The Dangerous Link between the Extractive Industry, Indigenous Territories and the Environment
By Marcela Torres Wong (FLACSO-Mexico)
The article published in the Journal of the Law School of the Universidad Autónoma de México (UNAM) can be accessed at the following link: http://www.revistas.unam.mx/index.php/rfdm/article/view/71492
Copper and conflict in Sonora, Mexico
By Valeria Guarneros-Meza (De Montfort University)
The article published in the Latin America Bureau (LAB) can be accessed at the following link: https://lab.org.uk/copper-and-conflict-in-sonora-mexico/
Mexico: disputed territory – gold vs indigenous autonomy
By Adrián Jiménez Sandoval
The article published in the Latin America Bureau (LAB) can be accessed at the following link: https://lab.org.uk/mexico-disputed-territory-gold-vs-indigenous-autonomy/#
Mapping violent conflicts in the Mexican extractive industry
By Valeria Guarneros-Meza (De Montfort University) y Gisela Zaremberg (FLACSO México)
The article published in Open Democracy can be accessed at the following link: https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/democraciaabierta/ilustrando-conflictos-en-la-industria-extractiva-de-m%C3%A9xico-en/
How an indigenous community halted mining
By Marcela Torres Wong (FLACSO México)
The article published in the Latin America Bureau (LAB) can be accessed at the following link: https://lab.org.uk/how-an-indigenous-community-halted-mining/
Booklet of the Project, Conversing with Goliath
This booklet was done in collaboration with CCiudadano.
Deciphering disorder: participative institutions and conflict in neo-extractionist and alternative energy industries in Mexico.
By Gisela Zaremberg , Marcela Torres Wong (FLACSO México) y Valeria Guarneros Meza (De Montfort University)
*Link to access the article http://revistas.usal.es/index.php/1130-2887/article/view/alh20187981102
This article offers a mapping of “participative institutions” (PI) in conflictive scenarios with mining and hydrocarbon mega-projects as well as wind energy and hydroelectric industries in Mexico. We argue that there is significant dissonance between the legal framework that regulates the PIs, and their implementation. In addition, we offer exploratory hypotheses regarding the possible relationship between PIs and the sought-after results of the main stakeholders involved in the above mentioned conflicts, which, at the same time, imply sub-optimal exchanges: 1) prevent the implementation of mega-projects, 2) reduce violence, and 3) obtain financial compensation for the communities affected by the mega-projects.
Key words: participation, prior consultation, neo-extractivism, reform energy sector
Participation on the Edge: Prior Consultation and Extractivism in Latin America
Gisela Zaremberg , Marcela Torres Wong (FLACSO México)
*Link to access the article: https://journals.sub.uni-hamburg.de/giga/jpla/article/view/1141
Violent conflicts between indigenous groups, multinational companies, and governments over the control of lands potentially containing valuable minerals and hydrocarbons are proliferating in Latin America, as well as elsewhere around the world too. In 1989 the International Labor Organization (ILO) approved ILO Convention 169, which mandates the implementation of prior consultation (PC) with indigenous peoples about any project that could potentially affect their territory. Many interpretations regarding the aims and scopes of PC exist. Some environmental sectors see PC as a mechanism to prevent the implementation of ecologically unsustainable projects in indigenous territories. Part of the indigenous rights sector, however, sees PC as a platform via which to negotiate financial resources for indigenous communities. On the side of governments and multinational companies, PC represents a means to diminish violence and advance projects under more stable political conditions. By examining mining and hydrocarbon projects in Bolivia, Peru, and Mexico, the authors compare cases in which PC takes place and ones where it is not applied. A typology of the outcomes in relation to 1) the prevention of industrialized resource extraction on indigenous lands, 2) redistribution of economic benefits produced by extractive projects, and 3) diminishment of the state repression associated with extractive projects is offered. Findings show that in many cases all three of these results are not simultaneously achieved; the authors explain why some outcomes might be obtained in certain instances and not in others. Finally, the article offers an overall assessment of PC results in light of participation theories.
First Interim Project Report
Second Interim Project Report
Results of the pilot survey
The survey was applied in 2018 to experts in environmental impact and extractionist projects, NGO members, companies and consultants.
The survey forms part of the research project, Conversing with Goliath: participation, mobilisation and repression in Latin America (FLACSO- De Montfort University), sponsored by the British Academy. It explores conflict and participation in mining, wind energy, hydrocarbons and hydroelectric projects. All responses are completely anonymous, in accordance with the code of ethics signed by the institutions.
Download the pilot survey and responses:
Results of the survey of experts
The survey of experts was applied between March and December of 2018. We obtained 77 responses from experts working in the extractive industry from the public and private sectors. The results show differences across sectors over the understanding of participatory institutions applied to extractivist projects and socio-environmental conflicts.
Download the report of results:
Press release February 27, 2019