Prepared by: Shahana Shafiuddin, Kajal & Langa
The Line C
Pipeline Project and its Environmental Justice Issues:
The Coastal GasLink pipeline in
Canada has sparked controversy since it passes across Indigenous grounds. Some
Indigenous leaders support it. TC Energy owns and runs the project, with Aimco
and KKR acquiring a 65% share in 2019. Along with the pipeline route, TC Energy
has an agreement with the 20 First Nations (6 treaties, 8 nations, and 14
elected band councils). While others, such as the traditional chiefs of the
Wetʼsuwetʼen people, oppose it for environmental reasons. There have been
protests and roadblocks despite efforts by courts and police to pave the way
for development. Despite these tensions, work has mainly continued, with a few
obstacles, such as COVID-19 pauses and environmental concerns. The pipeline
developer claims to have made progress, but some Indigenous leaders continue to
oppose it. However, the RCMP has intervened to ease development.
The Coastal GasLink pipeline runs
670 kilometres from Dawson Creek to Kitimat, crossing through Indigenous areas,
particularly the Wet'suwet'en. The pipeline will deliver natural gas to a plant
in Kitimat, where it will be processed into LNG for export to Asia.
Construction began in August 2020, with 70% done by July 2022, the cost has
climbed to CA$11.2 billion.
Local band councils and
hereditary chiefs were consulted on the Coastal GasLink pipeline planning and
environmental review between 2012 and 2014. The Office of the Wet'suwet'en
presented other routes, which were rejected by Coastal GasLink in 2014 due to
technical issues and the need for additional First Nations consultation.
According to Coastal GasLink president David Pfeiffer, the present route, which
was chosen in 2014, was the most technically viable and had the least
environmental impact. In 2020, Coastal GasLink proposed the Morice River North
Alternate route, but the Wetʼsuwetʼen hereditary chiefs did not respond to the
message.
The pipeline is expected to
transport five billion cubic feet of liquefied natural gas (LNG) daily. When
burned, this will produce an estimated 585.5 million pounds of C02 daily.
Because the pipeline crosses 206 waterways, it threatens land, air, water, and
local species. If the pipeline leaks, emissions and other damages can destroy
vegetation, harm wildlife, contaminate the local water and cause air pollution.
The project threatens Canada’s ability to ensure a safe, healthy climate for
everyone—now and in the future.
Relation to
systemic problems such as the tragedy of the commons, externalities, types of
capital involved, and GDP:
The initial construction of the
pipeline was handled extremely poorly by the local BC police force and
government. Protestors were being held at gunpoint and arrested for
interrupting the construction of a pipeline on their own land due to some
treaty agreements to which Hereditary chiefs of the Wet'suwet'en territory had
yet to consent. Referencing the Just Conservation Framework, Harms have been
allocated between the Wet'suwet'en community and indigenous communities in
general; it has affected them for over four years.
Pipeline work camps have fueled
drug trafficking, sexual violence, road accidents, and disease transmission and
driven up the cost of living across the region. Regulators have continued to
process multiple fines towards TC Energy as the pipeline’s erosion has damaged
salmon streams on the Wet’suwet’en territory.
The pipeline is supposed to
support global emissions reduction, but the Wet’suwet’en territory’s defence
laws are continuously ignored.
Use of the W5
Framework for the Case Study:
Who: Corporate/oil company TC
Energy owns and runs the Coastal GasLink pipeline project, with Aimco and KKR
acquiring a 65% share in 2019. The government of British Columbia and the
Federal Government are supporting them, and the RCMP is working according to
government policies. Twenty-First Nations (six treaties, eight nations, and 14
elected band councils) agreed with this project. But the traditional chiefs of
the Wetʼsuwetʼen people oppose it. Here, corporate groups will mostly benefit.
However, the environment of that area will suffer, including the indigenous
people who live there.
What: The Coastal GasLink
pipeline runs 670 kilometres from Dawson Creek to Kitimat, crossing through
Indigenous areas, particularly the Wet'suwet'en. The pipeline will deliver
natural gas to a plant in Kitimat, where it will be processed into LNG for export
to Asia. It threatens land, air, water, and local species.
Where: The Coastal GasLink
pipeline runs 670 kilometres from Dawson Creek to Kitimat, crossing through
Indigenous areas, particularly the Wet'suwet'en From Alberta to British
Columbia.
When: The British Columbia
government has held more than 120 meetings and countless phone calls and emails
with hereditary chiefs since 2012. The last update news is that the
construction work is done, in 2023. It will continue to work in 2024 for clean-up
and reclamation plan work.
Why: It will prepare the
construction team and communities for safe operations. The company, government
and the people of Canada will benefit from the money that this project will
earn. However, there is a high risk of environmental disaster.
Use of the Just
Conservation Framework for the Case Study:
The just conservation framework is utilized in this case
study in the following aspects: Distribution:
Harms are allocated between the Wet’suswet’en community and indigenous
communities in general; it has affected them for over four years. The
environmental and social impacts have been extensive not only on the community
but also on the environment. Procedure/Participation: Decisions were made by
the government and the liberal party standing for economic gain. They involved
the appropriate chiefs for their gain and did not consult with parties who
owned the land and deserved proper involvement. Recognition: Reconciliation
must be achieved, and what can be restored for the communities moving forward,
including adequate advisement for usage of land without further damaging
relations to First Nations.
Use of the Walker
Environmental Justice Framework:
Use of the Walker Environmental
Justice Framework within this case study include:
Justice: The Wet’suswet’en community should have appropriate
resolutions, the pipeline protests should not have been responded to as it was,
and the timeline to repair damages needs to begin and be consulted with the
communities moving forward—evidence: Multiple articles and case studies support
our case study and knowledge from protestors themselves. Following the pipeline
installation, multiple sources have credited the immense damages. Overall, the
recipients of this environmental justice are the indigenous peoples of Canada
and their continuous mistreatment and overuse of their land. The pipeline's
construction has set them back, and the case study will prove how/if they can
be rectified and see justice.
Possible
Stakeholder Approaches to the Principles of Environmental Justice:
Possible Stakeholders in British Columbia include The
Indigenous Implementation Committee. The Environmental Assessment Advisory
Committee. Both committees can essentially appeal on behalf of the indigenous
communities affected. Local governments in collaboration with the Wet’suswet’en
community - though this has perspired, there has not been an equal division of
decisions presented to the public. Approaches may appeal to multiple
principles, such as 9. Environmental Justice protects the right of victims of
environmental injustice to receive total compensation and reparations for
damages and quality health care. Environmental Justice opposes the destructive
operations of multi-national corporations. 11. Environmental Justice must
recognize a special legal and natural relationship of Native Peoples to the
U.S. government through treaties, agreements, compacts, and covenants affirming
sovereignty and self-determination
Some of the top
social and environmental justice dimensions that are likely to be most
important to this case study:
The Coastal GasLink pipeline issue in
northeastern British Columbia highlights the intricate relationship between resource
development and Indigenous rights. Government clearance and support from
several First Nations band councils contradict Wet'suwet'en hereditary chiefs'
demand that no pipelines be built through their traditional area without their
permission (CBC News, 2020). This conflict emphasizes the critical role of
Indigenous sovereignty and self-determination in land stewardship, addressing
broader issues concerning Indigenous rights and environmental justice. The
Wet'sunwet 'en people's commitment to safeguarding their unceded lands and
fostering healing and reconnection with Indigenous land and non-human relations
goes beyond environmental concerns, emphasizing the gravity of the conflict and
its repercussions for Indigenous cultures (Spice, 2019).
Police assaults, criminal sanctions,
harassment, and harassment have all been used against indigenous land defenders
who are accused of grave abuses of human rights. Despite the lack of hereditary
chiefs' agreement, they oppose the pipeline project, citing concerns about its
impact on essential ecosystems and natural resources (Amnesty International,
2022). The project's potential to harm drinking water sources and salmon
breeding habitats has provoked peaceful protests and brought international
attention to the growing use of force by the government and private security
services against land defenders and protestors. These crimes highlight the
critical need to address systemic Indigenous rights, environmental protection,
and human rights concerns in resource development projects.
How this case study
can move from problem to solution:
Moving from problem to solution in the
Coastal GasLink pipeline debate necessitates a holistic approach considering
the complex convergence of Indigenous rights, environmental concerns, and
social justice issues. The importance of genuine engagement and consent between
project proponents and Indigenous people, notably Wet'suwet'en hereditary
chiefs, cannot be overstated. Genuine consultation and involvement that
prioritize free, prior, and informed consent are critical for developing trust
and partnership. Furthermore, incorporating Indigenous knowledge and viewpoints
into environmental assessments might aid in identifying sustainable development
choices while mitigating potential ecological repercussions.
Maintaining legal safeguards and human
rights standards is critical for protecting Indigenous rights and holding
perpetrators accountable for any abuses throughout the project implementation
phase. Holding those responsible for human rights violations accountable,
including government institutions and private groups, is critical to
establishing justice and healing. Furthermore, addressing unintended
repercussions such as increased marginalization of Indigenous populations and
environmental degradation needs proactive risk-mitigation strategies and
promotes sustainable development. This could include investing in alternative
energy sources, supporting Indigenous-led conservation efforts, and
establishing community-based resource management systems.
Advocating for systemic change is
critical to addressing the conflict's fundamental causes and proposing
transformative solutions prioritizing Indigenous rights, environmental
sustainability, and social equality. Challenging extractive industries' dominance,
advocating for Indigenous self-governance and land rights, and supporting
equitable and sustainable development models are critical steps toward
attaining long-term solutions. By combining these tactics, parties may strive
to resolve the Coastal GasLink pipeline controversy in a way that respects
Indigenous sovereignty, protects the environment, and advances social justice.
To promote equitable and inclusive outcomes, all parties engaged must
demonstrate ongoing commitment, collaboration, and accountability.
How and if unintended
consequences can/should be considered:
Addressing the Coastal GasLink pipeline
controversy and its implications for Indigenous rights, environmental
sustainability, and social justice requires considering unforeseen effects. The
project's implementation poses significant risks of negative impacts on
Indigenous people, the environment, and human rights that must be thoroughly
assessed and managed. Unintended repercussions can include increasing existing
disparities, upsetting traditional land use practices, and jeopardizing
Indigenous people's health and well-being (CBC News, 2020).
One method for avoiding unintended
consequences is to conduct thorough impact assessments that consider both
short- and long-term effects on affected communities and ecosystems (Amnesty
International, 2022). This includes undertaking extensive consultations with
Indigenous people to identify potential dangers and concerns and incorporating
their traditional knowledge and viewpoints into decision-making processes.
Furthermore, monitoring and evaluation methods should be built to follow the
project's long-term impacts and adapt policies as needed to address developing
difficulties.
References
Amnesty International. (2022,
August 9). Indigenous land defender at
risk. Retrieved from https://amnesty.ca/urgent-actions/canada-indigenous-land-defenders-at-risk/
CBC News. (2020, February 12). What you need to know about the Coastal Gaslink pipeline conflict.Retrieved
from https://www.cbc.ca/news/indigenous/wet-suwet-en-coastal-gaslink-pipeline-1.5448363
Spice. A, (2019).The
Unist’ot’en and Gidimt’en land defenders aren’t just fighting pipelines,
they’re fighting for a way of life.. B.C Climate Change. Retrieved from https://www.asparagusmagazine.com/articles/wetsuweten-gidimten-unistoten-land-defenders-fighting-pipelin-protect-more-than-the-environment
The Wet'suwet'en conflict disrupting Canada's rail
system
(20 February 2020)
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-51550821
The Black Serpent": Wet'suwet'en Perspectives on
the Coastal GasLink Pipeline (Rocks, Cara Emily. 2023)
https://openarchive.usn.no/usn-xmlui/handle/11250/3102022
Exclusive: Canada police prepared to shoot Indigenous
activists, documents show (Fri 20 Dec 2019 10.30 GMT)
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/dec/20/canada-indigenous-land-defenders-police-documents
No comments:
Post a Comment