land footprint (as well as our material footprint, water footprint and carbon footprint) in order to set reduction targets within the Resource Efficiency Roadmap (RER). Also, the EU has to scrap targets and subsidies for biofuels and EU governments have to ensure that investors apply strict policy when financing agricultural companies. The EU further should ensure access for communities to legal redress in countries where investment originates. NGOs and activists should increase their efforts to share information on research and cases and develop alternative strategies for a more sustainable land use. Check here for the ppt of her presentation.
4
4. CASE: Ship breaking by Ingvild Jenssen NGO Shipbreaking Platform Mrs. Jenssen talked about the work of the NGO Shipbreaking Platform, illustrated current shipbreaking practices and explained what is needed for effective implementation of the new European Union Regulation on ship recycling. The NGO Shipbreaking Platform is a global coalition of environmental and human rights NGOs which works to prevent the environmental harm and human rights violations caused by the dumping of toxic ships on the beaches of South Asia. Each year about 1000 large ocean going vessels are dismantled on the beaches of South Asia to recover steel. These vessels are taken apart by unskilled and unprotected workers under extremely poor working conditions and in the process large amounts of hazardous wastes are released into the environment. Ship owners earn millions of dollars with every vessel beached and the true costs of safe and clean ship recycling are externalised to poorer communities and their environment. In 1992 the Basel Convention was adopted to control transboundary movements of hazardous waste, including end-of-life vessels, but ship owners knowingly take advantage of loopholes in this convention in order to circumvent the law. In 2009 the IMO adopted the Hong Kong Convention, which is less stringent and makes it even easier for ship owners to export toxic end-of-life vessels to developing countries. In the meantime, the EU has been negotiating a new ship recycling regulation which will ask the European Commission to establish a list of green ship recycling facilities and oblige EU-flagged vessels to use EU-listed facilities. Most EU-owned vessels, however, already use flags of convenience rather than European registries during operational use and thus will be able to circumvent the regulation. To ensure proper implementation of the new EU Regulation the NGO Shipbreaking Platform has been calling for the introduction of a financial instrument that will hold the polluter – the ship owner – responsible for the costs at end-of-life. Check here for the ppt of her presentation.
5
5. LAUNCH of the Atlas for Environmental Justice by Leah Temper - Autonomous University of Barcelona Ms. Temper introduced the Atlas of Environmental Conflicts. From the start she clarified that we call those conflicts “environmental”, but for the victims it is often about survival. People in the South usually do not call themselves environmental activists. Ms. Temper showed the filter functions – such as a map of violence on activists. She also explained that 17% of the cases are success stories. “Although we should say temporary success, because as long as there is gold under the ground, someone might come back.” Big Fish Lake in Canada is one of the examples she mentioned. She also stressed that what we call solutions is not always a solution to people in the South. “Our solutions often mean we take up more environmental space of others: see biofuels, land grabbing, REDD, CDM, ...” Finally, Ms. Temper explained how maps reveal which countries hold the power. Our logo puts the south up and in our communication work we often use a reversed map with the South up. Check here for the ppt of her presentation.
If you want to add cases to the Atlas mail to: ejoltmap@gmail.com
6
6. Challenges at the international level by Barbara Ruis Legal Advisor at the United Nations Environment Program Mrs. Ruis talked about the effort of the UNEP to increase awareness of the linkage between human rights and environmental law. She reported on the result of the Resolution 19/10 (2012) by the Human Rights Council: it was agreed to appoint an Independent Expert on the issue of human rights obligations relating to the enjoyment of a sustainable environment. The expert will study the human rights obligations regarding the right to a healthy environment and identify, promote and exchange views on best practices regarding human rights commitments. Further, she presented a compendium (UNEP Compendium on Human Rights and the Environment) which contains a selection of international legal cases and Environmental and Human Rights Law Instruments. Finally, she reported of the outcome of the UNEP GC 27/9 (2013) on Advancing Justice, Governance and Law for Environmental Sustainability which is the first internationally negotiated document to establish the term ‘environmental rule of law’. Check here for the ppt of her presentation.
7. PANEL DEBATE : Future challenges and policy recommendations
The moderator gave a short summary of the proposals the speakers mentioned during their interventions. She clustered them into 4 groups:
Legal frameworks: conventions, International Court for Environmental Crimes, use existing law to use the national/regional courts, commission on Human Rights, improve governmental and corporate accountability
Market based instruments: internalize the external costs in the price (polluter pays principle), tax shift (more on environmental degradation, less on labour), phase out perverse subsidies, Financial Transaction Tax, … 7
Coherence with other policies: agricultural-, trade-, energy – policies are often drivers for environmental conflicts: biofuels instead of food, export oriented agriculture, consumption based economic growth, …
Avoiding conflicts, by fundamental shift to sustainable lifestyles within the boundaries of the ecosystems of the planet. More focus on regional economies, recycling, leasing and sufficiency approach. Change of financial and monetary systems, which promote speculation and commercialization of common goods. Question: we are aware that possible solutions for the huge problems we are facing will always be a mix of the several instruments we can use. But what would be the best leverage to start for the European Union. May I ask this to Mr. Wates, as European federation of Environmental Organisations? Mr. Wates: The EU should be promoting the legal principles in the Aarhus Convention. Severe hard law instruments should be enforced as these are more likely to have an impact.
It is also important that environmentalists have improved participation possibilities in decision making processes. UNEP, for example, has a process on stakeholder engagement in UNEP itself, which hopefully will result in a future stronger voice for them in the process. Ms. Temper: Expressed her hope that the process will also include people from the South who do not necessarily call themselves environmentalists. Mr. Ojo: Stated that every society must aspire for positive change. They always fight for constructive proposals. But sometimes you have to be strict, and therefore they plea for leaving the oil in the soil, as the social and environmental cost is too high. It also forces a faster energy transition. Communities are rising so there is a need for this energy transition, also in our countries. He stresses also the need for an Environmental Court of Justice – and asked UNEP to promote that. Question from the floor: What is the panel’s opinion on the End Ecocide campaign? Mr. Wates: this is a promising and fascinating initiative. He would like to see the responsible CEO of companies committing environmental crimes behind bars. It will take some time to have environmental crimes be recognized as such, it took also a long time to get the ICC (International Criminal Court). He agreed that working this out is legally tricky and difficult. A lot more work needs to be done on that. We like to engage thinking on this. But this is still my personal view. We also need to discuss this further within the EEB and with the members. Mrs. Ruis: Noted that the ICC already contains an environmental chamber. This chamber has existed for 15 years without getting any cases asigned to it, because states do not want to classify a case as an environmental case. Question from the floor: there are many companies, for example in the food industry or producers 8
of mobile phones, which have long production chains that are less visible but at the same time have a huge impact. They are also maybe more sensitive to campaigns exposing them. How will you show these conflicts? Ms. Temper: That is indeed a huge challenge. We’re working on material flows too and are happy to work with new organizations. Many new cases need to be added to this atlas. Question from the floor: Are you aware of the cradle-to-cradle concept? Is that something that could be practiced in the shipbreaking? Ms. Jenssen: yes, we are aware of the concept, and indeed the new ships are built in a more environmental friendly way, but we deal now with all the old ships still navigating; Question from the floor: Is there no contradiction between the urgent need to create jobs and economic growth in Europe (and beyond) and trying to avoid this kind of conflicts? Ms. Temper: We shouldn't pit jobs against the environment, there is no contradiction. An energy transition would create a lot of jobs. Ms. van Schaik: making consumers feel guilty about buying certain products is not the right way. Politicians must take action, make sure that international companies can no longer violate environmental laws, that supply chains are revealed etc. Mr. Ojo: Was this a suggestion that people in the Global South need to continue to sacrifice their lives for jobs and need for economic growth in the Global North? We need to find other ways though. Question from the floor: I hope some cases resulted in some dialogue with a positive outcome? How could we go from (court) justice to good governance? Ms. Temper: These types of outcomes are also documented. We had an Access to Justice (principle10) debate last week in London. Non-judicial arbitration processes exist, but our focus is not on them. They are usually not sufficient. What might seem like a resolution of the conflict is actually not always a solution. You always deal with huge power differences on the dialogue table: huge multinationals and a community. We prefer to focus on legal accountability. Question from the floor: The Chevron case shows that we need more than what exists in legal terms. Also here we deal with power differences. Question from the floor: We have the guiding principles from the OECD, but in reality we see that this kind of voluntary mechanisms are not enough. Mr. Wates: Under TTIP and specifically the proposed Investor State Dispute Settlement mechanism we see now that society (governments) has to be accountable to corporations. This is totally the world upside down. But even when this would be taken out a lot of other bad elements in the TTIP will block progress in many environmental struggles. The conference was closed at 13h, with the promise to send all participants and persons who were on the waiting list the conference report. Many thanks were given to the organisers and speakers. Brussels, March 2014 9
ILUSTRATION WITH SOME PRESS COVERAGE
If you are interested in getting the full press coverage with the links to the articles, please send an email to nick.meynen@eeb.org
10
ANNEX: List of participants Last Name
First Name
Title
Organisation
1
Albreht
Tanja
Ms
European Commission
2
Barcaro
Giulia
Ms
ClientEarth, London
3
Barczak
Piotr
Mr
EEB
4
Beck
Maximilian
Mr
European Parliament
5
Berckmans
Eva
Ms
Interested individual
6
Berthier
Ana誰s
MS
ClientEarth
7
Bondi
Giulia
Ms
CIDSE
8
Buco
Maria Teresa
Ms
Revolve Magazine
9
Busa
Sergio
Mr
Euroreporter
10
Cherif
Nadia
Ms
C&C (Cooperation & Culture for Development)
11
Clement
Delphine
Ms
Veolia Environnement
12
De Crombrugghe
Aurore
Ms
UNEP
13
De walsche
Alma
Ms
MO*
14
Esteban Agut
Sonia
Ms
European Commission
15
Froger
Alexa
Ms
UNEP
16
Godayol
Alice
Mrs
European Commission
17
Goicoechea
Sonia
Ms
EEB
18
Goulding
David
Lt Col
European Union Military Staff
19
Gregg
Meghann
Ms
N/A Independent
20
Greyl
Lucie
Ms
CDCA- Documentation Centre on Environmental Justice
21
Heidegger
Patrizia
Ms
NGO Ship breaking Platform
22
Heyer
Kevin
Mr
UNEP
23
Huchet
Manon
Ms
Council of European Municipalities and Regions
24
Huijbers
Marlies
Ms
Enhesa
25
Jenssen
Ingvild
Ms
NGO Shipbreaking Platform
26
Kapetanovic
Tin
Mr
Teneo Strategy
27
Kikby
Julian
Mr
FoE
28
Kostakos
Georgios
Mr
The Hague Institute for Global Justice
29
Kovacs
Erneszt
Mr
ACR+ / Service Civil International
11
30
Kristiansen
Julie
Ms
The Permanent Representation of Denmark
31
Magyar
Armin
Mr
EURELECTRIC
32
Markel
Alexa
Ms
UNEP
33
Megyeri
Andras
Mr
European Institute for Asian Studies
34
Meskens
Gaston
Mr
University of Ghent
35
Mestre
Cristina
Ms
European Commission
36
Meynen
Nick
Mr
EEB
37
Mørkved Aavatsmark
Paal Ivar
Mr
Mission of Norway to the EU
38
Ndaruzaniye
Valerie
Ms
Global Water Institute (GWI)
39
Nitu
Andrei
Mr
Green Planet Association
40
Nixdorf
Daniel
Mr
UNEP
41
Ojo
Godwin
Mr
Environmental Rights Action
42
Onida
Marco
Mr
EU Commission
43
Paavilainen
Marika
Mrs
Finland's permanent representation to the EU
44
Pastorelli
Silvia
Ms
European Institute for Asian Studies
45
Pedrini
Camilla
Ms
Eni
46
Petendi
Agnes
Ms
European Commission
47
Raharinirina
Vahinala
Ms
48
Ramahatafandry
Voahangy
Ms
49
Reuter
Delphine
Ms
NGO Shipbreaking Platform
50
Rijnhout
Leida
Mrs
EEB
51
Ring
Geraldine
Ms
Ecolingo
52
Ruis
Barbara
Ms
UNEP
53
Saelen
Jonathan
Mr
Act4Change
54
Scarafino
Antonio
Mr
European Commission
55
Schneider
Cecile
Ms
Conservation International
56
Silina
Mara
Ms
European Environmental Bureau
57
Singh
Jaskarandeep
Mr
Université Libre de Bruxelles
58
Specht
Doug
Mr
VOZ
59
Spencer
Tom
Mr
Envirosecurity
60
Storm
Gertjan
Mr
University of Maastricht / ICIS
Université de Versailles Saint Quentin-en-Yvelines Be-cause Health Belgian Platform for International Health
12
61
Stumpf
Emilie
Ms
CECED - Industry Association for
62
Sukup
Viktor
Mr
Club of Rome Brussels
63
Temper
Leah
Ms
UAB-ICTA
64
Tolotto
Margherita
Miss
European Environmental Bureau
65
Ulmer
Karin
Ms
Aprodev
66
Valentino
Stefano
Mr
Globalreporter
67
Van den Berge
Jerry
Mr
European federation of Public Services Unions (EPSU)
68
Van der Henst
Emilie
Ms
WWF
69
Van Schaik
Anne
Ms
Friends of the Earth
70
Van Schoonhoven
Marieke
Ms
Eos Wetenschap
71
Vetsuypens
Bart
Mr
Future Plans
72
Villioth
Jakob
Mr
EEB
73
Viskantaite
Giedre
Ms
DEVCO
74
Wates
Jeremy
Mr
EEB
75
Wegerdi
David
Mr
European Commission
76
Wilmote
Astrid
Mrs
European Commission
77
Wittmer
Heidi
Ms
Helmholtz Centre for Environmental Research
78
Zaleski
Diane
Mrs
Global Water Institute
79
Zeitler
Helge
Ms
European Commission
13