"We are disappointed that the IFC has decided to fund the second phase of the Camisea project. We believe the board of directors should have requested a delay of the vote in order to more fully assess the environmental and social impact this project will have on local communities," said Ian Gary, Oxfam America's Senior Policy Advisor for Extractive Industries and a member of the World Bank’s Extractive Industries Advisory Group.
The region surrounding the Camisea project is home to indigenous communities, notable biodiversity, national parks, and reserves. Communities in the Lower Urubamba area were particularly neglected by the first phase of the project, with serious compensation agreement problems and little spending of royalties by local governments for increased social services. And these communities have not been fully consulted on the second phase.
"The IFC declined to participate in the first phase of the Camisea gas project, and, with support for Camisea II, runs the risk of being further tarnished for its financing of oil, gas and mining projects, such as the Chad-Cameroon oil project, with dubious development impacts," said Gary.
In April 2006, the IFC instituted new "Performance Standards" to manage social and environmental impacts and enhance development opportunities for all financed countries. The standards require that the company sponsor obtain "broad community support" for high-risk projects within affected communities.
"The IFC has greatly undermined its new environmental and social policies by not fully applying these standards to the gas fields in the Peruvian Amazon, which will supply the export facilities financed by the IFC and other lenders," said Gary. "The narrow parsing of this project, done in order to avoid addressing serious problems, sets a disturbing precedent and will do significant harm to the credibility of the IFC's social and environmental risk management."
"We have yet to see, for example, how the IFC demonstrates compliance with its 'Broad Community Support' requirement, within the narrowly-defined transportation/export portion of the project, let alone for the upstream gas fields that supply the project. 'Broad Community Support' is an important new feature of the 'Performance Standards,' but it is unclear how, or whether, the IFC ensures compliance," said Gary.
Now that the World Bank Group has decided to support the project, it must address serious failures, risks, and concerns still pending from the first phase of the project and from new gas development in the Amazon. These include:
We were there, together with Angel Chavez, one of Oxfam America’s humanitarian officers, to gather stories about Oxfam’s work with alpaca herders. They had suffered serious losses in 2004 when a severe winter storm killed many of the wooly creatures that are the backbone of the local economy. So vital are these camel cousins to the well-being of the families scattered across the mountains that many of the shelters they have built for the animals are superior to their own mud-brick and stone homes.
The income from alpaca wool—softer than cashmere when it’s cleaned, spun, and woven—feeds and clothes families, buys them medicine, and helps cover the occasional extraordinary expense. Without the few hundred dollars herders earn each year from the sale of the wool, life in these barren, thin-aired mountains would not be possible for them. And for many, it’s the only life they have ever known, helping to account for Peru’s position as the world’s top producer—by far—of alpaca wool.
About 80 percent of the wool now on the market comes from this South American country; Bolivia produces another 15 percent; and the rest comes from a smattering of countries including Australia, Switzerland, and England. So you would think, given Peru’s dominance in the industry, that the work of these Caylloma herders would guarantee their families a measure of security. Not so.
There, at nearly 16,000 feet above sea level, nothing is certain: The cold kills, and changing weather patterns are robbing the region of the rain it needs for mountain pastures to grow. Life is hard, and people are very poor.
Oxfam’s work with Proyección has been to help Caylloma herders find ways to buffer themselves against future disasters by improving pastureland; planting barley to serve as an emergency reserve for their animals; and developing an early alert system, including the installation of a simple radio network—all at an altitude that has scared off just about every other aid group.
“Nobody has worked at this height,” said Rivera. “No one wants to come up here. Only us.”
There’s a reason: To reach Caylloma’s remote communities requires a degree of energy that would exhaust a lesser field coordinator and his team. But for Rivera, that challenge—and the need that is so evident among the families of this rugged terrain—is the inspiration that repeatedly draws him up the steep slopes to Chinosiri, Jachaña, and a handful of other hamlets.
From Arequipa, a city in southern Peru where Proyección has its offices, the drive in a pair of heavy-duty pickup trucks to the town of Caylloma took us about seven hours through rain, hail, and snow on a rutted mountain road—and that was just the first half of the journey. Following a night’s rest, we left at 6 a.m. for the three-hour climb to Chinosiri, the belly of our truck scraping the ruts as we inched around hairpin turns and splashed through streams carving gullies in the dirt track.
The snow was falling in fat, wet flakes, blanketing the mountains in white, when Rivera, in the truck ahead, pulled over and jumped out, signaling that this—of all high and remote spots—was just the place for a group picture.
“Beautiful!” he said, surveying the vast emptiness around us: no trees, no bushes, no dwellings—only mountains and more mountains with sharp rocks underfoot.
It wasn’t until I scrambled up the slippery bank to where Rivera and Chavez were already standing in the snow that I realized just how hard the work in Caylloma could be: Without the sea-level amounts of oxygen I was used to, a few quick steps at 15,748 feet high left me breathless and exhausted. Puffing hard, I slipped back down the embankment and into the truck, grateful to be sitting once again, and marveling at the stamina of my colleagues. Could I do this, like them, on a regular basis? Could anybody?
Rivera had already answered that question: No.
The air at the end of this Andean summer was cold and damp, and all of us in the pair of trucks were bundled in just about every stitch of clothing we had brought. I had on two shirts, a sweater, a fleece vest, a fleece jacket, a down vest, a windbreaker, thick wool socks, and a wool cap—just enough to keep the chill at bay.
So I was surprised to see, beyond the steamed windows of the warm truck, two boys hiking hard and fast through the mud on a slope of pasture: They had only sandals on their feet—no shoes, no socks to keep the cold away. They’re boys, I thought, and that’s what boys do: tough things.
But as we bounced along, there were others—men, women, children—all wearing sandals in the frigid air. And as the clouds swept across the sky, occasionally unleashing a shower of cold rain, some of the mountain dwellers hardly seemed to notice, and simply wrapped themselves tight in their woolen blankets and ponchos.
Jose Gonzalez Condo, who has lived all of his 39 years in the tiny community of Chinosiri, explained that he and his fellow villagers are used to the mountain weather and its variable conditions. Chinosiri is home, he said, and he likes it.
But as weather patterns have begun to change—the rains are coming late, which in turn delays the growth of pasture grasses and threatens the health of herds—raising alpacas at this altitude has become increasingly difficult, said Gonzalez. And in the recent past, there was no way to get the word out about challenging weather conditions—be they drought or cold waves—unless someone made the 30-mile trek down to Caylloma to ask for help. The only way to get there is on foot, and the walk takes a day.
Chinosiri’s new two-way radio, installed by Proyección in February, has connected this remotest of villages to the outside world. And with that connection has come the sliver of hope that a way of life for the 70 families there—and for more than 3,400 rural residents scattered across the Caylloma district—is now more secure.
]]>Oxfam America and Peru's National Human Rights Coordinating Body are both publicly denouncing these threats and expressing concerns about the safety of the individuals being intimidated. Oxfam America calls on the legal authorities to protect these individuals, and investigate the death threats and attacks.
Javier Jahncke is the coordinator of a technical support team that advises communities affected by the Rio Blanco mining project in the Huancabamba and Ayabaca provinces of the department of Piura. Jahncke is also a member of FEDEPAZ, one of Oxfam America's partners, as well as the Muqui Network, which is an association of national and local organizations working on the environmental and social effects of mining.
The Rio Blanco Project is run by the Majaz Mining company, an affiliate of the British Monterrico Metals company. Critics of the Rio Blanco project contend that mining could transform an environmentally fragile area of cloud forests and high plains into a mining district that will degrade natural resources and pollute the Piura and Chinchipe rivers. (The Chinchipe is part of the Amazon Basin.) Peru's Public Defender office (a government ombudsman agency that protects the rights of citizens) has said that the mining company started the mining exploration project without the approval of the communities, as required by law.
Civil society groups including the Front for the Sustainable Development of the Peruvian Northern Border have proposed community consultations so that people can express agreement or disagreement with mining activities on their lands. The Front is formed by representatives of farming communities, social organizations, the mayors of the Provinces of Ayabaca and Huancabamba, in Piura, and of Jaén and San Ignacio, in Cajamarca. Javier Jahncke is member of the technical team that advises the Front.
FEDEPAZ has for several years assisted the communities of Ayacaba and Huancabamba in filing claims of illegal land seizure by the Majaz Mining Company.
The death threat against Jahncke is the latest in a series of threats and attacks against community rights advocates in Peru:
In December 2006, Father Marco Arana of the GRUFIDES organization in Cajamarca was being followed, threatened, and intimidated in retaliation for his work advocating for the rights of communities affected by mining.
In February 2007, a man driving a car shot at, but did not hit, Nicanor Alvarado, coordinator of the Environmental Apostolic Vicarage of Jaen, a member of the Muqui Network.
Oxfam America has joined with Peru's National Human Rights Coordinating Body (Coordinadora Nacional de Derechos Humanos del Perú) in expressing concern for the safety of environmental and community advocates, and calls on all sides of conflicts related to mining projects to resolve them through dialogue and other non-violent means.
]]>These were the questions taken up by the Organization of American States' Inter-American Commission on Human Rights in a special session to discuss "Human Rights Violations and the Responsibility of International Financial Institutions."
Financial institutions like the Inter-American Development Bank loan huge sums to governments and companies in Latin America. In 2006 it provided more than $6 billion for 112 projects. World Bank lending in the region was more than $5 billion in 2005. Yet despite the power to affect the lives of millions across the region, these bodies have always claimed they are not bound by international human rights law.
"This was the first time the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights has held a hearing on this topic, and they seemed quite enthusiastic about becoming more engaged on the issue," said Ian Gary, Oxfam America's policy advisor on extractive industries. He delivered remarks specifically on the $1.7 billion Camisea gas pipeline in Peru, which benefited from $135 million in financial support from the Inter-American Development Bank. Broader legal arguments regarding the need for international financial institutions to comply with human rights norms in their projects were made by representatives of the Indian Law Resource Center and the Center on International Environmental Law.
Critics of the pipeline charge that it runs through national parks and environmentally sensitive areas of Peru without the proper consultation of indigenous communities living there, a violation of the International Labour Organization's Convention Concerning Indigenous and Tribal People in Independent Countries. The five spills since the pipeline was completed in 2004 have affected the right to a livelihood of indigenous communities – communities say project impacts have contributed to a decline in fish stocks and access to wild game.. A delegation of NGO representatives led by Oxfam America visiting the pipeline area in 2006 were told by local groups that little of the gas royalties given to local government had been used for social programs, such as schools or health clinics, to help the indigenous people in the area.
"This hearing was an important first step to bring public agencies like the World Bank or the Inter-American Development Bank within a system of accountability to address human rights abuses," Gary said. "Our prospects for sustainable reforms are greatly enhanced when we support local partners to defend their rights and, at the same time, make these arguments in important venues such as this."
Oral Presentation by Ian Gary, Policy Advisor for Extractive Industries, Oxfam America, March 1, 2007
Indigenous groups, Peruvian and international environmental and human rights NGOs expressed serious concerns about the project prior to the IDB's decision to co-finance the project. Unfortunately, many of the concerns related to the rights of indigenous peoples and environmental damage have been borne out.
Twenty-five developing countries have now signed free trade deals with developed countries, with more under negotiation, according to the report, Signing Away the Future. In total, there are more than 250 regional or bilateral trade agreements in force today, governing 30% of world trade. The US Congress is now considering new Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) already signed with Colombia and Peru, agreements which will harm thousands of vulnerable small farmers, block access to affordable medicines and favor foreign investors, according to Oxfam.
“Trade could be an engine to lift millions out of poverty, but these agreements are simply bad for development,” said Stephanie Burgos, Trade Policy Advisor for Oxfam America. “Agreements such as the ones with Peru and Colombia will only exacerbate poverty in countries by imposing hardships on developing country farmers, making access to affordable medicines more difficult, and constraining the kinds of policies developing country governments should enact to protect their own citizens and fight poverty.”
The poorest people in developing countries often bear the brunt of FTAs, as seen in the case of Mexico and the North America Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). In the first ten years after the agreement was enacted, Mexico lost 1.3 million agricultural jobs, according to the report. Manufacturing jobs were initially created but competition from cheap labor in China led to 200,000 job losses between 2001 and 2004 as firms relocated. In Peru, studies show that up to 900,000 people could be left without access to medicines if the US-Peru trade agreement goes ahead.
“Mexico has already suffered the initial impacts of the NAFTA—I saw it first hand when I met with small-scale producers of corn in Chiapas - and it will be worse if they fully liberalize the market for corn, beans and rice,” said Mexican actor Gael Garcia Bernal who has been working with Oxfam’s Make Trade Fair Campaign. “These agreements demonstrate the absence of political will to transform trade into a tool in the fight against poverty.”
The Oxfam report recommends that all trade rules, whether multilateral, regional or bilateral:
“Here in Washington, Congress should develop a new framework of objectives and priorities for US trade policy to ensure that it is not a tool strictly for advancing mercantile US business interests, but for shared prosperity, increased integration, and cooperation,” said Burgos. “Congress should recognize the dangers of such bilateral agreements and quickly vote to reject them.”
]]>A woman in her 30s looked up from the floor, directed her gaze at me, and spoke. "Señorita," she began respectfully, yet ready to speak her part. "These projects you have helped us with are good. We are growing fish, and our gardens are healthy. But, a real concern to me is education. After completing the 6th grade here in the community, where will my children go to study?" She explained that she does not want to send them away to boarding school, but that she wants them to be educated "so that they know who they are, and what they can do." She proceeded to ask us to help them build a school.
This is a big request. I had to explain that Oxfam is not in a position to build schools in every rural Amazonian village. And once built, they need to be staffed with properly paid teachers. Schools also need books, desks, chalkboards, qualified teachers and to be maintained—every year. Funding a school from outside the community can be risky. A well-meaning donor could cover some construction and other costs. But as the years go by, if there is no viable local structure to foster education, who will be responsible for the school?
However, I continued, the people of Sensa have a basic right to quality education for their children, and we would consider supporting their efforts to claim that right in collaboration with the communities farther down the river. This would involve organizing these communities, and forming allies with others outside the Urubamba river valley. In this way they could reach out to the local and national government, who are responsible for education, and advocate for decent schools that will endure.
The contrast between the poorest indigenous people in Peru and the fantastic wealth in timber, gas, and minerals coming from their lands is stark. While the local government builds fancy offices for itself down the river in Echarate with oil and gas money, villages like Sensa, where the resources are extracted, have no electricity, telephones, or health clinic.
The indigenous people in these villages do not always understand their rights to a fair portion of these revenues in the form of basic services like health care and education. And if they do, they may not have the means to verify that they are getting their fair share. They usually lack the skills and political connections to hold accountable a government that has never shown it is open to the concerns of its native peoples.
"You do not want to be beggars, saying 'We are poor, give us money. Take care of us,'" said my colleague Igidio Naveda, himself an indigenous person from the Andes of Peru and a passionate, highly experienced program officer.
"No—you are indigenous people," he continued. "You have your culture, your traditions; you love your land. You have rights and need to demand them and ensure that they are met. And your lands: these are your home. Would you walk into someone else's home and take their things, leave a mess, disrespect the place? You should demand that the loggers in the area, the gas companies, the government workers respect your rights, and knock at the door before coming in. You need to lay out the rules and make them follow them."
Heads were nodding and people began to speak to one another in their Yine language. The group became animated, some laughing, others speaking intensely, gesturing as they sat at the wooden tables.
We concluded the meeting soon thereafter, inviting a new and more ambitious funding proposal from them, developed together with the chiefs of the other three nearby communities that had participated in the current project. A proposal like this would show that the community is moving to the next level of organization: The villagers will need to coordinate the project with other communities, and create effective ways to encourage the local government to meet its obligations. They will also have to address the illegal logging and other threats to the environment coming from outside the community.
From my perspective, last year's project was a success. It helped indigenous communities manage their local biodiversity and begin to increase their food supply. That, in turn, served as a catalyst for them to become organized and collectively determine their priorities. This greatly strengthens their control over local development efforts, and increases the likelihood that new projects they pursue will succeed.
Although they may lack the advocacy skills needed to get the government to meet its obligations to educate their children immediately, we know the right organizations that can train them. Once people know their rights and are educated, they are better able to hold their leaders accountable. This knowledge and sense of empowerment can never be taken away. It is one of the best investments you can make, because it helps people learn to solve their own problems—they create a vision for the type of future they want for their village, set their own priorities, and make sure that they are met.
Hoping to reach the next community before dark, we excused ourselves from the welcoming community of Sensa, slipping down the muddy river banks to our canoe, with children trailing us on all sides, teasing each other and, laughing, no doubt at the spectacle of the four outsiders that had come to visit. The sun had moved sideways along the river and the tree tops were shining with a golden light. As the first mosquitoes of the evening reached us in our boat, we pushed off and continued downstream, eager to see what the next community had to say.
]]>I am writing in regard to the imminent Congressional action on the US-Peru free trade agreement, titled the US-Peru Trade Promotion Agreement (PTPA). Oxfam America believes that trade can be an engine for development and poverty reduction, and we strongly support measures to improve trading opportunities that can reduce poverty. However, we also believe that trade agreements must take into account the economic and social disparities between trading partners and include rules that allow the poor to realize these important potential benefits. Unfortunately, as a recent Oxfam report indicates, the PTPA will cause greater hardship and could undermine development in Peru. For this reason, Oxfam is calling on Members of Congress to oppose this legislation.
The PTPA, as negotiated, will harm many thousands of Peru's small farmers who supply food to their domestic market, as they will be forced into an unfair competition with subsidized US agricultural exports. The agreement will limit access to affordable new medicines in Peru by unduly extending the monopoly rights of the international pharmaceutical industry. The PTPA will also restrict Peru's ability to regulate foreign investment to ensure it serves national development.
Agriculture
More than half of Peru's nearly 28 million inhabitants live in poverty, many of them in rural areas, and the PTPA will adversely affect the livelihoods of many of the poor if passed. Agriculture is the main source of jobs in rural areas, generating nearly a third of all employment nationally. The vast majority of Peru's agricultural production is for domestic consumption. The trade agreement makes permanent the export opportunities that Peru currently enjoys under US trade preference programs and will thereby benefit certain export sectors. Yet barely 8 per cent of Peruvian agricultural production is for export, only one third of which is destined for the US (coffee, as well as non-traditional products such as asparagus and artichokes).
On the other hand, the PTPA will fully eliminate tariff protection on basic crops, which the US International Trade Commission has estimated will lead to large increases in Peru's imports of US basic grains, such as wheat, rice and corn. This means that Peruvian farmers who supply their domestic market will be undercut by heavily subsidized, cheaper US imports that are dumped in Peru below their real cost of production. As a result, there is a risk that many Peruvian farmers who are no longer able to earn a living by producing basic grains will turn to coca cultivation, thereby undermining years of US foreign policy and drug eradication efforts.
It has been suggested that Peru's farmers could be compensated for the loss of their livelihoods. However, Peruvian agricultural leaders have stated that farmers would need close to $1 billion to compensate for their annual losses from the PTPA, nearly 30 times what the Peruvian government has committed to make available. This is also a far less effective way to promote development than providing full and effective safeguards for crops that are vital to livelihoods and food security.
Access to Medicines
The PTPA could lead to significant increases in medicine prices, another issue of major concern for poor people in Peru. Stringent, new intellectual property provisions in the PTPA will restrict generic competition and lead to higher prices for new medicines in Peru. Only half of all Peruvians have health insurance and about one-fifth of the population has no access to health care. Medicines account for one-quarter of all public health expenditures and 44 percent of household spending on health. People living in poverty are, for the most part, not insured and must either pay out of pocket or receive no treatment at all. Given these conditions, any increase in the price of medicines is likely to have significant negative consequences for the
The PTPA will unduly extend monopoly protections for the international pharmaceutical industry, which will mean that fewer Peruvians, particularly the poor, will be able to get the medicines they need. A study commissioned by the Ministry of Health in Peru has shown that provisions in the PTPA will increase the cost of new medicines, and the Health Minister has reported that an increase in public health care expenditures will likely be required in future years. Imposing new burdens on an already cash-strapped health care system will further exacerbate poverty and inequality in Peru. The primacy of public health over private patents has already been well-established at the World Trade Organization (WTO). Yet the PTPA ignores this by restricting the use of public health safeguards allowed under the WTO and requiring adoption of new intellectual property rules that exceed the WTO standards.
Investment
The rules on investment in the PTPA give foreign companies leeway to challenge investment regulations, such as laws to protect the environment and public health. This will undermine Peru's ability to ensure that foreign investment contributes to national development, rather than exacerbating poverty. For example, Peru's Law for the Promotion of the Agricultural Sector grants the farming industry certain tax benefits if at least 90 percent of its inputs are sourced nationally. Under the PTPA, this law could be challenged and potentially repealed. Likewise, efforts to regulate the operation of the mining industry to address its health and environmental effects could be challenged.
Conclusion
While the economic impact of the PTPA on the US is likely to be negligible, the economic and social costs to Peru will be high, especially among the poor. Peruvian agricultural exports to the US will expand little, as noted by the ITC, given that these products have already enjoyed duty-free access to the US market under Andean trade preference programs for the last 15 years. Contrary to promoting stability in Peru and the Andean region, the PTPA is likely to exacerbate the existing problems of poverty and inequality and undermine regional integration and development.
Although the PTPA has been actively promoted by Peru's outgoing president and approved by its lame-duck Congress, there is deep concern among much of Peru's population about agreement. Broad cross-sections of civil society in Peru have actively opposed or questioned the trade agreement. The PTPA was a significant campaign issue in the recent presidential elections, and the winner, incoming President Alan Garcia, campaigned on a promise to closely review the agreement's potential impact and renegotiate it if necessary.
Oxfam believes that in order for trade to truly be "win-win" for developed and developing countries, trade rules should be negotiated under the multilateral trading system at the WTO. The Doha Development Round was launched with the understanding that it would deliver on the promise of development for poor countries. A successful conclusion to these WTO negotiations that provides new opportunities for developing countries will also benefit the US by promoting more stable economies and increased purchasing power in the developing world.
Bilateral trade deals like the PTPA complicate the global trading system and divert efforts to achieve a more valuable global agreement at the WTO. Furthermore, the PTPA includes rules that weaken the ability of Peru to enact policies that reduce poverty and further national development.
For these reasons, and because of the harm it will cause to the poor in Peru, I urge you to vote no on the US-Peru free trade agreement.
Sincerely yours,
Raymond C. Offenheiser
President
Furthermore, they will weaken existing regional processes of integration and co-operation. Trade rules with the Andean region need to be substantially modified in order for development to become a priority once again.
]]>For that reason Oxfam America's duty is clear: We and our project partners must help reform government policies, laws, and social injustices that deny people the right to live a decent life. We do this by providing funding, training, and the moral support people need to make real, substantive and transformative changes. The courageous and visionary people who do this work are setting out to build a movement for social justice—and Oxfam America is one of the few organizations to which they can turn for the help they need.
]]>Climate change has huge implications for security and terrorism, for diplomatic distortions, for the viability of the global economy—and ultimately for equity. It also contains enormous opportunities for developing countries. In this issue of Exchange, Pulitzer Prize-winning writer Ross Gelbspan writes about the impacts of climate change on the world's most vulnerable people.
Also in this issue, Oxfam America's Fast for a World Harvest turns 30; we revisit communities in Central America devastated by Hurricane Mitch five years ago; and shed light on the struggles of Peru's indigenous Quechua people.
]]>Amid cheers from a throng of enthusiastic supporters and international media, Make Trade Fair won the day.
Oxfam's trade campaign was launched.
Within hours of the Hong Kong debut, events were held in 25 cities including Brussels, Dublin, Geneva, Mexico City, San Salvador, and Washington, D.C. These events ranged from press conferences and symposiums to a rock concert in London’s Trafalgar Square.
Oxfam's trade campaign seeks to unite concerned citizens around the world in calling for fair trade policies that will help move millions of people out of poverty.
Nobel Prize Professor Amartya Sen, UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan, and musician and social activist Bono were among those who endorsed the campaign. "Oxfam has got it right," said Bono. "It wouldn't cost much to change the rules of trade so that poor countries can work their way out of poverty. But the world's leaders won't act unless they hear enough people telling them."
Also in this issue of EXCHANGE, writers Frances and Anna Lappé discuss their book Hope's Edge: The Next Diet for a Small Planet, and we bring you updates on Oxfam's work with water and sanitation, drought in Ethiopia, and indigenous women in the highlands of Peru who are speaking out after decades of violence.
]]>Concerned by the proposed relocation and by threats to their agriculturally based livelihoods, local populations have mounted significant resistance to the project. On February 27 and 28, 2001, an estimated 10,000 people participated in blocking road access to the exploration site. A recent initiative collected approximately 28,000 notarized signatures of individuals in the Tambogrande district, of approximately 37,000 eligible voters, who are opposed to the mine. Tambogrande's Mayor and local Archbishop have called for the project not to go forward, citing not only the potential environmental impacts, but the mine's
disruptive social impacts, already evident in the exploration phase due to the tense environment of distrust and conflict that exists in the area. The archbishop has called the project "socially unviable." These actions represent significant opposition to the proposed mine by affected citizens and community leaders.
Manhattan Minerals, a mining "junior" with no previous experience operating a mine of this size, and no other current projects, rode into Peru on the wave of the country’s recent mining boom. With the privatization of Peru's mining sector in the early 1990s, foreign investment in the sector has exploded over the past decade. From 1992 to 1997, the volume of mining operations in Peru tripled from 30,000 to 100,000 metric tons of minerals per day. Land area devoted to exploration and extraction increased from 4 million to 18 million hectares between 1992 and 1998. According to the Financial Times, Peru has had South America's highest rate of exploration success in recent years, driving Latin America's emergence as the most popular continent for new mining projects. The Tambo Grande project is located in the department of Piura, a department that up until now has not been known for mining, but rather agriculture. Manhattan's operation may open the door to the exploitation of hundreds of thousands of hectares currently under concession in Piura. The impact on traditional agricultural livelihoods, from which the vast majority of Piurans draw sustenance and income, could be significant.
]]>Legislative Decrees 1015 and 1073 were enacted by Peruvian President Alan Garcia as part of a package of reforms created for the implementation of the Free Trade Agreement between the United States and Peru. The two decrees, designed to encourage international investment in mining, oil, and other industries, violated the rights of indigenous communities that are guaranteed by existing national law. The decrees endanger their land ownership, restrict their right to consultation, and exceed the limits of the responsibilities that had been delegated to the government. The Congress recognized these abuses and overturned the decrees.
?The Peruvian Congress made a crucial move to protect the rights of indigenous communities,? said Raymond C. Offenheiser, president of Oxfam America. ?Communities were not consulted during the formulation of these decrees, even though the legislation would directly affect their land ownership and jeopardize their quality of life.?
The Peruvian Congress found the decrees in violation of indigenous rights, which are guaranteed by existing Peruvian law. The decrees would have reduced the number of votes needed to authorize the sale of land and would have limited access to lands that indigenous people could claim as their own.
This decision followed a series of demonstrations by indigenous organizations opposing the decrees and protesting the absence of adequate prior consultation with affected communities. Among the leading opposition organizations was the Inter-Ethnic Development Association of the Peruvian Amazon (Aidesep). Oxfam works with Aidesep on intercultural education programs and development programs that aim to strengthen capacity, awareness, and knowledge of rights. Oxfam did not support or play a role in the demonstrations.
?Oxfam believes that peaceful dialogue between citizens and leaders is the most effective tool for resolving conflict and ensuring that all actors are heard equally,? said Offenheiser. ?By declaring the proposed legislation unconstitutional, the Peruvian Congress recognized the validity and necessity of the people?s right to be heard.?
The Peruvian Congress took a step forward to prevent resource depletion in the Amazon region and uphold indigenous land rights, but there is still much work to be done. President Garcia must ratify the decision to revoke decrees 1015 and 1073, and he has yet to do so. These decrees are part of a package of 99 reforms that the government enacted as part of the legislative power it was given to implement the Free Trade Agreement. More than half of these reforms have been found unconstitutional by a study commissioned by Oxfam International. For example, Legislative Decree 1064 eliminates the need for an agreement between landowners and mining and oil companies and contradicts existing Peruvian law.
The Peruvian Congress, which criticized the administration for not consulting with the indigenous community prior to enacting the decrees, has agreed to set up a series of meetings with indigenous representatives with the goal of finding alternatives to these decrees that are acceptable to indigenous peoples.
?Indigenous communities of Peru have unique ties to their lands, which are central to their identity, culture, and quality of life,? said Offenheiser. ?The right to decide how their lands are developed is critical to their ability to protect their traditions and maintain their livelihoods.?
Oxfam America has been working on development activities in Peru for more than 20 years, supporting the groups that have the least access to economic resources in the country. During this time, Oxfam has supported—in Peru and around the world—indigenous communities in the areas of bilingual education, productive projects, sustainable natural resource management, collective rights, and the preparation of local development plans.
]]>