voorblad thesis

Transcription

voorblad thesis

Environmental and Socio-Economic
impacts of mining in Guatemala:
The role of local communities and
the ecological justice movement
Auteur: Esther Vandenbroucke
Acknowledgments
The two years in which I’ve studied Human Ecology and Sustainable Development at
the VUB have known several changes on personal and professional level. Combining
this with writing a thesis hasn’t been easy. Still, the interesting subject and the
support I’ve felt made me able to finish it. I want to thank the following persons:
My promoter prof. Boon for encouraging this investigation. He always addressed my
problems with much attention.
My co-promoter Dirk Govaert who took the time to inform me and to revise several
draft versions.
As I wasn’t able to go to Guatemala to interview the stakeholders, I depended on
other people to do this. Asking over and over again didn’t help, the interviews didn’t
happen. Luckily, I could do some interviews myself. I would like to thank Magalí Rey
Rosa, Oscar Rosal and Dirk Govaert for answering my questions.
Klaartje, Gert, Frauke, Marijke, Johan, Daan and other Catapistas for the information,
the support and for giving their attention to mining in Guatemala.
Tim and Arne for revising my English.
Kristof for being my postman.
Sam for the much-needed support.
Mathias for the last and longest mile.
Many other persons for being there.
Esther Vandenbroucke, Gent, August 2008
I
Samenvatting
Wereldwijd verlegt de groeiende industriële economie de grenzen van de
grondstoffen-exploitatie. De groeiende vraag en de stijgende grondstofprijzen
stimuleren multinationale ondernemingen om steeds meer en verder te exploiteren.
Dit zorgt voor conflicten: Lokale gemeenschappen zijn afhankelijk van zuiver water
en aarde om in hun levensonderhoud te voorzien, bedrijven hebben diezelfde
bronnen nodig voor het ontginnen van de grondstof. Op die manier ontstaat een
ecologisch distributieconflict: een sociaal conflict met de natuur als inzet. De
aantasting van de natuur treft niet iedereen even op dezelfde manier. De lokale
bevolking die het hardst getroffen wordt behoort meestal tot een arme, weinig
vertegenwoordigde groep. Zij komen daartegen in opstand en gebruiken een
denkkader waarbij machtsanalyse en het opeisen van fundamentele rechten centraal
staat. Op die manier strijden ze voor ‘environmental justice’. Een belangrijk element
in deze conflicten is hoe de natuur naar waarde wordt geschat: krijgt die enkel een
monetaire waarde of wordt ook de spirituele, culturele, ... waarde in rekening
gebracht?
Guatemala is typisch een land dat buitenlandse bedrijven aantrekt om een graantje
mee te pikken. Gunstige maatregelen worden daartoe uitgewerkt. We onderzoeken
wat de aanwezigheid van die bedrijven op het terrein betekent, wat de ecologische
en socio-economische impact is. Dit wordt duidelijk in twee cases: de Marlin
goudmijn in San Marcos en het Fenixproject in El Estor dat in de nabije toekomst
nikkel zal ontginnen. De Marlinmijn is sinds 2005 een operationale open pit goudmijn
die nu reeds voor een pak problemen zorgt voor de lokale bevolking: vervuiling door
zware metalen, waterschaarste, geweld en intimidatie zijn nu reeds hun deel. In El
Estor brengt de aanwezigheid van het mijnbouwbedrijf het historisch grondconflict
extra in de aandacht. Inheemsen die grond bezetten die ze historisch als hun land
beschouwen werden hardhandig ontzet.
Kan de strijd in San Marcos en El Estor gezien worden als een strijd voor
ecologische rechtvaardigheid? We zien dat de bevolking die in opstand komt hun
‘livelihood’ proberen te beschermen. Ze maken daarbij gebruik van hun inheemse
(territoriale en andere) rechten en stellen de ongelijke verdeling van de lasten van de
milieuproblematiek in vraag. De macht van anderen om over hun gronden en
levensonderhoud te beslissen wordt in vraag gesteld. Op die manier maken de lokale
gemeenschappen in San Marcos en El Estor deel uit van een wereldwijde beweging
voor ecologische rechtvaardigheid.
II
Abstract
The growing industrial economy shifts the borders of the exploitation of resources
worldwide. The growing demand and the increasing commodity prices stimulate
multinational companies to exploit further and more. This causes conflicts: Local
communities depend on clean water and land for their livelihood, companies need
the same resources for exploiting the natural resources. This creates an ecological
distribution conflict: a social conflict with nature at stake. Not everybody has a same
share in the burden of environmental degradation. The local communities who are
most affected are mainly poor and poorly represented. They oppose this situation,
seeing the problem in terms of power and using a discourse in terms of rights. As
such, they are struggling for environmental justice. Important in these conflicts is the
value given to nature: is it only valued in monetary terms or are spiritual, cultural, ...
values also taken into account?
Guatemala is a typical country that wants to take advantage of the presence of
foreign companies. Several measures are taken to attract them. We investigate what
the presence of these companies means on the ground, what ecological and socioeconomic impacts they have. This becomes clear in two cases: the Marlin goldmine
in San Marcos and the Fenix Project in El Estor which soon will start producing
nickel. Since 2005, the Marlin Mine is an operational open pit goldmine which is
already creating several problems for the local communities: contamination of toxic
metals, water scarcity, violence and intimidation are their share. The presence of the
mining company in El Estor brings the historical conflict over land into the open
again. Indigenous communities occupying lands they historically claim their own
were violently evicted.
Can the struggles in San Marcos and El Estor be seen as a struggles for
environmental justice? The local communities who oppose the mine try to protect
their livelihood. Therefore they use (territorial and other) indigenous rights. They
question the unequal distribution of the burdens of the environmental problem. The
power of others to decide over their grounds and livelihood is questioned. As such,
the local communities of San Marcos and El Estor take part in a worldwide
movement for environmental justice.
III
Contents
List of Abbreviations .....................................................................................................1
Introduction....................................................................................................................2
CHAPTER 1
Mining in Guatemala .........................................................................4
1.1
Background ....................................................................................................4
1.2
Concessions, Corporations, Exploitation.......................................................8
CHAPTER 2
Marlin mine......................................................................................13
2.1
Area..............................................................................................................13
2.2
Background ..................................................................................................14
2.2.1
Goldcorp ..............................................................................................15
2.2.2
The mine ..............................................................................................16
2.2.3
A history of confrontation....................................................................19
2.3
Impacts.........................................................................................................25
2.3.1
Environmental......................................................................................25
2.3.2
Social ...................................................................................................28
2.3.3
Economic .............................................................................................31
2.3.4
Further expected impacts .....................................................................32
CHAPTER 3
Fenix Project ....................................................................................34
3.1
Area..............................................................................................................34
3.2
Background ..................................................................................................35
3.2.1
The mine ..............................................................................................37
3.2.2
Historical Conflicts over land ..............................................................38
3.2.3
Consultation .........................................................................................41
3.3
Impacts.........................................................................................................42
3.3.1
Social ...................................................................................................42
3.3.2
Environmental......................................................................................44
3.3.3
Economic .............................................................................................44
CHAPTER 4
Environmental justice movement ....................................................46
4.1
Origin ...........................................................................................................46
4.2
Ecological Distribution Conflicts ................................................................48
4.2.1
Ecological economics and political ecology........................................49
4.2.2
The language of valuation....................................................................52
4.2.3
Mining as an ecological distribution conflict. .....................................53
4.3
Environmental Justice Movements in Guatemala?......................................55
4.3.1
Analysis in terms of power ..................................................................55
4.3.2
Analysis in terms of rights ...................................................................57
4.3.3
Grassroots movement ..........................................................................58
4.3.4
Ecological and economic distribution..................................................59
4.3.5
Livelihood ............................................................................................60
4.3.6
Languages of valuation ........................................................................60
4.3.7
Guatemalan environmental justice movements? .................................61
4.4
Recommendations........................................................................................62
Conclusions..................................................................................................................65
Appendices...................................................................................................................75
IV
List of Abbreviations1
ADISMI
Association for the Integral Development of San Miguel Ixtahuacán
AEPDI
Association for the Integral Development of El Estor
CACIF
Coordinating Committee of Agricultural, Commercial, Industrial, and
Financial Associations
COPAE
Pastoral Commission Peace and Ecology
CGN
Guatemalan Nickel Company
EIS
Environmental Impact Study
EPA
Environmental Protection Agency
EXMIBAL
Metal Explorations and Explotations of Izabal, S.A.
HCC
Historical Clarification Commission
IMF
International Monetary Fund
FIAN
FoodFirst Information and Action Network
FONTIERRAS Land Fund
FTCC
Federation of Country and City Workers
FRG
Guatemalan Republican Front
ILO
International Labor Organization
INCO
International Nickel Company
INTA
National Institution of Agrarian Reform
MARN
Ministry of the Environment and Natural Resources
MEM
Ministry of Energy and Mines
MTC
Peasant Workers Movement
NAFTA
North American Free Trade Area
RIC
Register of Cadastral Information
WTO
World Trade Organization
1
Names in Spanish are translated.
1
Introduction
There's a deep fundamental ecological crisis going on. Much attention is given to
climate change, but that's only one of the problems we're facing. In fact we're eating
the world: every year we need more of the earth to face our needs, and the earth
can't recuperate fast enough. According to the Global Footprint Network, we reached
Ecological Debt Day on October 6th 2007.2 On that day, humanity has consumed the
total amount of new resources that our planet could produce in 2007. One of the
causes of this situation is how our economy is organized: the only focus of our
economic system is growth, without taking nature in account.
One of the industries where this situation is most visible is the extractive industry.
The last two decades are featured by an explosive growth in the extraction of raw
materials. These materials are mostly found in southern countries. The extractive
industry has a big impact on nature and the people living there. This causes conflicts:
local communities are threatened in their livelihood, human rights are violated.
How is this situation felt on the ground? To answer this question, two mining projects
in Guatemala are investigated: the Marlin project in San Marcos and the Fenix
Project in El Estor. We shall take a look on the area where the mines are located, the
background of the project and the environmental, social and economic impacts. We
shall also give some general information on mining in Guatemala. As such we give
the conflicts behind the extraction of resources a face: it’s about real people in real
places.
Several resources are used to sketch the cases: articles from ngo’s, newspaper
articles, scientific articles, reports from various instances, … Several fact finding
missions taken by different organizations informed me how the indigenous people
affected by the mines feel about their situation.
There are not many truly scientific sources available on the subject. Still, the
information gathered was as much as possible compared with other resources.
As mining is just one example of outlets of our economic system, these two cases
are placed in the framework of the environmentalism of the poor or the environmental
justice movement. This movement says it’s not a coincidence that the incidence of
2
Global Footprint Network (2007). October 6 is Ecological Debt Day. Available at
http://www.footprintnetwork.org/gfn_sub.php?content=overshoot. Last check 11 August 2008
2
environmental harm is bigger in regions where minorities live or where poverty
flourishes. Environmental economics and political ecology are used to show that the
ecological problem is an unjust problem and that this is most visible in the extractive
industry. Here, we use the works of Juan Martinez-Alier. After giving some general
features and background on this movement, we shall take a look at the movements
in San Marcos and in El Estor, if they can be seen as ecological justice movements.
The first part looks at mining in Guatemala and the two cases more in specific. Then,
we define the theoretical framework in which we want to place these cases. Using
the perspective of Juan Martinez-Alier, we’ll take a look at ecological distribution
conflicts and at some general features of the environmental justice movement. These
are placed upon the movements in Guatemala. Finally, we formulate some
recommendations for mining in general and in Guatemala.
3
CHAPTER 1
Mining in Guatemala
Pushed by economic growth, the demand for commodities grows. Transnational
companies are looking for new resources, mainly in development countries.
Guatemala is interesting for several reasons: it has enormous supplies of minerals
and it offers good conditions for transnational companies.
Figure 1 - Guatemala and it's neighbours3
1.1 Background
Under the government of Alváro Arzú (1996 – 2000) the current mining law was last
adapted. He tried to reactivate the economy by making foreign investments easier.
3
Digiatlas, 2008. Guatemala. Available at www.digiatlas.com. Last check 12 August 2008.
4
This reformed law, together with the signing of a great deal of the peace accords in
1996 which gave a more stable political situation, was most appreciated by the
mining companies. In that time, the revenue for the state was reduced from 6% to
1%.
In 2003, Berger came at stage. His Alianza Nacional made a difference with the
former Guatemalan Republican Front (FRG)-government of Portillo (2000 – 2003).
The Portillo-administration tried to compete with the industry, but Berger put a great
deal of power in hands of the industrials and the agro-exporters. Like Arzú, he
provided a legal framework and political stability to attract foreign investments. The
governmental priority lay in economic growth by big investment projects in the market
of regional trade agreements.4
According to Dirk Govaert, Guatemala expert, Arzú and Berger come from the same
political family, which is related to the big landowners in Guatemala. The country has
always known a powerful economic sector which forms a rich minority. Both
governments were formed by members of the Coordinating Committee of
Agricultural, Commercial, Industrial, and Financial Associations (CACIF) wich
represents the national economic powers. Because off the coffee crisis in 2000,
these landowners saw their income diminish. This made them very interested in
negotiations with big transnational companies to establish their economic and
political power and to enlarge their financial patrimony. This puts the policy of both
Arzú and Berger to attract foreign capital in a bigger framework.5
In January 2008, Alvaro Colom came in power. He promised to change the policy
towards mining companies, by putting the national interests central and by listening
to the Mayan population. This promise was received with skepticism, as the foreign
mining companies managed to put the national law and the governmental practice to
their hand.6
The Guatemalan mining law (Decreto 48 – 97) is very favourable to companies. This
law came about in the mark of the structural adjustments in Latin America forced by
the IMF. Illustrative are the following points:
4
Solano, Luis (2005), No todo lo que brilla es oro. Minería, petróleo y poder en Guatemala. Inforpress
Centroamericana. Enforme Especial, p2.
5
Vandenbroucke Esther. Interview with Dirk Govaert, 15 May 2008.
6
Coolen, Mario (2008). Nieuwe regering in Guatemala. Bescheiden hoop met Alvaro Colom.
5
-
A 100% ownership by foreign persons or institutes is permitted. No import
taxes have to be paid for machinery, equipment and production goods for
mining.
-
The companies have to pay 1% revenues: 0,5% to the state and 0,5% to the
municipality where the exploitation occurs.
-
As the resources in the underground belong to the state, exploration and
exploitation permits are easily granted.
-
Environmental rules don’t exist or are not strict.
-
Water can be used for free.7
Relevant to mention here is the problem of land: the civil war (1960 – 1996) was
about land and until today it stays a problem, for example regarding the granting of
the mining licenses. Land has a double dimension in Guatemala: it has an economic
role as the main vehicle to develop income-generating activities, and a cultural, even
spiritual asset for indigenous communities. But Guatemala is one of the world’s most
unequal countries as to the distribution of land. 92,06% of small agricultural
producers occupy 21,86% of the territory, 56.59% of the territory is occupied by
1.86% of the commercial producers. Moreover, 72% of the country’s fertile land is
idle, worsening the high concentration of ownership of productive land.
When the peace accords were signed in 1996, a comprehensive land reform was
included through the promotion of ownership rights via regularization/deed granting,
land and ownership registry. Until now, this has not been complied. FONTIERRAS,
the most important state agency therefore created, fails to be an efficient land
mechanism for farmers with no or insufficient land. As land titles still aren’t clear in
Guatemala, it’s easy for people with political and economic interests to appropriate
grounds without leaving traces. This problem of land titles is most clear in the El
Estor case.8
As Guatemala is a newcomer to the sphere of mining, civil society and ngo’s did not
recognize at once the far-reaching impact of this type of exploitation of the country’s
mineral resource. They didn’t react immediately when the new mining law was
passed in 1997. Only at the end of 2003 protests begun.9
7
Maldorado, Marco Vinicio Lopez, Análisis. La industria minera en Guatemala: entre el despojo y el
etnocidio. In: Voces del tiempo, 56, p16
8
Social Alert (2007). Guatemala 10 years after the Peace Accords. Social Alert Reports on Economic,
Social and Cultural Rights, p23.
9
McBain Brigitte, Bickel Ulricke (2005), Open Pit Gold Mining. Human Rights Violations and
Environmental Destruction – The Case of the Marlin Gold Mine – San Marcos, Guatemala,
FIANdocument d44e, p9.
6
The growing protests set up a process of discussion: a multisectoral commission,
named High Level Commission on Mining, was founded, with participation of the
social and environmental sectors, the Ministry of Energy and Mines (MEM), and the
Catholic Church to discuss the problems. In August 2005 their conclusions consisted
of reforming the mining law and supervising and controlling more.10 Throughout
2006, the Commission brought together various civil society organizations and
government officials in order to come up with a proposal to reform the current law.
This led to the presentation in 2007 by the MEM of the “Mining Policy Guidelines
2008 – 2015”, which designs the future for mining exploitation in Guatemala. This
document wants to be a guiding instrument to develop the mining activity in a
sustainable manner. It states different targets to achieve this:
-
Modernizing the legal framework applicable to mining and strengthen the
regulating role of the government
-
Developing politics of dialogue with the involved communities in agreement to
the Convention 169 of the ILO
-
Assuring that the benefits will be invested in the involved communities.
-
Assuring the protection of the environment and complying to the promises
about health and security of the population, closing of the mine and paying of
the finances.11
This guidelines received skepticism from civil society. The Pastoral Commission
Peace and Ecology (COPAE), who supports the people of San Marcos in their
struggle against the Marlin Mine, says it’s strange that the Ministry keeps on granting
new mining licenses, while this document shows the deficiencies of the responsible
Ministries. COPAE states that the guidelines should become more precise and
concrete, before mining can be stimulated.12
In March 2008, the new Parliamentary Commission on Energy and Mines reactivated
the debate to reform the current Mining Law. The reformation of the mining law
should be completed by the end of 2008. The recommendations presented by the
initiative of the High Level Commission on Mining are taken as a starting point:
-
The increase of revenues for the Guatemalan state
-
The genuine recognition of the community consultations
-
Changing the way an Environmental Impact Assessment can be obtained
10
Solano, Luis (2005). Guatemala petróleo y minería en las entrañas del poder, pp 126 – 127.
Ministerio de Energía y Minas (2007). Lineamientos de política minera 2008 – 2012, pp 13 – 17.
12
COPAE (2007). Presentación de los nuevos Lineamientos de la Política Minera del Estado.
11
7
-
More controls on the companies and the environment13
In June 2008, the Constitutional Court in Guatemala found eight articles or sections
thereof of the Mining Law to be unconstitutional14. The mining law was brought to
court by civil society in 2004, the conviction was conceived as a victory.15 However,
the conviction doesn’t seem to make much impression on the Ministry for Energy and
Mines. MEM Director Oscar Rosal says the MEM will keep on granting licenses with
the same law, complying to the requests made by the Constitutional Court.16
1.2 Concessions, Corporations, Exploitation
Guatemala is a country rich in mineral resources. Currently, more than 30% of the
country is in demand for concessions by mining companies. Three types of licenses
can be granted:
-
Recognition license: exclusive permission to identify and locate possible
exploration, in an area of 500 to 3000 km2. The license is granted for 6
months and can be extended for the same period.
-
Exploration license: exclusive permission to locate, study, analyse and
evaluate the site in an area of maximum 100 km2. The license is granted for 3
years and can be extended two times for 2 years, for each extension the site
is reduced by 50%.
-
Exploitation license: exclusive permission to exploit the site in an area of
maximum 20 km2. The license is granted for 25 years and can be extended
for the same period.
As the underground is owned by the Guatemalan state 17, the granted licenses are
unlimited in the depth of the underground, but limited in territorial terms. 18
13
Lucía Blas, Ana (2008). Reactivan debate para cambiar Ley de Minería. In: La Prense Libre, 14
March 2008.
14
Among the Articles deemed unconstitutional are 19 and 20, which allow mining activities to start
while the corresponding paperwork is still being processed, Articles 21, 24 and 27, which allow
mining activity to take place to unlimited depths of the subsurface, Article 75, which allows mining
companies to discharge water from their tailings pond directly into surface water, as well as
Articles 81 and 86.
15
Espada, Ramírez Espada (2008). CC resuelve contra Ley de Minería. In: La Prensa Libre, 17 June
2008.
16
Vandenbroucke Esther. Interview Oscar Rolas, 16 June 2008.
17
Guatemalan law only gives the title deed owner the right to exploit land resources on the surface,
while the subterranean resources belong solely to the state.
18
MEM, 2008. Ministerio de Energía y Minas. Dirección General de Minería. Licencias Mineras.
8
Currently (June 2008), 247 exploitation permits have been granted, as told by the
MEM in figure 2.
Alta Verapaz
Baja Verapaz
Chimaltenango
Chiquimula
El Progreso
Escuintla
Guatemala
Huehuetenang
o
Izabal
Jalapa
Jutiapa
Petén
Quetzaltenang
o
Quiché
Retalhuleu
Sacatepéquez
San Marcos
Santa Rosa
Sololá
Suchitepéquez
Totonicapán
Zacapa
TOTAL:
RECONOCIMIENT
O
EXPLORACIÓN
EXPLOTACIÓN
TOTAL
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
21
10
0
7
13
0
9
13
13
4
12
40
7
59
34
23
4
20
53
7
68
0
0
0
0
0
15
20
7
9
2
26
14
3
5
1
41
34
10
14
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
3
0
0
15
2
0
1
4
3
142
4
11
0
4
3
8
0
2
2
16
247
5
14
0
4
18
10
0
3
6
19
390
Table 1 - Mining License for Department – June 200819
There are different companies active in Guatemala. The main players in the mining
industry are Canadian and US companies. They mostly operate under various
registered names in Guatemala. Table 1 gives an overview. The Marlin Mine is
19
Available at: http://www.mem.gob.gt/Portal/Home.aspx?secid=52. Last check 11 August 2008.
MEM, 2008. Ministerio de Energía y Minas. Dirección General de Minería. Estadísticas Mineras.
Licencias Mineras por departamento. Available at:
http://www.mem.gob.gt/Portal/Home.aspx?tabid=226. Last check 11 August 2008.
9
owned by Goldcorp, Montana Exploradora is the Guatemalan subsidiary. For the
Fenix Project it’s Skye Resources (very recently Hudbay Minerals, cf. Supra) and the
Guatemalan Nickel Company (CGN).
Company
Country
Goldex Resources Canadá
Goldcorp Inc.
USA
Goldcorp Inc.
USA
Skye Resources
Canadá
Radius Gold Inc.
Canadá
BHP Billiton
Australia
Guatemalam Subsidiary
Project
Compañía Minera El Cóndor, El Pato
S.A.
Montana Exploradora S.A.
Marlin
Entre Mares de Guatemala,
S.A.
Compañía Guatemalteca de
Níquel, S.A.(antes EXMIBAL)
Exploraciones Mineras de
Guatemala, S.A.
Mayaniquel, S.A.
Cerro Blanco
Aurogin Resources Canadá
o Castle Gold Corp
Firestone Ventures Canadá
Rocas El Tambor, S.A
El Sastre
Gold Ore
Resources
Canadá
Sammy González Bueso
Nichromet
Extraction, Inc
Nichromet
Extraction, Inc
Canadá
Nichromet Guatemala, S.A.
Canadá
Guatemala Copper, S.A.
Fénix
Mineral
Gold and
Silver
Gold and
Silver
Gold and
Silver
Nickel
Marimba, Tambor Gold and
y Banderas
Silver
Sechol
Nickel
Cooperativa Juventud Minera Torlón
Gold and
Silver
Lead and
Zinc
Uranium
El Rincón y El
Incienso
(RENUNCIADAS)
Chinabenque I y II Nickel
Padre Antonio y
Lajitas
Copper
Table 2 - Foreign companies with operation in Guatemala20
Next to the foreign companies, there are several other companies active in
Guatemala. An overview is found in Appendix 1.
Until 2005, mineral production in Guatemala consisted mainly of non-metallic mines.
Between 1997 and 2005, the value of the production for these 9 years was about Q
686,7 million21. The production of metallic mining started in 2006, as such the value
rose significantly: in 2007 the estimated value was Q 1422,0 million. The contribution
of mining to the Guatemalan GDP maintained more or less 0,52% between 2002 an
2006, the GDP rose 13,2% in the same period. In 2006, the share of mining in the
20
21
Overview sent by Sr. Oscar Rosal, Director General de Minería.
1 Guatemalan Quetzal is exchanged for 0,14 US Dollar (August 2008)
10
Guatemalan economy rose significantly because of the production of gold and silver
in San Marcos.22 This Marlin Mine was the first large-scale modern capital intensive
mining operation in the country, the Fenix Project in El Estor is the second in line. 23
Goldcorp, the multinational company behind the Marlin Mine, is the single largest
taxpayer of Guatemala and claims that it will be contributing US $ 69,9 million in
taxes and royalties over 11 years to the Guatemalan government.24
As the commodity prices were rising, the Guatemalan government proposed to the
mining companies to raise the revenues. In April 2008, an agreement was signed
between CGN and the Guatemalan government to raise the revenues from 1% to
4%. As such, the Guatemalan government will gain $ 250 million the first 20 years of
the operational Fenix project, according to the Ministry of Energy and Mines.25
Mining and poverty
A report of the Ministry of Energy and Mines of 2004 states that the mining potential
of Guatemala coincides for a great part with poor or extremely poor regions. These
are characterized by rocky undergrounds with little or no vegetal underground, zones
with little development and without labour opportunities.26 Figure 3 shows the
concessions given in 2004 on a map of Guatemala where the poverty lines are
drawn.
22
Ministerio de Energía y Minas (2007). Lineamientos de política minera 2008 – 2012, pp6-7.
Wiig, Henrik (2008). Promoting Respect for the Collective Rights of the Q’eqchi’Population. An
evaluation of AEPDI in El Estor, Guatemala. NIBR Working Paper 2008:102, p20.
24
Imai, Shin, et al. (2007). Breaching Indigenous Law: Canadian Mining in Guatemala. In: Indigenous
Law Journal, 6 (1), p118.
25
Lix, Beatriz (2008). CGN sube regalías de 1% al 4%. In: La Prense Libre, 8 april 2008.
26
Ministerio de Energía y Minas (2004), Caracterización de la Minería en Guatemala. Primer Foro
Nacional de la Minería en Guatemala, p2.
23
11
Figure 2 - Mining concessions and poverty in Guatemala - 200427
27
Madre Selva (2004), Principales mapas de minería de metales en Guatemala. Powerpoint
MadreSelva.
12
CHAPTER 2
Marlin mine
Montana (100 % property of the Canadian Glamis Gold Ltd.) acquired the Marlin
mine in the department San Marcos in Guatemala in 2002 with a loan from the
International Finance Corporation, the private sector arm of the World Bank Group.
By 2005 they started producing gold (10%) and silver (90%).
2.1 Area
The Marlin Mine lies at an altitude of 2000 m in the south-western highlands of
Guatemala between the municipality of San Miguel Ixtahuacán and Sipakapa. This
area is mountainous, consisting of volcanic rocks, and lies in the River Cuilco basin.
Water is not abundant: according to the FoodFirst Information and Action Network
(FIAN), an international human rights organisation dedicated to the right to food)
researchers, villagers complain about increasing water scarcity due to erratic and
receding rain falls with ensuing conflicts about water usage. The population consists
of indigenous Mam and Sipakapense subsistence farmers. The area is one of the
poorest departments with up to 95% of the population living in severe poverty.28
San Miguel Ixtahuacán comprises of 19 villages, Sipakapa of 13. Since 2005,
villages in San Miguel Ixtahuacán have been transformed in an open pit mine, which
eventually will encompass 5 square kilometres. 85% of the total expanse of the
planned mine is in San Miguel Ixtahuacán, 15% in Sipakapa.29
28
29
Saunders Sakura ed. (2008), Investing in Conflict. Public money, private gain: Goldcorp in the
Americas, Rights Action, p10.
13
Figure 3 - Mining in San Marcos in 2004 (red ball = Marlin Mine, exploitation
started in 2005)30
2.2 Background
As seen before, the Arzú-administration changed the mining law to attract more
foreign investments. The Canadian company Montana Gold was one of the
companies who quickly entered the country under this new law. In 1996 they got a
license for the Marlin Mine, situated in the municipalities of San Miguel Ixtahuacán
and Sipacapa, in the department of San Marcos. After the exploration phase in San
Miguel Ixtahuacán, the company began buying properties from small landholders,
paying between eight and eighty times market value for the land they acquired. 31
Before the exploitation of the Marlin Mine, Montana Gold was bought by other
Canadian companies: first Francisco Gold, one year later Glamis Gold.32 This
acquisition fitted in a strategic plan of Glamis Gold starting in 1998 to pursue growth
30
Madre Selva (2004), Principales mapas de minería de metales en Guatemala. Powerpoint Madre
Selva.
31
Paley, Dawn (2007). Turning Down a Gold Mine. The Tyee, 7 Februari 2007.
32
Solano, Luis (2005). Guatemala petróleo y minería en las entrañas del poder, p106.
14
opportunities in the Americas to lower production costs. This included buying other
companies of the sector operating outside of the US. The first business venture of
Glamis Gold outside the VS was the acquisition of Marwest Resources Ltd. This
brought the San Martín mine in Honduras in their hands, operated by the subsidiary
Entre Mares.33
The Guatemalan subsidiary is Montana Exploradora, which acquired the exploitation
permit in 2003 after approval of the Environmental Impact Assessment. It started
executing the Marlin Mine in 2004. Glamis expected to have an annual production of
217,000 ounces of gold and 3,3 million ounces of silver over a ten-year mine life.34
In November 2006, Goldcorp bought Glamis Gold, thus creating one of the worlds
largest gold mining companies.35 Goldcorp is also seeking to expand its operations in
Guatemala. They started exploring in Asunción Mita, Jutiapa in 1996, for the Cerro
Blanco project. This project is seen as an underground deposit, with possible
operating synergies with the Marlin Mine.36
The Berger government gave a big impulse to the Marlin project, which already got a
loan of $45 million from the International Finance Corporation.37 Until July 2006,
Glamis Gold was not required to pay taxes other than royalties. It had negotiated to
be legally recognized as maquila (free trade zone).38 Because of the rise of the gold
prices, the Guatemalan state made an agreement with Glamis that, from July 2006
onwards, they would pay taxes for “improvements to services and infrastructure in
areas near the Marlin Mine” and “increased capacity building within government
ministries with mining responsibilities.”39
2.2.1 Goldcorp
Goldcorp is one of the world’s largest gold mining companies. It has 11 operations
and 6 developments project throughout the Americas. Over 70% of Goldcorp’s
reserves are situated in NAFTA countries. Goldcorp doubled its reserves and
33
Peace Brigades International (2006). Metal Mining and Human Rights in Guatemala. The Marlin
Mine in San Marcos, p10.
34
Glamis Gold Ltd. (2003). Glamis Gold receives key exploitation license for Marlin project. News
Release, p1.
35
Goldcorp, 2008. Company. Available at http://www.goldcorp.com/company/. Last check 11 August
2008.
36
Goldcorp, 2008. Operations. Cerro Blanco. Available at
http://www.goldcorp.com/operations/cerro_blanco/. Last check 11 August 2008.
37
Solano, Luis (2005). Guatemala petróleo y minería en las entrañas del poder, p 110.
38
Angél, Otto N. (2006). Montana Exploradora pagará IUSI y ISR. In: Siglo XXI, 19/7/06.
39
Mining Watch (2007), Goldcorp Analysis, p 16.
15
resources from 5 to 10 million ounces in 2006, through the acquisition of Glamis Gold
Ltd among others. Goldcorp expects to increase its production by over 50% in the
next five years. The company prides itself on being one of the world’s lowest cost
and fastest growing multi-million ounce gold producers.40
The acquisition of Glamis Gold made of Goldcorp the third largest gold producer in
North America.
2.2.2 The mine
The Marlin mine combines open pit and underground mining. Commercial production
commenced in the fourth quarter of 2005 and in its first full year of production 2006
Marlin achieved 161,000 ounces of gold and 1,6 million ounces of silver. The Marlin
mine is expected to produce through 2015.41
Open pit mining
Open pit mining is the least expensive but the most polluting form of mining. It scraps
the surface of the earth to get to the rocks which contain minerals.
There are several problems with open pit mining:
-
Lands are often illegally acquired, or at very low prices.
-
The mountains are deforested, as such destroying the ecosystem and
causing water depletion.
-
The fertile earth is removed to discover the rocks containing the minerals of
low quality.
-
Explosions of the rocks and grinding of the waste rock causes dust which
contains heavy metals, this causes acid rain run off.
-
Open pit mining requires a dumping location for the waste (waste rock and
tailings42).
-
Extraction requires an enormous amount of water, causing drought.
-
Leaching of heavy metals.
-
Acid rock drainage (cfr. infra).
Open pit mining is considered to be one of the most contaminating activities in the
world.43 Six of the ten most polluted places in the world, according to a study of the
Blacksmith Institute, are because of mining activities.44
40
Goldcorp, 2008. Company. Available at http://www.goldcorp.com/company/. Last check 11 August
2008.
41
Goldcorp, 2008. Operations. Marlin. Available at http://www.goldcorp.com/operations/marlin/. Last
check 11 August 2008.
42
Tailings is the waste that arises after the rocks are grinded.
16
Cyanide
The production process consists of a leaching process of the metals in tanks. This
leaching process requires the use of a lixiviation solution: sodium cyanide solution.
Cyanide is thus used to separate metal from the rock. When the lixiviation process is
done, adding zinc precipitates gold and silver. The residuals go through a
neutralization circuit and then to the tailings deposit.
To separate gold and silver from the rock, 6 tons of cyanide will be required each
day. One ton of rock must undergo this process to obtain one ounce of gold.
According to the Environmental Impact Study (EIS), the toxic rock must undergo a
process to eliminate toxicity after lixiviation. This INCO process converts the cyanide
in cyanate. At the end of the chain, the toxic waste is stored in a tailings dam, which
is a steel tank inserted in another tank of cement. This tailings waste will stay on the
site after the mine is closed.45
Cyanide is extremely toxic: for a human being 50 to 200 milligram is mortal. The
environmental impacts of noncatastrophic releases of cyanide from impoundments
are mitigated because cyanide breaks down quickly in sunlight. But sometimes free
cyanide breaks down slowly, for example in water that is ice-covered and so
protected from direct sun. It can also break down into less toxic but longer-lasting
forms, such as cyanate and cyanogen. Free cyanide will quickly kill aquatic life.
Cyanide is highly reactive with many heavy metals, and during the leaching process
a variety of metal-cyanide complexes can be formed: arsenic, mercury, selenium and
other heavy metals can be leached. Cyanide doesn’t react directly with many of
these metals, but it breaks down the sulphides to which they are bound, releasing
them. Thus, when tailings containments leak, these metals often enter ground or
surface water.46
Revision of the Environmental Impact Study
Robert Moran, an independent U.S. hydrologist with much experience in mining,
revised the Environmental Impact Study of Montana, and had several remarks on
43
Ramirez, Chiqui (2008). Que es (M.C.A.) la Minería a Cielo Abierto? Albedrío.org, 1 July 2008.
Blacksmith Institute (2007). Annual Report 2007, p2.
45
Montana exploradora de Guatemala, S. A. (2003). Estudio de Evaluación de Impacto Ambiental y
Social “Proyecto Mina Marlin”, pp. 3-45, pp. 3-49 en p 9-6.
46
Fields, Scott (2001). Tarnishing the earth: Gold Mining’s dirty secret. In: Environmental Health
Perspectives. 109 (10), pp. 478-479.
44
17
this EIS. One considers the fact that the tailings impoundment will be unlined (this
means that the impoundment doesn’t have an under-seal or liner) “because of the
mountainous setting of the region”. Moran states that most modern tailings
impoundments are constructed with some sort of liner, and these are often
constructed in mountainous areas. He calls it unreasonable to assume that this
tailings dam will not develop some degree of contaminated leakage over the longterm.47
Moran also criticizes the fact that Montana didn’t study in detail the quality of the
water, surface water and ground water. The EIS doesn’t comment the amounts of
water available in the project area, nor the likely impacts to the flows or to
neighbouring wells and springs.48 Knowing that the mine will consume about 250.000
litre water an hour49, it’s clear that the Marlin Project will severely affect the whole
water household in the area.
Another point where the EIS doesn’t give the information needed, is concerning the
natural toxicity of the rock. According to Moran, much of the rock probably is sulphide
rich, which makes the chances of developing acid rock drainage high.50 Acid rock
drainage is a known problem with mining activities. The rock containing for example
gold also contains sulphides. This is not dangerous if it remains trapped in the rock.
However, when the rock is pulverized to extract gold, the sulphide remains
suspended in the air. Rainwater coming into contact with the sulphide is
contaminated, affecting surface and ground water. This acid rock drainage is a longterm problem, it stays problematic for years after the mine will be closed. Moreover,
acid rock drainage causes further dissolving of heavy metals such as copper, lead,
arsenic, zinc, selenium or mercury into surface or ground water.51
Moran has several other critiques:
47
Moran Robert E. (2004), New Country, Same Story: Review of the Glamis Gold Marlin Project EIA,
p5.
48
Ibid., p3
49
Montana exploradora de Guatemala, S. A. (2003), Estudio de Evaluación de Impacto Ambiental y
Social “Proyecto Mina Marlin”, p3-49
50
Moran Robert E. (2004), New Country, Same Story: Review of the Glamis Gold Marlin Project EIA,
p4.
51
Americas, Rights Action, p 4.
18
-
The unrealistic analysis that the risk on an earthquake is low or very low,
based on the last 19 years and as such neglecting any seismic records from
1976, a period of extremely damaging Guatemalan earthquakes.
-
The totally disingenuous and incorrect statements about how fast cyanide
degrades.
-
The statement that leachates from waste rock are not toxic because they
have not been treated with cyanide, as such ignoring the pervasive tendency
for waste rock to contaminate surface and ground waters with inorganic
pollutants such as metals.
-
The fact that the EIS doesn’t give information about the detailed chemical
composition of effluents from the INCO cyanide decontamination process and
if they are toxic to local aquatic organisms.52
-
The EIS doesn’t give a realistic financial assurance measure for future
problems, like acid rock drainage, or leaking of the tailings dam, or toxic rock
remaining on the site.
To conclude, Moran states: “This EIA would not be acceptable to regulatory agencies
in most developed countries, specifically the European Union countries, the U.S.A.,
and Canada.”53
2.2.3 A history of confrontation
The Marlin project got immediate response from civil society: in February of 2004,
about 500 Sipakapense farmers were the first to protest. Several months later, the
National Front against Metal Open Pit Mining was founded, trying to avoid new
mining licenses. Another more recent initiative was added in 2005: the Western Front
against Mining consists of civilians of 8 departments and openly opposes the
exploration and exploitation of mines.
Not only protests marked the opposition to the mine. A research by the Prensa Libre
in November 2004 showed that 95,5% of the examined did not agree with the mining
project.
By the end of 2004 the inhabitants got more and more organized, most of all the
people of Sololá: on the 6th of December, the mayor of Sololá stated in an open
meeting with 3000 inhabitants that he never authorized mining in the region. Farmer
52
Moran Robert E. (2004). New Country, Same Story: Review of the Glamis Gold Marlin Project EIA,
pp.3-6.
53
Ibid., p 11
19
leaders signed a document in which they promised not to permit mining operations
nor the use of roads for this purpose. The community leaders and mayors of
Totonicapán took similar positions.
According to Solano, it was clear from the beginning that there wasn’t a dialogue
between the major actors: the communities and the government.54
In December 2004, the citizens of Sololá blocked the passage of a big cylinder. In
the village of Los Encuentros, workers started dismantling a pedestrian bridge to
make a way for the cylinder (7 meters in diameter, 52 ton). The inhabitants protested,
complaining that they were not consulted, so the cylinder remained at the side of the
road. As the civilians were not informed where the cylinder was going to be used, the
rumour was spread that a mining company in Sololá needed it. This provoked an
immediate response from the people who continued to block the passage of the
cylinder, demanding that the government negotiate with them to cancel any existing
concessions in Sololá. The government didn’t comply to this demand, instead, in
January 2005, they sent 1500 police officers and 300 soldiers to move the cylinder
by force. In the confrontation between security forces and residents, one resident,
Raul Castro Bocel, died and 16 police officers were injured. The next day, the
cylinder finally reached its destination: the Marlin plant.55
The social mobilization against the mining rose. A big manifestation in 2005 brought
thousands on the road in San Marcos, under the leadership of bishop Ramazzini56. In
February again thousands of civilians of Sololá protested against the mining. The
opponents of the mining industry experienced a climate of insecurity. Death threats
were pronounced against leaders of the indigenous, catholic and environmental
movements. Another death was counted in March 2007: Álvaro Sánchez who openly
denounced the mining industry, was shot down by a private guardian of the Marlin
mine.
The popular consultation in Sipakapa on the 18th of June 2005 marks another
important point in the history of the Marlin Mine.
54
Mine in San Marcos. p13.
56
The Catholic Church in Guatemala plays an important role in the conflict in San Marcos: Bishop
Ramazzini of San Marcos and Cardinal Toruño openly oppose open pit mining.
55
20
The issue of consultation of the population is stated in the Guatemalan legislation
(Decreto 12 – 2002 of the Código Municipal57) and in international law, ratified by the
Guatemalan state (ILO Convention 169 on Indigenous People and Tribals58): the
population living around any project that might affect them, must be consulted before
it can be approved. This obligation of the Guatemalan state is not included in the
Mining Law, which leaves a legal void, according to the public prosecutor of Human
Rights in Guatemala.59 So even though the Guatemalan law is responsible for
informing and consulting the affected population before granting an exploitation
permit to the mining company, this was not the case.
Montana states that, when the EIS was ordered in 2003, it distributed a shorter
version in the regional Mam language to inform the affected populations.
Researchers of FIAN state that “none of the regional groups in San Marcos or NGO’s
dedicated to the subject could present a copy of the document and local people
stated that they never received such information in their indigenous language.”60
Although Montana maintains that they duly informed and affected Mayan
communities, several sources (the public prosecutor of human rights, the
researchers of FIAN and Mesereor, and the Compliance Advisor/Ombudsman) agree
that there was no due consultation process to get the informed consent.61
The answer of the Sipakapa people was to make their own declaration on the matter.
On the 18th of June 2005, they held a referendum, despite the intimidations and
threats by Montana, who tried to prevent it by a complaint to a local court and by
spreading flyers in the town which said the referendum was suspended by the court.
In the referendum 45% of the town’s registered residents voted, the result was 98%
against the mining operations (11 communities against mining, 1 in favour and 1
57
“Los vecinos tienen el derecho de solicitar al Concejo Municipal la celebración de consultas cuande
so refiera a asuntos de carácter general que afectan a todos los vecinos del municipio.”
58
“The peoples concerned shall have the right to decide their own priorities for the process of
development as it affects their lives, beliefs, institutions and spiritual well-being and the lands they
occupy or otherwise use, and to exercise control, to the extent possible, over their own economic,
social and cultural development. In addition, they shall participate in the formulation,
implementation and evaluation of plans and programmes for national and regional development
which may affect them directly.” (article 7 of the Convention 169 concerning Indigenous and Tribal
peoples in Independent Countries)
59
Procuraduría de Los Derechos Humanos, Unidad de Estudio y Análisis (2005). Tema: La Minería y
los Derechos Humanos, pp 7-8.
60
McBain Brigitte, Bickel Ulricke (2005). Open Pit Gold Mining. Human Rights Violations and
FIANdocument d44e, pp 9-15.
61
los Derechos Humanos, p 9. - McBain Brigitte, Bickel Ulricke (2005). Open Pit Gold Mining.
Human Rights Violations and Environmental Destruction – The Case of the Marlin Gold Mine –
San Marcos, Guatemala, FIANdocument d44e, p 12. – Compliance Advisor/Ombudsman (2005).
Assessment of a complaint submitted to CAO in relation to the Marlin Mine Project in Guatemala,
pp 28-30.
21
abstention).62 Despite the outcome of the consultations, Glamis continued to employ
various strategies to enter in Sipacapa. For example, they offered the municipality a
gift of over $150,000 CDN63, which was refused.64
On the 8th of March 2007, the Constitutional Court ruled that the results of the
consultations are unconstitutional, because these cannot be considered binding.
Analysts in Guatemala have speculated that the recent decision by the Magistrates
of the constitutional court could have been influenced by political, economic and
commercial interests. The people of Sipakapa filed a complaint against that decision
on 11 December 2007 at the InterAmerican Commission on Human Rights.65
How the Ministry of Energy and Mines feels about these consults is illustrated by the
answer of Dr. Rosal, general director of mining, on what he thinks about the
community consultations: “Todas las consultas han sido bajo la base de mala
información, diciéndole a la gente que se van a secar las fuentes de agua, que sus
hijos van a nacer con cola, que el cianuro permanece por siglos en la tierra
(científicamente probado que desaparece en 15 días), que al hacer túneles van a
salir serpientes que se los van a comer, etc.”66 This gives the idea that the MEM
doesn’t take the concerns of the local communities serious.
Since the Consulta in Sipakapa, some 25 other communities in different
municipalities of Guatemala consulted their population. Most consultations spoke out
against mining, some against hydroelectric projects and one specific case against a
cement fabric.67 Next to the consultations in Sipakapa, five more were related to the
Marlin Mine: Tutuapa, Ixchiguá, Comitancillo, Sibinal and Tacaná all rejected mining
unanimously or with a great majority.68
In August 2006, 1000 people demonstrated in favour of mining in a march in the
capital. The marchers were mainly from the communities of Izabal and Alta Verapaz,
as well as workers from the Marlin Mine. The people from Izabal and Alta Verapaz
62
Mine in San Marcos, p22
63
1 Canadian Dollar is exchanged for 0,94 US $ (August 2008)
64
65
Loarca, Carlos (2008), Las consultas de buena fe in Guatemala y la corta interamericana de derechos
humanos, Albedrío.org, 27 May 2008, p9.
66
“All the consults have occured on the basis of wrong information, saying that the mine will draw the
water sources, that the children will be born with a tail, that the cyanide will stay for centuries in the
ground (scientific proven that it disappears in 15 days), that snakes will come out of the tunnels that
will eat their children, etc.”. Vandenbroucke Esther. Interview Oscar Rolas, 16 June 2008.
67
Sandoval, Miguel Angel (2008), Que occurre en Sipakapa? Albedrío.org, 28 July 2008.
68
COPAE, (2008), Listado de municipios donde efectuaron “Consultas Comunitarias” sobre la
actividad minera química de metales en los departamentos de San Marcos y Huehuetenango, p1.
22
were brought to Guatemala City in eleven small planes and a larger number of
buses, paid by the Guatemalan Nickel Company (subsidiary of Skye Resources who
owns the Phoenix Project, supra). The Marlin workers were transported by twelve
light trucks, organized by Montana. According to the Peasant Workers Movement
(MTC) of San Marcos, the company also offered 500 Quetzals to each participant,
while those not participating could lose their jobs.69
Between the 10th and the 22th of January 2007, around 600 residents of the
communities surrounding the Marlin Mine blocked the access roads to the mine,
protesting against the probable contamination of the Tzalá River and asking
compensation for the cracks in several houses, due to the explosions of the
company. They also felt that they had been unfairly compensated for their lands so
they demanded a renegotiation of the prices. The immediate reason for blocking the
access to the mine came when local people found out that Montana had recently
paid between 30 and 40 thousand quetzals per cuerda (715m) for a terrain adjacent
to the actual exploitation-site. The people who sold their land to the company
between 1999 and 2003 got 4000 quetzales per cuerda. In addition, several local
residents testify that they have been blackmailed: “Montana representatives told us
that they had already received all necessary permits to start their work. If we wouldn’t
leave our terrain, they announced that it would be evicted. So in the end our only
choice was between selling our land or being thrown off”. When Montana guaranteed
a meeting with the directors of the mine, the blockade was removed.70
Seven participants in the blockade were accused by the company of assaulting an
employee. Five were released after one year of legal battles, and two were found
guilty and are paying a daily fine.71
In September 2007, municipal elections were held. These became a victory for the
opponents of the Marlin project: the Sipakapa Civic Committee, formed in 2003 out of
people opposing the mines, won the elections. This Civic Committee was founded
apart from the traditional parties because none of them was willing to stand against
the presence of Montana in Sipakapa, says Delfino Tema Bautista, the mayor of
Sipakapa.72
69
Peasant Workers Movement (2006), Where did the mining companies’ ethics go?
COPAE (2007) , Residents of San Miguel Ixtahuacán obstruct entrance ways to the Marlin mine.
71
Americas, Rights Action, p10.
72
Rights Action (2008), Local Democracy & Indigenous Rights versus Goldcorp inc., Global
Investors, the Canadian Government, the International Community, etc.
70
23
January 2008, another conflict between the neighbours of the mine and the mining
company came into the open, when riot police forced the entry of electrical workers
into the yards of the villagers. The conflict was about the building of electrical lines to
supply energy to the mines processing plant. In 2004, mine representatives
approached indigenous Mayan farmers asking them to grant right of way for these
lines. Those who signed the right of way did not understand what they were signing,
as the document was written in Spanish and they were addressed in Spanish, a
language some of them minimally understand. Moreover, they did not understand
the type of line they ended up installing. In 2005, the company came to install high
tension energy lines and large posts in their lands. The presence of the lines has
been a source of constant protest by the villagers, as the lines run directly above
their homes and represent a threat to their safety and health. So on January 9 and
10, police forced the way for the electrical workers. This intrusion was unwarranted,
the objecting villagers got a violent response by the police. In June 2008, the energy
lines were damaged, which affected the capacity of the mine to operate. The mine
had to suspend its operations until July 1. Charges have been raised against the
women of the actions.73
Recently, some Goldcorp shareholders reacted to the Marlin Mine. They visited
Guatemala in February 2008 and witnessed the growing opposition from local
communities and concerns related to compensation and land rights, inadequate
consultation, water quality and quantity, safety and security and damage to homes in
the areas close to the mines. In April 2008, these Canadian and Swedish Goldcorp
shareholders urged Goldcorp to undertake an independent human rights impact
assessment. Goldcorp agreed to undertake the assessment before February 2009 to
withdraw to shareholders resolution. Yet, Goldcorp refused to circulate another
shareholder resolution that called on the company not to expand its activities without
the free, prior and informed consent of the affected communities.74
73
Rights Action (2008), Death Threats and Persecution Following Power Disruption to Marlin
Mine in San Marcos, Guatemala
74
Jantzi Research Inc. (2008). Jantzi Research recommends Goldcorp as ineligible for SRI portfolios,
p2.
24
2.3 Impacts
2.3.1 Environmental
As seen before, the Environmental Impact Assessment was criticised by Moran on
several points. The environmental risks posed to the local communities have been
described before. Some of these problems have already been reported.
Water
In November 2006, Flaviano Biachini, an Italian volunteer of the Madre Selva
Collective, effectuated a study of the quality of the water of the rivers near the Marlin
Mine. He investigated the Tzalá river, which flows in the western part of Sipaka and
flows about 20 km eastwards before it merges with the Cuilco river, affluent of the
Grijalva river which goes to the golf of Mexico. The water of this river is used to wash
and to irrigate the grounds for agriculture. It’s also used as drinking water for some
communities who live on the banks of the river.
Figure 4 - Rivers around the Marlin Mine75
75
Madre Selva (2006). Caso: Expansión de Concesiones y Actividades Mineras en Territoreo
Guatemalteco. Powerpoint Madre Selva.
25
Engineer Bianchini found that the water of the Tzalá river contained four heavy
metals with values above the limits of various international law, as seen in table 2:
copper, aluminium, manganese and iron. In contact with human beings, these metals
can produce cancer, congenital disorders and skin problems. According to Bianchini,
the cause of this higher level of heavy metals is acid drainage of the Marlin Mine.76
Table 3 - Water in the Tzalá River, downstream77 (the red values are above the
limits of the World Bank Guidelines for Open Pit Mining, the WHO Guidelines for
Drinking Water, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for Aquatic Life and
the Canadian limits for drinking water).78
The MEM called the Bianchini research a pseudo-study without any scientific basis.
Bianchini responded that the Ministry never presented clear proof that his results
were false.79
According to Magalí Rey Rosa, Guatemalan mining expert, a counter analysis was
made by Montana. This unpublished study was sent to the government, which states
that as long as the contamination isn’t proven, they won’t take any measures.80
Bianchini, an Italian national who worked as a volunteer for Madre Selva, received
several anonymous phone calls and has been kept under surveillance since the
publication of his study. Amnesty International launched a campaign in January 2007
because they feared for his safety.81 Bianchini decided to go back to Italy in February
76
Bianchini, Flaviano (2006), Estudio técnico. Calidad de agua del Río Tzalá (municipio de Sipakapa;
departamento de San Marcos), pp 1-8.
77
Upstream, no values above the limits were found. This indicates that the contamination is due to the
mine.
78
Comparing these values to the VLAREM guidelines shows for copper for example that the value in
the Tzalá river (39,9 mg/l) is far above the basic quality norm for surface water (max 50 µg/l).
79
COPAE (2007), Madre Selva informs on the quality of the Tzalá River.
80
Vandenbroucke Esther. Interview Magali Rey Rosa, 9 March 2008.
81
Amnesty International (2007). Guatemala: Fear for Safety: Flaviano Bianchini.
26
2007.82
In March 2007, Goldcorp lodged a formal complaint against María Eugenia Solís
from Madre Selva and Bianchini, for false material, commercial loss of prestige,
simulating a delict and usurpation of quality and functions.83
In February 2008, the Municipal Council of Sipakapa requested a visit to the Marlin
Mine to take water samples. This request was authorized but than revoked by the
company, stating they didn’t get an attendants list, although the council states never
had received a request for such a list. A next try to take samples in the site was
taken by the Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources on the 14th of March
2008. Although they sent a notification with the purpose of their visit days in advance,
the company wouldn’t let them in, stating that it concerned industrial water that is not
concluded as a monitoring site in the EIS.84
In April 2008, Ing. Agr. Fausto Valiente of COPAE presents the results of a study on
the Tzalá River, the Quivichil River, the Xcus River (origin of the Quivichil River) and
effluents of the tailings impoundment of the Marlin Mine. Some findings from Biachini
were confirmed: there is too much copper and iron in the rivers. The rate of
manganese was acceptable, except for the Tzalá River. The aluminium rate
diminished. Worrying was also the concentration of metallic and semi-metallic
arsenic in the Quivichil river, which reaches 2 times the parameter of the USA EPA
(Environment Protection Agency) norms. Arsenic is very toxic and can cause
different sorts of cancer. It’s very clear that there was never arsenic in this river
before.85
Nowadays, Guatemalan and European ngo’s are trying to establish an independent
commission in cooperation with some universities, to make independent water
studies possible.86
82
Amnesty International (2007), Guatemala: Further Informaton on Fear for Safety: Flaviano
Bianchini.
83
(anon.) (2007), Gerente de Montana denuncia a Madre Selva. In: La Prensa Libre, 9 March 2007.
84
COPAE (2008), Montana prevents Guatemalan Authorities to enter the Marlin Mine.
85
Valiente, Fausto (2008), Monitoreo y analisis de calidad del agua de los ríos Tzala (parte alta y parte
baja), Quivichil, Xkus (nacimiento del río Quivichil) y efluente del dique de cola de la mina Marlin
en San Miguel Ixtahuacán y Sipacapa, San Marcos, Guatemala, COPAE, pp 1-6.
86
Vandenbroucke Esther. Interview Dirk Govaert, 15 May 2008.
27
Tailings
Goldcorp plans to discharge the first ‘end of pipe’ late in the 2008 rainy season or
during the rainy season of 2009. According to the 2007 Annual Monitoring Report:
“During discharge events, water quality will be monitored and flow measured
regularly and reported quarterly to both the Ministry of the Environment and Natural
Resources (MARN) and the MEM.”87 COPAE is concerned about this discharge, as
there is no information available – neither from the mining company, nor from the
MEM, nor the MARN – about the quantity or chemical make-up of the process
affected waters that will be released, and because they don’t know how much time
the tailings water has remained in the impoundment to allow the cyanide compounds
to decompose. The concern of COPAE is also based on the problematic track record
of Goldcorp in other countries, regarding illegal releases and the contamination of
water.88
2.3.2 Social
Development projects
Goldcorp established the Fundación Sierra Madre to improve access to and quality
of health services, increase economic opportunities by supporting micro loans,
promoting environmental awareness and developing local community capacity. This
‘social wing’ of Goldcorp intends to promote development in fields not directly
connected to mining. Their Integral Community Development Program will run during
the lifetime of the mine, estimated 10 to 15 years.
According to Solano, this Foundation was created to be able to work in the region
with the least social tensions possible.89 Mario Tema, Sipakapa community leader
and brother of Delfino Tema, feels the same. He sees the social work of the
company as a manipulation to gain the thrust of the people instead of offering a real
development alternative to mining.90
Moran asks: “Following mine closure, who will pay for the continued operation and
maintenance of the public facilities that Montana Exploradora de Guatemala and
International Finance Corporation say are being constructed or augmented at the
87
Montana Exploradora de Guatemala, S.A. (2008). Environmental and Social Performance Annual
Monitoring Report (AMR) Marlin Mine, p 56.
88
COPAE (2007), New Environmental Concern in San Marcos.
89
Solano, Luis (2005). Guatemala petróleo y minería en las entrañas del poder, pp 127 - 128
90
Mine in San Marcos, p19
28
site, such as water supplies and treatment systems, schools, roads, health clinic,
etc.? Once the mine closes, the funding to operate and maintain such activities
ceases.”91 Moreover there are no guaranties nor compromises form the company
about the reforestation project after closing the mine.
FIAN researchers heard local people complain that the Fundación Sierre Madre only
reaches the persons who agree with the mine. They got the impression that
Montana’s foundation had not consulted the affected communities and did not work
for their benefit, but was completely depended on Montana funds, cooperating
closely with the company in order to promote mining activities in the region. 92
Meanwhile, the residents of Sipakapa have initiated other types of development
models, based on their local knowledge. An alternative project was presented in
March 2006 as an answer to the development model of the extractive industry and to
the impact the hurricane Stan93 had on the communities.
The development model consists of three strategic components:
-
Ecological development and environmental monitoring of the natural
resources of the community of Sipakapa. This encompasses the total
rejection of the Marlin Mine because of its environmental and social impacts.
-
Developing a program of sustainable economic production, based on an agro
ecological vision, cattle, manufacturing and community factories.
-
Political, organizing and social development of the municipality of Sipakapa.
The Civic Committee is mentioned as a good practice.94
The in 2007 elected mayor of Sipakapa Delfino Tema also mentioned how to develop
Sipakapa: he wants the amount of public resources to be invested in agricultural
programmes to increase and centred on the organic production of fruit, vegetables
and coffee beans.95
91
Quotation Robert Moran in: Moran Robert E. (2004), New Country, Same Story: Review of the
Glamis Gold Marlin Project EIA, p6.
92
FIANdocument d44e, p 13
93
Hurricane Stan hit Guatemala hard in 2005, floods and mudslides overwhelmed several
communities.
94
Organizaciones del Municipio, Parroquia de Sipacapa (2006), Programa de Desarollo del Municipio
de Sipacapa, Departamento de San Marcos, 81p.
95
COPAE (2008). Civic Committee takes possession of the municipality in Sipacapa, San Marcos,
29
Explosions
Over 59 houses near the Marlin plant have significant crevices and fissures,
particularly in the villages of Ajel and San José Nueva Esperanza, which are only a
few meters away from the mine. The fissures are probably due to the explosions
carried out to destroy entire hillsides in the Marlin project. The residents testify that it
began when the company placed explosives: “We felt the earth shake and little by
little the fissures have turned into large crevices”, states Mrs. Hernández Pérez. She
came together with a number of residents to complain to Montana, but their
engineers said the cracks were due to poor construction work or the shaking form
vehicles, but that it was not the company’s fault.96
Intimidation and violence
As seen before, the history of the Marlin Mine is a violent history. The death of Raul
Castro Bocel during the events in Sololá in 2005 and the killing of Alvaro Benigno
Sanchez by a mine security guard were already mentioned. Both murders have
never been prosecuted.
In April or May of 2007, Byron Bamaca Perez and his nephew Marco Tulio Vasquez,
who worked as cooks for a company subcontracted to dig the tunnel associated with
the mine, disappeared. Vasquez had participated in anti mining protests prior to
employment with the month. Despite months of inquiries, the company has provided
the families with no information as to their whereabouts. On June 15 2007, the
decapitated body of Pedro Miguel Cinto was found. Cinto was an elderly man who
lived in front of the mines entrance and who’s family has been active against the
mine. When the head was found by the authorities, it was communicated through the
mining company to the family, which was perceived to be a threat to those who dared
to protest the mine.97
Death threats were outed against bishop Ramazzini and to Bianchini, as seen
before. Several community members who oppose the mine are also subject to
threats of death.
An example of the intimidation by the company is what happened in January 2007,
right before the 13 days roadblock, when 28 community members asked for a
meeting with the company to discuss the numerous issues affecting their
96
Rodríguez, J. (2007), Gold Mine Worsens Social Tensions.
Rights Action (2008), Death Threats and Persecution Following Power Disruption to Marlin
Mine in San Marcos, Guatemala.
97
30
communities. After the meeting, Fernanco Basilio Pérez was hit by the general
manager of Montana and other community members were threatened with guns by
the company’s private security.
Intimidation doesn’t come from the company alone. The municipal mayors of both
Sipakapa and San Miguel Ixtahuacán from 2003 – 2007, have continually argued in
favour of the mining project. They sought re-election in 2007 under the slogan: “In
order for Peace to continue, vote for Mayor Oswaldo”. This slogan was interpreted as
a threat by community members.98
2.3.3 Economic
Economic growth
As stated before, the Marlin Mine has contributed to the economy of Guatemala. Still,
this didn’t mean an improvement for the majority of the population. The distribution of
wealth in Guatemala is one of the most inequitable of all the countries in the world,
and the concentration of wealth is extreme: 5.6% of the richest households control 50
% of the total income. Economic growth has not reduced inequality, with the benefits
of growth accruing mainly to the rich.99 The positive impact of the Marlin Mine on the
Guatemalan economy will probably not be felt by the local communities.
Ground water
The Marlin Mine uses an average of 250,000 litres water per hour, while a typical
family in San Marcos uses 30 litres per day. This means the gold mine uses the
same amount of water a typical family uses in over 22 years in one hour. Mrs.
Hernández Pérez states that their wells have dried up: “Before, up to 40 people could
bring water from that well, but now it is dry. It has been a year since it dried. We have
6 wells which have gone dry.”100
Employment
In 2006, during the construction phase of the mine, the Marlin Mine employed an
average of 1,132 workers. An average of 99% were Guatemalan residents, 72%
were from the local communities, and virtually all of these people were indigenous,
98
Economic and Social Council (2006). Economic, social and cultural rights. Mission to Guatemala,
p6.
100
99
31
states Goldcorp.101
The Marlin Mine provides 200 jobs during its operational phase, expected to last until
2015, 160 of these is staff recruited locally.102 The area has more than 40.000
inhabitants.
According to Goldcorp, each direct job created by the mine produces four indirect
jobs. Guatemala’s Human Rights Officer states that 5 indirect jobs requires 10 direct
jobs. Moreover, he says the quality of the jobs is not taken into account. He thinks it’s
necessary to investigate what the economic benefits from these jobs are and if they
contribute to diminishing the levels of poverty.103
According to the World Bank, the migration from San Miguel to the coast to work on
sugar and coffee plantations virtually stopped since construction of the mine started.
According to Paley, the reality on the ground is different. She cites Maria Lopez, a
citizen of San Miguel Ixtahuacán, whose husband is currently working on a
plantation. She says that everyone who can is looking for work in the plantations.
Some people are working at the mine, but only the few who have an education. The
others go to the coast and many go to the U.S., says Maria Lopez.104
2.3.4 Further expected impacts
The San Martín Mine in Honduras is another gold mine of Goldcorp and previously of
Glamis Gold. Production started in 2000 by Glamis’ subsidiary Entre Mares. The
mine had it’s last year of production in 2007. The same technique as in the Marlin
Mine (heap leaching with cyanide) was used to extract gold.
Some impacts on the people of Siria Valley, where the mine is located, are similar to
those felt by the people of San Marcos, like the deforestation of the region, and noise
pollution, dust pollution and cracks in dozens of farmers houses due to the
explosions to remove the mountaintop.105
Further impacts of the San Martín open pit mine predict what else the people of San
Miguel Ixtahuacán and Sipacapa can expect:
101
Goldcorp, 2008. Operations. Marlin. Sustainability. Available at
http://www.goldcorp.com/operations/marlin/sustainability/. Last check 11 August 2008.
102
Montana exploradora de Guatemala, S. A. (2003), Estudio de Evaluación de Impacto Ambiental y
Social “Proyecto Mina Marlin”, p 2-19.
103
Procuraduría de Los Derechos Humanos, Unidad de Estudio y Análisis (2005) Tema: La Minería y
los Derechos Humanos, pp 19-20.
104
Paley, D. (2007), Turning Down a Gold Mine.
105
Russell, Graham (2007). Goldcorp Inc. mining company in Honduras.
32
-
People living near the mine have been found to have high levels of arsenic,
mercury and lead in their blood. This is causing severe health problems and
skin infections. Goldcorp has stated that this has nothing to do with the mine
but that it’s due to poverty, malnutrition and the bad health situation.106
-
The enormous quantity of water used by the mine has led to water shortage.
According to community representative Carlos Amador, this has destroyed
the Siria Valley’s local economy, traditionally based on agriculture and cattle,
which caused a wave of immigration to the United States.
-
Cyanide and heavy metal contamination of several water sources in the area
has been confirmed by several studies.107 According to a study of February
2007, water sources, including a domestic use well built by the company,
have higher levels of copper and iron than the World Bank guidelines for
open pit mining.108
There are also reports of cyanide leakages due to some unlined cyanide filtering
pools.109 Moreover, according to the Movemiento Madre Terra Honduras, the closure
plan of the San Martín mine didn’t take the health problems of the local communities
into account and denied the responsibility of the mine in the pollution of metals and
toxic semi-metals by defining it as a natural problem.110
106
Meza, Dina (2008). Plomo, mercurio y arsénico fueron encontrados en pobladores del Valle de
Siria. Revistazo.com, 22 January 2008.
107
Amador, Carlos, Tema, Juan (2006). Statement to Glamis Gold Shareholders from Honduras and
Guatemala.
108
Bianchini, Flaviano (2006). Estudio Técnico. Contaminación de agua en el área de exlotación
minera del proyecto San Martin, en el Valle de Siria y repercusiones sobre la salud humana, p5.
109
Russell, Graham (2007). Goldcorp Inc. mining company in Honduras
110
Almendares, Juan (2008). Public Letter: Goldcorp Inc. mortal closure plan of the “San Martín”
Mine, Honduras.
33
CHAPTER 3
Fenix Project
The corporation Mining Exploration and Exploitation of Izabal (EXMIBAL) (local
substitute of the Canadian International Nickel Corporation) got a license of 40 years
in 1960 for the exploitation of nickel in the commune of El Estor, Izabal. Ten years
later EXMIBAL decided to retreat from the country because of the low nickel prices.
Recently they were interested to restart their activities.111
3.1 Area
The Fenix Project will be carried out in the jurisdiction of El Estor in north-eastern
Guatemala, which lies at sea level on the shore of Lake Izabal, the country’s largest
freshwater lake.
Maya Q’eqchi’ communities represent more than 90% of the
population. Over 35.000 persons, mainly subsistence farmers and fisherman, live
scattered over an area of nearly 3000 km2 in more than 100 villages as well as in the
town of El Estor. The exploitation license covers an area of 250 km2, mostly on lands
possessed by 16 Q’eqchi’ communities as their historical territory.112 The Q’eqchi live
in precarious economic and social conditions, they have one of the worst levels of
analphabetism and of school absence.113
The region has a very rich biodiversity: the Dulce River flows out of Izabal and hosts
Guatemala’s most extensive area of aquatic biodiversity. Beneath the lake’s surface
rich petroleum deposits are found. In the surrounding mountains, a thin layer of
topsoil covers rich nickel reserves.114 The reserves are enormous: about 20 percent
of the known nickel reserves in the world.115
111
los Derechos Humanos, p2.
112
Defensoría Q’eqchi’ (2006), Land Conflicts in El Estor, Izabal, Guatemala & the Rights of the
Maya Q'eqchi' People.
113
evaluation of AEPDI in El Estor, Guatemala. NIBR Working Paper 2008:102, p 31
114
Oxfam Amerika, 2008. The Defense of El Estor. Available at:
http://www.oxfamamerica.org/workspaces/where_we_work/camexca/news_publications/art5304.ht
ml. Last check: 11 August 2008.
115
evaluation of AEPDI in El Estor, Guatemala. NIBR Working Paper 2008:102, p20.
34
Figure 5 - Mining in Izabal in 2008116
3.2 Background
EXMIBAL was founded in 1960 by Hanna Mining and the International Nickel
Cooperation of Canada (INCO). Hanna Mining is the Canadian company who first
found evidence of nickel in the soil of El Estor, Izabal in 1955. INCO was the
international leader in the exploitation of nickel.117 In 1965, EXMIBAL was granted a
mining concession for 40 years, to extract nickel, chrome, cobalt and iron in Alta
Verapaz and Izabal.118 Because of the guerrilla war and the mining laws that were
not adapted to transnational corporations, the extraction delayed several years. The
Mining Code of 1965 compelled EXMIBAL to pay an income tax of 53%, which they
tried to avoid by getting the title of ‘industry of transformation’. Even though this title
116
Skye Resources, 2008 Fenix Project > Geological Setting. Available at:
http://www.skyeresources.com/projects/fenix/geological_setting. Last check: 11 August 2008.
117
Solano, Luis (2005). Guatemala petróleo y minería en las entrañas del poder, p 34.
118
Bauer Paiz, Alfonso (2004), No al la prórogga de la concesión de Exmibal. In: Diario La Hora, 18
October 2004.
35
could only be given to non-metal industries, they succeeded in 1968, which meant
that in the first five years of production they didn’t have to pay any income tax.
In 1966, the political instability manifested itself because of the guerilla’s focus on the
mining area. The counter-insurgency strategy meant an extraordinary increase in
military presence in the region, a strong impact on the losses of lives and the
violation of human rights.
From the 1970s onwards, the protest against EXMIBAL grew, academic and popular,
because of the clear disadvantages for the Guatemalan state. An ad hoc commission
of lawyers and university professors was founded in the University of San Carlos.
This commission saw clear disadvantages for the state in the type of concessions as
given to EXMIBAL. Still EXMIBAL got other privileges, thanks to the Minister of
Economy who was member of one of the principal economic elites. The negotiations
were held under an atmosphere of murder and political repression. Two members of
the commission, lawyers Julio Camey Herrera and Alfonso Bauer Paiz, were
attacked in 1970, Camey Herrera was killed. In 1971, lawyer and congressional
deputy Oscar Adolfo Mijangos López was assassinated. The fourth member of the
commission, Raffael Piedra Santa Arandí, fled into exile.119 The case of Adolfo
Mijangos López was one of the cases described in the Historical Clarification
Commission (HCC), which was charged with investigating crimes committed during
Guatemala’s 36-year armed conflict. In its report, ‘Guatemala, Memoria del Silencio’,
the HCC mentions the participation of EXMIBAL personnel in violent acts in the
armed conflict in Guatemala. For example, in 1978, the population of Chichipate in
El Estor was attacked by men in EXMIBAL trucks.120 The report also mentions a link
between the company and the brutal repression of a peasant protest in the village of
Panzós (Alta Verapaz) in 1978.121
In 1980, after three years of export, the mine made profit, but none of the revenues
went back to the Guatemalan state, even though they were obliged to pay taxes and
give privileges to the state since 1965. EXMIBAL argumented not paying by losses
due to the fall of the international prices, even though the international nickel prices
rose constantly until 1981. This provoked the reaction of the government, who
wanted to renegotiate the contracts. According to Luis Solano, this was the main
reason why EXMIBAL decided to suspend its operations. According to the company,
119
Solano, Luis (2005). Guatemala petróleo y minería en las entrañas del poder, pp 36-37.
los Derechos Humanos, p2.
121
CEH (s.d.). Guatemala. Memoria del Silencio. Caso illustrativo no 9. Available at
http://shr.aaas.org/guatemala/ceh/mds/spanish/toc.html. Last check 15 August 2008.
120
36
the high prices of oil and the fall of the international nickel prices made them shut
down their activities in 1981.122
Ten years later, in 1994, EXMIBAL returned because of a new law that gave new
benefits. In 1997, the reformed mining law lowered the taxes to the Guatemalan state
from 6% to 1%. Under this new law, EXMIBAL started to reorganize the ownership of
their actions: Skye Resources, a Vancouver based company, started the negotiations
to buy EXMIBAL in 2003, the year in which Ian Austin, former employee of INCO,
became CEO of Skye Resources. In 2004, the sale of 70% of the actions of INCO to
Skye Resources was made public. (30% is in hands of the Guatemalan state) The
same year, the Guatemalan government gave a new exploration license for three
years. The company had to pay the taxes EXMIBAL didn’t pay in 1978 – 1980:
$636.000 to the ministry of finance and $127.000 to the El Estor municipality. This
made the municipality of El Estor openly support the new mining operations.
EXMIBAL promised to put their ancient rights aside and to accept the actual laws:
not to mine in protected areas, effectuating an environmental impact assessment,
working together with the government to inform and to consult the local communities,
....123
3.2.1 The mine
Skye Resources operates in Guatemala by his Guatemalan subsidiary ‘Guatemalan
Nickel Company’ and will concentrate on the Fenix Project, which is located in El
Estor.124 The exploitation permit was granted in April 2006, after an approved
Environmental Impact Assessment. In July 2007, it was announced that a resolution
by the Ministry of Economy had determined that CGN would receive tax exemptions
due to the company’s classification under the Law for the Promotion and
Development of Export and Maquila Activities. This allows CGN to import materials
and equipment duty-free and also exempts CGN from paying value-added tax.125
The ambition was to start extracting (ferro)nickel in 2009 and to reach full production
in 2012. Due to the difficult capital market conditions, Skye Resources announced in
122
Solano, Luis (2005). Guatemala petróleo y minería en las entrañas del poder, p38
Ibid., pp 33 – 40.
124
Ibid., pp 132 – 133.
125
Cuffe, Sandra (2007). Guatemala: Recuperating the land that belongs to us.
123
37
January 2007 to defer the Fenix Project financing.126 In June 2008, it was announced
that Skye Resources would combine its business with HudBay Minerals Inc., a
leading Canadian base metal mining company. (Ferro)nickel production is now
estimated to start in the last quarter of 2010.127
3.2.2 Historical Conflicts over land
The Fenix Project is situated in a region were some indigenous communities have
titles to their lands, but many are still in the process of collective titling of the lands
they possess.
The historical context in which INCO got it’s mining license helps to explain the
conflicts over land which are still present and the good conditions of the contract. In
1954, the democratic elected government of Arbenz was overthrown by a CIAsupported military coup. The coup was driven by the intense lobbying efforts of big
land owners such as the United Fruit Company, in response to progressive reforms
being implemented by the Arbenz government. Most controversial amongst the
reforms was a land reform initiative that sought to redistribute uncultivated land from
major land owners to local small farmers. This coup marked the beginning of a 36
year armed conflict in which more than 200.000 peoples were killed or
disappeared.128
In 1960, EXMIBAL acquired a large finca from the Guatemalan state that had been
previously expropriated from a German railroad company, which had planned a
never developed train connection to El Estor. When EXMIBAL got its license to mine
nickel, nearly the whole area of nearly 400 km2 they acquired were lands possessed
by indigenous communities as their historical territory. As the mine project
developed, the company demarked its boundaries and evicted communities living on
the lands, which resulted in violent conflicts that were repressed by the Guatemalan
Army.
126
Skye Resources (2008), Skye Provides Update on Fenix Project and announces first quarter results.
News 13 May 2008. - Skye Resources (2008), Skye Resources Defers Fenix Project Financing in
View of Credit Market Conditions. News 30 January ’08.
127
HudBay Minerals Inc. (2008), HudBay Minerals and Skye Resources Announce Proposed Business
Combination. HudBay Minerals Inc. (2008). HudBay Minerals and Skye Resources Announce
Proposed Business Combination. Available at
http://investor.shareholder.com/hbm/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=317703. Last check 14 August
2008.
128
Astritis, Andy (2003). Canadian Mining Companies Violating Indigenous Rights in Guatemala. The
case of INCO In El Estor.
38
As seen before, the company ceased its mining activities in 1980, leaving the mine
project dormant until 2004. In 2004, INCO sold its mining rights in El Estor to Skye
Resources but retained title to the lands. The exploitation permit granted by the
Guatemalan government to Skye Resources in 2006 consisted of 250 km 2., which is
mostly on lands possessed by 16 Maya Q’eqchi communities. The same year, five
groups of some 400 families occupied lands that the company claims as its own,
after years of living in the overcrowded town of Chichipate, located just west of El
Estor. The vast majority are Mayan Q’eqchi peasant subsistence farmers, who are
trying to have enough land to support their families. These newly settled communities
sprang up on lands that have been unused and unproductive for decades. Until
November, the government didn’t intervene and the number of occupiers grew to
some 1000 families.129
Land issues in Guatemala are highly contested. Nearly all land rights can be
contested in one way or another, due to the unsatisfactory situation of the land
registry. For the region where the Fenix project is located, the situation is the same.
According to some invaders, the land granted to CGN when the concession was renegotiated, included properties that these communities already bought and paid for.
They didn’t receive the land titles for the property from the National Institute of
Agrarian Reform (INTA).130 Community representative Carlos Cacao even says the
21 pages were missing from the folder that contained the documents in which their
properties were adjudicated. FONTIERRAS, the successor of INTA, denies to know
anything about the 21 missing pages in the folder. However, FONTIERRAS seems to
support the claim of the local communities. A representative states it’s almost certain
that the occupied land is property of the communities, but that it’s up to the Register
of Cadastral Information (RIC) to determine that. FONTIERRAS can’t take a
resolution on the matter, he says.131 Apart from the problems of the missing land
titles, several representatives of the communities say they have been betrayed by
CGN. CGN offered land titles to the landless peasants but in the same time CGN
takes away more than half of the grounds that were rented to the peasants of the
129
130
Rey Rosa, Magali (2006), More mining problems: metal mining is causing increased problems and
the situation is getting out of control. In: La Prensa Libre 22 September 2006.
131
(anon.) (2006). Indigenous invade their own lands to fight mining usurpation. In: NotiCen: Central
American and Carribean Affairs. Available at http://www.allbusiness.com/caribbean/38937321.html. Last check 14 August 2008.
39
area at the time EXMIBAL was given a concession. These peasants rented some 30
caballerías132 of land to work on. EXMIBAL left the lands, and now, more than 40
years later, they come back as CGN to reclaim these lands.
The farmers organisations went to CGN to talk about these land titles in September
2006. Representatives of CGN stated that the only thing they could offer is selling the
5 caballerías of land, but that there will be a survey of the area to start negotiations
and thus see if it is possible to offer more land. The fact that CGN didn’t comply to
this promise was one of the reasons for the land evasions to start. Furthermore, the
communities state that they haven’t been consulted regarding the granting of this
land to CGN.
Because of the evictions, several representatives of CGN refused to talk with the
communities again. Officially, CGN says the occupations are a private matter, a
problem of land tenure that has nothing to do with mining.133
On November 12th 2006, the first eviction took place and was carried out without an
order signed by a judge, as required by Guatemalan law. Eyewitness testimonies on
the night of the evictions explained that groups of police and troops deployed from
within the boundaries of company property, some using company vehicles, to evict
people from their homes.134 This sparked a reaction that would later lead to the
burning of some mine company buildings and one of the houses belonging to the
local mayor.135
A second eviction took place on December 27th 2006. According to Paley, the
Christmastime eviction order was an attempt on behalf of the mining company to ‘go
legal’, to follow procedures for eviction from private land as dictated by Guatemalan
law. The eviction did not take place on December 27th, but on January 8th 2007. On
this day, 430 police officers backed by approximately 200 members of the state
military travelled the road to Barrio Unión for the first eviction, where a public
prosecutor read the eviction note. The community was given time to vacate, the
houses were dismantled carefully by groups of workers employed by the CGN-Skye
Resources. After Barrio Unión, La Pista was evicted, an eviction where some houses
were burned. The next day, Barrio Revolución, a bigger and better organized
132
1 caballería = 45,16 ha
Girón, Wilbert (2006). Campesinos exigen tierras en area de minería, en Izabal. Albedrío.org, 29
sep 2006.
134
Paley, Dawn (2007). This is what development looks like: Skye Resources and Land Reoccupation
in Guatemala.
135
133
40
community, was evicted. Here, the whole eastern part of the community has been
burned down, leaving families houseless.136
3.2.3 Consultation
As in the Marlin Mine, the consultation of the local communities as prescribed by
Guatemalan law has led to a dispute (cfr. supra). When the mining license was
granted in 1994, no consultations took place. The farm worker union, the Federation
of Country and City Workers (FTCC), has presented a claim alleging this violation to
the ILO in Geneva. The claim has been admitted and investigated by the ILO. The
ILO confirmed that no prior consultation had taken place.137
An Environmental Impact Assessment was elaborated by Skye Resources from late
2005 into 2006. The document was not translated into the Maya Q’eqchi’ language,
nor made available to the communities whose lands and resources would be
affected. Sky was granted an exploitation permit in April 2006 without having
implemented any transparent or verifiable consultation permit mechanism. 138
In September 2006, Skye released a public consultation report. According to this
document, there has been a consultation process between January and August
2006, reaching 3292 people from more than 28 communities. It mapped out what the
biggest concerns are for the different stakeholders.139 As this consultation didn’t took
place before the granting of the exploitation permit, this was not a consultation
process. Instead, it maps out what the doubts and fears from the local communities
are, to address them from now on.
136
Paley, Dawn (2007). This is what development looks like: Skye Resources and Land Reoccupation
in Guatemala.
137
ILO . 2008, Report of the Committee set up to examine the representation alleging non-observance
by Guatemala of the Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention, 1989 (No. 169), made under article
24 of the ILO Constitution by the Federation of Country and City Workers (FTCC). Available at:
http://www.ilo.org/ilolex/cgilex/pdconv.pl?host=status01&textbase=iloeng&document=87&chapter=16&query=%23Country
%3D%2A&highlight=on&querytype=bool&context=0 Last check 8 August 2008.
138
Maya Q'eqchi' People
139
Skye Resources (2006), Public Consultation Process, The Fénix Mining Project.
http://www.skyeresources.com/community/in_the_news
41
3.3 Impacts
As the Phoenix Mine is not yet operational, no impacts of the mining process as such
can be seen. Still, there are some impacts to be expected, and some social problems
that rise from the presence of the mining company.
3.3.1 Social
Rache’
CGN has created and funded a community association ‘Rache´’, which means ‘green
tree of hope’ in Q’eqchi. Rache’ is trying to ‘to improve health and education for
people in the communities surrounding the project’. They’re doing this by donating
school material, (re)building schools and restoring a hospital. Next to that, they’re
launching a regional development plan.140
Voices from the communities express their concern that this organisation might be
nothing more than a management vehicle for the company, instead of an instrument
for local sustainable development. Also heard is the remark that only the people
supporting the Phoenix Project benefit from the CGN’s social services. There is a
consensus that the work Rache’ is doing is dividing the community.141
Divided communities
Local communities are divided about their position towards the mine. The Skye
Resources’ website shows testimonies of people supporting the mine: a
pronouncement of the United Evangelic Churches of El Estor for example expresses
their gratitude for the work Rache’ is doing in their communities. Next to that, a
declaration of support is found by the mayor of El Estor, which expresses the belief in
foreign investments as a means for sustainable development and who asks “that the
Government give its total support to projects in the Izabal and Alta Verapaz areas”. 142
As seen before, at the time the mining license was granted in 1994, the company
had to pay the taxes EXMIBAL didn’t pay in 1978 – 1980: $ 636.000 to the ministry of
finance and $127.000 to the El Estor municipality. This made the municipality of El
Estor openly support the new mining operations.
140
Skye Resources, 2008. Raxche’. Available at http://www.skyeresources.com/community/raxche.
Last check 11 August 2008.
141
Henderson, Victoria L. (2006). Letter to Skye Resources Re: Fenix Project.
142
Skye Resources, 2008. Information and resources. Available at:
http://www.skyeresources.com/community/in_the_news. Last check 11 August 2008.
42
On the other hand, several communities have got deep concerns about the Phoenix
Project. The Association for the Integral Development of El Estor (AEPDI) for
example is drawing on UN treaties and other international documents ratified by
Guatemala to protect indigenous communities from extractive threats.143 Next to that,
there is the FTCC who alleged a complaint at the ILO. The evicted communities are
also anti-mining. La Paz (approximately 60 families), Lote 8 (100 families) and Barrio
Revolucion (currently 95 families) have historic territorial claims to the recuperated
lands from which they have each been evicted twice over this past year. Tomás
Chub of Barrio Revolucion states: "The work that we need is farming. Just like
everyone says, it would be better if the company would just leave."144
In August 2005, representatives of 20 Maya Q’eqchi’ communities of El Estor wrote
an open letter to the president of the republic, to the ministry of Energy and Mines
and to Skye Resources. In this letter, they protest against the fact that the
communities were not consulted before granting the license, reject the pressure of
CGN to make the communities leave their grounds and the massive deforestation
that takes place in the region. They asked for the suspension of the mining license
and the repair of the damages done. They also want the company to stop
misleading, dividing and intimidating their communities, and that the historical land
boundaries established by the Q’eqchi’ Mayan communities be respected until final
legal title is granted to them.145
According to Solano, these divisions between the communities are also inflamed by
the mining companies, public officials and the sectors that are most interested in
stimulating the extractive operations. He mentions a Maya ceremony for example,
which was carried out in January 2005 in El Estor. In this ceremony, permission was
asked to the earth to explore nickel. The white smoke that rose during the ceremony
was interpreted as a permit from nature to exploit the mines. Community members,
mining businessmen and officials from the Ministry of Energy and Mines were
present, which gave the idea of an orchestrated act.146
143
Oxfam Amerika, 2008. The Defense of El Estor. Available at:
http://www.oxfamamerica.org/workspaces/where_we_work/camexca/news_publications/art5304.ht
ml. Last check: 11 August 2008.
144
145
MiningWatch. Open letter to: the President of Skye Resources / Compañia de Níquel, S.A., the
President of the Republic of Guatemala and the Minister of Energy and Mines. August 12 2005.
Available at http://www.miningwatch.ca/index.php?/skye/open_letter_to_guate. Last check 11
August 2008.
146
43
Confrontation
I’ve already mentioned the difficult situation in the region because of the historical
conflicts over land. The evictions of November and December 2006, and of January
2007 are the most obvious confrontations resulting from this situation.
Next to that, fear lives within the local communities that history will repeat itself. The
memories of the civil war are still alive. As EXMIBAL is found complicit in grave
human rights violations against opponents of the mining project, including threats
and assassinations, communities are concerned that the same will happen now. The
way the evictions were carried out, with troops on vehicles from the mining company,
or in the presence of an armed force, made the memory at the EXMIBAL-days very
clear.
3.3.2 Environmental
What environmental consequences the Fenix Project will have, is not yet clear. Still,
there are some impacts to be expected because of the process used to mine nickel.
-
The Fenix Project is an open pit mine. This means that the problems as
stated under 3.2.2 also count for the mine in El Estor.
-
To mine nickel, a sulphuric acid would be used. This causes the same
problems
regarding
acid
mine
drainage
and
contamination
of
the
(ground)water as the mining of gold.
-
The effluents might be discharged in the ocean or in the Izabal Lake. Skye
states this would only be considered if it can be shown conclusively that
minimal environmental impacts would occur.
Some communities complained about exploration drilling which caused an erosion
runoff that has damaged and polluted several communities’ drinking water
supplies.147
3.3.3 Economic
According to the Ministery of Energy and Mines, the Fenix Project will generate
income for the country in the sense of revenues, devices and taxes, and will be a
147
Vogt, Daniél (2005), Hundreds of Q’eqchi’ Mayan protest Guatemalans granting Skye Resources
Nickel Exploration License.
44
source of employment and economic earning for the people who live close to the
project.148
According to Norwegian investigators, the mine won’t create much employment in
the region: about 400 people are employed at CGN today, this will rise to
approximately 1500 during the construction phase and about 800 when the mine will
be operational. Most of this workforce will probably come from the outside of El
Estor, due to the low education level of the local population.149
148
149
Ministerio de Energía y Minas (2007). Lineamientos de política minera 2008 – 2012, p 8.
evaluation of AEPDI in El Estor, Guatemala. NIBR Working Paper 2008:102, p 25.
45
CHAPTER 4
Environmental justice movement
Historically Martinez-Alier sees two main clusters of the environmental movement:
the nature movement and the environmental movement. The first, what he calls ‘the
cult of wilderness’, is the movement that is mainly concerned with the preservation of
nature, by buying nature reservations and the conservation of wild species,... The
second movement is mainly engaged in the sustainable use of natural resources. It
grew out of the critique on the negative consequences on the fast growing industry
and welfare, and focuses on water, air and soil pollution, nuclear energy, policies on
waste, mobility, ...150 Martinez-Alier calls this last movement the ‘gospel of ecoefficiency’, because off the believe in new technologies and the internalization of
externalities as instruments for ecological modernization.
Nowadays, both the first and second current of environmentalism are challenged by
a third: the environmental justice movement. This last movement is also called the
environmentalism of the poor or popular environmentalism. This movement points
out that economic growth unfortunately means increased environmental impacts. It
emphasizes the geographical displacement of sources and sinks and the
distributional aspects of ecological conflicts. This movement has a material interest in
the environment as a source and requirement for livelihood.151
The environmental justice movement states that some minority groups are forced to
live with a disproportionate part of the environmental burden. They believe that one
of the causes lie in the limited access to places where policy decisions are made.152
4.1 Origin
The environmental justice movement has his origin in the United States, where it
shifted the whole discussion about environmentalism away from preservation and
conservation of Nature towards social justice. It grew out of the civil rights movement
in the 1980s, fighting against the alleged disproportionate dumping of toxic waste or
exposure to varying environmental risks in areas of predominantly African-American,
150
Paredis, E., Geprangd tussen olie, reuzengarnalen en stortplaatsen. De wereldwijde strijd voor
ecologische rechtvaardigheid. In: De Gids op Maatschappelijk Gebied, nr. 5, mei 2005, p33.
151
Martinez-Alier, J. (2002), The Environmentalism of the Poor: A Study of Ecological Conflicts and
Valuation, Edward Elgar Pub, pp1-15.
152
Ibid., p9.
46
Hispanic, Native American or low income populations. It meant an organized
movement against environmental racism153. The movement for Environmental
Justice became well known in October 1991, with the First National People of Colour
Environmental Leadership Summit in Washington DC, where the Principles of
Environmental Justice were proclaimed. The movement destroyed the NIMBY (Not In
My Backyard) image of grass-roots environmental protests by turning them into
NIABY protests (Not In Anyone’s Backyard).154 “This "bottom-up" movement has
redefined environment to include where people live, work, play, go to school, as well
as how these things interact with the physical and natural world.” 155
In the South, a similar movement rose, known as the environmentalism of the poor.
Martinez-Alier uses the environmentalism of the poor as un umbrella term for social
concerns and for forms of social action based on a view of the environment as a
source of livelihood.156 The origin of this movement is not clear, as several moments
in a hundred places on a hundred dates can be seen as the beginning of the world
environmental justice movement. Many struggles over the world were reactions to
environmental racism to achieve environmental justice, as such we could use
‘environmental racism’ retrospectively for different conflicts in the past.157 These
social movements are often indigenous and poor, struggling for their survival. They’re
for two reasons ecological, according to Martinez-Alier: First, because of their
objectives that are defined in terms of the necessary things for living: energy, water
and species. Second, they try to get the natural resources out of the economic
sphere, from the general market system, the chrematistics (the study of the formation
of market prices, in order to make money), to keep them or use them for the
oikonomia (the art of material provisioning of the household).158 According to Sachs,
this is a resource conflict between subsistence and market economies.159
153
Environmental racism can be defined as any policy, practice or directive that differentially affects or
disadvantages (whether intended or unintended) individuals, groups, or communities based on race
or colour.
154
Martinez-Alier, J., Mining Conflicts, Environmental Justice and Valuation. In: Ageyman Julian,
Bullard Robert D., Evans Bob (2003a), Just Sustainabilities. Development in an Unequal World,
Earthscan, London, p 214.
155
Quotation of Robert Bullard in: Bullard, Robert D. (2000). Environmental Justice in the 21st
century. In: Environmental Justice Resource Centre. People of Colour Environmental Groups
Directory.
156
Valuation, Edward Elgar Pub, p 263
157
Ibid., pp 172 – 173.
158
Martinez-Alier, J (2008). Prefacio. In: Broederlijk Delen, Alai (2008), Territorios y recursos
naturales: El saqueo versus el buen vivir, p 12.
159
Sachs, Wolfgang, Santarius, Tilman (ed.) (2007). Fair Future. Resource conflicts, security & Global
Justice. Zed Books, p132.
47
So the environmental justice movement and the environmentalism of the poor can be
seen as two similar movements struggling for environmental justice. One critique of
Martinez-Alier on the US-movement is relevant: the fact that the environmental
justice movement in the USA emphasizes on ‘minority’ groups. This focus makes it
less useful worldwide, as the majority of humankind cannot be seen as a ‘minority’.
On
the
other
hand,
there
is
also
something
missing
in
the
Southern
environmentalism of the poor: the strong urban emphasis of the environmental
justice movement in the USA, which is extremely relevant for a world of increasing
urban poor populations. “There is then not only a north-south but also a rural-urban
complementarity among both approaches”160 Still, Martinez-Alier feels that the
movement for environmental justice as grown in the USA is uniquely placed to
overcome the intellectual and social gap between the environmentalisms of the North
and the South.161 Next to the North-South link, the South-South link is also relevant:
grass-roots groups of different places in the world have started to make links
between their separate struggles. It places their specific case in a broader
framework, where their struggles are linked to “issues of civil and human rights, land
rights and sovereignty, cultural survival, racial and social justice and sustainable
development... Whether in urban ghettos and barrios, rural “poverty pockets”, Native
American reservations or communities in the developing world, grass-roots groups
are demanding an end to unjust and non-sustainable environmental and
development policies.”162
4.2 Ecological Distribution Conflicts
The environmental justice movement or the environmentalism of the poor is a
movement against environmental racism: social conflicts with an ecological content
of the poor against the relatively rich, not only but mainly in rural conflicts. According
to Martinez-Alier, this movement is one connection between political ecology, as the
study of ecological distribution conflicts, and ecological economics, as the study of
160
Quotation Juan Martinez-Alier in: Martinez-Alier, J. (2002), The Environmentalism of the Poor: A
Study of Ecological Conflicts and Valuation, Edward Elgar Pub, p 179.
161
Ibid., p267.
162
Citaat van Robert Bullard in: Ibid., pp 173-174.
48
the ecological unsustainability of the economy. These conflicts are not only conflicts
of interest, but also conflicts of values. The study of an ecological distribution conflict
often reveals a clash of incommensurable values.163
4.2.1 Ecological economics and political ecology
Ecological economics has a different view on the economic system, as opposed to
neoclassical economics and environmental economics. Neoclassical economics sees
the economy as a closed system where labour and capital, goods and services are
exchanged between companies and households. There is no input of energy or
material, no waste is produced. There is just an abstract exchange value circulating
in an isolated system.
Neoclassical economics has evolved through time, trying to incorporate some
ecological aspects. Environmental economics for example tries to internalise
externalities, because these externalities are seen as market failures. As such, it tries
to give a monetary value to ecosystem services as to integrate them in the economic
system.164 This is a big difference with the ecological economics, where money is not
the only language spoken about. Ecological economics tries to give a multi-criteria
approach. It sees this economy as an open subsystem of a larger finite ecosystem. It
questions the sustainability of the economy because of its environmental impacts, its
material and energy requirements and the growth of the population.165
Ecologically unequal exchange
In neoclassical economics, the theory of the comparative advantage states that
countries have to specialize themselves in that activity for which they have a
comparative advantage: products that are internally cheaper to produce in relative
terms. This is the basis of the WTO-policy to stimulate economic growth by
liberalizing trade and financial markets. Jones states that the conditions for this
theory are not fulfilled. These conditions are the absence of oligo- and monopolies,
the internalization of externalities and the immobility of capital between countries.
However, capital is more mobile than ever, ecological costs are externalized and
there is an oligopoly of transnational companies. As such, absolute or competitive
advantages are more central than comparative advantages. International capital
163
Ibid., pp 270 - 271.
Jones, P.T. & Jacobs, R. (2006), Terra Incognita. Globalisering, ecologie en rechtvaardige
duurzaamheid. Academia Press, pp 108 - 109.
165
Valuation, Edward Elgar Pub, p19.
164
49
searches those countries with the biggest absolute advantages. To attract capital,
some Southern countries are obliged to lower their ecological, social, fiscal norms to
get an absolute advantage. So, increasing free trade together with worsening terms
of trade leads to a polarisation where the countries which already have a negative
starting point get stuck at the bottom.166
As such, apart from the notion of unequal exchange taking the underevaluation of
labour and health of the poor into account as well as the deterioration of the terms of
trade expressed in prices in consideration, an ecological component is added. The
links to the environment bring the unaccounted, and thus uncompensated, local
externalities into the picture, and the different production times exchanged when
extracted products that can only be replaced in the long run are exchanged for
productions or services that can be produced quickly. 167 Even when the trade
between regions or countries is balanced in monetary terms, it can hide an
unequilibrum in terms of natural resources or harmful emissions. Ecologically
unequal exchange leads to a situation where poor countries natural resources go to
the rich, while the consequences of environmental degradation goes from rich to
poor countries. Together with the decreasing gain from their natural resources, a
vicious circle is created.
To measure this ecologically unequal exchange, the notion of the ‘ecological
rucksack’ is sometimes used. This term expresses all negative effects felt in the
country of origin but invisible for the consumer. These hidden flows together with the
direct material input gives an idea of the material flow used for the metabolism of a
society. One investigation shows that the ecological rucksack of the EU import grows
faster than the absolute volumes of the import itself.168
Moreover, the general idea that our economy is dematerializing because of the
increasing weight of the service sector in terms of employment and in terms of
economic value added is not realistic: to some extent this is a consequence of a
geographical displacement of sources of energy and materials and of sinks for
waste. According to Martinez-Alier, if you look at the materials needed to keep an
economy going, it is clear that the economy is not dematerializing. It still needs input
from materials and energy, it’s only brought from further away.169
166
duurzaamheid. Academia Press, pp 224 – 231.
167
Valuation, Edward Elgar Pub, p214.
168
duurzaamheid. Academia Press, pp 232 – 234.
169
Valuation, Edward Elgar Pub
50
Important in the notion of the ecologically unequal exchange is the focus on poverty
and the lack of political power of the exporting region. This emphasizes the lack of
alternative options, in terms of exporting other renewable goods with lower local
impacts, or in terms of internalizing the externalities in the price of export, or in terms
of applying the precautionary principle to new export items produced with untested
technologies.170 As the notion of power is added, we get in the field of the political
ecology which studies ecological distribution conflicts: conflicts on environmental
entitlements, on the loss of access to natural resources and environmental services,
on the burdens of pollution and on the sharing of uncertain environmental hazards. 171
As Martinez-Alier puts it: “In ecological economics, the economy is seen as
embedded in the ecosystem. The economy is also embedded in a structure of
property rights on environmental resources and services, in a social distribution of
power and income, in social structures of gender, social class or caste, and this links
ecological economics to political economy and political ecology.”172 As such, the
externalities which are seen as ‘market failures’ by environmental economics, are
seen as ‘cost-shifting successes’, allowed by social asymmetries in the distribution of
property rights, income and power.173
Too poor to be green?
The fact that environmental degradation is exported from North to South, challenges
the classical economic point of view stating that economic growth leads to ecological
sustainability and social justice. The environmental Kuznets Curve marks this vision:
free trade and economic growth bring technological development in the long turn with
which we can combat pollution. Next to ecological awareness and quality of nature,
also social justice improves. However, this Kuznets Curve neglects the fact that
ecological sustainability is imported from poorer countries by richer countries and
that the ecological costs are shifted to the South. It also doesn’t take the irreversible
ecological damage into account.174 Ecological economics challenges the idea that
people would be too poor to be green, because they lack awareness or because they
don’t have enough money to invest in the environment. Although obviously not
170
Ibid., p 214.
Ibid., pp 96 – 97.
172
Quotation Martinez-Alier in: Ibid., p 21.
173
Muradian, R. & Martinez-Alier, J., (2002), Trade and the environment: from a Southern perspective.
In: Ecological Economics 36 (2), p 289.
174
(Forthcoming) Debruyne, P. (2008), Voorbij het ecologische verdelingsconflict. De ruimtelijkecologische strijd voor rechtvaardigheid in een volle wereld.In: Doom, R., (2008). Conflict en
ontwikkeling. In de grensgebieden van de globalisering. Academia Press, p 5-6.
171
51
everybody is environmentalist, Martinez-Alier argues that caring for the environment
is not a luxury of the rich, but a necessity of the poor, resulting in a logical, though
often unrecognized green activism of the poor.175
4.2.2
The language of valuation
Ecological distribution conflicts are thus social conflicts about the sharing of uncertain
environmental risks and the loss of access to natural resources and environmental
services. Martinez-Alier states that there can be different languages used to talk
about these conflicts: some victims may ask monetary compensation (internalization
of the externalities) for the damage done, others might argue that the environment is
of great ecological value or that the land is sacred, or that the resources of this
territory are excluded from the market by international treaties that protect indigenous
groups. So the question to ask is: “Who has the power to determine what will be the
relevant languages of valuation?”176
According to Martinez-Alier, environmental justice emphasizes incommensurability of
values by emphasizing racism. As an example he gives the Polluter Pays Principle:
this principle implies that a deteriorating ecological distribution is in principle
compensated by an improving economic distribution. The objective of course is to
make pollution expensive enough so that there will be a lower level of polluting
production or by a change in technology. Thus a single scale of value is used. If one
sees the same problem in terms of environmental racism, it becomes a different
problem. Paying a fine for inflicting damage on human dignity by racial discrimination
doesn’t entitle one to repeat such conduct. There is no real compensation. As money
and human dignity are not commensurate.177
Monetary compensation is often used in ecological distribution conflicts. Quite often
this doesn’t go together with the discourse of indigenous territorial rights or
indigenous identity. For indigenous communities, the access to ground, clean water,
clean air, … is worth more than gold, because this forms their livelihood: they depend
on it in their existence. Not only the physical relation with nature is relevant,
175
Martinez-Alier, J. (1994). The environment as a luxury good or “too poor to be green”? In:
Ecological Economics 13, pp 8-9.
176
Martinez-Alier, J. (2004), Ecological Distribution Conflicts and Indicators of Sustainability. In:
International Journal of Political Economy, p14.
177
Valuation, Edward Elgar Pub, p 173.
52
indigenous communities often have often a crucial relationship with the land,
expressing their spiritual living and their identity.178
4.2.3 Mining as an ecological distribution conflict.
As mentioned before, ecological distribution conflicts are conflicts over the principles
of justice applicable to the burdens of pollution and to access to environmental
resources and services. These conflicts appear in various points of the commodity
chain: in the extraction of material and energy, in transport and manufacturing, or in
the disposal of waste. These are often caused by the search for natural resources,
materials and environmental space, led by economic growth. They find their origin in
the hunger for resources of the economy, which is not (yet) dematerialising. The
growing industrial economy shifts the commodity frontiers, the borders of the
exploitation of resources, for example to mine gold and nickel in Guatemala. 179
According to Debruyne, this seems to put the ‘Lawrence Summers-principle’ into
practice: Lawrence Summer was a World Bank economist who wrote an unofficial
note where this principle is originated from: it states that dumping in developing
countries was preferable because economic costs in terms of loss of wages and
health risks are lower.180
The rising commodity prices push transnational companies to extract more
resources. The price of nickel has been rising the last years. It peaked at 25 USD/lb
in spring 2007, which gives an enormous income potential to mine nickel.181 The
price of gold has also risen the last years: it reached $1,000 an ounce for the first
time in March 2008. From January to March 2008, the value of gold increased by
about 20%, after it rose 32% in 2007.182
A handful of these transnational companies are controlling the market in different
sectors of export, like the extractive industry. To attract these companies,
178
De Walsche, Alma (2007), De ecologie van de armen. De ecologisch-economische benadering van
Joan Martinez-Alier. In: Oikos, forum voor sociaal-ecologische verandering, 2007-2, pp. 31-32.
179
Ibid., pp 26-30.
180
(Forthcoming) Debruyne, P. (2008), Voorbij het ecologische verdelingsconflict. De ruimtelijkecologische strijd voor rechtvaardigheid in een volle wereld.In: Doom, R., (2008). Conflict en
ontwikkeling. In de grensgebieden van de globalisering. Academia Press, p2.
181
182
(an.) (2008). Gold hits $ 1,000 for the first time. BBC News. Available at
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7294040.stm. Last check 14 August 2008.
53
governments are willing to take different fiscal, social and ecological measures. 183
The governments hope to take advantage of the earnings of these companies to
generate income. Guatemala for example is encouraging large mining companies to
enter the country, trying to take advantage of their richness in natural resources to
bring income. Mining companies have received exploration concessions for nearly
ten percent of the surface area in the country, and they are given tax concessions
and speedy processing of applications in order to facilitate the process for those
companies willing to invest in the country. Guatemala hopes to take advantage of
having these transnational companies in the country: it is trying to ensure the
success of the first large scale mining operations (Marlin and Fenix) to pave the way
for other projects to be realised. As such it is willing to give concessions to both the
local population and the companies, even at the cost of potential income for the
central government. The 1% revenue of the current mining law is an example. 184
According to a report of Oxfam America however, mineral dependence is strongly
linked to lower standards of living and increased poverty rates.185 This predicts that
mining probably won’t bring the prosperity hoped for. For the companies however,
the situation is different. Goldcorp is making huge profits, Skye Resources is hoping
the same. For the Marlin Mine for example, the combination of the record prices of
an ounce of gold on the international market and the low production cost ($ 144 per
ounce in 2007186) shows the mine is very profitable for the company. Goldcorp’s
earnings for the Marlin Mine reached up to $ 203.7 millions in 2007.187
The presence of these companies in Guatemala is causing conflicts on the terrain.
The cases of San Marcos and El Estor described above are clear examples of this.
These people are struggling against the big mining companies, the government and
international institutions to protect their livelihood and the right to a safe and sound
environment. Their struggle is about justice.
183
duurzaamheid. Academia Press, p 228.
184
evaluation of AEPDI in El Estor, Guatemala. NIBR Working Paper 2008:102, pp 20 – 21.
185
Ross, Michael (2001). Extractive sectors and the poor. Oxfam America Report, p8.
186
Goldcorp (2008). Delivering growth. 07 Annual Report, p11.
187
Ibid., p 33.
54
4.3 Environmental Justice Movements in Guatemala?
It’s clear that the two cases stated above cannot be compared easily. For example,
the historical background of the Fenix Project makes it a different story than the
Marlin Mine. Or the situation that the problems in San Marcos started with the
presence of Goldcorp, while in El Estor, it revitalized living problems on land tenure.
Or the mere fact that the Marlin Mine is operational and the Fenix Project not yet.
Still, in both cases, local communities and indigenous people are the central players
in the opposition of the mines. They are first affected, they organize protests,
blockades, take action against the mining company and get up for themselves.
Can the movements in El Estor and in San Marcos be seen as ecological justice
movements? This movement tries to answer the question: ‘Who gets what, why and
how much?’. It tries to uncover the underlying assumptions which may contribute to
and produce unequal production.188 This movement sees the problem in terms of
power (the concentration and access to power is decisive in the decisions made by
governments and enterprises) and uses a 'discourse' in terms of rights (the right on a
safe and sound surrounding as a human right). The environmental justice movement
is typical a grass roots movement.189 An important aspect of the environmental justice
movement is that it abandons the idea that communities in the South would be too
poor to care about the environment. On the contrary, they believe that their social
struggle has an ecological dimension: the struggle to protect their livelihood.190
4.3.1 Analysis in terms of power
Ecological distribution conflicts are analyzed in terms of power: who has the power to
take certain actions or decisions? The companies or governments choose certain
locations for dumping waste or for heavily polluting industries because they don’t
expect much opposition there.191 This is clear in both cases: who decides where the
mine is located, what compensations can be given? The map showing mining in
188
Bullard, Robert D. (2000). Environmental Justice in the 21st century. In: Environmental Justice
Resource Centre. Peoply of Colour Environmental Groups Directory, p 559.
189
Paredis, E., Geprangd tussen olie, reuzengarnalen en stortplaatsen. De wereldwijde strijd voor
ecologische rechtvaardigheid. In: De Gids op Maatschappelijk Gebied, nr. 5, mei 2005, pp 35-37
190
Ibid., p39.
191
Paredis, E. (2004), 'Environmental justice', verrijking van duurzame ontwikkeling met een
machtsanalyse en een rechtenbenadering. Seminarie van de Duurzame Raad voor Duurzame
Ontwikkeling 'Over Environmental Justice', 12 februari 2004, p5.
55
relation to poverty was clear: most concessions are given in regions where poor
people live. Evidently because minerals were found, but also because the people
living there don’t have the power to stop this project. Martinez-Alier makes a striking
comparison: if gold would be found underneath the football stadium of FC Barcelona,
this would probably not be easily given in concession. Supporters would demand true
compensations, the government would have to comply to these demands or cancel
the project.192 Why doesn’t this count for the people of San Marcos and El Estor?
This becomes most clear in the referenda held by the communities of San Marcos in
which they rejected mining. These consultations are not taken seriously by the
government nor by the company, who say the people have been misled. Several
communities who speak openly out against mining don’t seem to be worth taken into
account.
More general it’s about who has the power to choose the kind of development for
these communities. The Marlin Mine is seen as a development project by the World
Bank and the Guatemalan authority. Moreover, the state’s representatives have tried
to label the opponents of the governments’ mining policy as being against
development, thereby maintaining the poor in their fate.193 Marco Maldorado of
COPAE asks: “What kind of development do we want? What’s behind this
development? At what cost does it come?”194 A letter written by the CGN puts it this
way: “The promoters of the mining industry ... sell the Marlin mine as a
"development" project. In reality, however, the mine is simply a business that
enriches an international corporation at the expense of the good development of
communities, facilitated by the persistent and systematic corruption, impunity and
lack of real democracy, both at the national and international levels.”
The people of Sipakapa wrote their own development project. This doesn’t seem to
count as true development however. These people don’t have the power to stand
against the vision of the World Bank.
The same story in El Estor: The CEO off Skye Resources says: “What we can try to
do is offer them a better future. They need to move beyond subsistence farming.”
The answer by Martín Col Caal, a 21 year old subsistence farmer of Barrió
192
Vandenbroucke Esther. Notes of lecture Juan Martinez-Alier. Colloquium Ecollogical Economics,
24 February 2007.
193
194
Maldorado, Marco Vinicio Lopez, Análisis. La industria minera en Guatemala: entre el despojo y el
etnocidio. In: Voces del tiempo, 56, p4.
56
Revolución: ”Mining does not bring development. Development comes from tourism
and agriculture. Mining brings contamination of the environment and the persecution
of community leaders, those who oppose the mine.”195
The decision to place the mines in El Estor and San Marcos is about who has the
access to financial, structural and cultural power:
-
Financial power: Goldcorp is supported by the government because it’s the
single largest taxpayer of Guatemala. It has contributed to the Guatemalan
economy. As the Fenix Project will create the second modern open pit mine
in Guatemala, the same is hoped for this project.
-
Structural power: It’s clear that the communities are quite powerless facing
the Guatemalan government and two big Canadian transnational mining
companies. The fact that the Marlin Mine received a 45 million dollar credit by
the IFC/World Bank, who sees the Marlin Project as a ‘development project’
for the region, identifies another powerful player in this story.
-
Cultural power: Several examples can be given to show the different culture
of the indigenous communities and the Guatemalan government and the
corporations. For example, Guatemalan law stipulates that the underground
is owned by the state, even if one has a land title. Mayan culture and
Cosmovision however does not separate between landed and subterranean
resources, as such it contradicts to the formal national laws.196
4.3.2 Analysis in terms of rights
The origin in the civil rights movement gives the environmental justice movement a
framework and a language to articulate problems and demands. Central stands the
basic right on a safe and sound environment as a human right. Concepts as
individual (citizens)rights, social justice, human dignity, equal chances and self
determination are essential.197
The clearest example of how the people of San Marcos use rights to defend
themselves, are the consultations: the rights of the indigenous communities as stated
195
Amuchastegui, Maria (2007). Mining misery Guatemala is one of many countries that has attracted
the investment of Canadian mining companies —but at what cost to its people?
196
197
57
in Convention 169 of the ILO. Moreover, this convention is used as a basis for
defending their natural environment against open pit mining in general.198
Indigenous territorial rights are also used: Mario Tema, community leader in
Sipakapa, says rejecting the mine revindicates the rights of people who have been
the owners of these territories for at least 5,000 years.199
In El Estor, the situation is analysed by indigenous territorial rights: Who has the right
to claim a terrain? Indigenous territorial rights oppose some land titles given by the
Guatemalan government to mining companies. The Q’eqchi for example have a long
tradition for migration, expanding their territory when the population rises and
contracting their territory when the population is decreasing. They have a tradition
that each generation leaves their original communities to form new ones on virgin
land, avoiding land fragmentation in their original communities..200 These rights were
used to defend the occupations: “We are recuperating the land that belongs to us”,
says Alfredo Ical of Barrio Revolucion.201
4.3.3 Grassroots movement
The environmental justice movement is typical a movement that rises bottom-up,
informal and spontaneous. As seen before, the environmental justice movement
arises from the different local movements struggling for their livelihood.202 This is
clear in both cases: the resistance to the mines has grown spontaneously, bottom-up
and informal. People have organized themselves to oppose to the mine. Both the
situation in Sololá in 2005 and the land occupations in El Estor in 2007 show the
spontaneity and informality of these actions. The organisation of the first consultation
in Sipakapa in 2005 marks an important moment: the local communities organize
themselves, consulting their own community. This has been an inspiration for several
other communities. According to Magalí Rey Rosa, this was the first time a
198
”Defensa del patrimonio natural del territorio de Sipakapa y rechazo y resistencia del pueblo
Sipakapense a la minería de oro a cielo abierto y a las operaciones de la compañía Glamis
Gold/Montana/Proyecto Marlin, mediante la aplicación efectiva del Convenio OIT 169 sobre
derechos de los pueblos indígenas.” In: Organizaciones del Municipio, Parroquia de Sipacapa
(2006), Programa de Desarollo del Municipio de Sipacapa, Departamento de San Marcos, p28.
199
Paley, Dawn (2007), Turning Down a Gold Mine.
200
evaluation of AEPDI in El Estor, Guatemala. NIBR Working Paper 2008:102, pp 22-23.
201
202
58
community speaks so explicitly out against mining, based on an international
convention.203
Surely, there has been support from other actors: regional, national and international
ngo’s are reporting and taken action around these mining problems. But the origin of
the protest were truly grassroots.
4.3.4 Ecological and economic distribution
Ecological distribution conflicts are about the access to environmental services and
to natural resources, and about the burdens of pollution. The focus of the
environmental justice movement is how this environmental problem is felt locally: it’s
created locally, the effects are felt locally. This is important, because as such it gives
a story of real people in real places, replacing the analysis in abstract terms. 204 How
mining is an environmental distribution conflict, is described above. It made clear that
the positive effects of mining will mainly go to the company and the Guatemalan elite.
The communities surrounding the mine get the burden: water pollution, loss of
territories, health problems, destruction of the local economy. This shows clearly the
unequal ecological and economic distribution of mining in Guatemala.
This argumentation is used by the local communities in El Estor. A woman evicted
from Barrrio Unión says: “Look what the company is doing: eviction! ... They said the
company would bring work. Where is the work now? They are just taking the
minerals and leaving.”205
COPAE, denouncing the support of the World Bank to the Marlin project, states:
“Apart from the apparent impossibility to eradicate corruption among public officials
and politicians in Guatemala4, we know that the country’s upper class, the principal
supplier of high officials in governmental institutions, does not have the slightest
interest in changing the situation of exclusion and poverty that affects more than 60%
of the Guatemalan population.”206
203
Vandenbroucke Esther, Interview Magali Rey Rosa, 9 March 2008.
205
Quotation of evicted woman in: Rights Action (2007). Violent evictions in El Estor.
206
COPAE (2007). The World Bank’s other Paradigm. In: The Robust Oak, 2007 (12), p3.
204
59
4.3.5 Livelihood
Central in this movement is the material interest in the environment as a source and
a requirement for livelihood. As such, the environmentalism of the poor turns the
view of the Brundtland report around: from environmental damage caused by poverty
(’too poor to be green’) to conflicts in which poor people defend the environment,
their livelihood, against the state or the market.207 The people affected by the mine in
San Marcos and in El Estor are mainly subsistence farmers: land and water are
crucial for them. Economic security for them means protecting these resources. This
land and water is also needed by the mining company, which creates a social conflict
about their livelihood. This is clear in El Estor where local communities speak out and
act against the loss of their territory, and in San Marcos where people protest against
the loss of biodiversity, the drying up of their water wells, the metals found in the
Tzalá River, etc.
4.3.6 Languages of valuation
Environmental conflicts are fought out in different languages and arise because of an
incommensurability of values and of interests. This is clear in both cases. The World
Bank for example sees mining as a means to break out of the cycle of poverty 208:
mining has an economic value which is preferable above other values the land can
have. The indigenous communities on the other hand state the following: “As
Indigenous Peoples, we have an integral vision of our Mother Earth, manifested in
the respect and intimate relationship that exists between people and nature. This is
our Cosmovision, in which human beings are not superior, but part of a whole. Our
vision contrasts with the occidental logic of natural resource exploitation, based on
the accumulation of capital by a few at the cost of the lives of many, in this case of
Indigenous Peoples. The great consequence of this history is the State of poverty in
which we find ourselves.”209
Javier de León of the Association for the Integral Development of San Miguel
Ixtahuacán (ADISMI) poses the following question: “Is this the kind of development
207
Valuation, Edward Elgar Pub, p 266.
208
World Bank, 2008. Topics. Oil, Gas, Mining and Chemicals. Glamis Gold Ltd.'s Montana
Exploradora Marlin Project in Guatemala. Available at web.worldbank.org. Last check 14 august
2008.
209
Guatemala Community Network (2006). Stop Canadian Mining in Guatemala.
60
we want? What are we to negotiate? There is nothing to negotiate! Can you
negotiate life? I do not think you can negotiate life. Health can not be negotiated. In
this case, human lives are at risk.”210 The idea behind mining is that an improved
economic distribution will compensate the damages done. This again is a monetary
value put above other values. The question if health can be negotiated makes it
clear: how could a human life be monetary compensated? Who would estimate the
value of this life?
The different values used are also clear in the conflicts over land. The Q’eqchi’
Mayans for example see their territory as a fundamental element for their survival,
not only as individuals, but as a people with their own characteristics. Further, the
extraction of any component of its territory that is not subject to the rules and
customs of their culture, affects their world reality and as such, their cultural integrity
as a people.211 As such, historical grounds with a spiritual value and grounds to
create economic value are incommensurate.
It is clear that the different values used are incommensurate. The question then is
“who has the power to determine what will be the relevant languages of
valuation?”212 Who has the power to simplify complexity? For both cases, certainly
not the indigenous communities.
4.3.7 Guatemalan environmental justice movements?
The features show clearly that the communities struggling against the mining
companies in El Estor and in San Marcos can be seen as ecological justice
movements. They are fighting against environmental racism: the disproportionate
allocation of the burdens of mining to these communities. As such, they are linked to
other struggles of people over the world. From mining conflicts in Honduras, Peru,
Bolivia, Congo, to protecting mangroves against shrimp farming in Bangladesh, over
the struggle of the Ogoni against Shell in the Nigerdelta, to the resistance against a
dam in India, etc. All these conflicts can be looked at in detail, investigating the
specific situation of that country, that region, that project. Most of them would
210
Quotation of Javier de Léon in: Rodríguez, J. (2007), Gold Mine Worsens Social Tensions.
Vogt, Daniel (2005). ILO Investigates Claim Charging Violation of Convention 169 Regarding
Skye Resources’ Guatemalan Nickel Project.
212
Quotation of Martinez-Alier in: Martinez-Alier, J. (2004), Ecological Distribution Conflicts and
Indicators of Sustainability. In: International Journal of Political Economy, p14.
211
61
probably be fighting against some sort of environmental injustice. The strength of
linking them in one big movement, is that it gives them perspectives beyond their
own local struggle. It places their struggle in a broader frame, linking the
environmental degradation they face to the increasing globalization.
4.4 Recommendations
The search for commodities is driven by economic growth. This economy is not
dematerializing. Moreover, more and more countries are adapting this material
intensive economy. This means an increase in the use of natural resources and
material. As long as the demand remains high, mining will be a lucrative business.
New mines will open, causing conflicts like the ones seen in San Marcos and El
Estor. The first recommendation can’t be any other than this: we have to
dematerialize our economy. Using less materials, by consuming less, by using them
more efficiently, by inventing new techniques, ... Moreover, we should see which
materials are really necessary. Knowing that 80% of all gold is used to make
jewellery, it is clear that the production of gold could be diminished severely. As gold
mining is one of the dirtiest industries in the world, one could wonder why this isn’t
yet so.
Mining cannot be sustainable: it is always a polluting process. But can it be made
responsible? Oxfam America and Earthworks have established ‘golden rules’: a set
of minimum criteria for more responsible mining. These are the following:
-
Respect basic human rights as outlined in international conventions and laws.
-
Obtain the free, prior, and informed consent of affected communities.
-
Respect workers’ rights and labour standards, including safe working
conditions.
-
Ensure that operations are not located in areas of armed or militarized
conflict.
-
Ensure that projects do not force communities off their lands.
-
Refrain from dumping mine waste into oceans, rivers, lakes, or streams.
-
Ensure that projects are not located in protected areas, fragile ecosystems, or
other areas of high conservation or ecological value.
-
Ensure that projects do not contaminate water, soil, or air with sulphuric acid
drainage or other toxic chemicals.
62
-
Cover all costs of closing down and cleaning up mine sites.
-
Fully disclose information about social and environmental effects of projects.
-
Allow independent verification of the above.213
The cases described above show breaches on several of this criteria:
-
The free, prior and informed consent was in both cases not guaranteed
-
Communities have been forces off their lands in El Estor
-
There are severe indications that water in San Marcos has been
contaminated with heavy metals.
-
The closure plan of San Martín in Honduras indicates that a future closure
plan for the Marlin Mine won’t cover all costs of closing down and cleaning up
the mine site.
-
Information about social and environmental effects of both mines has not
been easily spread.
For Guatemala, the Golden Rules should be addressed to answer the key challenges
for mining as been stated above: there are several problems with the mining law, the
general situation in Guatemala with it’s land conflicts and small economic elite poses
specific challenges. Recommendations for Guatemala are thus the following:
-
Addressing the issue of land titles. Making sure that deeds are clearly stated
and that the land is less unequal distributed will take a big cause of conflicts
away.
-
The MARN should establish some good environmental laws and protect
them.
-
The revenue for the Guatemalan state should go up. The tax exemptions for
foreign companies should not be granted. This would increase the income for
the Guatemalan state. Another important point here is off course that the
government manages to put good governance into practice for the whole
population, not only for the rich elite.
-
The local population should be truly consulted before granting an exploration
license to a mining company. Involving the indigenous community from the
beginning and taking their concerns seriously is a condition for sustainable
mining with a positive impact on the local economy.
Are there good practices considering mining? One example is worth mentioning: In
Colombia, gold is mined in close relationship with the local population. The extraction
213
Earthworks, Oxfam America (2007). Golden Rules. Making the case for responsible mining, pp 2-3.
63
is fulfilling some certification criteria for ‘green gold’. These make sure that the
extraction doesn’t use toxic chemicals, that the load on the environment doesn’t
exceed it’s recovering capacity, etc.214 This could be an inspiring example for
Guatemala.
214
Corporación Oro Verde, 2008. Our Work. Certified Green Gold Program. Available at
http://www.greengold-oroverde.org/ingles/oroverde_ing.html, last check 14 August 2008.
64
Conclusions
The two questions posed in this thesis can now be answered: What is the impact of
mining in San Marcos and in El Estor? Can the movements opposing these mines be
seen as environmental justice movements?
Guatemala has a history of land conflicts and is the country with the biggest income
equity. It has attracted mining to share in the benefits of the company’s revenues.
However, the type of mining, the situation of the local population, the lack of good
laws make it a rather negative story. Looking at the history of the Marlin Mine and the
Fenix Project, it’s clear that these had and still have social, economic and ecological
impacts on the local communities. Mainly the Marlin Mine is already showing what
open pit mining means: water contamination, increased conflicts and economic
problems due to water scarcity. The story of the San Martín Mine in Honduras
predicts what more they can expect.
The people of El Estor don’t face the negative consequences of metal mining yet.
Still, the renewed mining license brings the struggle for their land into the open again.
The violent evictions keep the memory of the unpleasant Guatemalan history alive.
As these conflicts aren’t typical Guatemalan problems, we’ve placed them in the
framework of the ecological justice movement. This showed clearly how mining is an
ecological distribution conflict: a social conflict on who gets the benefits and who has
to bear the burdens of this highly polluting activity. Moreover, pushed by economic
growth and the high commodity prices, companies go further and further to extract
natural resources. This causes more and more conflicts similar to the ones
described.
To link the struggle of the people opposing the mine in Guatemala to similar
ecological distribution conflicts over the world, we looked if the features of the
environmental justice movement fitted them. This question was positively answered,
as such connecting their local problems to the increasing globalization. This made
clear that the struggle is about environmental injustice.
Some recommendations were formulated to address the challenges posed by
mining. Oxfams Golden Rules could be a starting point for the Guatemalan
government to work on sustainable mining. Still, this could run counter to the
65
Cosmovision of the indigenous peoples. The only mining acceptable would be the
one where local communities are closely involved, and following criteria which
prevent the destruction of the environment, their livelihood.
66
References
(anon.) (2006). Indigenous invade their own lands to fight mining usurpation. In:
NotiCen:
Central
American
and
Carribean
Affairs.
Available
at
http://www.allbusiness.com/caribbean/3893732-1.html. Last check 14 August
2008.
(anon.) (2007), Gerente de Montana denuncia a Madre Selva. In: La Prensa Libre, 9
March 2007.
(anon.) (2008). Gold hits $ 1,000 for the first time. BBC News. Available at
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7294040.stm. Last check 14 August 2008.
Almendares, Juan (2008). Public Letter: Goldcorp Inc. mortal closure plan of the
“San Martín” Mine, Honduras. Available at http://www.ccdhal.org/Public-LetterMortal-closure-plan-of-the-Gold-Corp-Inc-mining-enterprise-Carta-Publica.
Last
Amador, Carlos, Tema, Juan (2006). Statement to Glamis Gold Shareholders from
Honduras
and
Guatemala.
Available
http://www.miningwatch.ca/index.php?/Honduras_en/Glamis_shareholders.
at
Last
Amuchastegui, Maria (2007). Mining misery Guatemala is one of many countries that
has attracted the investment of Canadian mining companies —but at what cost to
its people?
Amnesty International (2007), Guatemala: Fear for Safety: Flaviano Bianchini.
Available at http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/info/AMR34/003/2007. Last check
14 August 2008.
Amnesty International (2007), Guatemala: Further Informaton on Fear for Safety:
Flaviano
Bianchini.
Available
at
http://www.amnesty.org/en/library/asset/AMR34/009/2007/en/domAMR340092007en.pdf. Last check 14 August 2008.
Angél, Otto N. (2006). Montana Exploradora pagará IUSI y ISR. In: Siglo XXI,
19/7/06.
Astritis, Andy (2003). Canadian Mining Companies Violating Indigenous Rights in
Guatemala. The case of INCO In El Estor. Rights Action. Available at
http://www.rightsaction.org/Reports/INCO_Nickel_904.htm. Last check 14 August
2008.
Bauer Paiz, Alfonso (2004), No al la prórogga de la concesión de Exmibal. In: Diario
La Hora, 18 October 2004.
67
Bianchini, Flaviano (2006), Estudio técnico. Calidad de agua del Río Tzalá
(municipio de Sipakapa; departamento de San Marcos), 9p.
Bianchini, Flaviano (2006). Estudio Técnico. Contaminación de agua en el área de
exlotación minera del proyecto San Martin, en el Valle de Siria y repercusiones
sobre la salud humana, 11p.
BIC (2005), Glamis en Guatemala: un boletín sobre la Mina Marlin, boletín nr 1, 7p.
Blacksmith Institute (2007). Annual Report 2007, 10p.
Broederlijk Delen, Alai (2008), Territorios y recursos naturales: El saqueo versus el
buen vivir, 221p.
Bullard, Robert D. (2000). Environmental Justice in the 21st century. In:
Environmental Justice Resource Centre. Peoply of Colour Environmental Groups
Directory.
CEH (s.d.). Guatemala. Memoria del Silencio. Caso illustrativo no 9. Available at
http://shr.aaas.org/guatemala/ceh/mds/spanish/toc.html. Last check 15 August
2008.
Compliance Advisor/Ombudsman (2005). Assessment of a complaint submitted to
CAO in relation to the Marlin Mine Project in Guatemala, 42p.
Coolen, Mario (2008). Nieuwe regering in Guatemala. Bescheiden hoop met Alvaro
Colom. Available at http://www.solidaridad.nl/. Last check 14 August 2008.
COPAE (2007), Madre Selva informs on the quality of the Tzalá River. Available at
http://www.resistance-mining.org/english/?q=node/48. Last check 14
August
2008.
COPAE (2007). Presentación de los nuevos Lineamientos de la Política Minera del
Estado. Available at http://www.resistencia-mineria.org/espanol/?q=node/68. Last
COPAE (2007). Residents of San Miguel Ixtahuacán obstruct entrance ways to the
Marlin mine. Available at http://www.resistance-mining.org/english/?q=node/49.
COPAE (2007). The World Bank’s other Paradigm. In: The Robust Oak, 2007 (12),
4p.
COPAE (2008). Civic Committee takes possession of the municipality in Sipacapa,
San Marcos. Available at http://www.resistance-mining.org/english/?q=node/80.
COPAE, (2008), Listado de municipios donde efectuaron “Consultas Comunitarias”
sobre la actividad minera química de metales en los departamentos de San
Marcos y Huehuetenango. 2p.
68
COPAE (2008), Montana prevents Guatemalan Authorities to enter the Marlin Mine.
Available at http://www.resistance-mining.org/english/?q=node/83. Last check 14
August 2008.
COPAE (2008). New Environmental Concern in San Marcos. Available at
http://www.resistance-mining.org/english/?q=node/63. Last check 14
August
2008.
Corporación Oro Verde, 2008. Our Work. Certified Green Gold Program. Available at
http://www.greengold-oroverde.org/ingles/oroverde_ing.html, last check 14 August
2008
Available at http://www.miningwatch.ca/index.php?/Skye/Barrio_Revolucion. Last
(Forthcoming) Debruyne, P. (2008), Voorbij het ecologische verdelingsconflict. De
ruimtelijk-ecologische strijd voor rechtvaardigheid in een volle wereld. In: Doom,
R., (2008). Conflict en ontwikkeling. In de grensgebieden van de globalisering.
Academia Press.
Defensoría Q’eqchi’ (2006), Land Conflicts in El Estor, Izabal, Guatemala & the
Rights
of
the
Maya
Q'eqchi'
People.
http://www.miningwatch.ca/index.php?/Skye/El_Estor_update.
Available
Last
check
at
14
August 2008.
De Walsche, Alma (2007), De ecologie van de armen. De ecologisch-economische
benadering van Joan Martinez-Alier. In: Oikos, forum voor sociaal-ecologische
verandering, 2007-2, pp.26-35.
Digiatlas, 2008. Guatemala. Available at www.digiatlas.com. Last check 12 August
2008.
Earthworks, Oxfam America (2007). Golden Rules. Making the case for responsible
mining, 40p.
Economic and Social Council (2006). Economic, social and cultural rights. Mission to
Guatemala, 24p.
Espada, Ramírez Espada (2008). CC resuelve contra Ley de Minería. In: La Prensa
Libre, 17 June 2008.
Fields, Scott (2001). Tarnishing the earth: Gold Mining’s dirty secret. In:
Environmental Health Perspectives, 109 (10), pp 474 - 481.
Girón, Wilbert (2006). Campesinos exigen tierras en area de minería, en Izabal.
Albedrío.org, 29 September 2006.
Glamis Gold Ltd. (2003). Glamis Gold receives key exploitation license for Marlin
project. News Release, 2p.
69
Global Footprint Network (2007). October 6 is Ecological Debt Day. Available at
http://www.footprintnetwork.org/gfn_sub.php?content=overshoot. Last check 11
August 2008.
Goldcorp (2008). Delivering growth. 07 Annual Report, 94p.
Goldcorp, 2008. Goldcorp “Company”, “Projects. Cerro Blanco” and “Projects.
Marlin”. Available at www.goldcorp.com. Last check 11 August 2008
Gómez, Rossana (2005), Minería, cuestiona responsabilidad del estado. License
Research for the Universidad de San Carlos de Guatemala, 7p.
Guatemala Community Network (2006). Stop Canadian Mining in Guatemala.
Available at
http://gcnetwork.ca/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=32&Itemid=31.
Henderson, Victoria L. (2006). Letter to Skye Resources Re: Fenix Project. Available
at http://www.miningwatch.ca/index.php?/Skye/Henderson_Skye_ltr/. Last check
14 August 2008.
HudBay Minerals Inc. (2008). HudBay Minerals and Skye Resources Announce
Proposed
Business
Combination.
Available
http://investor.shareholder.com/hbm/releasedetail.cfm?ReleaseID=317703.
at
Last
ILO , 2008, Report of the Committee set up to examine the representation alleging
non-observance by Guatemala of the Indigenous and Tribal Peoples Convention,
1989 (No. 169), made under article 24 of the ILO Constitution by the Federation of
Country and City Workers (FTCC). Available at: http://www.ilo.org/ilolex/cgilex/pdconv.pl?host=status01&textbase=iloeng&document=87&chapter=16&query
=%23Country%3D%2A&highlight=on&querytype=bool&context=0, Last check 08
July 2008.
Imai, Shin, Mehranvar, Ladan, et al. (2007). Breaching Indigenous Law: Canadian
Mining in Guatemala. In: Indigenous Law Journal, 6 (1), pp 101 – 139.
Jantzi Research Inc. (2008). Jantzi Research recommends Goldcorp as ineligible for
SRI portfolios, 3p.
Jones, P.T. & Jacobs, R. (2006), Terra Incognita. Globalisering, ecologie en
rechtvaardige duurzaamheid. Academia Press, 646p.
Lix, Beatriz (2008). CGN sube regalías de 1% al 4%. In: La Prense Libre, 8 april
2008.
Loarca, Carlos (2008), Las consultas de buena fe in Guatemala y la corta
interamericana de derechos humanos. Albedrío.org, May 2008, 20p.
70
Lucía Blas, Ana (2008). Reactivan debate para cambiar Ley de Minería. In: La
Prense Libre, 14 March 2008.
Madre Selva (2004), Principales mapas de minería de metales en Guatemala.
Powerpoint MadreSelva.
Madre Selva (2006). Caso: Expansión de Concesiones y Actividades Mineras en
Territoreo Guatemalteco. Powerpoint Madre Selva.
Maldorado, Marco Vinicio Lopez, Análisis. La industria minera en Guatemala: entre
el despojo y el etnocidio. In: Voces del tiempo, 56, pp. 14 – 17.
Martinez-Alier, J. (1994). The environment as a luxury good or “too poor to be
green”? In: Ecological Economics 13, pp 1 - 10.
Martinez-Alier, J. (2002), The Environmentalism of the Poor: A Study of Ecological
Conflicts and Valuation, Edward Elgar Pub, 272p.
Martinez-Alier, J. (2004), Ecological Distribution Conflicts and Indicators of
Sustainability. In: International Journal of Political Economy, 17p.
Martinez-Alier, J., Mining Conflicts, Environmental Justice and Valuation. In:
Ageyman Julian, Bullard Robert D., Evans Bob (2003a), Just Sustainabilities.
Development in an Unequal World, Earthscan, London, pp. 201 – 228.
McBain Brigitte, Bickel Ulricke (2005), Open Pit Gold Mining. Human Rights
Violations and Environmental Destruction – The Case of the Marlin Gold Mine –
San Marcos, Guatemala, FIANdocument d44e, 27p.
Meza, Dina (2008). Plomo, mercurio y arsénico fueron encontrados en pobladores
del Valle de Siria. Revistazo.com, 22 January 2008.
MEM, 2008. Ministerio de Energía y Minas. Dirección General de Minería. “Licencias
Mineras” and “Estadísticas Mineras. Licencias Mineras por departamento”.
Available at http://www.mem.gob.gt/Portal/Home.aspx?secid=52. Last check 11
August 2008.
Ministerio de Energía y Minas (2007). Lineamientos de política minera 2008 – 2012,
19p.
Ministeria de Enería y Minas (2004), Caracterización de la Minería en Guatemala.
Primer Foro Nacional de la Minería en Guatemala, 30p.
MiningWatch. Open letter to: the President of Skye Resources / Compañia de
Níquel, S.A., the President of the Republic of Guatemala and the Minister of
Energy
and
Mines.
August
12
2005.
Available
at
http://www.miningwatch.ca/index.php?/skye/open_letter_to_guate. Last check 11
August 2008.
Montana Exploradora de Guatemala, S. A. (2003), Estudio de Evaluación de Impacto
Ambiental y Social “Proyecto Mina Marlin”, 539p.
71
Montana Exploradora de Guatemala, S.A. (2008). Environmental and Social
Performance Annual Monitoring Report (AMR) Marlin Mine, 67p.
Moran Robert E. (2004), New Country, Same Story: Review of the Glamis Gold
Marlin Project EIA, 19p.
Muradian, R. & Martinez-Alier, J., (2002), Trade and the environment: from a
Southern perspective. Ecological Economics 36, Nr. 2, pp 281-298.
Organizaciones del Municipio, Parroquia de Sipacapa (2006), Programa de
Desarollo del Municipio de Sipacapa, Departamento de San Marcos, 81p.
Oxfam Amerika, 2008. Oxfam Amerika. The Defense of El Estor. Available at:
http://www.oxfamamerica.org/workspaces/where_we_work/camexca/news_public
ations/art5304.html. Last check: 11 August 2008.
Paley, Dawn (2007). This is what development looks like: Skye Resources and Land
Reoccupation
in
Guatemala.
Available
at
http://www.miningwatch.ca/index.php?/Skye/Evictions_in_El_Estor. Last check 14
August 2008.
Paley, Dawn (2008). Goldcorp: Occupation and Resistance in Guatemala (and
Beyond). Available at http://www.dominionpaper.ca/weblogs/dawn/1887. Last
Paredis, E., Geprangd tussen olie, reuzengarnalen en stortplaatsen. De wereldwijde
strijd voor ecologische rechtvaardigheid. In: De Gids op Maatschappelijk Gebied,
nr. 5, mei 2005, pp. 30-41.
Paredis, E. (2004). 'Environmental justice', verrijking van duurzame ontwikkeling met
een machtsanalyse en een rechtenbenadering. Seminarie van de Duurzame
Raad voor Duurzame Ontwikkeling 'Over Environmental Justice', 12 februari
2004, 20p.
Peace Brigades International (2006). Metal Mining and Human Rights in Guatemala.
The Marlin Mine in San Marcos, 35p.
Peasant Workers Movement (2006). Where did the mining companies’ ethics go?
Available at http://www.miningwatch.ca/index.php?/Goldcorp/Mining_ethics. Last
Procuraduría de Los Derechos Humanos, Unidad de Estudio y Análisis (2005).
Tema: La Minería y los Derechos Humanos, 43p.
Ramirez, Chiqui (2008). Que es (M.C.A.) la Minería a Cielo Abierto? Albedrío.org, 1
July 2008.
72
Rey Rosa, Magali (2006), More mining problems: metal mining is causing increased
problems and the situation is getting out of control. In: La Prensa Libre, 22
September 2006.
Rights
Action
(2007).
Violent
evictions
in
El
Estor.
Video
available
at
http://nl.youtube.com/watch?v=Q20YxkM-CGI. Last check 15 August 2008.
Rights Action (2008). Death Threats and Persecution Following Power Disruption to
Marlin
Mine
in
San
Marcos,
Guatemala.
Available
at
http://breakingthesilencenet.blogspot.com/2008/07/urgent-actioncrackdown-onlocal.html. Last check 15 August 2008.
Rights Action (2008), Local Democracy & Indigenous Rights versus Goldcorp inc.,
Global Investors, the Canadian Government, the International Community, etc.
Available
at
http://rightsaction2.org/articles/goldcorp_vs_democracy_03_30_08.html.
Last
Rodríguez, J. (2007), Gold Mine Worsens Social Tensions. Available at
http://mimundo-jamesrodriguez.blogspot.com/2007/07/gold-mine-worsens-socialtensions.html. Last check 14 August 2008.
Ross, Michael (2001). Extractive sectors and the poor. Oxfam America Report, 24p.
Russell, Graham (2007). Goldcorp Inc. mining company in Honduras. Available at
http://www.ccdhal.org/Goldcorp-mining-in-HONDURAS-Health-andEnvironmental-harms. Last check 15 August 2008.
Sachs, Wolfgang, Santarius, Tilman (ed.) (2007). Fair Future. Resource conflicts,
security & Global Justice. Zed Books, 276p.
Sandoval, Miguel Angel (2008). Que occurre en Sipakapa? Albedrío.org, 28 July
2008.
Saunders Sakura ed. (2008), Investing in Conflict. Public money, private gain:
Goldcorp in the Americas, Rights Action, 26p.
Skye Resources (2006), Public Consultation Process, The Fénix Mining Project.
Available at http://www.skyeresources.com/community/in_the_news. Last check
11 August 2008.
Skye Resources, 2008. Skye Resources. “Fénix Project > Geological Setting”,
“Raxche” and “Information and Resources”. Available at www.skyeresources.com.
Skye Resources (2008), Skye Provides Update on Fenix Project and announces first
quarter
results.
News
13
May
2008.
Available
at
http://www.skyeresources.com/news/2008_skye-provides-update-on-fenix-projectan. Last check 14 August 2008.
73
Skye Resources (2008), Skye Resources Defers Fenix Project Financing in View of
Credit
Market
Conditions.
News
30
January
’08.
Available
at
http://www.skyeresources.com/news/2008_skye-resources-defers-fenix-projectfina. Last check 14 August 2008.
Social Alert (2007). Guatemala 10 years after the Peace Accords. Social Alert
Reports on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, 31p.
Solano, Luis (2005). Guatemala petróleo y minería en las entrañas del poder, 169p.
Solano, Luis (2005), No todo lo que brilla es oro. Minería, petróleo y poder en
Guatemala. Inforpress Centroamericana. Enforme Especial, 4p.
Vandenbroucke Esther. Interview Oscar Rolas, 16 June 2008.
Vandenbroucke Esther. Interview Magali Rey Rosa, 9 March 2008.
Vandenbroucke Esther. Interview Dirk Govaert, 15 May 2008.
Vandenbroucke Esther. Notes of lecture Juan Martinez-Alier. Colloquium Ecollogical
Economics, 24 February 2007.
Valiente, Fausto (2008), Monitoreo y analisis de calidad del agua de los ríos Tzala
(parte alta y parte baja), Quivichil, Xkus (nacimiento del río Quivichil) y efluente
del dique de cola de la mina Marlin en San Miguel Ixtahuacán y Sipacapa, San
Marcos, Guatemala, COPAE, 6p.
Vogt, Daniél (2005), Hundreds of Q’eqchi’ Mayan protest Guatemalans granting
Skye
Resources
Nickel
Exploration
License.
Available
at
http://www.minesandcommunities.org/article.php?a=942. Last check 15 August
2008.
Vogt, Daniel (2005). ILO Investigates Claim Charging Violation of Convention 169
Regarding
Skye
Resources’
Guatemalan
Nickel
Project.
Available
at
http://www.miningwatch.ca/index.php?/Skye/ILO_Investigates_Cla/ Last check 14
August 2008.
World Bank, 2008. Topics. Oil, Gas, Mining and Chemicals. Glamis Gold Ltd.'s
Montana
Exploradora
Marlin
Project
in
Guatemala.
Available
at
web.worldbank.org. Last check 14 august 2008.
Wiig, Henrik (2008). Promoting Respect for the Collective Rights of the
Q’eqchi’Population. An evaluation of AEPDI in El Estor, Guatemala. NIBR
Working Paper 2008:102, 37p.
74
Appendices
Appendice 1: Mining companies in Guatemala in 2004, San Marcos (green), Izabal
(yellow)215
Empresas Mineras
Mineral metálico que explota
Departamentos donde opera
Minera Quetzal
Compañía Internacional Minera S.A.
Juan Diaz (Sacramento)
Minas de Guatemala S.A.
Exploración de Minas y Canteras
Lee P. Mosheim
Edgar Antonio Diaz Davila
Cooperativa Juventud Minera
Chisja I
Montana Exploradora de Guatemala
Jorge Luis Avalos Asturias
Geominas S. A.
Richard Keit Corbin
Compañía Minera El Cóndor S. A.
Gregory Arnold Vanclieaf
Representaciones Químicas S. A.
Químicos S. A.
Ruben Riveiro Champey
Roselina Sagastume
Entre Mares de Guatemala, S. A.
Pedro R. Garcia Varela
Exploraciones Mineras de Guatemala S. A.
Sociedad de energía creativa, S. A.
Bruno Monturi Vecchi
Michael Harold Barady
Elizabeth Haidacher Avila
José David Albizurez Del Cid
Edgar Rolando Vicentt Jaramillo
Minera Mayamérica
Exmingua, S. A.
Zinc centroamérica, S. A.
Industria del sulfato, S. A.
Exploraciones Mineras de Centroamérica, S. A.
Walter Orlando Mendez
Motagua Resources S. A.
Pedro Rafael García Varela
Jaime Fernanfo Pérez Morales
Productos Mineros de Guatemala, S. A.
Jesús Alfredo Erchila De León
Exportaciones y Servicios, S. A.
Gladys Annabella Morfín Mansilla
María Evangelista Puente de Marías
Josefina Granados López de Tello
Exmibal
Juan Gilberto Barrientos
Virgilio C. Recinos
Fernando Santucci
Teodoro Recinos
plata, plomo
oro
plomo, plata
plomo, plata y otros
Magnesita
Magnesita
plomo, plata y zinc
plomo
Oxido de hierro
oro, plata, cobre, plomo, zinc, niquel
oro, plata, cobre, plomo, zinc, etc.
oro, plata, zinc
oro, plata
oro
oro, plata
oro, plata, cobre
oro, plata, cobre
oro, plata, cobre
oro, plata
oro, plata
oro, plata
oro, plata
oro, plata
Niquel
oro, plata
oro, plata, niquel, cobalto, cromo, etc
oro, plata, hierro, zinc, cobre, cadmio
oro
oro, plata, cobre, plomo, zinc
Asociados (?), oro
Cobre, plomo, zinc, oro, plata
Oro y asociados
oro, plata, cobre, plomo, zinc, aluminio
Plomo y plata
Niquel, cromo, cobalto, Fe
Plomo
Plomo y plata
plata
plomo
Alta Verapaz
Izabal
Huehuetenango
Huehuetenango
Izabal
Izabal
Alta Verapaz
Huehuetenango
Chiquimula
San Marcos, Huehuetenango, Quetzaltenango, Suchitepéquez, Sololá
Baja Verapaz, Huehuetenango
San Marcos, Huehuetenango, Quiche
Zacapa
Chiquimula
Izabal
Quiche
Huehuetenango, Alta Verapaz
Guatemala
Baja Verapaz y Alta Verapaz
San Marcos, Jutiapa, Chiquimula, Guatemala, Jalapa, El Progreso, Huehuetenango, Quetzaltenango
Guatemala
San Marcos, Huehuetenango, Quiche, Totonicapan, Guatemala, Chiquimula, Jutiapa
Baja Verapaz
Huehuetenango
Jalapa
Izabal, Chimaltenango, Guatemala, Totonicapán, Quiché
Chiquimula
Chimaltenango, Huehuetenango, Totonicapán, Baja Verapaz
Izabal (El Estor), Alta Verapaz
Izabal (Morales), Chiquimula, Zacapa, El Progreso
Huehuetenango
El Progreso
Baja Verapaz, El Progreso
Jalapa
San Marcos, Alta Verapaz, Zacapa, Guatemala, El Progreso, Chimaltenango
San Marcos,Chiquimula, Huehuetenango, Jutiapa
Guatemala
Guatemala, Chimaltenango
Baja Verapaz, El Progreso, Alta Verapaz, Quiche
Quiche, Chimaltenango, Sololá, Guatemala
San Marcos, Totonicapán, Huehuetenango, Quiche, Sololá, Verapaces
Jutipa
Huehuetenango
Izabal (El Estor)
Huehuetenango
Huehuetenango
Guatemala
Huehuetenango
215
Madre Selva (2004), Principales mapas de minería de metales en Guatemala. Powerpoint Madre
Selva.
75

voorblad thesis

Transcription

Similar documents

Field Trip to Toveco Mining, Tripp and Clark Mines in New

Guatemala

ENCOUNTER GUATEMALA

NBI Complaint vs Tallado PDF 13 - Sagip

Guatemala

Implications El Projecto de Agua Pura/The Clean Water Project: An

endako mine - MineralsEd

May June 2010 - Mission Erickson

David`s Newsletter 03/31/15 It is “Semana Santa” (Holy Week) here

Mining Park of Almadén