Page 3 - MONTT GROUP MAGAZINE, ENERO 2018 (ENGLISH)

-Editorial-
The concern for the environment began when the United Nations established the World Commission on Environment and Development in 1983, where it was stated that the care of our natural habitat and economic growth had to be addressed as a unit, to achieve a fair balance between the different needs of the human person.
Although the Commission’s position was simple, clear and, in essence, shared by all, building a consensus around it continues to represent a huge challenge for most of the countries on the planet. It is not by chance that according to the Atlas of Environmental Justice, an initiative created in 2012 by the Autonomous University of Barcelona, there are 2,100 active conflicts in the world, led by India. The lack of agreements is such that the situation worsens as 350 new cases are added every year.
The situation in Latin America is not an exception: the region contemplates environmental conflicts in 16 countries, but the most serious ones are registered in Colombia (72); Brazil (58); Ecuador (48); Argentina (32); Peru (31) and Chile (30) and are mainly related to mining, problems with fossil fuels and the use of water.
The environmental institutional framework of the region is very recent. In the case of our country, in 2010 it was redesigned with the promulgation of Law No 20,417, which gave rise to the Ministry of the Environment; the Environmental Assessment Service and the Environment Superintendence. Subsequently, in June 2012, the Law No 20,600 created the Environmental Courts.
There is no doubt that there is still a long way to go in this area; it is required to generate and build collective knowledge, to have more experience; improve diagnostic tools and, above all, create environmental quality regulations, as it became clear, for example, in two emblematic cases, HidroAysén and Dominga.
The first conflict remained active for 10 years and was closed only last November. In 2007, HidroAysén presented the project that contemplated the construction of five hydroelectric plants and was approved in May 2011 by the Environmental Assessment Commission of Coyhaique. In April 2012, the Supreme Court of Chile ruled in favour of the initiative, dismissing the appeals filed by environmental groups. In June 2014, it was finally ruled out by a Committee of Ministers and in November 2017, despite all the appeals, the Santiago Environmental Court buried the project, by denying all the allegations made against the Committee of Ministers, maintaining the Resolution of “unfavourable environmental rating”.
In this case, the ambivalent stance of the State was observed regarding a long-term energy policy; the country was left without the possibility of having clean, autonomous and safe energy, while everyone is betting on the attractive renewable energy that, to date, is only a promise. The case of the Dominga project also highlights the weakness of our
A New Environmental Paradigm
“In my opinion, that harmful dichotomy between profitability and sustainability must disappear. It is imperative to eradicate political fanaticism and create a new concept, of responsible use of resources, which doesn’t harm the socio-economic development of the region.”
Montt Group President, Santiago Montt
environmental institutions: this project entered the Environmental Assessment System in September 2013; three years later this organism of the IV Region of Coquimbo approved it and recommended giving the green light to the corresponding Environmental Impact Study, but then the Evaluation Commission, chaired by the regional Governor and the Secretarios Regionales Ministeriales (officials representing the minister), rejected it.
In the middle of this year, before appeals of its owners, the Committee of Ministers discarded it, which produced an unprecedented ministerial crisis and two secretaries of State, Finance and Economy, resigned for disagreeing.
Dominga complied with all the environmental regulations and, nevertheless, it was not accepted, which does nothing but sow doubts about the current system and inhibit future investments in the area. It also shows a lack of legal certainty, something that will prevent further investments in the sector, as in the case of HidroAysén. Thus, economic growth, job creation and even sustainability, which mean balancing the economic, social and environmental pillars, are paralyzed. Another unfortunate case occurred a few days ago when the Contraloría General de la República (General Comptroller’s Office of the Republic, the supreme audit institution of Chile) rejected the Decontamination Plan in Puchuncaví for an apparent error of the Ministry of the Environment.
What happens in Chile is extensive to the rest of Latin America. The observations made for environmental management in the region are related to the shortcomings in the implementation of the National Environmental Impact Assessment Systems; the inflexibility of the regulations and, among others, the political use of the norms. Argentina, however, is promoting an attitude that could lead in the region: it adopted sustainable development as a State policy, which contemplates that state agencies stop being “green police”, to share relevant information, not to inhibit activities, but to make them sustainable, because without a doubt the great challenge and, not only for Argentina, is to emerge from poverty, without damaging the environment.
In my opinion, that harmful dichotomy between profitability and sustainability must disappear, because both concepts are sides of the same coin. I think it is urgent to eradicate political and environmental fanaticism from one side and the other. These vehement, visceral, deceptive attitudes that lead to bad decisions must be replaced by a new paradigm, that of a responsible use of resources, that does not harm the socioeconomic development of the region. More important than anything is granting dignity and opportunities to the inhabitants of the continent.
Montt Latin American Magazine p3