The Collective on China Finance and Investment, Human Rights and the Environment (CICDHA) and other civil society organizations presented a report in Geneva condemning “serious abuses” and the environmental impact of 14 major Chinese projects in Ecuador and eight other Latin American countries. The disapproval is part of UN oversight under the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, which Beijing ratified in 2001.

The report is emphatic in terms of Chinese non-compliance. It warns of “a number of patterns of human rights violations” in its operations in Latin America. Among others, the violation of the rights of indigenous peoples, abuse of labor, forced evictions and destruction of the environment are highlighted. The consequences are catastrophic and often lead to conflict and violence.

After two decades, it is evident that the bad practices and low standards of Chinese companies are not specific or exceptional, but repeated and transversal. With 172,000 million dollars invested, mostly in the extractive sectors, and the construction of more than 200 infrastructures, the socio-ecological impact in the region is enormous. And it’s not going to change anytime soon.

First, because in the power struggle for resources, China will increase its extractive investments and infrastructure in Latin America. And, secondly, because there is no indication of an amendment proposal from Beijing, whose authorities prevent dialogue with civil organizations. They are trying to use UN mechanisms to put pressure on them. But it does not serve China to correct its modus operandi.

Although Western companies have their own history of excess, they are generally viewed as much more…

Because of the possibilities it offers, it is positive that it is an Asian giant in the region. But it is problematic that it sets rules and standards, since it is precisely the absence of counterweights in its development model that encourages abuses. Although Western companies have their own history of excess, they are generally much more scrutinized, and the consequences of their bad behavior are – in theory – enough of an incentive to raise their social and environmental standards.

Adherence to these, the requirements of transparency and public scrutiny make a significant difference. As long as they are not subject to scrutiny and scrutiny and are not punished for their abuses, it is unlikely that Chinese investors will choose to introduce responsible policy guidelines that minimize the impact of their projects. The deterioration of the institutional framework in Latin America also contributes to the maintenance of this scheme.

There are also concerns that these megaprojects are not paying enough taxes on the wealth extracted. It is true that tax evasion is widespread in the industry and that optimal control mechanisms do not always exist in the “global south”. But environmental destruction, rights violations, job insecurity, and low taxation, along with the consolidation of a primary export model without technology transfer, should lead us to question what the real gains are for recipient countries from Chinese investment. . (OR)