Skip to main content

Analyze

9. What does this organization seem to find methodologically challenging in dealing with environmental governance?

annlejan7

While the organization was founded by Taiwan's citizens to uphold environmental justice movements centered on Taiwanese citizens, its involvement in Vietnam's Formosa case signals that the organization itself may be broadening their scope in future endeavors. In leveraging its resources to seek redress for victims outside of Taiwan, ERF may need to extend their networks to international agencies as well as engage with communities not directly reachable to its workers. As Vietnam's Formosa case also concerns dealings with an authoritarian government, restrictions on speech, police brutality, and censureship on the part of Vietnam's government may render it difficult for ERF and affiliated agencies to obtain all relevant information pertaining to the case.

7. What events or data seem to have motivated their ways of thinking about environmental governance?

annlejan7

Environmental Rights Foundation (ERF)  was founded due to the result of the court settlement regarding the lawsuit on the 3rd phase expansion of Central Taiwan Science Park (CTSP) between farmers and the government. As such, the organization’s focus remains centered on ensuring community members' environmental rights across different government development plans.

6. What data or reports has this organization produced or or used to support their approach to community engagement?

annlejan7

https://erf.org.tw/news/ 


ERF has published over 150 press releases documenting their engagement communities in seeking government actions to address environmental disasters. These press releases include up-to-date news on each relevant environmental justice case the agency is currently working on. One example of a recent press release includes information issued by the Formosa Plastics Vietnam Steel Alliance, which consists of six non-governmental organizations supervising the case. Statements issued within this press release comes from members of Amnesty International Taiwan, Reporters  without Borderes, Environmental Lawyer's Association, and the Environmental Rights Protection Foundation. 

4. What other organizations does this organization interact and collaborate with?

annlejan7

In regards to the Formosa case, ERF has collaborated with the Justice for Formosa Victims (JFFV)- a Vietnamese-American based organization- to coordinate efforts in seeking redress to affected communities.

3. What has this organization done through research or legislation?

annlejan7
  • Drawn from website,community engagement  activities undertaken by ERF in Taiwan includes:

    • At Reservoir Planning Areas: ERF has organized the International Day of Action for Rivers events on March 14 for two consecutive years in 2018 and 2019. The events aim at drawing the society’s attention on reservoir issues through local concerts or speed-walking events.

    • At Solar Power Planning Areas: ERF has organized with local indigenous people the Tribe Land and Sunshine Workshop so that the local communities know more about solar energy and the practicing of indigenous peoples’ right of consultation and consent and the right of benefit sharing.

    • At So-to-Be-Eliminated Fishing Villages Whose Land is Acquired by the Tourism Industry and Hotels: ERF organizes courses on urban planning procedures and more.

    • Near Factories of the High Technology Industry: ERF organizes courses on communities’ right to know, health risk reports, and more.

  • The organization has also established the following:

  • Citizen Monitoring the Sixth Naphtha Cracker Environmental Rights Promotion Action Platform (Citizen Monitoring the Sixth Naphtha Cracker Platform): The Sixth Naphtha Cracker of Formosa Plastics is the largest petrochemical industrial park in central Taiwan, impacting the local environment and the health of residents greatly. Research has shown that the incidence of cancer is significantly higher in residents living near the petrochemical industrial park. Taixi Village of Changhua even has the name “cancer village”. The platform was co-established by civic organizations and local residents, aiming at urging the government to enhance its capability of environmental governance and conduct adequate environmental monitoring to realize the public’s right to know.

  • Legalization of Unregistered Factories on Agricultural Land: At present, there are over 134,500 unregistered factories on agricultural land in Taiwan, occupying an area of 13,859 hectares. ERF has been working with civic organizations since 2017, organizing legal policy lobbying, urging the government to amend laws and regulations, and publicizing data and information for better policy tracking and judgement. 

  • Judicial Remedies for Transnational Corporation Pollution (Ocean Pollution of Formosa Ha-Tinh Steel Corporation): ERF organized a lawyer group to assist the 7,875 Vietnamese victims. We filed for a civil lawsuit for compensation against the shareholders and board of directors of Formosa Ha-Tinh Steel Corporation, hoping that transnational corporations bear responsibilities of pollution.

2. Who is their membership comprised of?

annlejan7

ERF members include lawyers and environmental experts.  The board of directors of the ERF are nominated by governmental authorities, local farmers, lawyers, and environmental experts. Of special note to this case is Hsin-Hsuan Sun, a researcher at ERF. She maintains  an active online presence to educate others on the progress of the Formosa case in Vietnam and raise awareness on international policy developments with direct relevance to environmental justice cases. For example, her recent tweets call for greater involvement of underprivileged and indigenous communities in renewables development.

1. What is the aim of this organization?

annlejan7

 The Environmental Rights Foundation (ERF) is a non-profit  based in Taiwan, Asia, that aims to support environmental grassroots movements, strengthen civic participation, promote information disclosure, and defend the communities for the right to live with a better environment.

5. What funding enables their work and possibly shapes their way of thinking about disaster and health?

annlejan7
  • The organization relies in part on private donations from concerned citizens. However, the founding of the organization relied on donors organized by Taiwan’s Ministry of Science and Technology. 

  • Born out of reconciliation between citizen movements and governmental actors, the organization’s mission continues to focus on holding the government accountable in implementing and promoting the protection of environmental protection and environmental rights stipulated in the Constitution, as well as Basic Environmental Law and other environmental regulations in accordance with the articles of association.

Mitigation, Extremes, and Water

weather_jen

META: Water seems to be one important medium through which NOLA envisions the “impacts” of the Anthropocene—scarcity, abundance, temporalities and spatial distributions, management of, and hazards that emerge in its context. Less is said about the causal or attributional aspects of the Anthropocene. How might water function as an entry point into the assemblages of local anthropocenics?

I found the NOLA Hazard Mitigation Plan for 2018, which frames the impacts of the Anthropocene as an intersection of weather extremes amid climate change and evolving vulnerabilities of its people. Four of seven items in the executive summary note water as central to local interventions: flood awareness, flood repair, flood mitigation, flood infrastructure. Too much water or water in the wrong places and the aftereffect of water on infrastructure and lives. One expression, then, is preparedness.

MACRO: Mitigation is an interesting analytic for the Anthropocene. In the US mitigation plans are shaped by the 1988 Stafford Act (which amended the 1974 Disaster Relief Act). Constraints on communities come through rules, regulations, policies, (dis)incentives, and surveillance by state and federal authorities. Much of this is bound by economic and administrative discourses.

Goals are set in this document—broken out by timelines, activities, priorities, and capabilities. Another expression is classification of anthropocenics by subfields and accounting metrics. How do we measure progress and what is deferred to the future, 5-10 years out from today, a goal that has no tangible accountability but is named and acknowledged. What are the practices of naming, responsibility, and making (in)visible in the Anthropocene?

BIO: One new initiative, Ready for Rain, in particular is of interest to me as it highlights the more neoliberal vision for how the public should self-regulate risk and mitigate harm. I hear this as an extension of a government agency program to make the nation Weather Ready. Other bullets highlight “green” buildings, energies, and infrastructures. These could be examples of how the city envisions the Anthropocene feedback loop of humans changing/planning for climate alterations, which is a fairly typical lens.

Some questions: What does the water do? What does the water know? If we trace water in all its instantiations (e.g. historical water, flow of water, chemistry of water, application of water, temperature of water), what do we learn about the future imaginaries of what NOLA will / could / ought to become?