Quantcast

The Goldman Environmental Foundation announced today the six recipients of the 2017 Goldman Environmental Prize, the world's largest award for grassroots environmental activists.

Awarded annually to environmental heroes from each of the world's six inhabited continental regions, the Goldman Prize recognizes grassroots activists for significant achievement to protect the environment and their communities.

The winners will be awarded the prize at an invitation-only ceremony at 5:30 p.m. Monday at the San Francisco Opera House (this event will be live streamed online). A ceremony at the Ronald Reagan Building and International Trade Center in Washington, DC will follow on April 26.

This year's winners are:

Rodrigue Mugaruka Katembo, Democratic Republic of Congo

Putting his life on the line, Rodrigue Katembo went undercover to document and release information about bribery and corruption in the quest to drill for oil in Virunga National Park, resulting in public outrage that forced the company to withdraw from the project.

Goldman Environmental Prize

Prafulla Samantara, India

An iconic leader of social justice movements in India, Prafulla Samantara led a historic 12-year legal battle that affirmed the indigenous Dongria Kondh's land rights and protected the Niyamgiri Hills from a massive, open-pit aluminum ore mine.

Goldman Environmental Prize

Uroš Macerl, Slovenia

Uroš Macerl, an organic farmer from Slovenia, successfully stopped a cement kiln from co-incinerating petcoke with hazardous industrial waste by rallying legal support from fellow activists and leveraging his status as the only citizen allowed to challenge the plant's permits.

Goldman Environmental Prize

Wendy Bowman, Australia

In the midst of an onslaught of coal development in Australia, octogenarian Wendy Bowman stopped a powerful multinational mining company from taking her family farm and protected her community in Hunter Valley from further pollution and environmental destruction.

Goldman Environmental Prize

mark! Lopez, United States

Born and raised in a family of community activists, mark! Lopez persuaded the state of California to provide comprehensive lead testing and cleanup of East Los Angeles homes contaminated by a battery smelter that had polluted the community for over three decades.

Goldman Environmental Prize

Rodrigo Tot, Guatemala

An indigenous leader in Guatemala's Agua Caliente, Rodrigo Tot led his community to a landmark court decision that ordered the government to issue land titles to the Q'eqchi people and kept environmentally destructive nickel mining from expanding into his community.

Goldman Environmental Prize

First look at new NASA satellite map reveals global carbon dioxide hotspots. NASA

By Lauren McCauley

The amount of carbon in the Earth's atmosphere is now officially off the charts as the planet last week breached the 410 parts per million (ppm) milestone for the first time in human history.

"It's a new atmosphere that humanity will have to contend with, one that's trapping more heat and causing the climate to change at a quickening rate," wrote Climate Central's Brian Kahn. "Carbon dioxide hasn't reached that height in millions of years."

The milestone was recorded Tuesday at the Mauna Loa Observatory in Hawaii by the Keeling Curve, a program of the Scripps Institution of Oceanography at University of California San Diego. Since the planet reached the dangerous new normal of 400 ppm last year, scientists have warned that that the accelerated rate at which concentrations of CO2 are rising means that humanity is marching further and further past the symbolic red line towards climate chaos.

What's more, as Aarne Granlund, a graduate student researching climate change at the University of the Arctic, pointed out, the recording was taken before carbon levels are expected to reach their annual peak, meaning they could soon notch even higher.

But despite the unprecedented threat, climate action has ground to a halt in the U.S. under the leadership of President Donald Trump and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency chief Scott Pruitt, forcing campaigners and concerned citizens to take to the streets in droves to prompt the government to do something to address the threat of planetary devastation.

Saturday's March for Science saw tens of thousands of people rally in Washington, DC and across the world to send a message to the Trump administration that governance should be based on research and facts—not ideology.

Speaking at the march in San Diego, Ralph Keeling, director of the CO2 program at Scripps whose father founded the Keeling Curve, gave an impassioned speech on why legislators need to abandon the partisan effort to stymie environmental legislation, declaring: "The climate change debate has been over for decades."

Now, infused by the energy of the March for Science, campaigners are gearing up for next weekend's Peoples Climate March with a week of action that centers on creating a just transition away from fossil fuels.

"The Peoples Climate March is the next step for the March for Science, a call to get more engaged in our political system, to confront power and to demand solutions," explained May Boeve, executive director of 350.org.

"The demands we will put forward—respect for Indigenous peoples, investments in communities on the front lines of the climate crisis, transitioning from fossil fuels to 100 percent clean energy economy that works for all and more," Boeve continued, "highlight the intersections between our different struggles and the common solutions we can work for together."

Dubbed "From Truth to Justice: Earth Day to May Day 2017," the more than 50 events in the lead-up to Saturday will include strategy sessions, a massive youth convergence, the introduction of a 100 percent Clean Energy Bill in Congress and non-violent direct actions.

On Friday, activists will form "Mother Earth's red line" on the Capitol lawn to symbolize the multiple lines that must not be crossed by corporations and governments in the increasingly severe climate crisis, organizers said.

"This is about strength in unity; diverse groups of people are coming together like never before and are creating a red line of protection against capitalism, militarism and racism," said Kandi Mossett, Indigenous energy and climate campaign organizer with the Indigenous Environmental Network, one of the group's organizing the direct action. "We are here to push for solutions like Indigenous rights, divestment and renewable energy as we continue to fight for a just transition away from a fossil fuel based economy."

Reposted with permission from our media associate Common Dreams.

Sponsored
Indigenous Women's Divestment delegates outside of Credit Suisse in Zurich, Switzerland before their meeting with the bank. (L-R) Michelle Cook, Tara Houska, Autumn Chacon, Wasté Win Young and Dr. Sarah Jumping Eagle. Photo credit: Osprey Orielle Lake / WECAN

By Osprey Orielle Lake

Despite the termination of the Environmental Impact Statement for the Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL) by the U.S. Trump administration and the oil now filling the pipeline beneath the Standing Rock Sioux people's sacred Lake Oahe—Indigenous women leaders and their global allies remain unyielding in their quest for justice and healing regarding the violations of Indigenous rights and human rights being carried out through the development of DAPL and other fossil fuel projects across North America.

With determination and courage, a delegation of Indigenous women from Standing Rock and their allies who observed and experienced rights violations in North Dakota due to the construction of the Dakota Access Pipeline, recently traveled to Norway and Switzerland to share their on-the-ground experiences as Indigenous women who are living and working in communities directly impacted by fossil fuel development and infrastructure.

Norway and Switzerland are home to some of the largest financial institutions investing in DAPL and in corporations that orchestrate pipeline projects, despite global and national reputations as countries with high ethical standards and respect for human rights.

Seeking to make known the impacts being felt in North Dakota as a direct result of the European investments, members of the Indigenous Women's Divestment Delegation engaged with representatives of financial institutions and government leaders, civil society groups and public forums to provide first-hand testimony on the impacts of extractive industries, oil spills and contamination in their homelands—as well as to raise urgent calls for international solidarity, justice, divestment from dirty energy and a transition to renewable energy.

"Making Indigenous human rights abuses visible is critical in ending human rights abuses against Indigenous peoples. Indigenous women deserve spaces where they can share their personal testimonies regarding the impacts of extractive industries on their lands, lives, bodies and human rights," Michelle Cook, Diné human rights lawyer and a founding member of the of the Water Protector Legal Collective at Standing Rock, explained in advance of the divestment trip, "this delegation provides the rare opportunity for Indigenous women to meet face to face with the international banks who fund DAPL and oil and gas extraction in their traditional territories."

In Norway, the delegation met with Den Norske Bank (DNB); the Council on Ethics for the Government Pension Fund Global, commonly known as the Norwegian Oil Fund; the Norwegian Parliament; a delegation of Sami Indigenous peoples of the region; and with Norway's Sami President, Vibeke Larsen.

Police use tear gas against peaceful protectors standing in freezing temperatures to protect the water.Honor the Earth

The delegation members provided compelling and graphic testimony during each of their meetings, calling for full divestment and withdrawal of support by international financiers of DAPL and conveying in detail the militarization and abuses of law enforcement at Standing Rock, which include the use of attack dogs, mace, rubber bullets, concussion grenades, intrusive surveillance, water cannons and other physical violence against those involved in nonviolent direct actions based in traditional prayer, freedom of speech and peaceful assembly.

"The inevitable pipeline break on the river will result in catastrophic contamination of the water supply for 17 million people downstream, including our people. This sends a direct message that our people are expendable," explained Standing Rock Sioux leader and former tribal historic preservation officer, Waste' Win Young, making known to the banks that her people would not be deterred in their work to maintain "a physical and spiritual presence on our ancestral lands."

"This movement has and always will be guided by prayer and love. Wóčhekiye. Wóthehila. Wówauŋšila. Prayer. Love. Compassion." Young explained.

In their testimonies the women called for justice and rule of law, drawing upon the recent report from the UN Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, which confirms that the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe had been the subject of violation of international Indigenous and human rights law due to the failure of processes of consultation and consent affirmed and recognized by the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, which has been adopted by both the governments of Norway and Switzerland.

The delegation advocated for the Norwegian Oil Fund to change their guidelines and standards to properly address Indigenous and human rights abuses and, while the women were in Norway, DNB bank fully divested its $331 million USD credit line to DAPL. Through inputs from diverse groups and an independent investigation, DNB had confirmed the lack of consultation with the Standing Rock Sioux and the violation of Indigenous rights.

The presence of the Indigenous Women's Divestment Delegation in Norway helped tipped the scales for the DNB divestment and during the delegation meeting with the bank, the women spoke out to encourage the bank to advocate for the other 15 international banks engaged in DAPL and the Norwegian Oil Fund to follow their example.

When the DNB representatives were asked by delegation members if they would invest in the controversial Keystone XL pipeline resurrected under the Trump administration, they flatly stated that after their experience with Standing Rock, they would not touch Keystone.

Indeed, the movement to pull funding from the Dakota Access Pipeline is gaining traction, with cities, tribes and individuals across the world removing over five billion dollars of DAPL investments, according to public statistics collected by the DeFundDAPL collective.

"In the 21st century, an investment in dated, entrenched, dirty fossil fuels is an investment against our children and our future. Indigenous peoples bear the brunt of the many harms associated with extractive industry, our communities are impacted first and worst. We must break the cycle of oil dependency and justly transition to a green economy," urged delegation member Tara Houska, an Anishinaabe tribal attorney, national campaigns director of Honor the Earth and former advisor on Native American affairs to Bernie Sanders.

The delegation meets with members of the Norwegian Parliament. Also pictured with the Indigenous women delegates and Parliamentarians: Tanyette Colon (documentarian and delegation supporter) and Osprey Orielle Lake (delegation organizer, Women's Earth and Climate Action Network).

In their meetings, delegation members also spoke about the traditional role women hold as protectors of water in their communities and the responsibility each person has to care for the web of life. Dr. Sara Jumping Eagle, Oglala Lakota and Mdewakantonwan Dakota living and working on the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation, elucidated on this point:

"The connections between who we are as Lakota Oyate—our health, our lands and water, our spirituality, our self-empowerment and self-esteem—are deeply rooted; the actions we take to protect our land and water, our future and our children's water can only help us all. We all have the power—wowasake—within us to make a difference in this world."

Following strong advocacy in Norway, the delegation received requests to travel to Switzerland to continue work to highlight human rights and Indigenous rights violations and demand pipeline divestment, arranging meetings with Credit Suisse bank and UBS, a Swiss global financial services company.

In Norway the 'Indigenous Women's Divestment Delegation: Experiences From Standing Rock' members (left to right) Dr. Sarah Jumping Eagle, Tara Houska, Michelle Cook, Autumn Chacon and Wasté Win YoungOsprey Orielle Lake/WECAN

"The meeting with Credit Suisse fulfilled all my expectations of a bank that tries to pretend it is removed from the atrocities happening on the ground," explained Tara Houska, "that said, I think it was very powerful for them to see our faces first hand and to hear the experiences of people at Standing Rock and to know that their money is invested in the company that is creating this pipeline project and causing destruction to real people. We are in the era of renewable energy; we have alternatives to the fossil fuel industry. We are asking the Swiss people to stand with us and to recognize that the actions they take affect others around the world and that simply because it's out of sight and out of mind does not mean that this is not actually happening. Divestment is the next wave of direct action against these corporations."

Autumn Chacon, a Diné artist, water protector and divestment delegate commented further:

"Here we have one of the most powerful banks in the world, doing business with unethical corporations in the U.S. who have undermined the law and human rights. Credit Swiss bank wants to relinquish any direct tie to genocide of American Indians, however in this case, we all see the bank as the enabler of the abuser."

Delegates hold a press conference in the center of the financial district in Zurich, Switzerland.

Credit Suisse bank has agreed to a follow-up communication with the delegation in two months time after an internal discussion process for reviewing and applying their respective guidelines.

As delegate Dr. Sarah Jumping Eagle reported:

"Credit Swiss was receptive to our description of the human rights abuses that occurred during the protests. Yet, they are still in denial about their direct financing of the corrupt Energy Transfer Partner Corporation and its role in the Dakota Access pipeline project. Credit Swiss is attempting to distance themselves from these violations of Indigenous rights and human rights abuses. On a positive note, they said that they would review their internal policies and procedures to take into account Indigenous and human rights."

Waste' Win Young (Standing Rock Sioux Tribe) is interviewed by the Swiss press during the delegation.Osprey Orielle Lake / WECAN

The Indigenous Women's Divestment Delegation was organized and facilitated by the Women's Earth and Climate Action Network (WECAN) International in response to the leadership and request of frontline Indigenous women seeking financial divestment from DAPL and other fossil fuel developments which threaten the lives, rights and cultural survival of their nations and peoples.

As has been demonstrated everyday on-the-ground at Standing Rock and during the divestment delegation—Indigenous women are the backbone and future of their tribal nations and now more than ever, it is essential that we stand with frontline women as they act for protection of water and land, a transition to clean energy and a halt to escalating climate change.

The various bank and government representatives who heard the women speak will not be the same again after hearing first-hand experiences of rights violations and the women's demands for no more fossil fuel extraction on their lands, respect for Indigenous rights and sovereignty, human rights and the rights of nature.

Globally, it is time for financial institutions to listen to the voices of Indigenous women leaders and their allies as they call for accountability to people and planet. Delegation members, WECAN and diverse leaders across the U.S. and around the world will continue divestment advocacy and actions until there are genuine results founded in justice and care for the futures of all of our children. Together, we must fight to restore the health of our communities, divest from dirty energy, invest and transition to renewable energy and build the just world we seek.

Osprey Orielle Lake is the founder and executive director of the Women's Earth and Climate Action Network (WECAN) International and serves on the Executive Committee for the Global Alliance for the Rights of Nature. She was asked to organize and facilitate the Indigenous Women's Divestment Delegation and is the author of the award-winning book Uprisings for the Earth: Reconnecting Culture with Nature. Follow on Twitter @WECAN_INTL.

In a historic verdict in defense of forests and human rights, a court in Central Kalimantan has ordered the government of the Indonesian province to review the permits of palm oil companies associated with massive forest and peat land fires in 2015.

The case against the government in Central Kalimantan was filed in 2016 by seven Indonesian citizens and supported by Friends of the Earth Indonesia (WALHI), following a 2-month mediation process. Among the evidence presented were findings previously presented in the report, Up in Smoke, published in 2015 by WALHI and Friends of the Earth member groups in the U.S. and Europe.

"While many of the world's largest palm oil producers have pledged to voluntarily address the massive environmental and human rights impacts of their business, its clear that legal action is required to hold them accountable," said Jeff Conant, senior international forests campaigner with Friends of the Earth U.S. "This decision by the court in Central Kalimantan is a historic step in ensuring the government does what's needed to limit the damage from this sector."

Palm oil from Central Kalimantan is in thousands of consumer food products and cosmetics on the global market, as well as in biofuels in many countries; numerous palm oil companies implicated in the decision receive financing from a broad range of banks and institutional investors in the U.S., including Goldman Sachs, JPMorganChase, Vanguard and the pension fund managers TIAA and CalPERS.

"This decision should also make it clear to the financiers of the sector that the risks of investment in palm oil continue unabated," Conant added.

The 2015 Indonesian forest fires lasted for months and caused massive air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions, at one point releasing more carbon dioxide than the entire U.S. economy and causing an estimated 100,000 premature deaths in the region. In 2016, four United Nations special rapporteurs sent a letter to the president of Indonesia urging his government to address the fire and haze crisis as an urgent matter of protection of human rights.

"This verdict is important not just to us, but to future generations," said Ari Rompas, director of WALHI Central Kalimantan. "The judge recognized that the environment is a heritage to be preserved for future generations. It is therefore important that the government does not waste time in appealing this verdict, but ensures that companies respect the law and stop the forest fires."

WALHI analyzed satellite data of 181 palm oil company concessions from the 2015 fire season. The largest plantation land banks included in the study are owned by Wilmar International, Bumitama Gunajaya Agro, Sinar Mas, Best Agro International and Genting group. According to WALHI, the verdict means that these companies can now effectively be brought to justice.

"The judge made clear that the local government needs to ensure that companies stop the forest fires," Rompas continued. "The companies need to allocate much more resources in order to prevent forest fires."

To date, the companies implicated in the verdict have not responded. The local government is now considering appealing the verdict. With a severe dry season predicted for 2017, it is imperative that the Indonesian government act quickly to adopt measures that enforce the court's decision.

The Verdict

In its ruling, the court ordered the central government to:

  • Review and revise the permits of all plantation companies, whether implicated in the 2015 fires or not;
  • Actively enforce civil and criminal laws to penalize companies whose concessions were implicated in the 2015 fires;
  • Inform the public regarding the affected land and the companies that own concessions implicated in the fires.

In addition, the central government of Indonesia is required to:

  • Form a joint team on forest fire management consisting of the Ministry of Environment and Forestry, the Ministry of Agriculture and the Ministry of Health;
  • Build a respiratory medicine hospital and an evacuation room for people affected by forest fires.

"The victory of this citizen's lawsuit in Central Kalimantan and previously in Riau Province, build momentum for the government to protect human rights, especially of vulnerable groups such as children, whose health is threatened by haze pollution from forest fires," said Khalisah Khalid, head of campaign and network development at WALHI. "The UN Human Rights Council should continue to remind the government of Indonesia to hold corporate actors accountable for their role in the fires," he continued.

European Parliament Votes to Clamp Down on Palm Oil Imports

Palm oil's environmental footprint was also raised in a European Parliament vote this week that called for a phase-out of palm oil as a component of biofuels by 2020.

Sponsored
Photo credit: iStock

By Amanda Maxwell and Anthony Swift

President Trump has made renegotiating the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) one of the main goals for his administration and has recently revealed the general plan to do so.

As this process moves forward, the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), Sierra Club and our partners across a broad range of sectors are calling on the administration to include eight critical issues among their priorities in changing NAFTA, outlined below. We want to ensure that any new provisions in NAFTA result in a transparent agreement that supports—and does not undermine—a more stable climate, clean air and water, healthy communities, indigenous peoples and good jobs.

In the 23 years since NAFTA's signing, the economies of Mexico, Canada and the U.S. have become intertwined and interdependent, with $1.1 trillion in trade moving among the three countries in 2016. During those decades, too, new issues such as climate change, clean energy and sustainability, have moved to the forefront of international relations. So, while it remains unclear exactly how and to what extent the Trump administration will change this accord, there are several critical provisions that should be included to improve the lives of people living and working in all three countries and the environments they depend on.

NRDC is pleased to ally with 350.org, Center for Biological Diversity, Center for Food Safety, Defenders of Wildlife, Earthjustice, Friends of the Earth, Global Exchange, Green America, Greenpeace USA, Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy, League of Conservation Voters, Food & Water Watch, Sierra Club and U.S. Human Rights Network in calling on the Trump administration to include the following eight issues among their priorities in changing NAFTA:

1. Eliminate rules that empower corporations to attack environmental and public health protections in unaccountable tribunals. NAFTA's investor-state dispute settlement system allows multinational corporations—e.g. ExxonMobil and TransCanada—to bypass our courts, go to private tribunals and demand money from taxpayers for policies that affect corporate bottom lines. Corporations have used NAFTA to challenge bans on toxic chemicals, decisions of environmental review panels and protections for our climate. They have extracted more than $370 million from governments in these cases and pending NAFTA claims total more than $50 billion. What's more, the cases are heard not by judges, but by corporate lawyers outside the normal court system.

2. Incorporate strong, enforceable environmental and labor standards into the core text of the agreement. To address environmental and labor issues, NAFTA created side agreements which are non-binding and have limitations. As a result, they have been relatively ineffective. To ensure that the new terms of a revised trilateral trade agreement create and uphold a fair playing field for environmental and labor conditions, these two areas must be included inside the core text of the agreement. That means that a country that fails to live up to its environmental obligations will be subject to trade sanctions similar to the existing provisions for violation of commercial parts of the agreement. This will also require that countries live up to existing international agreements and address environmental challenges such as critical conservation challenges related to illegal timber trade, illegal wildlife trade and fisheries management.

3. Protect energy sector reform from backward-looking rules. NAFTA's energy chapter limits Canada's ability to restrict production of climate-polluting fossil fuels such as tar sands oil. The chapter, written before awareness of climate change was widespread, must be eliminated. Other NAFTA rules allow renewable portfolio standards, low-carbon fuel standards and other climate-friendly energy regulations to be challenged for impeding business for foreign fossil fuel firms. Such rules must be narrowed to protect climate policies in each country.

4. Restrict pollution from cross-border freight vehicles. NAFTA encouraged a rise in cross-border motor carrier traffic without doing anything to mitigate the resulting increase in harmful vehicle emissions. Any deal that replaces NAFTA must require cross-border freight vehicles to reduce emissions in order for their goods to benefit from reduced tariffs. In addition, all cross-border commercial vehicles must be required to comply with all state and federal standards to limit pollution.

5. Require green government purchasing instead of restricting it. NAFTA's procurement rules limit governments' ability to use "green purchasing" requirements that ensure government contracts support renewable energy, energy efficiency and sustainable goods. Any changes to NAFTA must require signatory governments to include a preference for goods and services with low environmental impacts in procurement decisions.

6. Bolster climate protections by penalizing imported goods made with high climate emissions. NAFTA allows firms to shift production to a country with lower climate standards, which can spur "carbon leakage" and job offshoring. To prevent this and encourage greater climate action from high-emissions trading partners, each country should be required to impose a border fee on imported goods whose production causes significant climate pollution.

7. Require governments to prioritize policies that minimize climate pollution. While NAFTA restricts climate policies that limit trade or investment, any replacement deal must instead put climate first. This includes requiring governments to use a "climate impact test" for policymaking, in which potential climate impacts of policy proposals are reported and weighed.

8. Add a broad protection for environmental and other public interest policies. NAFTA's many overreaching rules restrict the policy tools that governments can use to protect the environment and other broadly-shared priorities. NAFTA includes no provision that effectively shields public interest policies from such rules—only a weak "exception" in Article 2101 that has consistently failed to protect challenged policies. Instead, any deal that replaces NAFTA must include a broad "carve-out" that exempts public interest policies from all of the deal's rules.

If President Trump moves forward with altering NAFTA, any renegotiations must be conducted transparently through open processes, providing the public in all three countries with the opportunity to participate. We and our partners in the environmental, labor, health, consumer, agricultural and other communities will be eager to see whether President Trumps supports a renegotiated NAFTA that supports—and does not undermine—a more stable climate, clean air and water, healthy communities, indigenous peoples and good jobs.

Amanda Maxwell is the director of the Latin America Project at the Natural Resources Defense Council. Anthony Swift is the director of the Canada Project and the International Program at the Natural Resources Defense Council.

Politics
Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch. Photo credit: Shawn Thew / EPA

By A. Tianna Scozzaro

The Judiciary Committee confirmation hearings for Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch began this week, but the jury is still out on whether the judge will be confirmed.

Since being nominated, legislators and voters have raised concerns about what Gorsuch's potential confirmation could mean for women's rights, especially since his record shows a history of voting against women's interests.

In Burwell vs. Hobby Lobby, Gorsuch ruled to give corporations the right to deny their employees contraception coverage despite the Affordable Care Act mandate. This was based on the false statement that birth control medicine and devices have the effect of "destroying a fertilized human egg." The disregard for basic science and fact should be alarming to every single American.

Low-income communities and communities of color and the women who live within them face a greater risk of getting sick, losing their livelihoods, living in poverty and being displaced when weather disasters strike. Women's rights and environmental justice go hand in hand; to win the fight against environmental injustice we need to make sure all are able to lead healthy lives. Universal access to voluntary family planning and health services for women is critical to that goal.

Reproductive rights are just that: rights. Comprehensive reproductive health services are a vital way to help women plan their future and move toward full equality.

Hobby Lobby isn't the only case where Gorsuch has sought to limit women's right to reproductive health services. In a similar case filed to contest the Affordable Care Act's birth control mandate, Gorsuch dissented from a judicial panel's decision not to rehear a case for the Little Sisters of the Poor, after their attempt to secure their own exemption from the health care law's contraception requirement.

In order to protect our environment, we must protect our democracy. That means having three functioning branches of government where all the people's interests are represented. Gorsuch, the son of perhaps the most anti-environment head of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in its history (though Scott Pruitt is certainly seeking to outdo Ann Gorsuch), has a record of limiting access of everyday Americans to the courts. Serving as a check on the Executive Branch—a check that's more important now than ever given President Donald Trump's misguided and extreme executive actions—the Supreme Court must be filled by people who judge impartially, guided not by corporate interests but by our Constitution.

Without access to the courts, families can't fight back against coal plants polluting the air and causing asthma attacks in their children. Without access to the courts, families relying on bottled water after their water supply has been polluted can't fight to protect their right to clean water. Without access to the courts, women can't fight for their right to comprehensive reproductive healthcare. Limiting citizens access to the court limits our ability to protect vital public and environmental health safeguards. Gorsuch's dangerous judicial philosophy threatens our access to the courts in jeopardy.

The stakes are as high as they can be, and we are all taking note. Judge Gorsuch is not qualified to represent every American on the Supreme Court.

A. Tianna Scozzaro is the director of the Sierra Club's Gender Equity and Environment Program.

Sponsored

By Perry Wheeler

Following global pressure on pet food companies, industry giants Mars and Nestlé have announced that they will take steps to ensure their pet food supply chains are free of human rights abuses and illegally caught seafood. Their commitments to act on transshipping at sea increase the need for global seafood giant Thai Union, a supplier for both companies, to eliminate any outstanding risks of human rights abuses and illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing in its own supply chains.

Nestlé has committed to a full ban on transshipment at sea in its supply chains, while Mars has committed to suspend the use of transshipped products in its supply chains if its seafood suppliers cannot adequately address the human rights and illegal fishing issues associated with the practice in the coming weeks.

"Pet owners and activists have demanded that companies eliminate human rights abuses from their pet food supply chains. This move toward stopping out of control transshipment at sea means we're finally seeing results," said Greenpeace USA oceans campaigner Graham Forbes.

"These are the two largest pet food companies in the world and their commitments to address transshipping at sea will put significant pressure on suppliers like Thai Union to show the leadership needed to clean up their own seafood supply chains. We'll be closely monitoring Mars' and Nestlé's progress to ensure these policies lead to real changes on the water," added Forbes.

Greenpeace launched a campaign in 2016, Cats vs. Bad Tuna, to demand that Mars ensure its supply chains were free of any potential human rights abuses. A Greenpeace Southeast Asia report, Turn the Tide, demonstrated the unacceptably high risk of tainted seafood entering numerous supply chains throughout 2016, including Nestlé and Thai Union's. Nestlé immediately committed to address the concerns when they were raised in the report. Mars committed to tackle unchecked transshipment at sea in its pet food supply chains this month.

"Over the past several years, Nestlé and Greenpeace have worked together to strengthen Nestlé's policies governing the procurement and responsible sourcing of seafood," said Nestlé Purina PetCare head of sustainability Jack Scott. "In light of Greenpeace's research findings, Nestlé has committed to a ban on all transshipments at sea."

Transshipment is a process through which companies move fish from one vessel to another, enabling them to remain at sea for extended periods of time to plunder the oceans, dodge regulations and keep fishers as a captive workforce. In addition to its connections to human rights abuse, transshipment at sea provides an opportunity for illegal fishing vessels to unload their illegally caught loads into supply chains, away from port authorities. In 2015, an estimated 40 percent of these transfers happened on the high seas, outside of the jurisdiction of national authorities. Transshipment at sea has also been linked to other organized crime, including drug, weapon and wildlife trafficking.

Mars' and Nestlé's commitments send a strong message to Thai Union to address transshipment in its supply chains. Greenpeace is currently pressuring Thai Union to make sweeping changes for workers and our oceans across its seafood supply chains. Greenpeace has campaigned on Thai Union since 2015 and is asking the company to lead the seafood industry by ending transshipment at sea, addressing overfishing and destructive fishing and increasing traceability from sea to plate.

"Mars recognizes the risks of transshipment at sea. We want to see human rights respected and the environment protected in our seafood supply chains" said Isabelle Aelvoet, global sustainability director at Mars Petcare.

"The current problems associated with transshipment are serious and demand urgent attention. We are committed to working with our suppliers to remedy these problems, but if we cannot resolve these issues to our satisfaction quickly, we will seek to end the use of transshipped products in our supply chains until these serious problems are fixed."

Thursday's news follows a new report from Global Fishing Watch highlighting the problems with transshipment at sea. The report found that from 2012-2016, refrigerated cargo vessels participated in more than 5,000 likely transshipments. Concerns were raised about Mars and Nestlé supply chains in a 2015 New York Times investigation into human rights abuses at sea.

International Women's Day is celebrated each year around the world on March 8. That inaugural date is linked to a women's anti-war protest in Russia known as "Bread and Peace" in the early 1900's. It was quickly replicated around Europe in the following year as women took to the streets, embracing the indisputable connection between hunger and war, expressing solidarity with women's peace movements around the world and advocating for their countries' governments to end armed conflict.

Early on rallies and protests by women were firmly established as a mechanism for building international solidarity around a feminist agenda. And the echoes of that mechanism are still reverberating today, as millions of people around the world took to the streets in January of this year (notably the largest protest in U.S. history) to remind world leaders, especially the newly elected U.S. president, that women's rights are still human rights.

Magha Garcia is an eco-farmer and environmental activist. She is a member of the Organización Boricuá de Agricultura Ecológica, USA.

Today, International Women's Day is recognized and celebrated in nearly every country—from villages to cities, from the Global South to the Global North—and has taken on a variety of hues and is realized in a variety of ways—protests, song and dance, conferences, shared meals and conversation and volunteer work.

This March 8, in honor of International Women's Day, women organizers from around the world are amplifying their voices in resistance to the structural forms of violence against the Earth, all forms of life and especially women, as a result of the unmitigated growth of industrial agriculture and international agribusiness.

Industrial agriculture is the dominant form of food production in the U.S and, increasingly, around the world. The impacts of industrial agriculture on our health and our living environment are well-documented: pesticide toxicity, water pollution, processed food, antibiotic resistance, worker injustice.

Women, who are arguably the most responsible for food moving from field to table, have the most at stake. Women are responsible for 60 to 80 percent of food production in the Global South. And the share of U.S. farms operated by women has tripled in the past three decades. Official reports tell us that there are nearly 1 million women farmers in the U.S.—a vast underreporting when small-scale, subsistence and urban farms are added to that pool. We also know that women represent more than 43 percent of the agricultural workforce in the Global South and that 50 percent of food chain workers in the U.S. are women. And, according to the United Nations, women and girls around the world disproportionately suffer from hunger and food insecurity. Conservative estimates indicate that 60 percent of chronically hungry people are women and girls.

The statistics are important in understanding the vast impacts of industrial agriculture on women and their families, as well as the role women play in resisting those impacts. But it's the stories that women tell—their words and images—that bring to life the ways in which industrial agriculture and international agribusiness are structural forms of violence against the Earth, all peoples and especially women. It's not only the contamination of their bodies by agrochemicals—it's also the forced displacement, the division of families and the loss of loved ones that results from migration and land conflicts. It is the denial of the right to food—food that is accessible, both economically and physically, adequate in nutrition, affordable and sustainable in both production and consumption. It is the denial of the right to healthy soil and clean water for food production. It is the denial of the right to sustain one's family with dignity.

It is imperative; therefore, that women's voices are at the center of the debate about how to dismantle the current food regime and replace it with food sovereignty and agroecology. Though not yet mainstream concepts or practices, the work of grassroots organizations is beginning to result in a scaling out of agroecology in both rural and urban areas. And the leadership of women has played a significant role in making that possible.

In honor of International Women's Day, WhyHunger launched a new publication, Through Her Eyes: The Struggle for Food Sovereignty, which offers excerpts of interviews and dialogue with women organizers and food producers from the U.S. and globally in response to the question, "What are the impacts of industrial food and farming on women and how are women organizing to build an alternative?" This publication amplifies the voices of women who are on the frontlines in the ongoing struggle for land, water, localized economies and a world free of violence and hunger. It emerges in a moment when arguably a new world order is beginning to take shape.

In the face of economic and social systems in crisis and deepening inequality the world over, the struggle for food sovereignty, agroecology and climate justice is a struggle for more than just the right to food. It is a struggle for a new world order that centers the rights of women to live freely and safely and to lead in envisioning and crafting a world void of hunger and violence. This International Women's Day, join WhyHunger by standing in solidarity with women whose lived experiences are forging the path to food sovereignty.

mail-copy

Get EcoWatch in your inbox