While the markets and economies have been globalised in the last couple of decades, this is not the case for social, environmental and human rights standards, and for law enforcement processes. As a result, the suppression of... [ view full abstract ]
While the markets and economies have been globalised in the last couple of decades, this is not the case for social, environmental and human rights standards, and for law enforcement processes. As a result, the suppression of local resistance against unsustainable development projects and processes is increasing; in particular in the last five years the death toll amongst environmental group leaders is steadily increasing, together with trade unionists and indigenous representatives. However, such cases are often local and in countries faraway with no media coverage and the lack of publicity contributing to the negligence. Against this background the project Environmental Justice Organizations, Liabilities and Trade (EJOLT), a transdisciplinary collaboration of environmental justice NGOs and researchers, set out to enhance transparency as the basis for civil society campaigns and for political regulation. The EJOLT method was that the civil society groups (mostly environmental justice organisations EJOs) produced documentations of local cases which were refined by scientists to make the message better understandable to scholars, media and decision makers in Europe, and to derive policy recommendation – all this in close cooperation and based on consent with the EJOs. The documentations covered of environmental conflicts in the fields of
- nuclear energy,
- oil, gas and climate justice,
- biomass and land conflicts,
- mining and ship breaking,
- environmental health and risk assessment,
- liabilities and valuation,
- consumption, ecologically unequal exchange and ecological debt.
The case descriptions include the processes of intervention, dispossession and suppression, local resistance and the agents involved (often transnational corporations). We found that both national and international stakeholders benefit from the decisions causing the conflicts, and that the vast majority of international beneficiaries are corporations from the affluent countries. Mining and energy turned out to be amongst the most frequently involved sectors, and the Philippines and Central America as the regions with the highest level of violence against environmental and human rights based resistance. The results have been translated into the “EJOLT Atlas” (http://ejatlas.org/), with maps showing the distribution of conflicts globally, by country, by sector or by corporations involved. Although not comprehensive, the almost 4,000 cases in the Atlas (continuously expanding) show a clear dominance of Northern corporations amongst the beneficiaries; in many cases we have hints – although not legally sufficient evidence – that the benefitting corporations initiated or sponsored the violence. The political conclusions are twofold: first, claims of internationally comparable standards of operation of transnational corporations are questionable and should be scrutinised by authorities and shareholders. Secondly, we urgently need international liability regulations which make it possible to hold the mother companies accountable for the damages caused by their subsidiaries, and a strict enforcement with of EU international performance standards, including effective sanctioning mechanisms.
Key Words
EJOLT, environmental justice, environmental conflicts, beneficiaries, knowledge co-production
9a. Peace and security
