Search Library

The Rights of Indigenous Peoples Towards a Just Energy Transition: The Dutch Approach to Mandatory Corporate Due Diligence

Resource Key: K5CI736D

Document Type: Journal Article

Creator:

Date: May 2025

Language: en

The need to urgently shift away from fossil-based systems of energy for the sake of the planet and its people is clear. The green transition comes, however, with negative impacts on human rights and the environment, notably on the rights of Indigenous Peoples in the Global South, where most of the essential minerals and metals needed for the transition are found. In this piece, we discuss recent legal developments in the Netherlands from the perspective of the need for a just energy transition. Against the background of the recently adopted European Union (EU) Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD), we analyze two draft Dutch due diligence laws and their potential in the context of a just energy transition. The focus is on the rights of Indigenous Peoples who are in an extremely vulnerable position in the transition process.

Human Rights, Social Resistance and Mining Firm Behaviour in Latin America

Resource Key: ACD3FTDC

Document Type: Journal Article

Creator:

Date: May 2025

Language: en

Mining companies are rhetorically committed to corporate social responsibility standards such as human rights, but what really affects their behaviour in the developing world? Communities impacted by mines have become increasingly resistant to them, bolstered and supported by international actors and norms as well as stronger domestic environmental and justice institutions. In this paper, I examine the behaviour of multinational mining companies (primarily Canadian) in two Latin American countries in the face of social resistance, finding that domestic institutional capacity and legal mobilization have an important effect on company decisions and actions. Both are necessary—the legal opportunity structure creates an institutional context in which legal mobilization is encouraged or discouraged. Litigators interacting with competent institutions have a far greater ability to hold firms to account. Thus, company practices adjust to the country’s institutional and legal context, and behaviour varies according to host country conditions.

Towards a Feminist Energy Justice Framework

Resource Key: PIV2QUII

Document Type: Journal Article

Creator:

Date: May 2025

Language: en

This article explores a feminist approach to energy justice. In business and human rights to date, there has been little attention to the gendered dynamics in energy transition, mirroring the lack of attention to the rights of women and girls within broader energy and energy transition discourses. Without this attention, there is a risk that energy transition efforts maintain, increase, or create new gendered inequalities, rather than diminish them. With a focus on the distributional, recognitional and procedural dimensions of energy systems, the concept of energy justice holds much potential for the field of business and human rights. Taking women’s participation in energy transition policy-making in Sub-Saharan Africa as a concrete example, we argue that a feminist approach to energy justice could be one way of operationalizing a more gender-transformative energy transition.

Procedural Justice and Due Process Principle in the Context of Just Energy Transition: Learning From South Africa

Resource Key: Z5KELKBP

Document Type: Journal Article

Creator:

Date: May 2025

Language: en

The transition to renewable energy models to tackle environmental degradation and climate change is one of the most important topics on the international agenda. The energy transition requires a system that is decentralised and democratic, depending more on local energy ownership and the genuine participation of the affected stakeholders. Although different states face various economic and cultural challenges, a common challenge is making the transition as inclusive and equitable as possible so that everyone can benefit equally. The article focuses on South Africa, acknowledging its special place among the Global South countries due to its history and the dependency of its economy on coal. Taking the South African experiences as an example, this article aims to show how the energy transition processes can be more inclusive and just, allowing the affected parties to participate at all levels of the just transition processes and making their voices heard.

Indigenous Peoples, Business, and the Struggles for Justice in the Green Transition: Towards a Rights-Based Approach to Just Transitions

Resource Key: BY738STG

Document Type: Journal Article

Creator:

Date: May 2025

Language: en

This article explores the responsibility of wind energy developers for the rights of Indigenous Peoples whose lands are affected by wind energy projects. Applying a rights-based approach and drawing on three landmark court rulings involving the struggle of Indigenous communities against the development of wind energy projects, the analysis explores the insights provided by the cases for clarifying the responsibility of business actors involved in developing such projects. It examines how Indigenous Peoples’ rights are frequently marginalized or overlooked in the planning and siting of wind energy projects and the need to respect the rights of Indigenous Peoples throughout a project in order to attain a transition that is just. Based on the analysis, we argue for a rights-based approach as the theoretical framework and analytical tool to advance justice in the green transition and a means to articulate the responsibilities of corporate actors within that context.

China’s Solar Dominance: Worker Rights in the Pursuit of a Just Transition

Resource Key: F2C99LKV

Document Type: Journal Article

Creator:

Date: May 2025

Language: en

This article examines the intersection between forced labour, supply chain risks and environmental, social and governance concerns that pose a threat to the ‘Just Transition’. It addresses how states, businesses and other stakeholders drive or fail Just Transitions and why. Through an application of a ‘policy currents framework’ to the case study of solar panel supply chains originating in China, we analyse states, international organisations and civil society organisations’ framing of modern slavery issues in the context of the ‘Just Transition’. We focus on the framing of challenges and solutions to the nexus of forced labour and climate change. We draw attention to the fact decarbonisation risks are being achieved at the cost of labour rights abuses within supply chains, question whether the concept of renewable sources is ‘Just’ and provide a series of recommendations for stakeholders.

Mapping Human Rights Violations Connected to Renewable Energy Development in India: A Case Study of the ‘Oran Land’ at Thar Desert and Energy Transition

Resource Key: RXRZ5CAI

Document Type: Journal Article

Creator:

Date: May 2025

Language: en

This article examines India’s energy transition agenda, which the central government drives to reduce the impact of climate change through the development of renewable energy. It presents a case study of the ‘Oran Land’ in the Thar desert in India, which is affected by the country’s energy transition agenda. It further highlights issues relating to human rights infringement linked to corporations undertaking the transition and operating in the ‘Orans’—a community-protected land. The article concludes with discussions on legislative developments in India and global best practices that seek to mainstream human rights into business practice and further strengthen compliance with the United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights.

IRMA Standard for Responsible Mining 1.0 – Supplementary Guidance on Indigenous Peoples and Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC) Version 1.0

Resource Key: RVG8ATBL

Document Type: Report

Creator:

Institution: Initiative for Responsible Mining Assurance

Date: March 2025

Language: en

The IRMA Standard relies on, and acknowledges, the importance of certain globally recognized laws, standards and norms including the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People and International Labor Organization (ILO) Convention 169 for a common definition of Indigenous Peoples, Indigenous rights, and Indigenous rightsholders. Even within these global guiding references, we recognize that navigating the complex nuances and specific rights and aspirations of Indigenous Peoples is not a simple exercise. The purpose of this guidance is to complement the existing Guidance Document for the Standard for Responsible Mining and provide more specific details on how the IRMA Standard is intended to be applied within this global context. This guidance does not change the content of the IRMA Standard for Responsible Mining; it has been prepared to address a need for further guidance that has become clear from the application of the IRMA Standard at mines in various regions of the world. IRMA acknowledges that even with this additional guidance, there might be circumstances where determining relevancy of the chapter is not clear, or where mines and auditors interpret requirements or determinations of relevancy differently. In these cases, where parties cannot reach an agreement that is consistent with IRMA, IRMA can provide supporting dialogue and/or connect parties with external global resources for further support.

General Recommendation No. 39 (GR 39) on the Rights of Indigenous Women and Girls: Practical guide for advocacy by indigenous women

Resource Key: 59D3ZDKP

Document Type: Report

Creator:

Place: Baguio, Philippines

Institution: Indigenous Peoples Rights International

Date: September 2023

Language: en

The General Recommendation No. 39 (GR 39) on the Rights of Indigenous Women and Girls issued by the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) in October 2022, provides important guidance and recommendations for the rights and well-being of indigenous women and girls (IW). This document was developed with the active participation and engagement of indigenous peoples’ organizations including the Indigenous Peoples Rights International-IPRI, the International Network of Indigenous Women-FIMI and other indigenous women’s organizations. It reflects many of their views and recommendations. Below are some salient points and key recommendations from GR 39 that indigenous peoples and IW should keep in mind.

Sector-wide social impact scoping of agrivoltaic systems: A case study in Japan

Resource Key: SHLKHG8Y

Document Type: Journal Article

Creator:

Date: August 2019

Language: en

The recent rapid promotion of renewable energy technology (RET) worldwide may have led to a greater social impact on local communities, where multiple otherwise-small individual units of RET are concentrated in one place, as may occur in the case of small photovoltaic power generating units, for example. This study examines such a case of the dissemination of innovative agrivoltaic systems (AVSs), a system in which photovoltaic power facilities are installed above cultivated farmland, across Japanese rural areas.
The paper offers a preliminary sector-wide social impact scoping (SSIS) for potential cumulative social impact of a dissemination policy of AVSs. AVSs were predicted to positively impact many local stakeholders. It was found that AVSs themselves improve energy security as they are, but if particular devices are accommodated, energy security is further improved. Several measures, including providing information to farm operators regarding specific examples of favourable economic outcomes and good agricultural practices, are recommended to mitigate any negative impact of AVS installation.
Policymakers should undertake SSIS for RET to reveal the variety of views among otherwise reticent stakeholders so that they can eventually increase the positive impact and mitigate the negative impact of RET.

CEDAW: Jurisprudence on Indigenous Women and Girls 2017-2024

Resource Key: 9BMRERES

Document Type: Report

Creator:

Place: Baguio, Philippines

Institution: Indigenous Peoples Rights International

Date: March 2025

Language: en

Exploring the Conflict Blind Spots in Climate Adaptation Finance

Resource Key: VW3NXIYU

Document Type: Report

Creator:

Institution: Supporting Pastoralism and Agriculture in Recurrent and Protracted Crises (SPARC)

Date: September 2021

This synthesis report explores whether and how climate adaptation programmes have been conflict-sensitive in fragile and conflict-affected situations (FCSs). It looks also at the barriers and enablers to increasing adaptation finance to these contexts. The report refers to these two issues as the ‘conflict blind spots’ in climate adaptation finance. In this study, climate adaptation programmes are defined broadly to include: (1) projects whose principal objective is to reduce vulnerability of human and natural systems to current and expected climate impacts by increasing resilience, and/or reducing exposure to them; and (2) development projects with other principal objectives, such as poverty reduction, where climate change concerns are mainstreamed into activities (these programmes are often also called climate-relevant development programmes).1 Therefore, many of the issues identified throughout the report do not apply solely to adaptation finance but to official development assistance (ODA) more generally. The report is based on an analysis of approaches to conflict sensitivity of donors operating in the Sahel and Horn of Africa – a region with a large concentration of highly climate-vulnerable and conflict-affected countries (Moran et al., 2018) – and synthesis of findings from the application of such approaches to climate adaptation investments in Mali, Somalia and Sudan. It is informed by, and should be read in conjunction with its sister report ‘Exploring the conflict blind spots in climate adaptation finance in the Sahel and Horn of Africa’, which documents in full the donor analysis and the three country case studies.

Environmental and Social Framework

Resource Key: TAGZYB4M

Document Type: Report

Creator:

Place: Mandaluyong City, Philippines

Institution: Asian Development Bank

Date: 2024

Language: en

“The Environmental and Social Framework (ESF) comprises: Vision, which sets out the aspirations of the Asian Development Bank (ADB) regarding environmental and social (E&S) sustainability; Environmental and Social Policy (E&S Policy), which sets out the mandatory responsibilities that apply to ADB; Environmental and Social Standards (ESSs), which set out the mandatory requirements that apply to borrowers/ clients; Requirements for Financing Modalities and Products, which set out the mandatory responsibilities that apply to ADB and mandatory requirements that apply to borrowers/clients for different financing modalities and products; and Prohibited Investment Activities List.

The 10 Environmental and Social Standards, which establish the performance standards that borrowers/clients and projects will meet throughout a project cycle, are as follows: Environmental and Social Standard 1 (ESS1): Assessment and Management of Environmental and Social Risks and Impacts; Environmental and Social Standard 2 (ESS2): Labor and Working Conditions; Environmental and Social Standard 3 (ESS3): Resource Conservation and Pollution Prevention; Environmental and Social Standard 4 (ESS4): Health, Safety, and Security; Environmental and Social Standard 5 (ESS5): Land Acquisition and Land Use Restriction; Environmental and Social Standard 6 (ESS6): Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Natural Resources Management; Environmental and Social Standard 7 (ESS7): Indigenous Peoples; (viii) Environmental and Social Standard 8 (ESS8): Cultural Heritage; Environmental and Social Standard 9 (ESS9): Climate Change; and (x) Environmental and Social Standard 10 (ESS10): Stakeholder Engagement and Information Disclosure.”

Māori – infrastructure provider engagement

Resource Key: TK4VAT7H

Document Type: Report

Creator:

Place: Wellington, New Zealand

Institution: New Zealand Infrastructure Commission - Te Waihanga

Date: 2024

Language: en

Engagement is happening in an inherently diverse, fluid and complex environment The environment within which Māori and infrastructure providers engage on infrastructure initiatives is inherently diverse, fluid and complex. • Māori are diverse and the differences between, and evolving nature of, Māori groups mean that it is unhelpful for infrastructure providers to make assumptions about what the priorities and aspirations of members of a particular group of Māori will be (even if the infrastructure provider has engaged with members of that group before). • The government infrastructure sector is also complex. Different government infrastructure providers have different levels of autonomy and different accountabilities, are subject to different funding controls, and take different approaches to how they undertake infrastructure initiatives. Relevant legislation changes regularly. These factors make it challenging for Māori groups who engage on a range of government infrastructure initiatives. The environment will continue to be complex and evolving. It would help both Māori groups and infrastructure providers to engage effectively in this environment if infrastructure providers improved the extent to which their personnel had visibility of: • what other parts of their organisation are engaging with different Māori groups on • what other infrastructure providers (and other government organisations) are talking to particular Māori groups about. Approaches to increasing the visibility of the engagement that is occurring with different Māori groups across the infrastructure sector need to: – be practicable to maintain over time – not place an unreasonable time or cost burden on Māori groups or infrastructure providers – enable mātauranga Māori (Māori knowledge) (including information about culturally sensitive sites and landscapes) and commercially sensitive information to be treated appropriately. Why Māori groups and infrastructure providers engage with each other New Zealand legislation, local authorities, mana whenua groups, and infrastructure sector participants give a very wide range of reasons why Māori groups and infrastructure providers should be, or are, engaging with each other in relation to infrastructure initiatives. Mana whenua groups’ reasons for engaging tend to include: • to fulfil inherited responsibilities and uphold their status (including as kaitiaki (guardians)) • to enable te ao Māori values to be integrated into infrastructure initiatives • to achieve broader outcomes for the group (including to ensure that the group’s social, and economic interests are taken into account). Infrastructure Staff’s reasons for engaging include some factors focused on achieving particular infrastructure initiatives. However, their reasons are not limited to that, and many of the reasons they give for engaging take a longer term view. Mana whenua groups, infrastructure sector participants and local authority websites all see engagement as part of the participants fulfilling their roles under the Treaty of Waitangi | Te Tiriti o Waitangi (Treaty | Te Tiriti). Trust-based ongoing relationships There is a lot of debate regarding what the Treaty | Te Tiriti requires. However, there appears to be consensus between mana whenua groups, the New Zealand Courts and infrastructure providers that (whatever else it does or does not require) the Treaty | Te Tiriti obliges both Māori groups and government infrastructure providers to: • There is a reasonable degree of consensus between mana whenua groups and infrastructure providers that infrastructure providers should use publicly available sources to seek to understand a mana whenua group’s history, priorities, kawa and tikanga before substantive engagement occurs. • Generally, infrastructure providers do not develop written engagement strategies or plans for engaging with Māori groups (and instead are guided by a Māori group on how and the extent to which that group wants to engage on a particular initiative). • Infrastructure providers pay for Māori groups’ time, and meet expenses Māori groups incur, in engaging on projects initiated by those infrastructure providers (in the same way as infrastructure providers would pay for other specialist input). • Where possible, engagement includes multiple kanohi ki te kanohi (face-to-face) meetings (unless a Māori group indicates that that is not required). • If differences arise between Māori groups during engagement infrastructure providers do not get involved in trying to broker agreement between those groups, but in some situations the parties will use mechanisms that allow those differences to be resolved between the Māori groups separately while other aspects of the infrastructure initiative continue to progress. • Infrastructure providers generally do not undertake formal reviews of how engagement with a Māori group went on a particular initiative or have a formal process for discussing with Māori groups how their feedback shaped an initiative (with several infrastructure providers commenting that those matters are addressed more informally as part of regular ongoing meetings with a Māori group). Three areas where there is notable divergence in views or practice are: • mana whenua groups appear to have a greater level of preference for entering into written relationship Memoranda of Understanding than infrastructure providers • differences in when and how any specialist Māori engagement staff employed by an infrastructure provider are involved in engagement with Māori groups • a lack of consensus as to whether which contracting and procurement model an infrastructure provider uses for a project has a substantive impact on Māori engagement. There are some issues that appear to arise in relation to many infrastructure initiatives. • Infrastructure providers often find it difficult to identify which specific Māori groups to engage with or who within a Māori group to engage with. • It is quite common for infrastructure providers not to identify that some areas of land affected by an infrastructure initiative are multiple-owned Māori land, resulting in the beneficial owners of that land not being engaged with. • Māori staff within infrastructure providers have multiple accountabilities – their accountabilities as employees/public officials and accountabilities to their iwi, hapū or Māori generally – which may lead to burn-out or other issues. • There are issues regarding the extent to which Māori groups and infrastructure providers can be open with each other when information relevant to an infrastructure initiative is mātauranga Māori (particularly information about culturally sensitive sites or landscapes), or commercially sensitive. • Infrastructure providers generally do not specifically budget or account for the costs of engaging with Māori groups. • The acquisition of land owned by Māori groups for infrastructure initiatives is a matter of particular concern to Māori groups and creates complex future obligations for infrastructure providers/the Crown when land acquired for a project is no longer needed.

Environmental and Social Performance Tool

Resource Key: QR5TS95P

Document Type: Report

Creator:

Place: Victoria, Australia

Institution: AusIMM

Date: 2025

Social Performance and Environment practitioners advise on, guide and undertake work activities that seek to minimise harm and maximise benefits from minerals development on social and biophysical landscapes to constructively and sustainably position the minerals industry in society. AusIMM’s Social and Environment Committee has developed materials to support the professional development and assessment of AusIMM members in the disciplines of Social Performance and the Environment. The Area of Practice descriptors, competency assessment tools, courses and guidelines linked here are designed to support self-directed professional development by Social Performance and Environment practitioners. The materials identified are assessed by AusIMM’s Social and Environment Committee to be useful and current in 2023, with no opinion provided nor implied on relative merit or likelihood of future availability.

What Are the Success Factors for a Just Transition in Critical Mineral Extraction? Analysis From the Lithium Triangle

Resource Key: TPZZYPVP

Document Type: Journal Article

Creator:

Date: May 2025

Language: en

The scramble to extract critical energy transition minerals creates risk of widespread negative human rights impacts. A just transition in the extraction of critical minerals must involve deep examination of the mine-community interface to gain a better understanding of the drivers of successful engagement between mining companies and communities. Drawing on fieldwork in South America’s lithium triangle, this paper finds that the nature of the corporate-community relationship is increasingly key to enabling a just transition whereby communities participate in the benefits of extraction with negative impacts mitigated. It establishes that key success factors are related to empowerment of Indigenous communities and have the potential to maximise positive outcomes for communities in the context of lithium extraction. Governments and companies must embed a more bottom-up process with an end goal of communities themselves defining the parameters of what a just transition means in the critical minerals context.

Towards a Human Rights-based Approach to Energy Transition in Africa

Resource Key: EMKJKET3

Document Type: Journal Article

Creator:

Date: May 2025

Language: en

African countries have increasingly emphasized adopting lower carbon, more efficient and environmentally responsible energy systems. Despite these efforts, little progress has been made in addressing the adverse human rights impacts of energy transition programs and projects, and the responsibilities of extractive sector corporations and operators. Existing legal and institutional frameworks supporting human rights face hindrances in adapting to local contexts to pursue clean energy transition and energy justice. Through the lens of community engagement, gender equality and other rights-based approaches, this article argues that socially excluding vulnerable groups in accessing energy markets is primarily a function of consolidating energy delivery in a way that navigates current discrimination and responds to the central roles played by different actors. The article explores how energy is produced, extracted, distributed and shared to help outline a future agenda for shaping discussions on just transitions in Africa, emphasizing the prioritization of fairness in these efforts.

The Norwegian Transparency Act, Renewable Energy and Extractive Industries: Towards a Just Transition for the Indigenous Sámi People

Resource Key: 6BR43CV4

Document Type: Journal Article

Creator:

Date: May 2025

Language: en

Norway is, in many aspects, at the forefront of the global energy transition. Nevertheless, a human rights paradox in Norway’s energy transition plan is that while addressing climate-related human rights impacts, it might come at a high cost to the rights of the Indigenous Sámi People. Mining operations and renewable energy developments in the Sámi ancestral lands have already threatened reindeer husbandry, on which certain Sámi communities rely for a living, and which represents an integral component of their cultural identity. Resolving this paradox is crucial to achieving a just transition that leaves no one behind. Against this backdrop, the piece examines how the Norwegian Transparency Act—a mandatory human rights due diligence initiative—can address the impacts on Sámi rights caused by companies involved in renewable energy and extractive developments on Sámi lands.

Guía sobre la evaluación del impacto en la salud: Unidad de Soluciones Ambientales y Sociales – Evaluación del impacto en la salud

Resource Key: DQ5INIWQ

Document Type: Report

Creator:

Place: Washington D.C.

Institution: Inter-American Development Bank

Date: 2025

Language: es

El Marco de Política Ambiental y Social (MPAS) del Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo (BID) requiere que los prestatarios establezcan y mantengan un proceso para identificar, evaluar y gestionar los impactos ambientales y sociales de un proyecto. Esto incluye los impactos relacionados con el proyecto en la salud, la seguridad y el bienestar de las comunidades. El MPAS tiene 10 Normas de Desempeño Ambiental y Social (NDAS) que tratan cómo se deben identificar, evaluar y gestionar los impactos. La NDAS 4 sobre Salud y Seguridad de la Comunidad establece las responsabilidades de los prestatarios para minimizar los impactos de un proyecto en la salud, la seguridad y el bienestar de la comunidad. Otras NDAS que también se relacionan con la NDAS 4 sobre Salud y Seguridad de la Comunidad son: NDAS 2 sobre Trabajo y condiciones laborales, NDAS 3 sobre Eficiencia en el uso de los recursos y prevención de la contaminación, NDAS 5 sobre Adquisición de tierras y reasentamiento involuntario, NDAS 6 sobre Conservación de la biodiversidad y gestión sostenible de los recursos naturales vivos, y NDAS 9 sobre Igualdad de género. El MPAS recomienda que los prestatarios realicen una Evaluación del Impacto en la Salud (EIS), en su proceso de identificación de riesgos e impactos ambientales y sociales, como la forma óptima de identificar, evaluar y gestionar sistemáticamente los impactos en la salud de la comunidad relacionados con el proyecto. Este documento proporciona orientación sobre la realización de evaluaciones de impacto en la salud que estén en línea con las mejores prácticas internacionales y los requisitos del MPAS y las NDAS del BID.

Health impact assessment guide: Environmental and Social Solutions Unit – Health impact assessment

Resource Key: 9QTEANFV

Document Type: Report

Creator:

Place: Washington D.C.

Institution: Inter-American Development Bank

Date: 2025

Language: en

The Inter-American Development Bank’s (IDB) Environmental and Social Policy Framework (ESPF) requires Borrowers to establish and maintain a process for identifying, assessing, and managing, the environmental and social impacts of a project. This includes project-related impacts on the health, safety, and well-being of communities. The ESPF has 10 Environmental and Social Performance Standards (ESPS) for how impacts should be identified, assessed, and managed. ESPF 4 on Community Health, Safety and Security sets out the responsibilities of Borrowers to minimize the impacts of a project on community health, safety, and wellbeing. Other ESPSs that also relate to ESPS 4 on Community Health, Safety, and Security include: ESPS 2 on Labor and Working Conditions, ESPS 3 on Resource Efficiency and Pollution Prevention, ESPS 5 on Land Acquisition and Involuntary Resettlement, ESPS 6 on Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Management of Living Natural Resources, and ESPS 9 on Gender Equality. The ESPF recommends that Borrowers carry out a Health Impact Assessment (HIA), in its environmental and social risks and impacts identification process, as the optimal way to systematically identify, assess, and manage project-related community health impacts. This document provides guidance on conducting Health Impact Assessments in accordance with international good practice and the requirements of the IDB’s ESPF and ESPSs.

Guia sobre avaliação de impacto na saúde: Divisão de Soluções Ambientais e Sociais – Avaliação de impacto na saúde

Resource Key: RTUQ9D55

Document Type: Report

Creator:

Place: Washington D.C.

Institution: Inter-American Development Bank

Date: 2025

Language: pt

O Marco de Política Ambiental e Social (MPAS) do Banco Interamericano de Desenvolvimento (BID) exige que os Mutuários estabeleçam e mantenham um processo para identificar, avaliar e gerenciar os impactos ambientais e sociais de um projeto. Isto inclui impactos relacionados ao projeto na saúde, segurança e bem-estar das comunidades. O MPAS tem 10 Padrões de Desempenho Ambiental e Social (PDAS) sobre como os impactos devem ser identificados, avaliados e gerenciados. O PDAS 4 sobre Saúde e Segurança da Comunidade estabelece as responsabilidades dos Mutuários para minimizar os impactos de um projeto na saúde, segurança e bem-estar da comunidade. Outros PDAS que também se relacionam com o PDAS 4 sobre Saúde e Segurança da Comunidade incluem: o PDAS 2 sobre Mão de Obra e Condições de Trabalho, PDAS 3 sobre Eficiência de Recursos e Prevenção da Poluição, PDAS 5 sobre Aquisição de Terra e Reassentamento Involuntário, PDAS 6 sobre Conservação da Biodiversidade e Gestão Sustentável dos Recursos Naturais Vivos e PDAS 9 sobre Igualdade de Gêneros. O MPAS recomenda que os Mutuários realizem uma Avaliação de Impacto na Saúde (AIS), no seu processo de identificação de riscos e impactos ambientais e sociais, como a forma ideal de identificar, avaliar e gerir sistematicamente os impactos na saúde da comunidade relacionados com o projeto. Este documento fornece orientação sobre a realização de Avaliações de Impacto na Saúde que estejam em conformidade com as boas práticas internacionais e os requisitos do MPAS e dos PDAS do BID.

Addressing the legacy of past mining in the Garden River First Nation Community: Perspectives and pathways to improve community engagement

Resource Key: ZSLGL35D

Document Type: Journal Article

Creator:

Date: June 2025

Language: en

The negative effects of resource extraction have disproportionately affected Indigenous people in Canada. There is an ongoing legacy of environmental damage and infringements of treaty and title rights among Indigenous Nations such as the Garden River Nation, that the government must address. A community engagement project between Natural Resources Canada and the Garden River First Nation community was carried out to gather information about the legacy of past mining activities in this Nation. Thematic categories were collaboratively and manually pulled from the community engagement transcripts to explore the effects of mining on the live lihoods of the people of the Garden River First Nation. The discussion results showed social and environmental concerns about resource extraction, and the community calls for action to be taken to restore abandoned mines that continue to leave a negative legacy for the People, land, and other inhabitants of Garden River. The com munity also urge the government and industry to make a concentrated effort to understand Indigenous world views, perspectives, and philosophies when conducting work that could have adverse impacts on the Indigenous Nations who call the territory home. Recommendations were made for capacity building for Indigenous people to adequately participate in project negotiations.

Local perspectives, regional consequences: The socio-environmental impacts of sand harvesting in southern Africa

Resource Key: BDWNW5JB

Document Type: Journal Article

Creator:

Date: September 2025

Language: en

After water, sand is the most exploited resource on Earth, with extraction rates often exceeding the sustainable supply, impacting ecosystems and local communities. Still, there is very little information on the situation in southern Africa, despite the rapid economic growth in the region and associated increase in sand demand. This study aimed to address this gap by identifying the implications of sand extraction on local communities and the ecosystem, drawing upon the perspectives of local stakeholders. Qualitative data collected in Botswana, South Africa and Mozambique through stakeholder interviews, revealed a suite of environmental and social issues surrounding both licensed and unlicensed operations. The experienced negative impacts and benefits were occasionally contradictory in nature, strongly depending on characteristics relating to geography, and the type of sand harvesting activity. We subsequently explored links between experienced benefits, impacts and current regulatory frameworks through development of a Driver-Pressure-State-Impact-Response (DPSIR) framework, which highlighted that careful mining site selection and adherence to regulations could minimise socio-environmental impacts whilst achieving benefits. The findings of the study provided insights on the main obstacles for alleviating sand harvesting-related impacts and existing knowledge gaps that need to be first addressed to inform the development of more sustainable sand harvesting practices.

Mining contestation as an impetus for natural and cultural heritage protection

Resource Key: A88S2EYS

Document Type: Journal Article

Creator:

Date: September 2025

Language: en

This article provides evidence that contestation over mining helps bring attention and protective action for conservation hotspots. Drawing from the experience of several terrestrial and marine sites in Australia and globally, the case is made. Typically, formal protection comes after extractive use of wild areas, organised campaigns directed at companies and their allies, and law court actions. While contestation over mining directs attention to conservation hotspots, commercial and political decisions to allow mining may prevail with irreversible environmental damage. Globally, protected hot spots protect very little of the world’s wilderness areas. Reviewing these cases helps design future conservation efforts: There is an urgent need for (1) local to global strategic plans and assessments of wilderness and cultural heritage conservation and ‘coexisting’ mineral resource development; (2) an authoritative international agency to lead negotiations and planning over the inherent trade-offs involved and to document livelihood opportunities, if any, after mining; and (3) a neowilderness movement to balance negotiations given the power of global mining companies.

Human rights and solar energy: A primer for the Danish solar energy sector

Resource Key: FRWNE44B

Document Type: Report

Creator:

Place: Copenhagen, Denmark

Institution: Danish Institute for Human Rights

Date: 2025

Language: en

In January 2024, the Danish Institute for Human Rights partnered with Green Power Denmark to launch the Solar Energy and Human Rights Project. This initiative builds the capacity of Danish companies within the solar sector, human rights experts and rightsholders as well as peer learning via workshops co-facilitated with Ethical Trade Denmark. The project aims to facilitate the sharing of dilemmas, best practices, and experiences among stakeholders, thereby encouraging improvements at company level and collective action. During the early stages of the project, individual interviews were conducted with the participating Danish companies and sector stakeholders to understand current practice, challenges and capacity needs related to human rights across the solar value chain. Key issues of concern were similar across the 16 companies, as were requests for guidance on building company capacity, specifically embedding human rights due diligence in practice. The interviews revealed significant differences in maturity levels of human rights due diligence across the companies, but common situations of quick growth of business activities and steep learning curves on responsible business conduct issues. This guide, informed by desktop research, interviews and workshops, aims to both outline the current state of play and provide information and practical recommendations to support responsible business conduct efforts by companies and the solar sector more broadly. The report is structured into three chapters: 1. Overview of human rights issues in the solar energy sector: This section outlines salient sector-wide human rights issues at each step of the value chain. 2. Deep dive into critical human rights issues and action for the Danish solar energy sector: This section includes a deep dive into critical issues in the solar energy value chain and provides recommendations for mitigating these adverse impacts. It focuses on the types of impacts that companies in the sector are most likely to encounter in their activities in Denmark and Europe and throughout their value chains. 3. Future directions for the Danish solar sector: The final section offers strategies for advancing the respect for human rights in the Danish solar sector.

Sexual and gender-based violence in artisanal and small-scale mining in Ghana: Implications for African women’s socioeconomic empowerment and well-being

Resource Key: QSQVRV6R

Document Type: Journal Article

Creator:

Date: September 2025

Language: en

This paper examines the complexities of sexual and gender-based violence (SGBV) in artisanal and small-scale mining (ASM) in Africa, drawing from qualitative interviews with 38 women miners and 9 non-miners in Ghana. Our findings revealed five themes; 1) sex for mining jobs/roles and trading space protection, 2) physical aggression towards women miners during work, 3) sexual exploitations and manipulations, 4) everyday sexual harassment at mine sites: body touching and sexist comments, and 5) emotional/psychological abuse– which underlie women’s experiences of SGBV in ASM spaces. These findings have implications for women’s empow erment in ASM as discussed in the paper.

Energy transitions at remote mines: The implications of transitioning to low-carbon electricity generation for Indigenous rights in northern Canada

Resource Key: FB4EDRC6

Document Type: Journal Article

Creator:

Date: September 2025

Language: en

This article contributes to scholarly literature about energy transitions, extraction, and social justice with case studies of proposed low-carbon electricity generation for remote mines in Nunavut, Canada. It considers the implications of energy transitions at remote mines for the Indigenous rights of Inuit and Dene. On the one hand, low-carbon electricity generation can disturb wildlife habitat, negatively affecting the ability of Inuit and Dene to exercise their rights to harvest wildlife. On the other hand, Indigenous community and institutional opposition to some forms of low-carbon electricity generation raises questions about the ability of Indigenous peoples to provide or withhold their consent to land uses that may negatively affect their rights. In some cases, compromises between Indigenous communities and extractive industries will be possible. Compromise solutions are more likely to emerge when proponents and regulators consider ecological and Indigenous values when siting energy infrastructure, avoid siting infrastructure in critical wildlife habitat, consult Indigenous communities regarding the type of low carbon electricity generation, and agree to conservative and precautionary measures to mitigate the effects of electricity generation on wildlife.

Expectations for meaningful free, prior, and informed consent: an exploration by the Little Salmon/Carmacks First Nation

Resource Key: 5BUD6MMA

Document Type: Journal Article

Creator:

Date: September 2025

Language: en

Indigenous self-determination plays an increasingly prominent role in lands and resources development decisions. One way of operationalizing self-determination is through the realization of free, prior, and informed consent (FPIC) for development impacting Indigenous Peoples and their lands, as recognized in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous peoples (UNDRIP). In the Yukon, Canada, where some consent and consent-like rights are held by First Nations, few First Nations have formally articulated their expectations for the meaningful expression of their consent. This paper begins to address this gap based on a case study by the Little Salmon/Carmacks First Nation (LS/CFN), a self-governing, Northern Tutchone Yukon First Nation located proximate to past, present, and potentially future mineral development. Though LS/CFN’s expectations of FPIC are not formalized today, this exploratory research presents that LS/CFN participants expect: early engagement; to be fully informed; space for self-defined internal processes; ongoing engagement with proponents and the Crown; mitigation of resource barriers; enforceability of commitments; contextually relevant processes; appropriate representation; agreed upon definitions of terminology; mitigation of power imbalances; and mutual agreement on the consent process itself. More broadly this article makes a case for a covenantal, rather than a solely contractual, approach to make FPIC meaningful.

IPRI Annual Report 2024

Resource Key: GY6669C9

Document Type: Report

Creator:

Place: Baguio, Philippines

Institution: Indigenous Peoples Rights International

Date: 2025

2024 was a year of significant progress for IPRI in our fight to promote and defend the rights of Indigenous Peoples. Together, we responded to urgent global challenges—confronting the criminalization and violations of Indigenous rights that continue to go unreported and unpunished. Through unwavering advocacy, strong partnerships at the national level, and direct support for Indigenous defenders at risk, IPRI has reinforced its role as a vital voice in the movement for justice and dignity. Our work would not be possible without the strength and resilience of Indigenous communities and organizations worldwide. By standing alongside them—whether in local struggles or key global platforms—we have shone a light on the injustices faced by Indigenous Peoples in biodiversity conservation, renewable energy projects, and extractive industries, particularly the mining of transition minerals. As we look ahead to 2025, we are committed to deepening our impact. We will focus on strengthening our Secretariat, expanding partnerships with Indigenous organizations, and increasing our support for Indigenous men, women, and communities facing criminalization. We will also push harder for stronger accountability mechanisms to ensure Indigenous rights are protected, and impunity is challenged.

Indigenous Peoples and United Nations Human Rights Bodies: A Compilation of UN Treaty Body, Jurisprudence, Special Procedures of the Human Rights Council, and the Advice of the Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples

Resource Key: SCLTSBNZ

Document Type: Report

Creator:

Place: Baguio, Philippines

Institution: Indigenous Peoples Rights International

Date: 2025

Language: en

Volume X of the compilation of United Nations human rights treaty bodies’ jurisprudence on Indigenous Peoples covers the period of 2023-2024. It also contains the advice of the Expert Mechanism on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (EMRIP), the observations and recommendations of selected Special Procedures of the Human Rights Council (e.g., Special Rapporteurs, Independent Experts and Working Groups), and a few other mechanisms under the Human Rights Council.

Multistakeholder approaches to socio-economic transitions in mining

Resource Key: FYRHX8SN

Document Type: Report

Creator:

Place: London

Institution: International Council on Mining & Metals (ICMM)

Date: May 2025

This handbook has been developed to address a gap identified in the availability of information on how to develop and use multistakeholder approaches for socio-economic transitions. It is part of ICMM’s ongoing work around community resilience and mine closure and is relevant to Indigenous Peoples’ participation in mining. Mine closure was one of the first priority areas that ICMM developed guidance on, producing publications on f inancial assurance for mine closure in 2005 and 2006. In 2008, the Planning for Integrated Mine Closure: Toolkit was launched, which was then updated as the Integrated Mine Closure: Good Practice Guide (2nd edition) in 2019. ICMM has also developed additional resources to support the industry in implementing responsible closure practices, including Financial Concepts For Mine Closure (2019), and the Closure Maturity Framework (2020) which is designed to assess, drive and track assets’ progress toward sustainable closure. The handbook also complements ICMM’s existing portfolio of work in community resilience and various resources on social performance and community engagement. The handbook should also be considered alongside ICMM’s Position Statement on Indigenous Peoples and Mining and Good Practice Guide as well as the various supplementary resources on human rights due diligence. The handbook is therefore intended to: — be used by mining companies and external stakeholders to co-design or contribute to socio economic transition processes that foster community resilience and enable site-to-regional scale planning — lay the groundwork for local economic participation, sustainable land use, and environmental resilience in and around mining communities, such that they will be resilient during the up and down cycles of mining and beyond closure — provide mining companies with a suite of tools and options to support multistakeholder processes for socio-economic transition, which they could choose to apply across the varied contexts within which they operate. While the handbook has been developed primarily with a mining company audience in mind, it also contains suggestions and approaches which may be of interest to governments, NGOs and civil society groups.

Environmental and Social Impact Assessments in Mining Legal Frameworks: Case studies from California, United States; Kazakhstan; and Queensland, Australia

Resource Key: AATPJFC7

Document Type: Report

Creator:

Place: Winnipeg, Canada

Institution: Intergovernmental Forum on Mining, Minerals, Metals and Sustainable Development (IGF)

Date: 2023

Language: en

A sustainable mining industry starts with a strong legal framework for environmental and social impact assessment (ESIA) and management. Developing a strong legal framework takes time. Much can be learned from other countries’ frameworks and continually reviewing and improving one’s own framework. The Intergovernmental Forum on Mining, Minerals, Metals and Sustainable Development (IGF) published its Guidance for Governments: Improving Legal Frameworks for Environmental and Social Impact Assessment and Management in Mining in June 2020. IGF is now conducting case studies to support the implementation of this guidance, the first three of which are presented here for California in the United States, Kazakhstan, and Queensland in Australia—three mineral-rich jurisdictions in contrasting stages of development of their ESIA legal frameworks. This report first presents the main components of a legal framework pertaining to ESIA in mining then looks at the three case studies. California has a well developed ESIA framework and is adapting to the latest challenges, which include the concerns of Indigenous communities and issues of climate change in a litigious jurisdiction. Kazakhstan is in the process of developing its ESIA framework to meet the country’s more recent sustainability goals and commitments and is in the process of putting the changes into practice. Queensland, Australia, provides an example of a comprehensive ESIA legal framework but is still challenged with managing the underlying risks of corruption. These three case studies were chosen to demonstrate that ESIA is a critical tool in the legal framework for meeting sustainability goals. Yet each jurisdiction is unique and must strive for continual improvement to keep the ESIA legal framework effective in practice. The case studies show • the importance of leadership and ongoing evaluation in developing and improving ESIA legal frameworks; • the benefit of looking for assistance and feedback from outside the jurisdiction; and • that there is always room for improvement, irrespective of the economic development stage and political situation.

Independent Evaluation of the GCF’s Result Area “Health and Wellbeing, and Food and Water Security” (HWFW)

Resource Key: FR4YC48B

Document Type: Report

Creator:

Place: Incheon, Republic of Korea

Institution: Green Climate Fund Independent Evaluation Unit

Date: January 2025

Language: en

The Green Climate Fund (GCF) is a key institution in the global architecture for responding to the challenges of climate change. It advances and promotes a paradigm shift towards low-emission and climate-resilient development, supporting countries and their development partners in doing so, as per the objectives and targets set by the global community. GCF funding and financing are delivered to support the achievement of both mitigation and adaptation results, in line with the global and national priorities articulated in the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the 2015 Paris Agreement on climate change. The GCF delivers programmes and projects targeting eight mitigation and adaptation result areas (RAs), identified for their “potential to deliver a substantial impact on mitigation and adaptation” (Green Climate Fund, 2021b). As outlined in relevant Board decisions, the RAs were to serve as a basis for the GCF and its stakeholders to pursue a strategic approach to developing programmes and projects. The GCF Secretariat divisions and programming teams provide guidance and support for RA(s) selection for funding proposals (FPs) and facilitate result monitoring and management. These eight mitigation and adaptation RAs provide some guidance to the GCF and its stakeholders for producing impact from their collective investments. In 2024, the GCF’s Independent Evaluation Unit (IEU) undertook the Independent Evaluation of the GCF’s Result Area “Health and Well-being, and Food and Water Security” (HWFW) in line with its Board-approved 2024 work plan. The HWFW result area is one of the four GCF adaptation results areas.1 The evaluation assessed the GCF’s approach to and portfolio of the HWFW result as well as the GCF’s result management system, against the GCF’s evaluation criteria, including relevance, effectiveness, country ownership, coherence and complementarity, results and impact, and sustainability of results.

Independent Evaluation of the Green Climate Fund’s Approach to Indigenous Peoples

Resource Key: BIYIGXTS

Document Type: Report

Creator:

Place: Incheon, Republic of Korea

Institution: Green Climate Fund Independent Evaluation Unit

Date: January 2025

Language: en

At the thirty-seventh meeting of the Board (B.37) of the Green Climate Fund (GCF) held in Tbilisi, Georgia, from 23 – 25 October 2023, the Board approved the Independent Evaluation Unit’s (IEU) workplan for 2024. The approved workplan included a mandate for the IEU to independently evaluate the GCF’s approach to Indigenous Peoples (IPs). The evaluation aimed to objectively assess the GCF’s approach towards IPs, focusing on the relevance and effectiveness of the Indigenous Peoples Policy (hereafter referred to as “IPs Policy” or “the Policy”). The GCF’s approach to IPs is anchored in its Governing Instrument (GI) paragraph 71, which states that “the Board will develop mechanisms to promote the input and participation of stakeholders, including private-sector actors, civil society organizations, vulnerable groups, women and Indigenous Peoples, in the design, development and implementation of the strategies and activities to be financed by the Fund”. The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) recognized the rights and roles of IPs in climate action, and references to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) (2007) and the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) Declaration 10/4 on climate change and human rights (2009) in several UNFCCC decisions (United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, 2010; 2015). Additional guidance from the Conference of the Parties (COP) to the GCF on working with IPs has been provided through various COP decisions aimed at adopting specific measures to protect IPs’ rights. This guidance culminated in the request for the GCF Secretariat to develop a Fund-wide policy regarding IPs. The GCF articulated the IPs Policy adopted by the Board and contained in annex XI to decision B.19/11. The IPs Policy aims to provide a structure that ensures GCF activities are designed and implemented in ways that respect and safeguard IPs, are culturally appropriate, and do not cause harm. The evaluation examines the GCF’s overall approach, assessing its relevance and alignment with international commitments related to IPs. It also examines how the GCF GI, the UNFCCC, and a range of IPs-related policies have shaped the Fund’s approach to IPs. The evaluation also assesses the GCF’s strategies for implementing the IPs Policy alongside other GCF policies. Additionally, the evaluation examines the strengths and weaknesses of key aspects of the Policy and their alignment with IPs’ priorities, including integrating traditional knowledge, co-benefits for Indigenous communities, gender inclusivity, and grievance mechanisms. Finally, the evaluation addresses the role of country context, the implementation of free prior and informed consent, and compliance as underpinning factors in the Policy’s implementation.

Human well-being outcomes of large-scale marine protected areas

Resource Key: QSNXCVHM

Document Type: Journal Article

Creator:

Date: March 2025

Language: en

Large-scale marine protected areas (LSMPAs, >100,000 km2) account for over half of the global ocean under protection, yet little is known about their outcomes for people. We conducted a review of the peer-reviewed literature to identify studies that investigated human well-being outcomes from forty-four (44) LSMPAs worldwide. Sixty-four (64) peer-reviewed articles were identified, which analyzed well-being outcomes in 18 of the 44 LSMPAs. For LSMPAs where human well-being outcomes have been studied, outcomes were highly variable and LSMPAs with more than three studies had both positive and negative outcomes. Fifty-two (52) percent of human well-being outcomes reported were positive, while 42 percent were negative, and 6 percent showed no change. Results highlight diverse domains of human well-being as the subject of studies, indicating that as increasing attention is placed on human well-being and MPAs, more aspects of social outcomes are being investigated. However, the scientific literature also left important variables of human well-being understudied, including the differentiated outcomes that LSMPAs can impart on race, gender, social class, and diverse cultural groups. Our review is a first step towards synthesizing existing knowledge but highlighted that our understanding is nascent. Future studies are needed that focus on understanding the differentiated impacts of LSMPAs across different social groups and that examine the processes that lead to different human well-being outcomes. With global commitments to protect 30 % of the oceans driving ongoing interest in LSMPA establishment, it is crucial to gain a better empirical understanding of the effect of LSMPAs on human well-being.

Māori engagement across the infrastructure system: Te whakapāpā a ngāi Māori huri noa i te pūnaha tūāhanga

Resource Key: XU6A3VM7

Document Type: Report

Creator:

Place: Wellington, New Zealand

Institution: New Zealand Infrastructure Commission - Te Waihanga

Date: 2025

Language: en

One of the functions of the New Zealand Infrastructure Commission | Te Waihanga (Te Waihanga) is, at least every five years, to provide the Minister for Infrastructure with a strategy report which, among other things, identifies the priorities for infrastructure for the next 30 years (section 13(1)(b), New Zealand Infrastructure Commission/Te Waihanga Act). The first of these strategy reports, Rautaki Hanganga o Aotearoa | the New Zealand Infrastructure Strategy 2022-2052 (New Zealand Infrastructure Commission Te Waihanga, 2022) (the Strategy) was released in 2022. The Strategy recognizes the many roles Māori undertake in the New Zealand infrastructure system (New Zealand Infrastructure Commission Te Waihanga, 2022, fig. 7). It also identifies several opportunities where infrastructure can have a role in improving Māori wellbeing, including (relevant to the matters discussed in this report) (2022, pp. 43–44): • supporting iwi (extended kinship group or tribe) aspirations, plans, and goals • using procurement as a mechanism to unlock opportunities for Māori • promoting employment opportunities and improving diversity across the infrastructure workforce • enhancing wellbeing through access to infrastructure services. The Strategy acknowledges that to achieve a thriving New Zealand, and lift the performance of our infrastructure system, we need to: • “strengthen partnerships with and unlock opportunities for Māori” (2022, p. 10) • “recognise and respect Te Tiriti o Waitangi and look for opportunities to build strong, meaningful and enduring relationships with Māori” (2022, p. 13). It prioritises three action areas in relation to these matters (2022, p. 42): • “Creating stronger partnerships with Māori across infrastructure planning and delivery” • “Unlocking opportunities for Māori across the infrastructure system” • “Incorporating mātauranga Māori [Māori knowledge] into infrastructure design, planning and delivery”. The Strategy contains three recommendations regarding how to achieve these things (each with sub-recommendations). The first sub recommendation (1 a.) is: “Undertake a ‘State of Play’ of current Māori engagement activity for infrastructure to help inform and educate readers on how infrastructure providers can engage and work with Māori in a way that works for Māori and infrastructure providers.” In September 2022 the Government released its response to the Strategy (New Zealand Government, 2022a). In relation to the recommendations around strengthening partnerships with and opportunities for Māori, the Government (New Zealand Government, 2022a, pp. 9–11): • supported the proposal to undertake the State of Play work • noted that it supported other recommendations in principle and would consider implementing them (in several cases following the completion of the State of Play).

Integrando la Seguridad Alimentaria en la Evaluación de Impactos: Una Introducción

Resource Key: G6G3KDN7

Document Type: Report

Creator:

Place: Fargo, USA

Institution: IAIA

Date: December 2024

Language: sp

Esta introducción provee a los miembros de la Asociación Internacional para la Evaluación de Impactos (IAIA) y a otros, con una guía sobre cómo incorporar el concepto de seguridad alimentaria en la evaluación de impacto (EI). Este proyecto apoya la visión de la IAIA para “un mundo justo y sustentable para las personas y el ambiente”, al destacar la seguridad alimentaria -un tema de política con importancia global- y el rol que la EI puede desempeñar para abordarlo. La evaluación de la seguridad alimentaria en la EI sirve a poblaciones vulnerables (a menudo indígenas), subrayando sus derechos a la supervivencia, la dignidad y el bienestar, mientras enfrentan las crecientes presiones de factores de gran escala, tales como el desarrollo urbano e industrial, y el cambio climático.

Behind ESG Ratings: Unpacking Sustainability Metrics

Resource Key: V5VQLW6Y

Document Type: Report

Creator:

Place: Paris

Institution: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development

Date: February 2025

Language: en

Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) metrics, aggregated in rating products, increasingly inform a wide range of business and investment decisions. For policy makers, investors, business and other stakeholders, having sufficient levels of transparency and quality with respect to the ESG metrics used in these products is key to ensuring clarity, consistency, and accountability when it comes to measuring sustainability performance of business. For investors, this means making informed investment decisions and for policy makers being able to monitor and evaluate the impact of sustainable finance-related policies. Against this background, this report aims to assess the scope and characteristics of over 2 000 ESG metrics from eight major ESG rating products. The analysis helped identify four key findings as presented below. Metric scope: significant imbalances and gaps across ESG topics More nascent or less standardised ESG issues typically lack comprehensive and granular metrics compared to more established topics. For instance, over 20 different metrics are used on average to measure performance related to topics such as corporate governance, business ethics and environmental management, compared to less than five metrics for topics such as biodiversity, business resilience, and community relations. In some cases, certain topics are entirely omitted from ESG rating products, including human rights and corruption. While it cannot be assumed that a higher number of metrics leads to better measurement, an extremely limited number of metrics associated with a topic may infer that topical impacts, risks, and opportunities are not being captured in a meaningful and comprehensive way. Metric comparability: Considerable divergences in measurement approaches across products Significant divergences exist when comparing the scope of metrics for the same topic across rating products. For instance, one rating product uses 28 times more metrics to measure Corporate Governance performance compared to another. The range varies from 1 to 47 metrics to measure corporate GHG Emissions, and from 4 to 113 metrics to gauge a company’s corporate governance. High variations in the number of metrics available per topic across rating products usually reflect distinct methodological approaches, divergent levels of granularity applied, and likely disagreement as to how performance ought to be measured. Metric characteristics: ESG performance largely measured by focusing on business’ effort rather than effect ESG rating products rely primarily on input-based metrics (68%). These metrics capture self-reported policies and activities put in place to address potential and actual ESG impacts, risks, and opportunities. Meanwhile, a third of the metrics rely primarily on output-based metrics, focusing on the outcomes of these policies and activities. The reliance on input-based metrics could incentivise “tick-boxing” approaches over actual risk prevention and mitigation actions. It may also benefit large companies over SMEs, as multinational enterprises may have more resources to adopt, implement and disclose measures underpinned by such metrics. Moreover, ESG performance is predominantly assessed using qualitative metrics (72%). Noticeably, input based metrics account for the vast majority of qualitative metrics. These metrics may not always provide a reliable proxy of a company’s ESG performance but rather infer ESG performance based on the existence of policies and measures to manage impacts, risks and opportunities related to that topic, irrespective of the actual effectiveness of such measures. Conversely, only 17% of all metrics are quantitative output-based metrics. For policy makers, the potential disconnect between the proxy metric and the performance measurement can also have implications with regard to assessing the effectiveness of public policies. Lastly, there seems to be a positive correlation between low shares of quantitative data and low numbers of metrics per topic. For instance, biodiversity, climate resilience, taxation, and competition are among the topics with the lowest shares of quantitative data and the lowest number of metrics overall, further suggesting that assessment of performance against certain topics may not be sufficient. Looking forward: metrics are insufficient to assess observance of OECD standards on responsible business conduct OECD instruments on responsible business conduct promote risk-based due diligence, including the identification and prioritisation of adverse impacts. In contrast, ESG rating products tend to measure how companies manage impacts, risks, and opportunities with respect to a specific topic—not across topics—irrespective of their interlinkages and interdependencies. Less than 5% of input-based metrics could be associated with explicit risk-based due diligence measures and steps without being associated with one single topic. This siloed and topical structure is also at odds with recent sustainability-related standards structures (e.g. ESRS and ISSB), creating potential challenges for investors wishing to leverage ESG metrics to assess the quality and effectiveness of companies’ due diligence across sustainability issues. Moreover, most ESG rating products assess observance or “violations” of the OECD Guidelines through controversy-related metrics as a proxy. These metrics usually look at the existence and prevalence of controversies in a company’s operations and/or supply chains, rather than evaluating a company’s due diligence efforts and effectiveness in mitigating sustainability impacts. 15% of all metrics could be broadly identified as ‘controversy-based’. Finally, measurement of ESG performance beyond an entity direct operation is limited, including measurement of how businesses identify, prevent, mitigate and account for adverse impacts in their business relationships and global supply chains. Only 7% of all metrics could be associated with supply chain risk management metrics across topics and products.

How costly is a community benefit agreement for a private project developer?

Resource Key: JD2YA2X9

Document Type: Journal Article

Creator:

Date: March 2025

Language: en

Community benefit agreements (CBAs), also referred to as impact and benefit agreements, are common resource governance tools that are negotiated across the globe between private project developers and local, often Indigenous, communities whose land must be accessed or disturbed for major extractive resource projects (O’Faircheallaigh, 2013). A relatively recent body of scholarship has focused on the benefits received by local communities from CBAs and their associated natural resource development projects. According to the literature, CBAs have the potential to help facilitate economic and social development of Indigenous and non-Indigenous communities by providing revenue benefits (Adebayo and Werker, 2021; Agbaitoro, 2018; Alcantara and Morden, 2019; Bocoum et al., 2012), employment and training opportunities (Adebayo and Werker, 2021; Agbaitoro, 2018; Fidler and Hitch, 2007; V. Gibson, 2008; O’Faircheallaigh, 2006), contracting opportunities for local businesses (Adebayo and Werker, 2021; O’Faircheallaigh, 2010a; Shanks and Lopes, 2006; Wanvik, 2016), new community infrastructure (Agbaitoro, 2018; Cameron and Levitan, 2014; Glasson, 2017; O’Faircheallaigh, 2006), and impact mitigation measures (Craik et al., 2017; Fitzpatrick, 2007; Kielland, 2015; O’Faircheallaigh, 2010b, 2017). A smaller group of studies have focused on the benefits of negotiating CBAs for project developers, including increasing project certainty and reducing the potential for conflict by securing consent from local Indigenous communities (Bruckner, 2015; Dorobantu & Odziemkowska, 2017, 2017, 2017; Fidler, 2010; Henisz et al., 2014; Prno and Slocombe, 2012). There is a need, however, for research that focuses on the costs of negotiating CBAs for project developers.
To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to date to estimate the cost of a CBA for a private project developer, estimating the cost of the Mary River Inuit Impact and Benefit Agreement (IIBA) for a project developer, Baffinland Iron Mines Corporation (Baffinland), that was a CBA negotiated with the Qikiqtani Inuit Association (QIA) regarding the Mary River Iron Mine.1 This case study has received some attention in the past with studies analyzing community benefits from the IIBA (Adebayo and Werker, 2021; Loxley, 2019) and the economic viability of the mine (Loxley, 2019; West and Lépiz, 2021). These previous studies, however, do not analyze the impact of the IIBA on Baffinland. In addition to estimating the cost of the IIBA, this study estimates the impact of the IIBA on the economic viability of the mine and evaluates the cost of the IIBA relative to total after-tax project cash costs and relative to a hypothetical cost of conflict. Conflict is prevalent in extractive natural resource development industries and CBAs are believed to help reduce conflict (Agbaitoro, 2018; Dorobantu and Odziemkowska, 2017; Dyck, 2013; Haggerty et al., 2023; Le Meur et al., 2013; O’Faircheallaigh, 2017; Sternberg et al., 2020).
CBAs negotiated in Canada are legally binding through contract law and set out obligations for project developers and local communities (Browne and Robertson, 2009; Cameron and Levitan, 2014; Fidler, 2008; G. Gibson and O’Faircheallaigh, 2010). Although CBAs are only legally required in certain regions in northern Canada in accordance with lands claim agreements (Coppes, 2016), CBAs are negotiated for virtually every major extractive resource project developed in Canada and are becoming increasingly common all around the world (O’Faircheallaigh, 2013). Some attribute the prevalence of CBAs to private developers recognizing the right of communities to free, prior, and informed consent as affirmed by the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) (Cascadden, 2018; Mahanty and McDermott, 2013; Papillon and Rodon, 2017) while others attribute the prevalence of CBAs to project developers managing social risk and attempting to satisfy consultation and accommodation requirements to obtain approval (Caine and Krogman, 2010; Cameron and Levitan, 2014; Grégoire, 2013). Ultimately, federal and provincial governments have a legal duty to consult and accommodate local Indigenous communities but some aspects of this duty can be delegated to private project developers (Newman, 2014; Peach, 2016). While the Canadian government has taken steps to recognize UNDRIP, legislation does not require consent from local Indigenous communities in order for consultation and accommodation requirements to be satisfied and for projects to be approved (Bankes, 2020).
Theoretically, CBAs have the potential to build mutually beneficial relationships between private project developers and (our focus here) Indigenous communities and to facilitate sustainable community development. The benefits provided to a community from a CBA are likely to be influenced by a number of factors including the fiscal mechanisms used (e.g., profit-based or volumetric royalty), the size of the project, the profitability of the project, the predicted adverse impacts of the project, the bargaining power held by each party, and, ultimately, the objectives of each party (Dale, 2020; Dorobantu and Odziemkowska, 2017; Gunton et al., 2021; Gunton and Markey, 2021; Odziemkowska and Dorobantu, 2021; O’Faircheallaigh, 1998, 2021). While CBAs can benefit communities and project developers, the benefits provided to communities, and the reduction in the likelihood of conflicts, often come at a cost to project developers (Dorobantu and Odziemkowska, 2017; Odziemkowska and Dorobantu, 2021).
In Section 2, we outline the theoretical framing for this study. In Section 3, we introduce the case study and summarize our methodology. Then, we present our assessment of which provisions of the IIBA generate incremental costs and which do not and present the to-date realized costs of the IIBA, which help inform the assumptions of our case study analysis. Next, we present the results of our analysis, estimating the incremental costs of the IIBA over the project’s lifetime. We then discuss the significance of the results in Section 4 and present conclusions in Section 5. While our case focus is on the Canadian North, we hope that the theoretically-informed study finds resonance with other jurisdictions host to CBAs.

Global Review: Integrating Gender Into Mining Impact Assessments

Resource Key: XS3MADHC

Document Type: Report

Creator:

Place: Winnipeg, Canada

Institution: Intergovernmental Forum on Mining, Minerals, Metals and Sustainable Development (IGF)

Date: October 2022

Language: en

“There are numerous ways to analyze and document the potential and ongoing impacts of a mining operation on people from different genders, ages, and sociocultural backgrounds.

This report takes stock of the toolkits, guidelines, and legal frameworks that have been devised and used by governments, international organizations, and civil society organizations to identify and address the gendered impacts of mining operations. It also features three case studies where these tools have been applied.

The main finding of this report is that governments, mining companies, and other stakeholders do not conduct sufficient comprehensive, systemic, and structured gender analysis before and during all phases of the mining project cycle.”