 |
|||||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
Liens Sites
Web d'organisations importantes: Ressources sur l'industrie minière et la mondialisation en Inde : Mining
in India Orissa:
From "Backward" to "Investor's Paradise"?
(1997) Destroying
Orissa, Fueling Climate Change - A Joint Project of the World
Documents sur l'état d'Orissa et les enjeux du Kashipur : The
People’s Struggle Against Utkal Alumina Plant In Kasipur
(2002) ALCAN
Juggling with the Futures of Marginalized Peoples in India
(2003) Where
Assertion Is Insurrection (1999) Police
violence and mass detentions Echoes
no. 21 (2002) Orissa:
Mining Bauxite, Maiming People (2001) Profits
over people (2001) Adivasi
struggles against the aluminum industry continue in Orissa, east
India (1999?) Kashipur
Aluminia Projects And The Voice Of Tribals For Life And Livelihood
(1998?) Synopsis
of Report on Investigation into Maikanch shootings (2003?) Orissa:
A continuing denial of adivasi rights (2003) Nalco
smelter fluoride damages Orissa crops (2003) Utkal
continues without Norsk Hydro (2002) Various
Norwatch newsletter articles on Utkal from 1996-2001 Photographs Documents sur Alcan et l'industrie : Corporate
Social Responsibility and the Mining Industry (1998) The
MMSD Final Report, Breaking New Ground: The
MMSD Final Report - Chapter 7 - Principles
For The Conduct Of Company Operations Behind
the Shining - Aluminum's Dark Side (2001) Alcan
2003 Sustainability Report Seven
Questions to Sustainability - Alcan
CEO speech on Sustainability: A Critical Component of Successful
Business Models in the 21st Century (2004) World
alumina output seen rising to meet demand (2004) ALCAN
Commits to Releasing Documents Regarding Controversial Indian Project
(April 2004)
Les peuples autochtones, l'industrie minière et les droits de la personne : Draft
UN declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (1994) ILO
Convention 169 concerning Indigenous and Tribal Peoples in Independent
Countries
(1989) Defending
the Fifth Schedule (2001) Human
Rights Based Approach to Mining on Aboriginal Land (2002) [“Human rights constitute the ethical basis of the social contract between those who exercise power and accrue wealth, and those whose lives are affected by this exercise and accrual. Where such a relationship has no ethical basis and is inconsistent with human rights principles it is not a sustainable relationship. Coercion may prolong it for some time but this is costly to maintain and eventually becomes exhausted. Where human rights principles form the basis of a relationship between mining companies and Indigenous communities, then, by necessity it is a sustainable relationship based on free and informed consent.”] Human
Rights in the Minerals Industry (2002) [“Mining companies have been criticized for their complicity in the human rights abuses of people and indigenous populations at risk. This report provides a background and examines issues related to specific points of conflict concerning human rights where mining companies find themselves involved, specifically: the use of security companies to protect operations; the rights of indigenous people in the areas of mining operations; issues of conflict revolving around labor rights, especially the rights to organize; issues of pariah (or failing) states, such as Burma which are human rights abusers; and issues of conflict between sub-jurisdictions and national jurisdiction, and to what extent the mining company is subject to one or another when the two are in conflict.”] Indigenous
Peoples, Mining, and International Law (2002) [Re
indigenous land rights, “This piece will begin with an historical
account of the progressive development of the law, as driven by
European invasion and indigenous peoples’ resistance and negotiation.
With the legal framework in place, this piece will then outline
the structural transformations of the international legal system
that have ensued with the emergence of human rights standards and
supervisory bodies. This overview will conclude with a brief report
of past and ongoing work at the most active international institutions
in this ambit, including the United Nations and the World Bank.”] [“the resettlement effect, (is) defined as the loss of physical and non-physical assets, including homes, communities, productiveland, income-earning assets and sources, subsistence, resources, cultural sites, social structures, networks and ties, cultural identity and mutual help mechanisms. The effect introduces well-documented risks over and above the loss of land. The loss of land may address only 10-20% of the impoverishment risks known to be associated with involuntary displacement. Investigations into displacement have found nine other potential risks that deeply threaten sustainability; these include joblessness, homelessness, marginalization, food insecurity, loss of common lands and resources, increased health risks, social disarticulation, the disruption of formal educational activities, and the loss of civil and human rights. Failure to mitigate or avoid these risks may generate “new poverty,” as opposed to the “old poverty” that peoples suffered before displacement. Certain groups, especially indigenous peoples, the elderly and womenhave been found to be more vulnerable to displacement-induced impoverishment risks.”] Meaningful
Consultation and Participation in the Mining Sector? A Review [“This literature review attempts to synthesize and expand current knowledge concerning the consultation and participation of Indigenous peoples within the international mining sector. We provide an overview and synthesis of consultation and engagement practices, drawing from academic literature, as well as civil society, industry, and government initiatives. However, we also attempt to move the debate away from a narrowed focus on consultation. We argue that a shift toward “responsible” mining requires a broader approachthe meaningful participation of Indigenous peoples at both the consultation and decision-making level of natural resources management, including the right to prior informed consent. Mining
and Indigenous Peoples (2003) [“There
exists a need to promote and support effective participation and
previous arrangements with indigenous peoples in the design, adoption,
implementations and monitoring of mineral exploitation that might
affect their lands and natural resources. The lack of capacity to
engage with government and corporate actors in successful discussions
and negotiations, including on national-level policy, remains a
basic hurdle for indigenous communities and their organizations.
In response to this deficiency, indigenous organizations are organizing
themselves, mobilizing broader civil society networks and building
their capacity to engage innegotiations, agreement building and
monitoring activities. …There is a growing call among indigenous
peoples to ensure their right to say no and to negotiate their own
conditions through prior informed consent, to the establishment
of a moratorium of mining on their lands until new conditions are
met, and to the creation of “no-go zones”, which needs
to be better linked to efforts to ensure that protected areas are
free from threats posed by mining operations. At present, practical
approaches to, and measures for, social impact assessments, appropriate
consultation measures, and prior informed consent and appropriate
mitigation remain marginal in the broader debate.”] [“We,
indigenous peoples, reject the myth of 'sustainable mining': we
have not experienced mining as a contribution to 'sustainable development'
by any reasonable definition. Our experience shows that exploration
and exploitation of minerals, coal, oil, and gas bring us serious
social and environmental problems, so widespread and injurious that
we cannot describe such development as 'sustainable'. Indeed, rather
than contributing to poverty alleviation, we find that the extractive
industries are creating poverty and social divisions in our communities,
and showing disrespect for our culture and customary laws.…
We find that the extractive industries worsen our situation, create
greater divisions between rich and poor and escalate violence and
repression in our areas.”] [a preliminary working paper serves as a framework for the drafting of a legal commentary by the Working Group on Indigenous Populations on the principle of free, prior and informed consent of indigenous peoples in relation to development affecting their lands and natural resources.] Through
Indigenous Eyes: Toward Appropriate Decision-Making Processes [“Companies, governments and international financial institutions considering undertaking or funding mining activities on ancestral lands are under increasing public pressure to ensure that Indigenous rights are not violated. One of the key vehicles toward this end is to involve the would-be affected Indigenous Peoples in decision-making about potential projects… But what are the appropriate mechanisms for approaching and involving Indigenous Peoples in decision-making with regard to potential mining activities on or near ancestral lands? While much literature has been written on appropriate ‘public participation’ mechanisms with some focusing on Indigenous Peoples there is a dearth of research and literature highlighting the views of Indigenous Peoples themselves… To begin to address this important research gap, the NorthSouth Institute (NSI) partnered with the Amerindian Peoples Association (APA) of Guyana and the Institute of Regional Studies (INER) of the University of Antioquia in Colombia on a collaborative research project to examine these issues within the Latin American and Caribbean context, a region that has seen a dramatic increase in mining projects, particularly by Canadian mining companies.” Indigenous
Peoples and Mining Encounters: Strategies and Tactics (2002) [“This report addresses the most critical sustainability in an encounter between indigenous peoples and the (mining) industry, as well as governments, financiers and non-governmental organizations. An encounter has four dimensions. The first involves perceptions and objectives - delineating who is or is not indigenous, presuppositions about one another, and desired outcomes. The second dimension involves the stakeholders’ capacities to sustain and/or resist negotiations. The third involves stakeholder tactics and/or strategies for dealing with one another. The fourth dimension consists of socio-economic and environmental risks and benefits - possible “on the ground” changes that may occur to the livelihoods and culture of project-affected peoples. A consideration of these four dimensions assists in understanding the negotiations, or lack thereof, between indigenous peoples and other stakeholders.”]
|
|||||||
La campagne au Canada: Cibler Alcan | Dialogue avec Alcan
Agir: Demandes à Alcan | Programme de recherche | Événements à venir
Presse: Canadienne | Internationale | Communiqués et dossier de presse
Ressources: Film sur le sujet | Liens | Contactez-nous | Rejoignez la liste de diffusion