For four days, participants exchanged their experiences using "Getting It Right," a dynamic tool developed by Canada-based Rights & Democracy. Designed especially for communities and their support organizations, the tool enables teams to conduct HRIAs of private investment projects, such as infrastructure projects, agro-industry, dams, extractive industries, and other initiatives.

This report summarizes key lessons learned and recommendations from participants, based on their pilot experiences in Bolivia, Columbia, Ecuador, Peru, the Philippines, and the United States.

The Canadian organization Rights and Democracy has developed an assessment tool that communities can use to answer these questions for themselves. The system is called the “Getting it Right” Human Rights Impact Assessment tool, and is designed so that local organizations and citizens can, with minimal training, carry out their own study of how their basic rights -- such as free speech, water, safe working conditions, shelter, and education -- are affected by the actions of governments and companies establishing mines, agricultural operations, factories, or oil and gas pipelines.

“A lot of companies will do an impact assessment on their operations, using an outside consultant, but these don’t always do much for the stakeholders in the community, or promote accountability,” says Chris Jochnick, director of Oxfam America’s private sector program. “Helping community members conduct their own human rights assessment strengthens their capacity to examine their situation, frame their issues, and engage with a company or government,” he says. “We think this will produce a more robust and balanced assessment than one done by outsiders.”

The Rights and Democracy assessment tool helps people document how their rights are supposed to be protected under national law, and the actual effects of an investment project on these rights. It helps community leaders create a team, plan out the work and specific rights to assess, carry out surveys and community consultations, validate findings, write reports, and meet with companies and governments to urge action to address the problems uncovered in the assessment.

A tested tool

Rights and Democracy commissioned five assessments to test the system starting in 2005. One of them looked at the effects of a metal refinery on women’s rights in La Oroya, Peru, concentrating on the rights to water, health, adequate housing, and working conditions. It was done by the Centro de Promoción y Estudios de la Mujer Andina. The organization concluded that lack of enforcement of environmental rules by the state was one of the main contributors to the poor public health situation in the city. The report also cites lack of commitment by the Doe Run Peru SRL company to improve the environmental performance of the plant.

“By looking at the health problems in La Oroya through a woman’s eyes, this assessment helped uncover a pattern of children’s and reproductive health issues that was clearly connected to lead poisoning,” says Gabrielle Watson, Oxfam America’s planning and learning specialist who helped develop the assessment tool with Rights and Development.

Oxfam America is helping two organizations carry out a Human Rights Impact Assessment. One is related to a proposed natural gas operation in Bolivia where the Centro de Estudios Aplicados a los Derechos Economicos, Sociales y Culturales (CEADESC) will carry out the study with local Guaraní indigenous communities that were denied their right to be consulted about the gas exploration activities in their territory. The other case concerns tobacco pickers in the United States, and will be carried out by the Farm Labor Organizing Committee (FLOC). FLOC will look at efforts by migrant and undocumented farmworkers to improve working conditions on tobacco farms.

Watson says the human rights assessments will help people take control of the type of development carried out in their name. “Local people are the experts about human rights impacts of private investment projects in their communities. This tool puts them in the driver’s seat in the search for safer, more equitable outcomes that are good for everyone.”

"This is the time that big business must talk as one international voice to political leaders and we anticipate—for the first time—that it will be calling for both long- and mid-term targets for emissions cuts, and for money on the table to help developing countries adapt and pursue low-carbon futures," said Oxfam International executive director Jeremy Hobbs who will address the World Business Summit on Climate Change on Monday. "These are make-or-break issues. We could witness at this meeting the private sector wielding its power for the climate good. The outcome could not matter more to millions of poor people around the world who are already suffering first and worst from the impacts of climate change."

"It is crucial that the Summit's "Copenhagen Call" contains specific detail on these key issues and that it is not derailed by businesses that continue to resist the inevitability of a low-carbon future," Hobbs said. "At the moment, the private sector is a very mixed bag. There are companies providing world-class leadership, vision and action on climate change but others are just looking for loopholes and excuses."

"Companies have a powerful interest to tackle climate change because they have to secure their own markets and supply chains. And they must call for a fair and safe deal so that the future world economy is stable and sustainable," Hobbs said. "It is not only the future of business at stake, but that of human development."

Oxfam urged for the Summit's "Copenhagen Call" to specify at least 80 percent global emission cuts from 1990 levels by 2050 and acknowledge that emissions must peak by 2015 and fall to at least 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2020 in developed countries. Summit participants must also demand that rich countries commit the necessary resources for developing countries to adapt and mitigate, including at least $50 billion for adaptation on a yearly basis. Oxfam also warned participants to be wary of "red warning flags," such as voluntary sectoral agreements for target cuts—which could arise in discussions at the Summit.

A growing number of companies have recognized the business case for addressing the climate problem systematically, and they are now advocating for public policies that not only seek to curb dangerous greenhouse gas emissions, but also help developing countries prepare for and adapt to the adverse impacts of climate change. This includes companies who are part of the Business for Innovative Climate and Energy Policy (BICEP), such as Gap Inc., eBay Inc., Symantec Corp., Levi Strauss & Co., Nike, Sun Microsystems, Starbucks and The Timberland Co., which have advocated for the passage of strong US climate and energy policies.