Grassroots Resistance to the Plan Puebla Panama: Contesting Wind Mill Construction in Oaxaca, Mexico
Introduction
The government of
At first glance, the mounting resistance of local communities and landowners to wind farm construction seems counterintuitive or even out of step with the prevailing global mood of increasing environmental consciousness. Wind energy is decidedly more “clean” than fossil fuels, and in an era in which global warming has finally moved to the forefront of international concerns, the decision to pursue a clean energy certainly seems laudable. Yet, if one scratches the surface of this “new” clean energy venture in
As will quickly become clear, the questions which local communities are now putting forward - to the government, the CFE and the international community - are important and fundamental ones: What is the purpose of the Plan Puebla
Wind farms and the Plan Puebla Panama
It is impossible to understand the rationale behind wind farm construction without situating it within the larger context of the Plan Puebla
The master plan of the Plan Puebla
The second, though equally important, goal of the PPP is to develop the infrastructure of southern
The wind farms are clearly an important component of the PPP for the electricity that they are alleged to provide. They fit within the broader electricity generating program of SIEPAC. SIEPAC aims toward the construction of an entire electricity grid blanketing all of southern
Not surprisingly, as the myriad development projects associated with the Plan Puebla Panama have continued, so has resistance. Communities throughout the southern Mexico and Central American regions are organizing increasingly effectively as the magnitude of the project has become apparent. Organizations that have come out in opposition to the PPP run the gamut from the internationally recognized and long-standing Zapatista movement down to little known and newly emergent organizations, such as the Grupo Solidario de la Venta that formed in explicit opposition to continued building of wind farms. The PPP has become increasingly associated with a downward spiraling globalization in which the rich get richer and the poor become systematically more impoverished. In Mexico, this impoverishment took its present, institutionalized and legal form under NAFTA, and PPP is seen largely as a continuation of that, particularly in terms of its effects on racially or ethnically marginalized populations, and the popular classes more broadly. Although the official language used to put the Plan Puebla Panama in place rings of the many tired epithets of “sustainable development,” at this point there seem to be few in this region who are buying into it. Twenty five years worth of free trade based “development” in Latin America has given these populations ample empirical evidence to dispute the claims of the neoliberal orthodoxy, and even World Bank reports increasingly acknowledge the failures of this development model.
Wind Farm Construction and Resistance on the Isthmus de Tehuantepec
The region that has been selected as the primary site for the building of wind farms is called the Isthmus de Tehuantepec, and it is located in the southernmost portion of Oaxaca. Like Chiapas, Oaxaca is well known for the high presence of indigenous groups in the region, and it is also one of the poorest states in the country. The wind farms are currently located in and around a set of rural towns – principally La Venta and La Ventosa – located within the larger municipality of Juchitan. Juchitan is famously the seat of COCEI, a unique and influential popular movement that emerged in the seventies combining socialists, peasants, students and indigenous groups. It is also the birthplace of famed Mexican artist Francisco Toledo.
The Isthmus of Tehuantepec is an extremely narrow stretch of land (which is why it has also been sited for a dry canal) and during the windy season, which lasts roughly from November through March, the wind blows so furiously that cars are sometimes knocked from the roads and, in one recent year, a wind tower itself was blown over. Existing parques eolicos are located on a narrow stretch close to the Pacific Ocean, while planned farms are located right on the sand bars of the ocean itself. As will also be discussed below, one of the more controversial aspects of the wind farm construction has to do with its existing – or potential – impact on migrating and indigenous bird populations. As the narrowest stretch of the MesoAmerican Corridor, it is an essential flyway for migrating birds - some of which are endangered species.
Wind farm construction in and around La Venta and La Ventosa of Juchitan consists of a set of seven different existing or planned “parque eolicos” or wind parks. The existing and proposed parks are numbered in a series, going from Venta I through Venta VII. The first wind farm was a pilot project constructed right across the highway from the small town La Venta, of 3,000 people, in 1994. This first project consisted of only seven windmills, and while it was supposed to be experimental, it was followed almost immediately by plans for Venta II. Venta II is located on the same plot of land and is thus directly adjacent to Venta I. To date, it is only about 80% complete because the farmers are disputing it. The goal of the Mexican government and the CFE is to eventually build 3,000 windmills, which would essentially cover the entire area of this narrow isthmus. Ironically, part of the oft-stated logic behind the Plan Puebla Panama is the greater integration of southern Mexico populations into the global economy. Such logic is disingenuous however; in La Venta alone, an estimated 10% of the population must work in the US in order to support the local community – a migration made necessary by the crushing effect of NAFTA on rural livelihoods and the failures of the trade agreement to deliver local jobs. Sadly – yet consistently – the windfarms constructed to date also fail to employ local workers and, instead, bring them in from elsewhere.
In spite of rising discontent among farmers, not to mention incomplete environmental impact assessments and possible violations of international law, the government of Felipe Calderon has plowed ahead with plans for the next in the series, Venta III, which is due to be constructed near the neighboring town of La Ventosa. Bidding for Venta III had been opened by the summer of 2007. Similarly, he flew to la Venta in late March of 2007 in order to conduct an inaugural ceremony for the wind projects; in preparation for his visit, the squatter camp of Tres de Abril that had been set up to resist continued construction of Venta II had to be forcibly removed with federal police.
Simultaneously, the CFE – or alleged representatives of the CFE (see below) – are moving ahead in their efforts to secure land for the development of more parks. Not only do they regularly approach and negotiate with individual landowners from La Venta and La Ventosa, but also from the surrounding communities of Union Hidalgo and Santo Domingo de la Blanca. Moreover, they are beginning to approach the beach communities as well, particularly San Dionisio, San Mateo and San Francisco, in order to begin lease negotiations there. In these areas, the windmills are scheduled to be built on sandbars, which would disrupt the natural redistribution of salty and fresh water, and the particular aquatic life that supports local fishing communities of the area. In short, in spite of mounting resistance from all of these communities, the government of Calderon, the CFE and the multinationals continue to plow ahead with plans for more and more windmills.
What then, precisely, are the concerns of local resistant farmers and landowners? The complaints of this newly mobilizing force can be divided roughly into two major categories for the purposes of this short article. The first category has to do with the negotiating practices of the CFE and, as a corollary, the terms of existing or planned contracts. A second concern has to do with the environmental impacts of the wind farms themselves. This latter concern includes, but is not limited to, a preoccupation with the impact on migrating and indigenous bird species.
First, it is important to point out that many landowners and ejiditarios of the local communities were originally very amenable to working with the CFE and leasing their lands. It is only based on their experiences with the CFE and the wind farms to date that resistance and disillusionment has mounted. In the beginning period of negotiations and construction, the CFE promised that the parks would bring more employment and greater development to the area. Neither of the two has happened since the owners of the wind parks bring in employees from elsewhere and the wind parks themselves by definition cannot bring greater “development” because they are more closely linked with extra-local (foreign and national level) interests than local interests. In short, the only “benefit” which the farmers received was the amount paid for the lease of their lands. It is widely reported that the initial amounts agreed to were later reneged on by the CFE, thus putting into motion the acrimonious relations that prevail between the institution and the local community today.
Moreover, as time has passed it has become increasingly clear that local farmers are paid a penance of what is paid to those who lease their lands for wind park construction in other parts of the world. Currently, a farmer is paid 12,500 pesos (or roughly 125.00 dollars) annually for the lease of a single hectare of land which supports a single windmill. According to Alejo Giron Carrasco, leader of Grupo Solidario de la Venta, that is 10 to 20 times less than what people are paid in other parts of the world.[1] While one might immediately conclude that the cost of living in rural Mexico is ten to twenty times less than what it might be in a “developed” economy, the fact of the matter is that NAFTA has sent the cost of living soaring, producing a growing disparity between real wages and purchasing power which these low rental prices reflect. Sadly, it is rural areas like La Venta and La Ventosa which have been hardest hit.
Additionally, it is widely reported that the people who go around house to house trying to negotiate contracts do not work for the CFE directly but, rather, are hired personnel who essentially act as harassing thugs. As one person relayed it to me, they exist in Juchitan under the office name of Maderas y Granos de la Laguna. Maderas y Granos is a cover name for this speculation company whose representatives go around trying to arrange contracts to allow the CFE and foreign companies to lease the land, all while saying that they work for the government. This assessment of the fraudulent nature of these “representatives” has been backed up by Ucizoni leader, Carlos Beal, in his article Los Negocios Sucios de la Energia Limpia (Dirty Negotiations for Clean Energy).[2] Perhaps even more ominously, there have been widespread reports of harassment and threats when landowners did not readily sign over their lands.
There are additional and seemingly systematic problems with the contracts and negotiations themselves. In the summer of 2007, members of the community of Union Hidalgo reported in a meeting in La Venta that the “representatives” had been coming around house to house trying to get individuals to sign over their lands. Some of them had agreed to the contracts, only to find that when the representatives returned with the “official” copies of the contracts and their own public notaries from Mexico City, many key terms had been changed, endless clauses added, and the term of the lease had been changed from twenty to thirty years. Under pressure and intimidation, the farmers might still sign with a Mexico City notary looking on. These types of egregious legal abuses, including lying about the social benefits of leasing and never following up or returning copies of contracts to landowners, seem to be chronic and widely reported in many landowners’ dealings with the CFE and its alleged representatives. The fact that these lands are leased essentially to foreign companies for a period of thirty years has additionally brought up the question of whether or not these arrangements are in violation of Article 27 of the Mexican Constitution, which prohibits the selling of land to foreigners. It increasingly seems that the proper authorities seem to skirt this issue by using the language of leasing – even if for a period of decades – rather than selling.
A second major concern which local communities have pertains to the environmental impact of the windmills. The possible deleterious effects of the windmills on bird populations is a pressing question here, but there are other concerns as well.
Briefly, approximately six million birds fly through the Isthmus de Tehuantepec each year. Estimates of the numbers of endangered species within this group run as low as three and as high as thirty-two. There have already been many anecdotal reports of high levels of bird deaths, determined primarily by the discovery of carcasses in and around the wind farms. Many of these are pigeons, but it is not yet known how many other bird species may be affected. Additionally the area around La Venta and La Ventosa are virtually saturated with wetlands areas and accompanying aquatic species. Because Mexican ornithologists – as elsewhere in the world - are still in the process of identifying which habitats are essential to protected species, the role that these wetlands or other areas may play in the survival of both endangered and other species is not yet known. According to a 2003 environmental impact report commissioned by the CFE itself, the greatest danger of the parques eolicos is to the bird population. While the report acknowledges that insufficient information exists to determine precisely the effects of the windmills on the birds, the wind farms were reported early on to be “highly risky.”
This is precisely the problem. Windmill construction has gone ahead without ascertaining precisely what the impact on indigenous and migrating bird populations might be. While scientific knowledge is always going through a process of accumulation and revision, it seems that with 100 windmills already in place, this would be a good time to stop and take stock of the impact on bird life before proceeding with the construction of 3,000 windmills. Residents who live in the area report that during the migrating season, you can’t even see the sky for all the birds flying directly overhead.
In addition to this thorny issue about the possible effects on birds, local landowners have other concerns that have yet to be answered by environmental impact assessments. While this may be the case because the use of large wind farms is fairly new and long term studies are not yet available, it doesn’t detract from the soundness and sensibility of questions that concern all of us: What might be the long term climatic effects of the wind farms? If they are being built in response to global warming, what effect might they inadvertently have to stir up the warm winds and skies that contribute directly to hurricanes and tornadoes (precisely the types of whether conditions that can afflict Caribbean and Central American nations) ? What might the effects of soil erosion be, and can these lands ever be cultivated again? What about bats? If the windmills kill birds they likely kill bats, and if bats are being killed what kind of plagues of insect populations loom in the future? If the windmills are already, as suspected, affecting bird populations, then what kind of chain ecological reaction is being set loose that we have no way as yet of understanding? Could that chain reaction have as disastrous effects as global warming itself?
Conclusion: Community Demands for Social Change
Local communities have a set of demands and concerns that are perfectly reasonable and at least as “forward looking” as green energy itself. Tellingly, in the form of a community that thinks in a truly “sustainable” manner, these demands speak to both environmental and social concerns. These demands can be summarized as follows:
There should be an environmental impact study (or studies) conducted by serious and neutral scientific institutions, and these studies must be conducted with the participation and input of the local community.
There should be more transparency about the benefits of the wind farms for the CFE and Mexican government. Why are they so eager to construct them, why are they being so accommodating of multinational interests, and what is in it for them?
For the obverse, what is in it for local communities? To date, they have never received electricity at reduced rates, nor have local populations been employed by the wind farms. If future wind mills are going to be constructed, there must be direct and tangible benefits written in contracts: schools, pavement, jobs, health care – in short, the “sustainable development” that is always promised but never delivered. The local community must be seen as more than a resource from which land can be extracted, because the local community is the land.
Conditions of going into a contract or lease agreement with the CFE would have to be completely different – with greater transparency, accountability, and legality. Those who do not want to lease their lands will have their decisions respected, and they will be free from pressure or harassment.
There must be an established space for ongoing discussion and negotiation (mesa de dialogo) so that affected communities can legally ensure that they are the recipients of public works.
There must be a permanently established conflict resolution forum that allows for any conflict to be resolved legally and fairly.
Community members should receive a discount in electricity prices.
On September 22 of 2007, the Grupo Solidario de la Venta and UCIZONI gathered together dozens of groups in La Ventosa for the third regional forum to discuss the matter. Along with laying plans for future steps to be taken, the groups issued a formal declaration of protest against the Plan Puebla Panama and ongoing wind farm construction. In addition to the demands listed above, organizations additionally maintained that the Calderon government has been violating the rights of indigenous peoples, causing both environmental and cultural destruction; that the intent of the PPP and wind park construction is to turn the Isthmus into an industrial corridor; that substantive information about the PPP be shared with local communities and they be engaged in a legitimately participatory fashion; that all neoliberal projects that destroy indigenous cultures and lands be halted immediately; and last, but not least, the release of political prisoners and an end to the militarization of the region under the pretext of drug war. The full text of the Declaration, in both Spanish and English, can be found at the end of this article.
Additional information:
For those interested in learning more about the wind farms of Oaxaca, please visit the following sites:
www.wind-watch.org/news/2007/05/08/oaxaca-braces-for-new-protests/
http://kirbymtn.blogspot.com/2007/03/against-giants-in-oaxaca.html
http://www.apiavirtual.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=12122
For those interested in learning more about birds of Oaxaca, visit www.tierradeaves.com
To learn more about the Plan Puebla Panama, visit some of these sites:
www.globalexchange.org/campaigns/mexico/ppp/ppp.html
http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=3953
If you would like to help or gain further information, please contact the following people:
English speakers:
Sylvia Sanchez at ssanchez50@yahoo.com
Spanish speakers:
Alejo Giron Carrasco at carrascogiron_a@hotmail.com
Roberto Giron Carrasco at duroventero_68@hotmail.com
Carlos Beas at carlos_beas@yahoo.com.mx>
DECLARATION OF LA VENTOSA
La Ventosa, Juchitán, Oaxaca a 22 de septiembre de 2007
The organizations and participating communities in their third meeting of Isthmus Communities Defending the Land
MAINTAIN that:
With the imposition in our region, the Isthmus of Tehuantepec, of modernizing and eager neocolonial projects of the Plan Puebla Panama by means of wind parks, highway infrastructure, mineral exploitation and repression, we are witnessing an extensive stripping of our region’s natural resources, the expropriation of community lands, and the cultural destruction of our communities.
WE DECLARE that:
1. The projects that are being imposed in our region threathen the way of life of our communities, and there is a plan is to convert our region into an industrial and commercial zone solely for the benefit of large multinationals such as IBERDROLA, EURUS, GAMESA, PRENEAL, ENDESA, UNIÓN FENOSA and WAL MART, among others.
2. The Mexican state is using the employment needs of our region, which has been impoverished by neoliberal policies instituted since 1982, to come to our communities and offer development projects with the promise of raising the standard of living in our communities.
In reference to the above
WE DEMAND that:
1. The true plans of the Mexican state for our region be shared with us, in each one of our local languages, in order to achieve an informed consultation.
2. Our communities receive respect for their rights and capacities to construct a desirable way of life based on our cultures, customs and the sustainable use of our natural resources.
3 The suspension of all neoliberal projects planned for our region, since they have not resulted from consultations with our communities, and are in possible violation of both local laws and international conventions and threaten the social organization of our communities.
4. The wind energy project be cancelled since it represents the stripping of our lands, serious environmental dangers, and the loss of national sovereignty.
We call upon all regional communities, social organizations, towns, ejidos, authorities and the population in general to come together and participate in a day of mobilizations in defense of our territory that will take place the next 12th of October.
Similarly we demand the release of all political prisoners in our country, and we specifically call for the liberation of our companions from the communities of San Isidrio Aloapam: Juana Morales Pérez, Santos Pérez Cruz, Eutimio Méndez Pérez, Artemio Pérez Cruz, Juventino Cruz Pérez y Anastasio López Pérez, militantes del CIPO-Ricardo Flores Magón, asi como de David Venegas, Flavio Sosa y demás presos políticos integrantes de la APPO
We demand an end to militarization being pursued under the pretext of ending drug trafficking, which in reality has represented a policy of intimidation and harrassment against our communities.
We declare ourselves to be in support of the town of La Ventosa, and its demand to elect authorities based on their capacities, customs and respect for community rights.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home