Confronting Extractivism & Corporate Power

Women human rights defenders (WHRDs) worldwide defend their lands, livelihoods and communities from extractive industries and corporate power. They stand against powerful economic and political interests driving land theft, displacement of communities, loss of livelihoods, and environmental degradation.


Why resist extractive industries?

Extractivism is an economic and political model of development that commodifies nature and prioritizes profit over human rights and the environment. Rooted in colonial history, it reinforces social and economic inequalities locally and globally. Often, Black, rural and Indigenous women are the most affected by extractivism, and are largely excluded from decision-making. Defying these patriarchal and neo-colonial forces, women rise in defense of rights, lands, people and nature.

Critical risks and gender-specific violence

WHRDs confronting extractive industries experience a range of risks, threats and violations, including criminalization, stigmatization, violence and intimidation.  Their stories reveal a strong aspect of gendered and sexualized violence. Perpetrators include state and local authorities, corporations, police, military, paramilitary and private security forces, and at times their own communities.

Acting together

AWID and the Women Human Rights Defenders International Coalition (WHRD-IC) are pleased to announce “Women Human Rights Defenders Confronting Extractivism and Corporate Power”; a cross-regional research project documenting the lived experiences of WHRDs from Asia, Africa and Latin America.

We encourage activists, members of social movements, organized civil society, donors and policy makers to read and use these products for advocacy, education and inspiration.

Share your experience and questions!

Tell us how you are using the resources on WHRDs Confronting extractivism and corporate power.

◾️ How can these resources support your activism and advocacy?

◾️ What additional information or knowledge do you need to make the best use of these resources?

Share your feedback


Thank you!

AWID acknowledges with gratitude the invaluable input of every Woman Human Rights Defender who participated in this project. This project was made possible thanks to your willingness to generously and openly share your experiences and learnings. Your courage, creativity and resilience is an inspiration for us all. Thank you!

Related Content

Challenging the economic growth model

Context

Contesting the premise that a country’s economy must always ‘grow or die’, de-growth propositions come to debunk the centrality of growth measured by increase in Gross domestic product (GDP).

Definition

A de-growth model proposes a shift towards a lower and sustainable level of production and consumption. In essence, shrinking the economic system to leave more space for human cooperation and ecosystems.

The proposal includes

  • Downsizing resource-, energy- and emission-intensive superfluous production, particularly in the North (e.g. the automotive and military industries)
  • Directing investments instead into the care sector, social infrastructure and environmental restoration

Feminist perspective

Feminist perspectives within de-growth theory and practice argue that it also needs to redefine and revalidate unpaid and paid, care and market labour to overcome traditional gender stereotypes as well as the prevailing wage gaps and income inequalities that devalue care work.


Learn more about this proposition

  • In “The Future WE Want: Occupy development” Christa Wichterich argues that in order to break up the hegemonic logic of unfettered growth and quick returns on investment, three cornerstones of another development paradigm must combine: care, commons and sufficiency in production and consumption.
  • Equitable, Ecological Degrowth: Feminist Contributions by Patricia Perkins suggests developing effective alternative indicators of well-being, including social and economic equity and work-time data, to demonstrate the importance of unpaid work and services for the economy and provide a mechanism for giving credit to those responsible.

Part of our series of


  Feminist Propositions for a Just Economy

Snippet FEA Map of Georgia (ES)

Esta imagen es un primer plano de Georgia en rosa coral con un alfiler amarillo que indica "Sindicato Red de Solidaridad".

Snippet - WITM RESOURCES - AR

المصادر

(متوفرة باللغة الإنجليزية)

Paula Andrea Rosero Ordóñez

« C’[elle] était une personne qui se caractérisait par son travail acharné en faveur de la défense des droits humains et la construction de la paix à Nariño, notamment dans la municipalité de Samaniego-Nariño »  - Jorge Luis Congacha Yunda pour Página10

Paula Andrea Rosero Ordóñez était avocate au sein du bureau du Ministère public à Samaniego, Nariño, l’agence principale qui défend les droits des citoyen·ne·s en Colombie.

Elle s’est concentrée sur les droits civils et politiques, les enjeux d’impunité et de justice, et a contribué à dévoiler les abus de pouvoir, dont la corruption.  Elle a également participé à des projets de construction de la paix dans sa ville natale, Samaniego, comme le Conseil municipal pour la paix et le Bureau municipal de femmes. 

Paula a reçu des menaces de mort après avoir exposé une gestion irrégulière des ressources, de même que porté plainte contre des actes de corruption au sein de l’Hôpital Lorencita Villegas dans la municipalité de Nariñense. Elle a été assassinée le 20 mai 2019, lorsque deux hommes se sont approchés d’elle et l’ont abattue à bout portant. 

Key opposition discourses

Ultra conservative actors have developed a number of discourses at the international human rights level that call on arguments manipulating religion, culture, tradition, and national sovereignty in order to undermine rights related to gender and sexuality.

Anti-rights actors have increasingly moved away from explicitly religious language. Increasingly, we see regressive actors - who may previously have derided human rights concepts - instead manipulating and co-opting these very concepts to further their objectives.


Protection of the family

This emerging and successful discourse appears innocuous, but it functions as a useful umbrella theme to house multiple patriarchal and anti-rights positions. The ‘protection of the family’ theme is thus a key example of regressive actors’ move towards holistic and integrated advocacy.

The language of ‘protection of the family’ works to shift the subject of human rights from the individual and onto already powerful institutions.

It also affirms a unitary, hierarchical, and patriarchal conception of the family that discriminates against family forms outside of these rigid boundaries. It also attempts to change the focus from recognition and protection of the rights of vulnerable family members to non-discrimination, autonomy, and freedom from violence in the context of family relations.

The Right to Life

The Holy See and a number of Christian Right groups seek to appropriate the right to life in service of an anti-abortion mission.  Infusing human rights language with conservative religious doctrine, they argue that the right to life, as set out in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, applies at the moment of conception.

The discourse has no support in any universal human rights instrument. Yet this is an appealing tactic for anti-rights actors, because the right to life cannot be violated under any circumstances and is a binding legal standard.

Sexual rights

Anti-rights actors use a number of rhetorical devices in their campaign to undermine sexual rights: they argue that sexual rights do not exist or are ‘new rights,’ that they cause harm to children and society, and/or that these rights stand in opposition to culture, tradition or national laws.

Conservative actors engaged in advocacy at the UN attack the right to comprehensive sexuality education from several directions. They claim that CSE violates ‘parental rights’, harms children, and that it is not education but ideological indoctrination. They also claim that comprehensive sexuality education is pushed on children, parents, and the United Nations by powerful lobbyists seeking to profit from services they provide to children and youth.

Attempts to invalidate rights related to sexual orientation and gender identity have proliferated. Ultra conservative actors argue that application of long-standing human rights principles and law on this issue constitutes the creation of ‘new rights’; and that the meaning of rights should vary radically because they should be interpreted through the lens of ‘culture’ or ‘national particularities.’

Reproductive Rights

Christian Right organizations have been mobilizing against reproductive rights alongside the Holy See and other anti-rights allies for several years. They often argue that reproductive rights are at heart a form of Western-imposed population control over countries in the global South. Ironically, this claim often originates from U.S. and Western Europe-affiliated actors, many of whom actively work to export their fundamentalist discourses and policies.

Regressive actors also cite to ‘scientific’ arguments from ultra-conservative think tanks, and from sources that rely on unsound research methodologies, to suggest that abortion causes an array of psychological, sexual, physical, and relational side effects.

Protection of children and parental rights

Just as anti-rights actors aim to construct a new category of ‘protection of the family,’ they are attempting to construct a new category of ‘parental rights,’ which has no support in existing human rights standards.

This discourse paradoxically endeavours to use the rights protections with which children are endowed, as articulated in the Convention on the Rights of the Child, to support the rights of parents to control their children and limit their rights.

Violence against women

Increasingly, anti-rights actors are attempting to infiltrate and subvert standards and discourses developed by women human rights defenders, such as violence against women (VAW).

At the Commission on the Status of Women and other spaces, one rhetorical move is to treat VAW as a concept in which to embed anti-reproductive rights and patriarchal arguments. Ultra conservative actors, for example, have argued that non-heteronormative or traditional intimate partner relationships are a risk factor for violence, and emphasize that fathers are necessary to protect families from violence.

Gender and ‘gender ideology’

The Holy See has set off a sustained critique of gender, ‘gender ideology’, ‘gender radicals,’ and gender theory, and anti-rights actors often read the term as code for LGBTQ rights. Gender is used by the religious right as a cross-cutting concept that links together many of their discourses. Increasingly, the hysteria on this subject fixates on gender identity and trans rights.

Complementarity and human dignity

Complementarity of the sexes is a discourse employed by a number of ultra-conservative actors today. Its rhetoric is structured around an assumption of difference: men and women are meant to have differing but complementary roles in marriage and family life, and with respect to their engagement in the community and political and economic life.

Reference to ‘natural’ roles is meant to fundamentally reject universal human rights to equality and non-discrimination.

It is also used to justify State and non-State violations of these rights, and non-compliance with respect to State obligations to eliminate prejudices and practices based on stereotyped roles for men or women.

National sovereignty and anti-imperialism

This discourse suggests that national governments are being unjustly targeted by UN bodies, or by other States acting through the UN. This is an attempt to shift the subject of human rights from the individual or marginalized community suffering a rights violation to a powerful and/or regressive institution - i.e. the state, in order to justify national exceptions from universal rights or to support state impunity. 

Religious freedom

Anti-rights actors have taken up the discourse of freedom of religion in order to justify violations of human rights. Yet, ultra-conservative actors refer to religious freedom in a way that directly contradicts the purpose of this human right and fundamentally conflicts with the principle of the universality of rights. The inference is that religious liberty is threatened and undermined by the protection of human rights, particularly those related to gender and sexuality.

The central move is to suggest that the right to freedom of religion is intended to protect a religion rather than those who are free to hold or not hold different religious beliefs.

Yet under international human rights law, the right protects believers rather than beliefs, and the right to freedom of religion, thought and conscience includes the right not to profess any religion or belief or to change one’s religion or belief.

Cultural rights and traditional values

The deployment of references to culture and tradition to undermine human rights, including the right to equality, is a common tactic amongst anti-rights actors. Culture is presented as monolithic, static, and immutable, and it is is often presented in opposition to ‘Western norms.’

Allusions to culture by anti-rights actors in international policy debates aim to undermine the universality of rights, arguing for cultural relativism that trumps or limits rights claims. Regressive actors’ use of cultural rights is founded on a purposeful misrepresentation of the human right. States must ensure that traditional or cultural attitudes are not used to justify violations of equality, and human rights law calls for equal access, participation and contribution in all aspects of cultural life for all, including women, religious, and racial minorities, and those with non-conforming genders and sexualities.

Subverting ‘universal’

Anti-rights actors in international policy spaces increasingly manipulate references to universal or fundamental human rights to reverse the meaning of the universality of rights.

Rather than using the term universal to describe the full set of indivisible and interrelated human rights, ultra conservative actors employ this term to instead delineate and describe a subset of human rights as ‘truly fundamental.’ Other rights would thus be subject to State discretion, ‘new’ rights or optional. This discourse is especially powerful as their category of the truly universal remains unarticulated and hence open to shifting interpretation.


Other Chapters

Read the full report

Snippet FEA collaborator and allies Photo 1 (FR)

La photo montre Sopo Japaridze, l'une des cofondatrices de l'Union Solidarity Network. Sopo a de longs cheveux bruns, avec une frange, et des yeux bruns, et porte un masque rouge de l'Union du réseau de solidarité. La photo est prise de nuit.

على من يجب تعبئة الاستطلاع؟

المجموعات، المنظمات والحركات التي تعمل خصوصاً وبالأساس على حقوق النساء، حقوق الفتيات، العدالة الجندرية، حقوق مجتمعات الميم - عين وحلفائها/يفاتها في جميع المناطق وعلى جميع المستويات، إن كانت مجموعات جديدة أو قديمة.

Magaly Quintana

Magaly Quintana was known by many in Nicaragua as ‘La Maga’ (meaning wizard). She was a feminist historian, activist, and an unyielding defender of women’s rights demanding justice for the victims of femicide.

Magaly was committed to documenting and building statistics on women and girls who were killed as a result of sexual violence in the country. 

“She rebuilt the life of each one, of their families, to show those lives that had been torn away.” - Dora María Téllez

Magaly also criticized the government for reforming Law 779 addressing violence against women. A product of the hard work of Nicaraguan women’s movements, this law included important provisions to criminalize femicide before its reform. She argued that legislative reforms weakened the law and limited the definition of femicides to homicides, as a result invisibilizing violent crimes against women.

Magaly’s feminist organizing began in the early 1980s. She was the director of Catholic Women for the Right to Choose, advocating for the right to therapeutic abortion after it was banned in 2006. In 2018, she supported the protests against Daniel Ortega’s government.

Magaly was born in May 1952 and passed away in May 2019.

“See you later, my dearest Magaly Quintana. Thanks so much, thanks for your legacy. We’ll see you again, as strong and powerful as ever.”- Erika Guevara Rosas (American Director of Amnesty International)

Body

When development initiatives, religious fundamentalisms and the state of women’s rights collide

Nuestro nuevo documento de investigación El diablo se esconde en los detalles aborda la falta de conocimientos sobre los fundamentalismos religiosos en el sector del desarrollo, y se propone comprender mejor de qué manera estos fundamentalismos inhiben el desarrollo y, en particular, los derechos de las mujeres. Propone recomendaciones para que quienes trabajan en temas de desarrollo desafíen la labor de los fundamentalismos y eviten fortalecerlos inadvertidamente. [CTA download link: Leer el documento completo]

 

Seven pointers to consider

 

Graphic1 1. Control of women’s bodies, sexuality, and choice are “warning signs” of rising fundamentalisms.
2. Neoliberal economic policies have a particularly negative impact on women, and fuel the growth of religious fundamentalisms. Graphic2
Graphic3 3. Choosing religious organizations as default for partnerships builds their legitimacy and access to resources, and supports their ideology, including gender ideology.
4.Everyone has multiple identities and should be defined by more than just their religion. Foregrounding religious identities tends to reinforce the power of religious fundamentalists. Graphic4
Graphic5 5. Religion, culture, and tradition are constantly changing, being reinterpreted and challenged. What is dominant is always a question of power.
6. Racism, exclusion, and marginalization all add to the appeal of fundamentalists’ offer of a sense of belonging and a “cause”. Graphic6
Graphic7 7. There is strong evidence that the single most important factor in promoting women’s rights and gender equality is an autonomous women’s movement.

 

Auge global de los fundamentalismos religiosos.

El Diablo se esconde en los detalles proporciona detalles de las graves violaciones a los derechos humanos y, en particular, de las violaciones a los derechos de las mujeres, causados por los fundamentalismos auspiciados por los Estados, así como por actores fundamentalistas no estatales como milicias, organizaciones comunitarias confesionales e individuos. La profundización fundamentalista de normas sociales atávicas y patriarcales está provocando el aumento de la violencia contra las mujeres, las niñas y las defensoras de derechos humanos (WHRDs). El informe propuesta estas ideas clave para abordar el problema:

  • [icon] Fundamentalismos religiosos están ganando terreno en el seno de las comunidades
  • [icon] Sistemas políticos
  • [icon] Escenarios internacionales, con efectos devastadores para la gente común y para las mujeres en particular.

 

Los agentes de desarrollo deben actuar urgentemente.

Quienes trabajan en el desarrollo están de capacidad de asumir una posición más firme. Su capacidad colectiva para reconocer y enfrentar conjuntamente a los fundamentalismos religiosos resulta crucial para promover la justicia social, económica y de género y los derechos humanos de todas las personas en el marco del desarrollo sostenible.   Resulta fundamental promover que el poder y los privilegios se entiendan desde la óptica del feminismo interseccional y aplicar esta comprensión a los interrogantes sobre religión y cultura. Las organizaciones de mujeres ya poseen conocimientos y estrategias para oponerse a los fundamentalismos. Quienes trabajan en el desarrollo deberían apoyarse en estos e invertir en coaliciones enfocadas en múltiples temáticas. Lo anterior, les ayudará a alcanzar nuevos horizontes.

Snippet FEA Workers demonstrations in Georgia 3 (EN)

The photo shows a demonstration with a crowd holding green and white posters.

Что подразумевается под внешним финансированием?

Внешнее финансирование включает гранты и другие формы финансирования от благотворительных фондов, правительств, двусторонних, многосторонних или корпоративных спонсоров и индивидуальных доноров – как внутри вашей страны, так и из-за рубежа. Сюда не входят ресурсы, которые группы, организации и/или движения генерируют самостоятельно, такие как, например, членские взносы, добровольные взносы "сотрудниц(-ков), участниц(-ков) и/или сторонниц(-ков), сборы через сообщество, сдача помещений в аренду или продажа услуг. Для удобства в опрос включены определения различных видов финансирования и краткие описания различных доноров.

Janet Benshoof

Janet Benshoof fue una abogada de derechos humanos de los Estados Unidos, y defensora de la igualdad de las mujeres y de los derechos sexuales y reproductivos.

Hizo campaña para ampliar el acceso a los anticonceptivos y al aborto en todo el mundo, y luchó contra las sentencias antiaborto y en el territorio estadounidense de Guam. Fue arrestada en 1990 por oponerse a la ley de aborto más restrictiva de su país. Sin embargo, obtuvo una medida cautelar en el tribunal local de Guam que bloqueó la ley y, finalmente, ganó en el Tribunal de Apelaciones del Noveno Circuito, que llevó a la anulación de la ley para siempre.

"Las mujeres de Guam están en una situación muy trágica. No tengo intención de callarme al respecto." - Janet Benshoof para la revista People.

Janet sentó precedentes jurídicos históricos, entre ellos, la aprobación de la anticoncepción de emergencia por parte de la Administración de Alimentos y Medicamentos de los Estados Unidos, así como la aplicación del derecho internacional para garantizar los derechos de las víctimas de violación en el Tribunal Superior de Iraq, durante el procesamiento de los crímenes de guerra de la época de Saddam.

Janet fue Presidenta y fundadora del Centro de Justicia Global, y fundadora también del Centro de Derechos Reproductivos, la primera organización internacional de derechos humanos del mundo centrada en la elección y la equidad reproductiva. Durante 15 años se desempeñó como directora del Proyecto de Derechos Reproductivos de la Unión Americana de Libertades Civiles, donde encabezó litigios que dieron forma a las leyes constitucionales de los Estados Unidos sobre igualdad de género, libertad de expresión y derechos reproductivos. 

"Janet era conocida por su mente jurídica brillante, su agudo sentido del humor y su coraje ante la injusticia". - Anthony D. Romero

Nombrada una de las "100 Abogadas más influyentes de América" por el National Law Journal, Janet recibió numerosos premios y honores.

Nació en mayo de 1947 y falleció en diciembre de 2017. 

Here is your Feminist Realities Toolkit

Thank you for taking the first steps to Co-create Feminist Realities!

Download your toolkit


 

Learn more about Feminist Realities

Any questions? Please do not hesitate to contact us