Documents

PROCEDDIA

Description
Description:
Categories
Published
of 12
2
Categories
Published
All materials on our website are shared by users. If you have any questions about copyright issues, please report us to resolve them. We are always happy to assist you.
Similar Documents
Share
Transcript
  ScienceDirect   Available online at www.sciencedirect.com  Aquatic Procedia 5 ( 2015 ) 69 – 80 2214-241X © 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ ).Peer-review under responsibility of Stockholm International Water Institute.doi: 10.1016/j.aqpro.2015.10.009 World Water Week 2014, WWW 2014, 31 August to 5 September 2014 Indigenous peoples and industry water users: Mapping the conflicts worldwide A. Jiménez a* , M. F. Molina a  and H. Le Deunff  a   a Stockholm International Water Institute, Linnégatan 87A, Box 101 87, 100 55 Stockholm, Sweden Abstract This article presents the findings of a mapping study undertaken in 2014 to determine the characteristics of conflicts between governments, private industrial users and indigenous peoples over the use of water resources. Gathering information about 384 situations of water-related conflicts reported around the world during 1960  –  2014, the study found that mining and hydropower development were the most conflict-ridden types of projects. In only 3 per cent of the cases had the parties reached the stage of formal cooperative agreements. Conflicts had significant impacts on operations, since one-third of projects had to be either cancelled or renegotiated. There is an urgent need to develop successful ways of cooperation between indigenous peoples, states and industries. © 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. Peer-review under responsibility of Stockholm International Water Institute.  Keywords:  Conflicts; Water; Indigenous; Extractive Industries; Hydropower; Mining; Mapping 1.   Introduction Approximately 90 per cent of global energy production is water intensive, placing large demands on water resources for the conversion process (Berggren, 2014). Global energy consumption is expected to rise by 41 per cent from 2012 to 2035 (IEA, 2014). This growing energy demand, combined with population increase and other industry needs, will put increasing pressure on the world's scarce water resources, since the total demand is projected to rise * Corresponding author. Tel.: +46 8 121 360 00; fax: +46 8 121 360 01.    E-mail address:  alejandro.jimenez@siwi.org   © 2015 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ ).Peer-review under responsibility of Stockholm International Water Institute.  70  A. Jiménez et al. / Aquatic Procedia 5 ( 2015 ) 69 – 80  by 55 per cent by 2050 (OECD, 2012). At the same time, humans consume more minerals and metals than ever, and demand is increasing steadily due to population growth, changing lifestyle in developing countries and the increased demand for other minerals (e.g. for mobile phone batteries). Much of the world’s remainin g unexploited minerals and hydroelectric energy sites are located in environmentally and socially sensitive areas, many on land inhabited by indigenous people. It is estimated that there are more than 5000 distinct indigenous peoples, constituting some 370 million individuals and living in more than 90 countries in all inhabited continents (UNDESA, 2009). Indigenous peoples have a unique position in the cultural heritage of humankind: of the around 7000 languages spoken today, it is estimated that more than 4000 are spoken by indigenous  peoples (UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, 2014). However, indigenous peoples around the world face multiple forms of discrimination; while they constitute approximately 5 per cent of the world’s population, they make up 15 per cent of the world’s poor (IFAD, 2007). There is no single agreed definition of indigenous peoples. Based on a working definition quoted by the United Nations (UN) system (UNDESA, 2008), the most commonly identified characteristics of indigenous peoples can be summarized as:    Self-identification as indigenous people at an individual and/or collective level,    historical continuity in and strong cultural links to specific territories and resources,    unique social, economic and political systems that are to some degree maintained,    unique languages, cultures, beliefs and knowledge systems that are to some degree maintained,    determination to sustain and develop their identity and unique systems as distinct peoples and communities,    non-dominant groups in society. As many indigenous people have a long and close relationship to specific territories and the natural resources within them, they often hold extensive and detailed knowledge about the ecosystems and environmental conditions (Peña, 2004). However, their right to self-determination of political status and economic, social and cultural development were recognized only recently by the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UN, 2007). In addition to the right to self-determination, Article 26 of the Declaration recognizes the right of indigenous people to control, use, and develop their territories and resources. With indigenous peoples’ concerns gaining worldwide visibility (UNDRIP, 2013) and the recognition at the international level that they have distinct rights and interests, there is a growing expectation that governments and companies will work actively to avoid potentially significant adverse impacts of water resources use and development of extractive industries. Evidence shows that indigenous peoples bear disproportionate costs of many of these projects, which are often conducted without their consultation, depriving them of the possibility to influence outcomes, or without any compensation. The weak interactions of many indigenous populations with state authorities (Barber and Jackson, 2014) increases the risk of indigenous peoples being left out of these negotiations. However, in some cases, dialogue between stakeholders and agreements has prevailed. To advance knowledge of these issues, a mapping exercise was conducted to determine the characteristics of conflicts over water resources that emerge between governments, private industrial users, and indigenous peoples. Reports of devastating consequences of extractive and energy industries on water ecosystems in areas inhabited by indigenous peoples throughout the world suggest that large-scale development projects have become one of the greatest challenges to the exercise of their rights. Because of their “distinctive cultural relationship” with water   (UN, 2007) and greater dependence on water   , losing access to this resource has multiple and often dramatic impacts on indigenous peoples . In a significant number of cases, tensions over indigenous peoples ’ water issues trigger conflicts, which frequently escalate to very destructive stages, including loss of human lives. These conflicts can also have significant costs for the industry, in terms of reputation, costs to financing, construction, operations, breakdown of a company’s social lice nce to operate, and can lead to delays, renegotiation, and even cancellation of projects. This  paper allows to visualise the global trends of competing claims over water use, the type of conflicts and the effects that these have in the industry. 2. Methods The mapping of conflicts related to energy, extractive, and other industries and water concerning indigenous  populations was based on event data obtained from secondary sources.  71  A. Jiménez et al. / Aquatic Procedia 5 ( 2015 ) 69 – 80 Event data have been used by political scientists to discuss conflicts over natural resources focusing on diplomatic and military behaviours (De Stefano et al., 2009). The analysis undertaken here is novel because these types of databases are not commonly employed by natural resources scientists ( ibid  ) nor, presumably, water resources managers in the study of water-related conflicts. Exceptions for this trend are the Transboundary Freshwater Dispute Database (TFDD) (Program in Water Conflict Management and Transformation, 2014) and the Water-Related Intrastate Conflict and Cooperation databases (Bernauer et al., 2012), which seek to specifically analyse the resource-related interactions. In the former case, the aim is to “aid in the assessment of the process of water confl ict prevention and resolution” in transboundary water management. The latter studies the climate change–  conflict nexus with a focus on water scarcity at regional and local scales through a methodology that aims to identify cooperative processes arising from crisis. For this purpose, the databases use a conflict  –  cooperation scale to determine the interaction intensity through the recording of indicators such as acts of violence and litigation acts on the conflict side, and meetings or requests for negotiations on the cooperation side. Research on cooperation or conflict would be subsequently sought for by relating individual case information with interaction intensity for a given case. Although our approach has similarities to the methodologies employed in the event datasets used for the political analysis of resource-based conflicts, it differs in the selection of relevant events. Whereas these databases list events retrieved from media datasets rely on a list of key terms, the cases used in this mapping were extracted from environmental justice and indigenous  peoples’ datasets and reports. For each identified conflict, three main elements were codified:    The impacts of the project on indigenous peoples: the impacts were categorized drawing on a list adapted from the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (CAFTA  –  DR et al .  2011a and 2011b).    The intensity of conflict and/or cooperation: the codification was on the basis of a conflict  –  cooperation scale adapted from the TFDD for intra-national events (Eidem et al., 2012).    How the status of the project was affected by the event, which we classified into eight possible situations: ranging from cancellation or renegotiation to no impact, where projects operate as planned. Selecting water resource-related conflicts involving indigenous peoples over extractive industries or hydraulic infrastructure development projects for the 54 years during 1960  –  2014 yielded a total of 384 different cases worldwide. Information from an average of five different sources were collected and analysed for each case. 2.1. Data set The main sources for this study were the Environmental Justice Atlas (Environmental Justice, 2014), the Centro Documentazione Conflitti Ambientali (CDCA, 2014), Conflictos Mineros en Latinoamerica (CM, 2014) and Dams in the Amazon (Dams Information, 2014) databases. Information from the International Work Group for Indigenous Affairs’ annual reports ( IWGIA, 2014) provided insights on development-related impacts on indigenous peoples and for the selection of cases. The latter source was particularly important in the case of local-scale events, where little information is publicly available and customary management systems are expected to be found (Boelens, 2008). Finally, studies and reports by the UN Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (OHCHR, 2014) were consulted and all relevant cases included in the selection. Other sources included academic articles from a literature review on water, hygiene, and indigenous peoples, which identified a number of articles studying water-related conflicts involving indigenous peoples (Jiménez et al., 2014). The review of wider literature on non-water indigenous mining conflicts was not part of the scope of this study. Data was set up in a relational database with filtering capabilities (using Microsoft Excel). The information recorded included basic descriptors of projects; geographical features of location and watershed location; official/legal status of a project; a set of projects’ impacts, retrieval sources, and stakeholders; the ethnicity/self-denomination of indigenous groups; and occurrence of elements evaluated in the conflict  –  cooperation scale. The basic data content of the dataset is detailed in the Appendix. The events were selected by the filt ered field of groups restricted to “Indigenous groups or traditional communities” and thematic areas of “Biomass and land conflicts”, “Fossil fuels and climate justice/energy”, “Industrial and utilities conflicts”, “Mineral ores and building materials extraction”, “Nuclear” and “Water management” in the Environmental Justice database (Environmental Justice, 2014). For the Centro Documentazione Conflitti Ambientali database (CDCA, 2014), the events were selected by conducting a key- term search using “indigenous”, “native” and  72  A. Jiménez et al. / Aquatic Procedia 5 ( 2015 ) 69 – 80 “tribal”. The same method was employed for the Conflictos Mineros en Latinoamerica  (CM, 2014) and Dams in the Amazon (Dams Information, 2014) databases. Annual reports of the International Work Group for Indigenous Affairs (IWGIA, 2014) provided information on development-related impact of projects on indigenous peoples and provided additional information for the selection of cases. Table 1 displays the total number of cases identified before  processing, organized according to reference sources. This distribution highlights the differences in proportions rather than informing about absolute quantities because many cases were found in more than one source. Table 1. Distribution of reference sources before processing Source Number of Consults IWGIA (IWGIA, 2014) 199 Environmental Justice atlas (Environmental Justice, 2014) 168 Other 61 CDCA (CDCA, 2014) 56 UN Special Rapporteur OHCHR (2014) 40 Dams-Info (Dams Information, 2014) 13 Conflictos Mineros (CM, 2014) 10 Total 547 A discard process was conducted for cases that did not include a direct reference to an indigenous ethnicity and took place in rural settings. The conflicts that take place with indigenous peoples in urban settings are thus not considered in this study. Similarly, cases linked with water and energy infrastructure (i.e. pipelines or electric transmission lines), tourism or global environmental policies such as nature reserve declarations were not included in the analysis. Some cases were retrieved from media sources while compiling information on other events. After excluding cases that did not meet our specified selection criteria, a total of 384 events were selected for further analysis. An average of five sources was retrieved for each case to compile the basic information needed and contrast it. 2.2. Definition of impacts The impacts of development projects on indigenous communities were identified from peoples’ own accounts or descriptions as reflected in press releases or in the srcinal source of information concerning the case. This assessment makes use of environmental justice indicators to define, identify, and measure environmental impacts of the project on vulnerable populations. The five criteria used to categorize the impacts were adapted from the srcinal list used in EPA’s EIA Guidelines for Energy Production and Transmission and for the Mining Sector (CAFTA  –  DR et al .,  2011a and 2011b). Additional separate categories of impacts were created to describe the particular situation of indigenous  peoples, with special attention to water-related impacts (Table 2).

Term1 Tt Pgdm

Sep 22, 2019
Search
Similar documents
Tags
We Need Your Support
Thank you for visiting our website and your interest in our free products and services. We are nonprofit website to share and download documents. To the running of this website, we need your help to support us.

Thanks to everyone for your continued support.

No, Thanks
SAVE OUR EARTH

We need your sign to support Project to invent "SMART AND CONTROLLABLE REFLECTIVE BALLOONS" to cover the Sun and Save Our Earth.

More details...

Sign Now!

We are very appreciated for your Prompt Action!

x