Home > Archives for indigenous movement

Holiday Fundraiser for the Huaorani of Bameno

December 8, 2011 By Leave a Comment
Project Owner, Luminita's Photo
Project Organizer:
Luminita
BENEFITING: Village Earth
EVENT DATE: Dec 04, 2011
DEADLINE TO GIVE: Dec 31, 2011

HERE’S THE STORY:
This holiday season Maloca* and friends are organizing a fundraiser to support the Huaorani of Bameno. We are aiming to raise 2,000$, please read below what the money is for.

Who are the Huaorani?

The Huaorani are legendary warriors who live deep in the Ecuadorian Amazon, protecting their territory, their culture, and their way of life. By supporting the Huaorani, you contribute directly to the conservation of the Amazon and Yasuni Biosphere Reserve – a place of incredible biodiversity and beauty, designated by Ecuador’s government as a conservation area off-limits to oil extraction, mining and logging since 1999.This area is very special because it overlaps with the Intangible Zone, a spectacular refuge of carbon-rich, biologically-diverse rainforest that spans nearly 3,000 square miles of ancestral Huaorani lands. Here, two uncontacted groups, the Tagaeri and Taromenane, still live, along four communities of contacted Huaorani. Despite the protection on paper, The Intangible Zone and the Huaorani who live there continue to be threatened by encroaching oil companies, settlers and illegal loggers. Read more about Yasuni and the Intangible Zone here: http://huaoraniintangiblezone.wordpress.com/

In the past, the Huaorani defended their territory with spears. Now they understand they must defend it with documents and by traveling far from home, like Penti, Huaorani leader from Bameno community, explained: “MY FATHER IS AHUA. HE IS A GREAT WARRIOR. HE DEFENDED OUR HUAORANI TERRITORY WITH HARDWOOD SPEARS. NOW I MUST DEFEND OUR TERRITORY AND OMEDE, THE RAINFOREST, WITH DOCUMENTS AND LAW, SPEAKING SPANISH, AND TRAVELLING FAR AWAY LIKE THE HARPY EAGLE.” The Huaorani of Yasuni have organized themselves to work together, as communities, to protect The Intangible Zone and the right of their “uncontacted” neighbors to be left alone.  They call themselves Ome Gompote Kiwigimoni Huaorani, which means “We Defend Our Huaorani Territory.”

To see pictures from the Huaorani community Bameno, go here: http://nosotras.smugmug.com/Indigenous-Amazon/Communities/Bameno/7938495_vrjvLR#677804684_zqE2S

What are we raising money for?

-      A “minga”(a work meeting for the benefit of the whole community) – In mid-January 2012 the Huaorani of Bameno will invite its neighbors to a meeting. The Huaorani of Yasuni will come together in a forum in which community leaders will take coordinated action to protect their human rights and land. The meeting will also keep members informed on external events that affect them and their territory and they will decide what kind of actions to take together.

These mingas (gatherings/working meetings) are an ongoing process where the Huaorani exchange ideas and information, reflect and decide how to continue to move forward together to protect their territory and rights. The Huaorani leaders of Bameno posted a video on youtube containing messages from the last minga in August 2011. Now they want to do an online petition to support the Huaorani and their rights. The Huaorani also want to take a trip in 2012 to the US to speak for themselves in the international forum. They will discuss and plan this trip at the minga as well.

-      Investigating a troubling reportthat the colonists have moved into Huaorani territory, right in the frontier area where the two uncontacted groups Tagaeri and Taromenane live. This is very serious, as penetration by outsiders of the Intangible Zone can lead to conflict and this will endanger the uncontacted people which Penti and the Huaorani of Yasuni are protecting. Penti and his community need to travel at the location and investigate and document the facts. If the Huaorani do not say anything, more colonists will settle into their territory, invading it, creating deforestation and conflict. This will also be discussed at the minga.

-      Start an Emergency Health Fund for the community of Bameno (which will cover basic medicine, doctor visits for the more serious cases)

-      A printerfor Penti. Sadly printer Penti was using was stolen (along with his computer, camera, and important documents). Penti is using the printer, computer and cameras to defend his territory and also to set a community tourism initiative that brings much needed income in the community.

Why is protecting the Huaorani territory so important?

“Land rights, access to land and control over it and its resources are central to indigenous peoples throughout the world, and they depend on such rights and access for their material and cultural survival. In order to survive as distinct people, indigenous peoples and their communities need to be able to own, conserve and manage their territories, lands and resources.” (United Nations Permanent Forum for Indigenous Issues, 2007)

 

* MALOCA is an affiliate of Village Earth, a nonprofit charity exempt from federal income tax under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code, and which is not a private foundation because it is described in Sections 509(a)(1) and 170(b)(1)(a)(vi).

Filed Under: Maloca Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Peru Readiness Preparation Plan (R-PP) for REDD

March 24, 2011 By Leave a Comment

Reposted from: Bank Information Center

Peru Ready to Approve R-PP but Issues Continue Unresolved

23 March 2011

Peru submitted its 4th version of the R-PP today in Da Lat, Vietnam, without addressing many of the issues that stakeholders, including civil society and indigenous communities, wanted to see resolved. These issues are critical to ensure sustainable environmental and social development under the REDD+ strategy.

The fourth version of the R-PP Peru will be reviewed at the eighth meeting of the FCPF Participant Committee from March 23rd to the 25th, 2011, in Da Lat, Vietnam. Some of the main concerns about the R-PP that have emerged include safeguard harmonization, the representation of civil society at the highest level of decision-making, the strengths and weaknesses of the government’s analysis of drivers of deforestation and related implications for the mitigation of harm, gaps in knowledge , the urgency to promote land security, forest governance, the quality of SESA, coherency between different actors, as well as the process of consultation and participation, especially of civil society and indigenous groups. Certain changes have been made to the latest version of the R-PP that address resolutions to the indigenous territories as well as the obligations of Peru to the international law, especially the ILO C169.

However, according to reviews by various stakeholders at the national and internatioanl levels, some of the most concerning issues continue unresolved. Some of the most salient issues with the R-PP are indigenous territories and land tenure, forest governance, as well as the process of consultations and participation of civil society. AIDESEP, an organization that represents many indigenous groups in Peru has addressed a letter to Peru’s government to express their concerns. They ask for the demarcation and titling of hundreds of unrecognized territories, the consolidation and reorganization of territory, for safeguards for the right to decide and control the process of development, for the opportunity for indigenous groups to manage forests, and naturally, that their requests be incorporated into the plan.

Other organizations like DAR (Rights, Environment, and Natural Resources), Grupo REDD, Global Witness, and the Rainforest Foundation Norway (RFN), made several of the same observations as AIDESEP, asking for the improvement of the laws that protect indigenous territory, the improvement of forest management, for a credible system to implement the recommendations resulting from the participation and consultations to stakeholders, and to ensure the free prior and informed consent of the affected communities. Other recommendations these non-indigenous organizations had in common were to improve the management of funds in terms of the roles and relationships between donors and managers, to give more attention to the benefits and impacts of deforestation and degradation that are not carbon, among others. The FCPF Participant Committee had already brought many of these matters to the attention of the Peruvian government, but many of them continue unresolved in the latest version of the R-PP that it is currently in the process of reviewing.

More Info:  Peru

Forest Issues

22 March 2011

 

Update

Peru will submit the fourth version of its Readiness Preparation Plan (R-PP4) for REDD+ at the eighth meeting of the FCPF Participant Committee (PC8) which will take place March 23rd-25th, 2011.

Key issues that have emerged in the review of the Peru R-PP:

  • Safeguard harmonization in the context of multiple delivery partners
  • Participation and consent of Indigenous Peoples over key aspects of future REDD projects
  • The representation of civil society at the highest decision-making levels of FCPF/REDD
  • Strengths and weaknesses in the Government’s analysis of the drivers of deforestation and related implications for mitigation or avoidance of harm
  • Gaps in knowledge about deforestation trends, REDD pilots and institutional performance
  • The urgency of investments and reforms to promote land security in the Amazon
  • Full integration and process guarantees for quality of SESA
  • Need to strengthen forest governance outcomes in the results framework
  • Coherence between FCPF, FIP, and various other bilateral and government forest governance investment strategies

Overview

Sixty per cent of Peru is populated by forests, covering almost 72 million hectares, making it the second largest forest ecosystem in Latin America, and the fourth largest tropical forest surface in the world. According to the Government of Peru, the main source of GHG emissions in this country is deforestation for agriculture, cattle ranching, and informal mining. There are many other causes of deforestation and degradation of forests; Wikileaks confirmed that Peru has exported massive amounts of an illegally felled endangered species of timber from the Amazon. For fifteen years, Peru lost 150,000 has of forests per year, up to the year 2000. However, the current deforestation rate is not known, one of the main knowledge gaps facing Peru. Indigenous leaders argue that commitment to address massive unresolved land demarcation, legalization, and titling problems, is an urgent prerequisite for REDD effectiveness. Difficulty in mitigating and managing forest ecosystem impacts from major infrastructure investments, such as the Southern Interoceanic Highway, have called attention to the lack of adequate planning in the Peruvian Amazon. [1]

 

[1] See “Peruvian Amazon in 2021: Infrastructure and the Exploitation of Natural Resources: What is happening and what does it mean for the future?” by Marc Dourojeanni; Alberto Barandiaran y Diego Dourojeanni (2009)

Readiness Preparation Plan (R-PP)

The latest version of the R-PP has been reviewed by stakeholders including national and international non-governmental organizations, indigenous organizations, Grupo REDD, and the FCPF Participant Committee. Most of them note that the R-PP needs improvement in its elaboration process, especially in terms of the consultation and participation of stakeholders, including compliance with the Law of Previous Consultation and with special concern over the stakes of indigenous groups; that the plan needs improvement in issues of land tenure; that it needs to properly identify the drivers of deforestation and to ensure the transparency of the monitoring process; and lastly, that it does give enough attention and value to the benefits and impacts of deforestation other than carbon.

The Government of Peru made changes to the 4th draft of the R-PP to accommodate critical observations made by AIDESEP in a letter.  In meetings prior to the Da Lat PC8, the Peruvian government addressed some of the concerns of AIDESEP and agreed to certain adjustments to the R-PP that are to be presented at the PC8, including;

1. Adjustment to the norms governing indigenous lands consistent with the concept of collective rights of indigenous peoples in ILO 169, with indirect references to collective territory.

2.  Rapid startup of the legalization and titling of land, beginning in the region of Loreto, with an estimated inicial Budget of $US 1 million in addition to the $200,000 budgeted within the FCPF R-PP (leaving clear the balance of $20 million that is required to complete the legalization process based on an estimate of $US 1 per hectare for 20,000 hectares under claim).

3.  Inclusion of the content describing “Indigenous REDD” within the R-PP as proponed by AIDESEP

4.  Inclusion of a self-organizing Indigenous MESA REDD within the R-PP

5.  Safeguards based on ILO 169 and UNDRIP, no only the UNFCCC or World Bank

6. Inclusion of a paragragh addressing the regulatory oversight capacity of MINAM to avoid pressures and protect invasions of local communities against a REDD speculative bubble.

Ultimately, the position of AIDESEP and several other allied organizations will rest on the presentation of the Peruvian Government, to incorporate these and other stated recommendations and the approval of the goverments on the FCPF PC.

forest investment program (FIP)

From January 17th – 20th, a Forest Investment Program scoping mission was carried out in Peru, one of the FIP’s eight pilot countries. The mission including staff from the World Bank, the IFC, the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) and Peru’s Environmental Ministry. The IDB participated having been proposed as the “delivery partner” for FCPF and FIP programs in Peru.

Civil society interaction during the scoping mission was significantly improved over those carried out in 2010. The Indonesia scoping mission report, for example, notes that only two NGOs were able to attend the civil society information meeting, “because of the short notice for the meeting.” In Peru’s case, the scoping mission met with Grupo REDD Peru, in addition to bi-lateral meetings with two umbrella indigenous federations, covering communities in the Peruvian Amazon.

On January 19th, the scoping mission team visited the offices of AIDESEP, the Inter-Ethnic Association for the Development of the Peruvian Amazon. In recent years, AIDESEP has been engaging within the REDD discussions, for example sending their climate change focal point, Daysi Zapata, to deliver statements at the FCPF participant committee meetings in Guyana (June 2010) and Washington, DC (November 2010).

During the scoping mission visit to their offices, the AIDESEP team outlined a number of concerns and proposals related to REDD implementation in Peru. These ideas have been further fleshed out in AIDESEP’s recent letter to the World Bank regarding the latest version of Peru’s “readiness preparation proposal” to be discussed at the FCPF’s upcoming meeting in Da Lat, Vietnam. Key aspects include:

(1) Territory: Prior demarcation of hundreds of un-recognized or un-titled indigenous communities, expansion of some existing titles, and formalization of proposed communal reserves and other reserves created for the protection of indigenous peoples living in voluntary isolation. They also demand that laws regulating titling of indigenous territories be modernized in accordance with Peru’s obligations under international law such as ILO Convention 169.

    In the R-PP3: 

    The document reassures that Peru’s Political Constitution “stipulates that the State guarantees the right of land ownership”, and that the “Law of Native Communities and Agrarian Development of the Selva and Ceja de Selva stipulates that the State shall guarantee the integrity of the lands of indigenous peoples, conduct the corresponding cadastre, and grant them property rights”. The R-PP also claims that the issue of land titles and assignations to indigenous groups is of key importance to REDD+.

    In terms of the demarcation of communities, the R-PP states that it will be the responsibility of the respective regional governments to issue the demarcation of these lands, and therefore the assignation of agricultural lands and lands suitable for forestry, will be stipulated in accordance to the Regulation on the Classification of Lands by their Capacity for Greater Use.

    Likewise, for the the formalization of proposed communal reserves, the R-PP says that both the Forest and Wildlife Law and the National Forestry Policy have been proposed to be the national forest authority. They claim that these laws were prepared by the State with the participation of various sectors nationally, regionally and locally. The draft Forestry Law states that the assignment for use constitutes a real, exclusive, perpetual, non-transferable right, the objective of which is to ensure the traditional uses and life systems of native communities and grants to exclusive ownership, access, use, enjoyment, and recovery of lands for forest production and protection, as well as of forest and wildlife resources found within them.

    For land titling, the R-PP states that it will not grant authorizing titles of land that, as of the date of the Law’s publication, are still in the process of titling or the expansion of native communities; no project or activity will be authorized in such areas.

    The R-PP claims that there are current discussions at the national level concerning AIDESEP’s petition for the completion of land title clearing in areas occupied by indigenous communities, not just those with an ongoing process, and that forest authorization titles exclude the areas of passage of people in voluntary isolation. The R-PP also claims that they are discussing how all laws in regard to land tenure, forest governance and indigenous groups will meet the obligations under ILO C169.

    However, it states that it is hard to title these lands due to the lack of information such as an official study that determines the number of indigenous people’s existing in the territory and the status of the process of their recognition or expansion of communal lands, and also the lack of economic resources for demarcation and titling. They understand the social conflicts resulting from this problem, as well as the need to update the official registries in order to avoid them.

    Therefore, one of the main problems with demarcation and titling of communal reserves and indigenous territories is the lack of information and proper record-keeping. The R-PP3 proposes an allocation of funds to several aspects of a process that will help improve that situation. The funds come from FCPC and MOORE and will go to the analysis of land use in terms of: an overall diagnosis, an analysis of overlapping, a diagnosis of ownership, title clearing, and the governance and intervention on lands traditionally occupied by indigenous communities and their use. It also includes the preparation of a specific program to identify uncategorized lands, designing specific actions to resolve land titling, and analyzing a way to put together a unified cadastre for land titling. The funds total.

    To prepare the political, legal and institutional framework for the REDD+ strategy that addresses land tenure issues, a REDD+ Coordination Agency will be formed (OCBR). During the first two years of R-PP implementation, the OCBR will be financed by projects that co-finance the Readiness phase and the FIP, and in the third phase, it is expected to be self-sufficient.

    The R-PP also states that SESA will help Peru to ensure the proper development of society within REDD, including the development and implementation of an Environmental and Social Management Framework (ESMF).

    Peru has made some advances to address the issue of land tenure and indigenous communities. Land titling, however, is a grave issue and it should be given more attention by the government as well as the international community. The IDB, for example, has dedicated smaller-scale funding projects to address issues with titling, such as the Multiphase Sustainable Forest Development Program (Pro-Bosque) for Honduras that provided $6 million to finance cadastre and land titling. Such projects would greatly support the REDD+ strategy initiative in Peru.

(2) “REDD Indigena”: AIDESEP is proposing an alternate model for REDD, which would include (amongst other characteristics): Considering the holistic value of forests, not just value as carbon sinks, indigenous management of forests, no third-party control of forests within indigenous territories, the primacy of ILO 169 and UNDRIPs within REDD contracts, and maintaining indigenous territories outside of the carbon market.

 

(3) National legal norms: AIDESEP has repeated the need to approve the Prior Consultation Law, as it was originally passed by the Peruvian Congress in April of 2010. They have also made suggestions for crucial improvements to the Forestry Law and the Environmental Services Law, which have not been incorporated.

Read the Scoping Mission Aide Memoire

The reviews:

FCPF Participants Committee

The FCPF PC7 evaluated how the R-PP3 complies with the standards for the plan. The PC7 suggests that the plan of management needs clarification in terms of the roles, relationships and responsibilities of the managers. They also have concerns over ensuring the participation of stakeholders, including indigenous groups, so that consultations are not dominated by technical experts. They also mention that the private sector needs to be considered in order to apply appropriate methodologies and technologies to REDD+. Also, the group suggested that the R-PP needs to clarify how the results and feedback of consultations will be evaluated, in order to ensure an appropriate plan of implementing information. PC7 also says that Peru must make sure that it complies with its obligations with the ILO C169 in terms of the “Law of Previous Consultation”; to ensure the consultation and participation of indigenous groups in both the R-PP and REDD+ strategy.

They had concerns about land use, and forest policy and governance. They suggest strengthening the legal framework of indigenous land and territories by evaluating the responsibilities of the Ministry of the Environment (MINAM) as there could be a contradiction in forest governance policy; this ministry is both in charge of authorizing megaprojects and a member of the REDD+’s Coordination Agency(OCBR). Their comments give a lot of attention to the management of funds, suggesting the need for more clarity in regards to the roles and relationships between the donors and fund managers, as well as the role of different organizations in FIP,which is in charge of financially supporting the REDD+ strategy.

Read the report


Grupo REDD

Grupo REDD has been very important in the R-PP process, especially in regards to their consultations.  The government has requested their opinions and statements on the R-PP’s content and process of elaboration. MINAM has agreed with Grupo REDD that the group’s participation is imperative in the R-PP’s elaboration. Grupo REDD will also be involved in the REDD preparation process; they are planning changes to their organization in order to do so. Grupo REDD is composed of many organizations and they have agreed on the need for indigenous organizations to participate, and planning on asking AIDESEP about how they feel about this participation in the group.

Read the meeting report

The Interethnic Association for the Development of the Peruvian Rainforest (AIDESEP)

AIDESEP prepared a report of its analysis and suggestions about the R-PP3. Their analysis concentrates mostly on land tenure, the R-PP’s consultation process, and the participation of indigenous groups in a way that is fully consistent with ILO 169 and UNDRIP. In terms of territory, they want the demarcation and titling of hundreds of unrecognized territories as they believe that this is a historical social debt on the part of the state to indigenous peoples. They also believe that such action would prevent the increase of social conflicts that result over these territories. They also want to see this happen through the regional and local governments so that they titling process does not depend on state authorities that did not perform adequately. They also ask for safeguards by the consolidation and reorganization of territory with the same objective, to prevent social conflict over the land. This organization which represents many indigenous groups also asks that safeguards be implemented that defends their right to decide and control the process of culturally appropriate development.

Their concern with land tenure leads into their point about consultation. They ask that their requests be taken into account and incorporated into the plan so that meetings with indigenous groups are not be simply decorative. They also argue that indigenous communities be given the opportunity to manage the forests because they have the knowledge for doing so holistically and sustainably, using fewer resources and causing minimal impact. They want an improvement of the law of environmental services which they believe could use the inputs of different communities. . They constantly mention that they still feel that their inputs are not being properly incorporated into this important document.

AIDESEP will participate in a Panel Discussion on March 22, 2011 in Da Lat, Vietnam, speaking about how to safeguard the rights and participation of indigenous people and civil society in REDD.

Read the Report


Rights, Environment, and Natural Resources (DAR)

DAR suggests that the R-PP is deficient in three main areas which are consultation and participation of indigenous groups, the treatment of the drivers of deforestation, and the implementation of SESA (Strategic Environmental and Social Assessment), stating that both the process of elaboration and the contect of the R-PP are important.

DAR at PC7

DAR commented on second version of the R-PP at PC7 in Washington, DC. They commended MINAM for incorporating Grupo REDD’s suggestions into the R-PP, which were based on the opinions by TAP (FCPF Technical Advisory Panel), the World Bank, the Participants Committee, indigenous organizations, and different national and international NGOs. However, they stressed that there is still room for improvement of the plan, especially on the activities needed for the R-PP’s implementation phase. They also pointed out the deficiencies of the elaboration process on incorporating the opinions of the public and private sectors at the regional and local levels, focusing especially on the participation of indigenous communities. They mentioned that it is not clear how the economic benefits reach local and indigenous communities.


Global Witness

Global Witness expressed similar concerns about R-PP3, saying the document is still weak in its production process, stating that the consultation of stakeholders has been no more than an information provision. They mention that civil society had already communicated their concern over the matter last year, but no changes have been made. They also say that it should easier to track the changes made on the latest version of the R-PP so that NGOs and other organizations do not have to spend valuable time and resources finding the differences. In regards to consultations, they asked to clarify the participatory role of Grupo REDD, in terms of having a vote in the process, and how much their inputs are being incorporated into the R-PP. This organization is also concerned that the R-PP3 is not clear about ensuring “free, prior, and informed consent” from the necessary parties, especially indigenous groups and their territory. Global Witness also notes that the section about drivers of deforestation and degradation needs to be consolidated as it can be confusing. Also, they say the R-PP needs to properly explicate the monitoring of the benefits and impacts of forests other than carbon, and that it needs to include monitoring by independent Peruvian society in order to ensure integrity and transparency in the system. Finally, they say that the length of the document can make it confusing; that is needs to avoid too much repetitiveness.


Rainforest Foundation Norway (RFN)

The Rainforest Foundation Norway said that the R-PP process in Peru was fundamentally flawed and lacked transparency and credibility. They suggested the need to improve the lack of communication and trust between the government and indigenous groups and civil society in order to correct those problems. They also concentrate their criticisms on territory; they say that territorial legislation does not sufficiently take into account the government’s obligations with the ILO C169; that such weak handling of these issues only feeds into the lack of trust from their counterparts. Their comments also suggest that Peru needs to develop a credible plan with clearer guarantees for the proper consultation to indigenous peoples’ representatives and wider society. They also say that the current law of consultation is also not consistent with the ILO C169. They say that that Peru’s forest law needs to improve in regards to indigenous peoples, corruption, and other forest governance issues; it is still too weak and negative to be the foundation for the R-PP.  Another concern is the difficulty behind tracking the changes made to the document which can be so subtle yet so important, making it hard to be reviewed.

Read the report

Important Documents

overview

EarthTrends Peru Report 2003, World Resources Institute (PDF, 116KB)

Partners

DAR (Derecho, Ambiente y Recursos Naturales)

AIDESEP (Asociación Interétnica de Desarrollo de la Selva Peruana)

COICA (Coordinadora de Organizaciones Indígenas de la Cuenca Amazónica)

Forest Carbon Partnership Facility

AIDESEP’s analysis of RPP, February 2011 (English)

AIDESEP’s analysis of RPP, February 2011 (Spanish)

Peru R-PP for PC-8 (March 2011)

Peru R-PP (English)

Peru Draft R-PP for PC-7 (November 2010)

Peru Draft R-PP (Español)

AIDESEP-Recomendaciones sobre R-PP (Sept. 2010)

AIDESEP Letter on R-PP

Peru Draft R-PP (September 2010)

TAP Synthesis Review

Peru Draft R-PP (April 2010)

Peru Draft R-PP (PDF, 4.2MB) and Presentation (PDF, 430KB)

TAP Synthesis Review (PDF, 535KB) and Presentation (PDF, 292KB)

PC Synthesis Review and Presentation (PDF, 57 KB)

Carta de AIDESEP / Letter from AIDESEP (June 22, 2010) (Español) (PDF, 1.5MB)

Respuesta del Banco Mundial a AIDESEP / World Bank Response to AIDESEP (Español, English) (PDF, 68KB)

Comentarios de la Sociedad Civil sobre el R-PP de Perú / Civil Society Comments on Peru’s R-PP (June 2010) (Español, English) (PDF, 1.5MB)

Peru R-PIN (June 2008)

R-PIN (PDF, 644KB)

TAP Synthesis Review (Word Document, 178KB)

Forest Investment Program

Peru: Scoping Mission/FIP (January 2011)

Pilot Country – Peru (FIP Website)

REDD+ Partnership

Partner Country – Peru (REDD+ Partnership Framework Document)

Filed Under: Peruvian Amazon Indigenous Support Network Tagged With: , , , , , ,

Indigenous Rights Developments in Peru

February 24, 2011 By Leave a Comment

The following information is reposted from Amazon Watch and is important as it will be affecting the communities with whom we work.

“The next two months are going to be crucial for the future of Peru’s forests and the rights of peoples who inhabit them. The context, in brief:

Peru’s Presidential elections on April 10th: Apparently unaffected by any kind of “lame duck” phenomenon, the outgoing Garcia Administration is pushing a number of controversial initiatives in its final months.
  • One one hand, the president has issued several “urgent decrees” which would weaken environmental safeguards on a list of 33 mega-projects. Diverse Peruvian voices have decried this move as unconstitutional, including environmental group SPDA and the legal specialists at IDL.
  • On another hand, colleagues on the ground say that the Forestry Law is likely to be brought to a vote before the election. This would likely entail the Peruvian Congress being hastily re-convened and members rushing into Lima for a vote with no debate. The Agriculture Committee has been carrying out a second round of “consultations”. While the number of locations has expanded over the Nov/Dec process, indigenous federations have continued to denounce the methodology as woefully inadequate and undeserving of the term “consultation”. AIDESEP has called for the vote to be postponed till the following congress, and for the Prior Consultation Law to be passed first.
Peru’s “Readiness Preparation Proposal” at the World Bank: Peru’s environmental ministry is applying for $3.4 million from the World Bank’s Forest Carbon Partnership Facility, the funds of which would finance the development of a national forests and climate change mitigation strategy. Draft versions of the RPP were discussed at several FCPF meetings in 2010, paving the way for a potential approval at the March 21 – 24 FCPF meeting in Da Lat, Vietnam. AIDESEP has been raising concerns about the content of and procedure through which the RPP has been developed. As outlined in the attached letter, they make a number of detailed proposals around strengthening land tenure for indigenous communities and what they call “Indigenous REDD”.
Ongoing threats to Amazonian communities: The above developments are taking place in the broader context of ongoing threats to indigenous communities and their leaders, which include:
  • Spurious legal charges against indigenous leaders and protesters, in the aftermath of the Amazon-wide mobilizations of 2009. Some cases have been thrown out, but many remain. Bladimiro Tapayuri, a top forestry expert within the indigenous movement, was convicted in late December;
  • Ever-expanding hydrocarbons concessions and regular oil spills from aging pipeline infrastructure;
  • Proposed hydroelectric mega-dams within indigenous territories, which in some cases would destroy sacred sites. These include Inambari, Pakitzapango, and Pongo de Mainique, amongst many others;
  • Other mega-infrastructure projects, like the proposed construction of additional gas pipelines in the Camisea region;
  • Informal gold mining which has spread deep into the rivers of Loreto, according to recent investigations; and
  • Other illicit activities in the rainforest, such as illegal logging and coca cultivation.”

Click here to read AIDESEP‘s analysis and proposals regarding the Peruvian government’s plans around climate change and REDD (Translation courtesy of Amazon Watch)

For the original Spanish document: “Análysis y propuestas indígenas sobre el RPP (3ra versión) del REDD Perú“

Filed Under: Peruvian Amazon Indigenous Support Network Tagged With: , , , , , , , ,

Two Screenings of the film “CRUDE: The Real Price of Oil”

January 12, 2010 By Leave a Comment

As a fundraiser for Village Earth’s “Peruvian Rainforest Support Network” project, we will be screening the new film “Crude: The Real Price of Oil”.

Watch the trailer here:

For more information about the film visit: http://www.crudethemovie.com/

The first screening will be on February 18 at 7:00PM (doors open at 6:30PM) at the Lory Student Center Theater at Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado. Tickets will be sold at the door only for a donation of $5 to Village Earth. Call 970-491-5754 for more information on the Fort Collins showing. The Fort Collins screening is sponsored by Be Local Northern Colorado

The second screening will be on March 2 at 5:30PM in Fort Lauderdale. Join us at the Courtyard of the Cinema Paradiso to celebrate the culture of the Peruvian Amazon with arts and crafts on exhibition. Kristina Pearson will be doing a short presentation about her work with the Peruvian Rainforest Support Network, a project of Village Earth. There will also be samples of Peruvian food for sale. “Crude” will begin at 7:00PM. Cinema Paradiso, 503 SE 6th Street, Fort Lauderdale, Florida.

Filed Under: Peruvian Amazon Indigenous Support Network Tagged With: , , , , , , , ,

Protecting Indigenous Land in the Amazon

November 16, 2009 By Leave a Comment


During the Village Earth Peru Project Coordinator’s last trip to Peru, the Shipibo leaders we were working with asked Village Earth to let the world know about the complex political situation with regard to land rights in the Peruvian Amazon.

 

 

Oil Development

 

 

According to our indigenous partners, the Peruvian government is currently in the process of a major land-grab. In fact, many suggest that Peru is violating ILO Convention 169 as well as the U.N. Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, resolutions to which Peru is a signatory and which require free, prior and informed consent for all development projects on indigenous territories. During the past three months, PeruPetro (the state hydrocarbon licensing agency) and PetroVietnam (the state run Vietnamese oil company that recently leased the rights to extract oil in the Shipibo territory) were holding “informational” meetings for indigenous leaders in an obvious attempt to bypass their representative indigenous organizations. Importantly, the meetings are held months and even years after the Peruvian government has already leased indigenous people’s lands to oil companies, which means that indigenous people have no real opportunity to oppose development project on their lands. In reality, they hold the meetings only to inform the communities that oil exploration and later extraction will take place.

 

 

According to one Shipibo leader who attended one of these informational meetings, PeruPetro said “The contract has been signed, and there is nothing the communities can do about it.” The leader then commented “where was the consultation BEFORE they sold our lands? How can you sell someone’s lands and then only consult with them afterwards?” Another Shipibo leader likened this practice to someone entering your house and knocking after they are already inside and says “oh by the way, we’re going to be working inside your house.”

 

Another strategy of PeruPetro to appear that they have approval from indigenous communities is to ask indigenous leaders to sign paperwork. According to our sources, some of the leaders signed PeruPetro’s paperwork without even knowing what they were signing. There have been other reports of underhanded dealings by extractive industry representatives of getting indigenous leaders to sign blank pieces of paper and then attaching some type of contract that gives them permission to enter an indigenous community.

 

 

According to Shipibo leaders, they specifically asked PetroVietnam how the communities are going to benefit from oil development. One of PetroVietnam’s expressed goals in the material they passed out to indigenous leaders is to “enrich the quality of life in the communities and protect the environment”. Yet, at the meetings PetroVietnam never answered the question. Although Shipibo leaders are skeptical of oil development, if it is going to come anyway, they would at least like to be able to secure employment with the company. And when they asked if this was going to happen, the industry reps replied “Yes, but only those with the proper requisites and papers.” None of the indigenous leaders have any idea what that the proper requisites or papers were.

 

 

In response to these community concerns, Village Earth and our community partners have developed a “hydrocarbon awareness” workshop for Shipibo communities that receive very little information about oil development that will ultimately affect them. The workshop consists of giving communities information about the oil lot that they are located in and the company to whom the lot has been leased. This is followed by a video about the environmental contamination and devastation in the Rio Corrientes River Basin caused by oil exploitation, then followed by a discussion about the community’s rights and the problems associated with oil development. This workshop was developed as a defense against the flood of government and oil company propaganda, which claim that oil development will bring jobs to indigenous communities (oil companies generally hire very few indigenous workers) and that oil extraction technology has improved so much that they don’t contaminate anymore (in fact, it is impossible to extract oil without contamination). We would finally end with a community strategic planning session to determine the priorities and sustainable development projects that communities would like to do as opposed to oil development. For example, one community decided they would like to carry out sustainable agro-forestry projects combined with reforestation to sell agricultural products for income generation without destroying the forest.

 

 

Government Settlement Schemes

 

Another challenge faced by indigenous communities in Peru’s Amazon basin is the illegal colonization of their lands. Each day, thousands of acres of indigenous territories are cleared for settlement while the government turns a blind-eye. It is believed this is just an extension of the government’s broader agenda to privatize indigenous territories. In fact, low-level government bureaucrats within the Ministry of Agriculture have been caught selling 30-100 hectare parcels of indigenous territories to non-indigenous colonists. This is partly the result of a land titling process that is, according to the Shipibo and other indigenous peoples, utterly chaotic. However, through Village Earth’s mapping and surveying work we have been able to shed light on this problem.

 

 

In one community where we have been working for many years, the small walking trail that used to run through the far end of the community has now been widened and improved by the government in order to make it easier to travel between the district capital and a large pristine lake that many indigenous communities rely on for water and fishing. Non-indigenous fisherman are now overfishing the lake, oil companies are said to have discovered oil in this area, and of course with the expansion of roads comes loggers and more colonists. Along this particular road, over 80 allotments inside one indigenous community have already been sold to outsiders. Of course all of this is illegal under Peruvian law, but indigenous communities have little legal or political recourse in order to stop it. Village Earth is supporting grassroots community-organizing efforts precisely to stop these illegal settlements.

 

 

Bureaucratic Nightmare

 

While surveying territories and formalizing titles are clear strategies that indigenous communities can take to protect their lands, they face an uphill battle when dealing with government bureaucracy. In fact, the same government agencies that are supposed to title indigenous lands and small farm holders, the Ministry of Agriculture and the Commission to Formalize Informal Property (COFOPRI), are the source of many of the problems they are supposed to be solving. We have noted several examples of these agencies providing titles that overlap existing titles causing major problems between neighboring indigenous communities and also between indigenous and non-indigenous small farmers and communities. The indigenous communities we have been working with decided that visible demarcation of their territory (with signs notifying people when they enter community territory) and a committee within the community to constantly monitor their lands are the best ways to protect their lands. But oftentimes these communities’ borders are ambiguous because of the poor original titling process and overlapping titles. Yet, in a meeting with the Ministry of Agriculture and COFOPRI, COFOPRI stated that they are trying to stay out of these “social problems” by not being involved in the demarcation process of indigenous communities. So, it appears they have adopted an out-of-sight, out-of-mind policy. It is clear that this inaction on the part of COFOPRI will only make the situation worse.

 

 

At least from this whole experience Village Earth and the indigenous communities we work with are learning a lot about the political and legal process of protecting indigenous lands in the Peruvian Amazon. Slowly but surely, by working with indigenous rights organizations, other allies, and colonist settlers, we are hoping to mitigate the problems and find solutions that work for both parties. Through mapping and continued monitoring of indigenous lands, we will be able to take a proactive role in this process before it’s too late.

 

 

Although we have a long struggle ahead, the indigenous communities nor Village Earth have given up hope that it is possible for indigenous communities to determine their own futures without the presence extractive industries on indigenous territories.

 

 

 

Filed Under: Peruvian Amazon Indigenous Support Network Tagged With: , , , , , , ,

Shipibo Radio Network

November 2, 2009 By Leave a Comment


Photo: Participants in the 4-day hands-on community-based radio workshop with their handmade antennas, radio transmitters, and all the parts necessary for 4 complete radio stations throughout the Central Peruvian Amazon.


Village Earth has spent the past three months preparing for and implementing four community-based radio stations throughout the Ucayali Region of the Peruvian Amazon. In a strategic planning session with Village Earth in 2007, the Shipibo community leaders decided that the creation of their own radio stations to improve communication in the region is an important part of their vision for the future of the Shipibo Nation.

Photo: Building the Radio Transmitters.

 

 

In October 2009, the Shipibo achieved this goal with the help of Village Earth and Project Tupa of Free Radio Berkeley. Project Tupa traveled to Peru for a 4-day radio workshop where participants from four communities learned to build FM radio transmitters by-hand. The hands-on nature of the workshop will lend to the success of the radios because the participants are intimately familiar with every part and component of the radio, this will lead to the sustainability of the radio transmitters. They also learned to use soldering irons to solder small components onto the circuit boards. Project Tupa also taught the participants to scrap old electronics as a cheap way to get replacement parts. If a part were to burn out, the workshop participants would know where to find the parts and how to replace them without waiting for some technical expert or international funding.

Photo: It takes a lot of people working together to build a radio transmitter by hand in 4 days.

Photo: They learned to use soldering irons to solder small parts onto the circuit board of the amplifier.

 

 

 

 

In many remote regions of the Amazon, radio serves as one of the only means of getting news and information to communities. At the beginning of workshop, indigenous leaders talked about the importance and significance of indigenous-language and bi-lingual radio because the radio stations in the city require a certain amount of Spanish-language programming. Because each of the four radios will be controlled by an elected committee within each community, the communities will decide on the radio programming. Community members have already come up with program ideas such as an environmental education program, local news, and an oil awareness program to discuss oil exploitation in the region.

During the workshop the participants decided to form a radio network called “Red de Radio Emisora de la Amazonia Peruana “Xawanbo” (Radio Transmitter Network of the Peruvian Amazon “Macaw” in English). This radio network will be a point of access to resources for the radio network to share resources and information between the four community-based radio stations. More communities are already interested in joining this network and starting their own community-based radio station.

 

Photo: They learned to scrap old electronics for parts to build and repair their radio transmitters.

 

 

These radios will be an important tool in Shipibo cultural self-determination, defense of their lands and resources, and the development of their communities.

 

We are hoping to expand both the coverage area through more strategically-placed community-based radio stations, and also to expand the current radios programming capabilities by getting more equipment for field reporting (such as laptop computers and digital voice recorders). We also hope to provide more training in advanced radio programming and to continue to build the capacity of the radio network to be a strong, empowering force for the self-determination of the Shipibo Nation.

 

Thank you to First Peoples Worldwide for a Keepers of the Earth grant, Project Tupa for donating their time training, and to all of the Village Earth individual donors who helped make this possible!

 

The following map shows the transmission of the radio stations throughout the region. The four communities who received the radios were elected during a previous Village Earth workshop of indigenous leaders. As you can see there are still some gaps to fill in the region, and more communities in the region are asking to join the radio network.

 

 

 

For more information, on do-it-yourself radio check out: http://www.scribd.com/doc/8336941/Micropower-Broadcasting-Primer

 

Filed Under: Peruvian Amazon Indigenous Support Network Tagged With: , , , , ,

Peru throws out Amazon land laws

August 23, 2008 By Leave a Comment

Reposted from BBC News

 

 

A sunset over the Amazon, Peru

The Amazon region is home to some of Peru’s poorest communities

Peru’s Congress has voted to repeal two land laws aimed at opening up Amazonian tribal areas to development, which led to protests by indigenous groups.

Correspondents say the repeal of the laws is a blow to President Alan Garcia, who had approved the legislation by decree.

Mr Garcia had described the initiative as pivotal to the improvement of life in Peru’s poorest regions.

A leading indigenous rights campaigner welcomed the repeal of the laws.

Alberto Pizango called it a new dawn for the country’s indigenous peoples.

During the protests, which lasted more than 10 days, indigenous groups took several police officers hostage, and took control of both a major natural gas field in southern Peru and an oil pipeline.

‘True democracy’

Congress repealed the laws by 66 votes to 29.

Alan Garcia addresses Peru's Congress, file pic from July 2008

Mr Garcia had said repealing the laws would hold up progress

 

Speaking before the vote, Roger Naja, president of the National Commission for Andean, Amazonian and Afro-Peruvian Peoples, had urged Congress to vote to rescind the laws.

History, he said, would remember Friday as “the day that the disappearance of the indigenous communities in the jungles and mountains was avoided”.

Mr Pizango, leader of the Inter-Ethnic Association of the Peruvian Forest (Aidesep), hailed the repeal as “a moment of true democracy and true inclusion”.

“This is a new dawn for the people of this country, and for all Peruvians who wish to develop in freedom, not in oppression,” he said.

On Wednesday, President Garcia had warned the repeal would be “a very serious, historic mistake”.

“If that were to happen out of fear of protesters, fear of unrest, Peru would some day remember it as the moment when change came to a halt and hundreds of thousands of people were condemned to poverty, exclusion and marginalisation,” he told reporters.

The laws would have allowed the sale of tribal lands by a simple majority vote in a community assembly, which the protesters say would make it easier for big energy companies to grab their land.

Around 70% of Peru’s Amazon is leased for oil and gas exploration and many of its tribal people say they do not want the companies on their land, the BBC’s Dan Collyns reports from the Peruvian capital Lima.

Filed Under: Peruvian Amazon Indigenous Support Network Tagged With: , , , , , , ,

“Living Well,” a development alternative

June 5, 2008 By Leave a Comment

Reposted from: Latin America Press

Thursday, June 5, 2008

“Living Well,” a development alternative

Elsa Chanduví. Jun 5, 2008

Proposal is considered legacy of indigenous peoples to humanity

More than 1,000 representatives from indigenous communities across the Americas gathered in Lima, Peru, have agreed on a new social system, known as “Living Well,” focused on reciprocity between people and the Earth.

The participants — delegates of the Quechua, Kichwa, Aymara, Lafquenche, Guambiano, Toba, Colla, Poccra, Ashaninka and other indigenous groups — agreed in the “Declaration of the Children of the Earth” to reject the “planetary suicide of the commoditization of life,” when the document was reached at the end of a two-day National Summit of Indigenous Communities and Peoples of Peru and the International Forum: Indigenous Agenda, the European Union and the Decolonialization of Power and Knowledge held on May 12-13.

A break from market dogmas
“We believe there is a big difference between [living well and] those who believe that living well is to live better than someone else. [The latter] reflects a competition instead of respect and equality. So, ‘living well’ is the exercise of rights, respect, equality, and means a life for everyone,” said Blanca Chancoso, a renowned leader of Ecuador’s Kichwa women, who formerly served as one of the directors of the country’s largest indigenous organization, CONAIE. She is currently part of the Dolores Ulcuango Indigenous School in Ecuador.

“Capitalism is guilty of the depredation of Mother Nature and therefore, of global warming, which is going to have serious consequences for the life of the planet,” said Tomás Huanacu, of Bolivia’s National Council of Ayllus and Markas of Qollasuyo. “So, the indigenous peoples are looking to ‘live well’ but within a planned system, not one of super exploitation, but one of rational exploitation.”
The concept of “living well” is based on respect of the environment and equality. (Photo: William Chico)


Huanacu referred to Bolivian President Evo Morales’ 10 commandments to save the planet — presented during the inauguration of the United Nations’ VII Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues in New York in April — which say that in order to save the planet, the capitalist model that encourages consumerism, individualism and the desire for wealth must be scrapped.

“We want everyone to be able to live well and to understand that this is not the same as living better at someone else’s cost,” states the last of Morales’ commandments.

This concept is currently being used by Ecuador’s Constituent Assembly. Members of the body have already approved four articles regarding the development system, the first of which makes reference to the “implementation of living well.”

“Living well requires people, communities, groups and nationalities to exercise their rights and liberties, and to exercise their responsibilities in the framework of respect for diversity and harmonious coexistence with nature,” says the article.

Luis Ángel Saavedra, president of Ecuador’s Regional Foundation for Human Rights Assistance, who was a speaker at the Peoples’ Summit in May, an alternative summit which ran alongside a biennial summit of European Union, Latin American and Caribbean leaders, signaled that the concept of living well is three-tiered: individual, community and nature.

The individual level includes a healthy lifestyle, based on satisfying needs, which implies recognition of economic, social and cultural rights, while avoiding consumerist or lavish tendencies. Living well on the community level relates to how human development indexes play out collectively, the sense that all rights should be for everyone. The nature level — based on the concept of Pachamama, the indigenous notion of Mother Earth — is envisioned not only as the environment, but a source of life and humankind’s only hope for survival.

Saavedra stressed that bestowing certain rights to Mother Nature is impossible within the framework of a free market. He added that in Ecuador, the mention of this issue in the constitution is currently being debated, similar to what was already incorporated in Bolivia’s constitution, which faces approval in a national referendum. Living well marks a break from market dogmas that promote consumerism, competition among individuals and accumulation of wealth as synonymous with power over others, stated Saavedra.

Challenges and obstacles
Ecuadorian Magdalena León, of the Social Forum Committee of the Americas, referred to living well as a new paradigm that meets obstacles like wealth accumulation and competitiveness that impede progress.

“Even in the proposals that appear innovative or alternative, there is the idea to not change [wealth] accumulation, but the form of distribution: we are going to continue accumulating in the same way and later we’ll see how to redistribute a little,” said León.

The idea of competition is also deeply rooted, León explains, “as if economic progress comes naturally because we compete against one another as individuals, as communities, as countries, as regions.” But she maintains that this couldn’t be any further from the notion of living well, which is based on reciprocity, cooperation and complementarity. However, for those who promote new social relationships based on on living well, the fundamental challenge to make it possible is generating harmonious relationships between human beings.

“It is incompatible, for example, that in social relationships there is a gender division in labor, under-estimation and exploitation, a lack of recognition of women’s work,” says León. “It’s absurd that we talk about defending life but at the same time failing to recognize women’s rights to reproductive self-determination.”

Though living well is an indigenous concept, its advocates do not see it as something that can only belong to indigenous peoples, but instead, as the indigenous peoples’ legacy to humanity.

Filed Under: Peruvian Amazon Indigenous Support Network Tagged With: , ,

PERUPETRO Presentation at the Road Show in Houston

February 14, 2008 By 1 Comment

Road Show Houston, February 8, 2008.

This video shows evidence of a speech that Cesar Sarasara from CONAP has said that CONAP is in favor of oil development in the Peruvian Amazon. This video also shows the intervention by Robert Guimaraez, of AIDESEP, during the presentation asking PeruPetro to stay off lands inhabited by uncontacted indigenous groups and environmentally fragile areas of the Amazon. This video also shows the protest at the event.

Filed Under: Peruvian Amazon Indigenous Support Network Tagged With: , , , , , , , ,

Peruvian Amazonian Leaders to Warn Oil Companies: “Don’t Trespass on Our Lands!”

February 7, 2008 By Leave a Comment

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

February 7, 2008

Peruvian Government Breaks Promises, International Laws with Plans to Sell Oil Concessions Overlapping Indigenous Reserves

See below for photo op. and media briefing details. Interviews, photos and B-Roll footage from Amazon available on request.

Houston – Indigenous leaders from the Peruvian Amazon will this Friday personally deliver a message to oil companies gathered at a concession road-show organized in Houston by Perupetro, Peru’s hydrocarbon licensing agency: “Don’t trespass on our lands!”

Robert Guimaraes, Vice-President of AIDESEP, Peru’s national federation of native Amazonians, will also be demanding an explanation from Perupetro and the Peruvian government why clear promises to avoid indigenous lands have been broken. The Perupetro road-show is part of the 2008 North American Prospect Expo (NAPE).

The concessions include four highly controversial concessions, 132, 133, 136 and 139, which have each failed to win any bidders in the past as the oil industry became aware that local indigenous communities would oppose any operations there.

The concessions would also violate international indigenous rights laws as well as the international human rights benchmark of Free, Prior and Informed Consent, contained in the recently approved UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. In particular some of the last communities living in voluntary isolation anywhere in the Amazon, inside dedicated Territorial Reserves declared to protect them from contact with outsiders, are highly vulnerable due to their lack of imde munity to diseases.

Of the Amazonian blocks now being offered by Perupetro:

  • Four overlap titled indigenous lands;
  • Three intrude on Territorial Reserves for indigenous peoples in voluntary isolation;
  • Two overlap proposed Territorial Reserves for indigenous peoples in voluntary isolation;
  • One overlaps a Natural Protected Area.

Mr. Guimaraes said: “Our message to interested companies and their investors could not be clearer; you are not welcome here. We will do everything we can to stop you drilling on our territories and devastating our lands, communities and health. Please, for the good of your own companies, stay away.”

Perupetro’s roadshow comes as international investors grow increasingly concerned about the risks associated with oil extraction in remote areas of the Amazon. Last year, oil major ConocoPhilips voluntarily gave up part of an oil concession in the northern Peruvian Amazon because of unified opposition from the indigenous Achuar people.

Photo op. and media briefing

Featuring Mr. Guimaraes in traditional attire, outside the Petroleum Club, 800 Bell Street, downtown Houston, from 12.30pm to 1.30pm CST, Friday February 8.

Background

The latest sell-off comes despite assurances from Perupetro and the Peruvian government that it would respect indigenous rights and lands. In February 2007, the Peruvian government formally agreed that Perupetro would redraw its proposed oil concessions to avoid official territorial reserves. In April, according to AIDESEP, Perupetro also agreed to inform bidders that the Peruvian state would create the “necessary mechanisms” to ensure that the winning companies would not intrude onto the proposed reserves, until Peru’s indigenous agency INDEPA had completed an evaluation.

Friday’s roadshow is the latest chapter in the Peruvian government’s scramble to concession off the nation’s highly biodiverse Amazonian rainforests, roughly twice the size of California, to the oil industry. In roughly two years, the proportion of the Peruvian Amazon zoned into hydrocarbon blocks has risen from 13 percent to roughly 70 percent, despite the widespread toxic contamination and negative social impacts left by previous oil companies, such as Occidental Petroleum, Hunt Oil and Pluspetrol in Peru’s rainforests.

For background on the campaign to protect the human rights and collective territories of the Peruvian Amazon’s indigenous peoples, visit www.amazonwatch.org.

 

 

 

Filed Under: Peruvian Amazon Indigenous Support Network Tagged With: , , , , , ,
« Older Posts