Clear all

94 results found

reorder grid_view

Write for Rights 2021 Campaign Report

April 12, 2022

In 2021 Write for Rights (W4R) was 20 years old. Beginning as grassroots activism in Poland, the campaign now sees over 70 Amnesty entities taking part and people in 120 countries around the world taking action either in person or online.Covid-19 continued to impact campaigning for Write for Rights, with many countries still imposing strict rules around group gatherings. There was however light at the end of the tunnel for some national entities, who did manage to hold in person events. For those who couldn't, the innovations and 'outside the box' thinking continued, with creativity and technology helping make restrictions less restrictive!As we rapidly head into planning for Write for Rights 2022, now is the time to reflect on what we all did together and the amazing ways we worked for positive human rights change in the lives of 10 individuals and communities at risk. 

Changing chicken in Guatemala: Relevance of poultry to income generation, food security, health, and nutrition

April 20, 2020

KEYWORDS: Chickens and eggs. Industrial production. Consumption. Guatemala. HIGHLIGHTS: *This report or Guidance Memo explains the major role played by: (1) a few powerful home-grown businesses and brands, (2) cross-border and international trade and policies, in flooding Guatemala with industrially-produced chickens in the last half century. *It brings to the fore public health, food justice, and other significant issues that should be emphasized in campaigns to defeat "industrial chicken" there. *The Guidance Memo also exposes assertions and myths that help to hold in place chickens' current popularity with consumers (e.g. the claim that producing chickens industrially is important to the country's economy, but the fact is that economic benefits accrue mainly to the country's most powerful families like the Gutiérrez-Bosches who own Pollo Campero and Pollo Rey). *Provides practical strategies and actions that one can take to turn things round (e.g. challenge industry claims through magazine articles and social media, valorize indigenous culinary knowledge and promote consumption of nutrient-rich native legumes, form alliance across permaculture and other food movements).

Belize National Lionfish Management Strategy 2019-2023

March 1, 2019

Across the Caribbean, the invasion of red lionfish (Pterois volitans) poses a pervasive threat to marine ecosystems and coastal fishing communities. First recorded in Belize in 2008, lionfish have become well established across the country's entire marine environment. Uncontrolled, invasive lionfish populations disrupt marine food webs, negatively impacting coral reef health and fisheries productivity, thereby undermining the resilience of coral reefs and reef-associated systems to global change.This document describes how to design and implement an integrated approach to lionfish management – incorporating environmental, social and economic wellbeing goals – and provides specific recommendations for the adaptive management of lionfish in Belize.

U.S. Foundation Funding for Latin America, 2014–2015: With Additional Analysis on Central America

October 22, 2018

This report examines grantmaking in 2014 and 2015 for Latin America by large U.S.foundations, with a closer look at philanthropy for Central America.

Connecting the Dots: Emerging Migration Trends and Policy Questions in North and Central America

March 7, 2018

North America and the Central American countries of the Northern Triangle—El Salvador, Guatemala, and Honduras—represent one of the world's most dynamic migration corridors, with millions traveling from, through, or to these countries in recent decades. The United States has the world's largest immigrant population; Canada has one of the highest immigration rates per capita; and Mexico and Central America have significant shares of their nationals abroad, primarily in the United States. However, policies and public perceptions around immigration, especially in the United States, are not keeping up with emerging shifts in the region's migration.

Mesoamerican Reef Report Card 2018: An Evaluation of Ecosystem Health

March 1, 2018

Over the past 10 years, we have conducted rigorous science in support of management. Our reliable measures of reef condition allow us to identify the most urgent threats and responses. HRI training workshops continue to strengthen scientific capacity. Our partners are scaling-up and improving management in 47 MPAs spanning almost 60,000 km2. Through our Regional Coral BleachWatch Network, we have quickly mobilized and supported teams of partners across the region to monitor coral bleaching. HRI convenes annual partner meetings, enabling us to achieve a common voice and collectively accelerate conservation action. Together, we have shaped policy, such as protecting herbivorous fish in 3 of 4 countries. It has been 20 years since the four country leaders signed the historic Tulum Declaration, committing to protect the MAR's shared resources. Our science-based knowledge and collective management efforts need to be accelerated—particularly to reduce pollution and increase replenishment zones. Our 2018 Coral Reef Report Card includes a 10-year perspective on reef health and conservation aimed to ensure our reefs will endure and thrive into the future.

Leaders, Contexts, and Complexities: IFP Impacts in Latin America

November 16, 2017

The third report from our 10-year tracking study of the Ford Foundation International Fellowships Program (IFP), Leaders, Contexts, and Complexities provides an in-depth look at the lives and careers of IFP alumni in three Latin American countries: Brazil, Guatemala, and Mexico. Drawing on interviews and focus groups with 268 alumni, former IFP staff, community members, and other stakeholders, the fieldwork paints a complex picture that highlights the opportunities of the IFP experience against the challenges posed by local social and political realities.Myriad examples emerged from the fieldwork of ways the IFP fellowship has helped boost the individual lives and social justice careers of many members of Brazil, Guatemala, and Mexico's most disadvantaged communities. IFP alumni in these countries are serving in leadership roles, most often in academia, government, and civil society organizations. They are directing research centers, serving as vice ministers of education, and leading organizations that work on a wide range of social justice issues such as cultural preservation, indigenous and human rights, and youth development. At the same time, home country contextual challenges have limited the extent to which some alumni have been able to advance their careers, their organizations, and social progress more generally. Several alumni have faced significant challenges because of continued discrimination and difficult labor market conditions in their home countries. In contrast, some alumni in Brazil have been able to leverage the introduction of affirmative action programs and other policies aimed at addressing inequities to advance their social justice aims. Taken together, these findings show that local environments matter.

Response to Vanderbilt University's LAPOP Critique of CEPR Report, "Have US-Funded CARSI Programs Reduced Crime and Violence in Central America?"

January 25, 2017

This report is a response to Vanderbilt University's Latin American Public Opinion Project (LAPOP) critique of our report, "Have US-Funded CARSI Programs Reduced Crime and Violence in Central America?" released in September 2016. That September report was an examination of the only publicly accessible impact assessment of USAID-funded anticrime and community-based violence prevention programs carried out under the umbrella of the US State Department's Central American Regional Security Initiative (CARSI). LAPOP took issue with our illustration of certain methodological flaws in LAPOP's study, as well as with the manner in which we presented our conclusions. LAPOP's criticisms appear to be largely based on misunderstanding and misinterpretation of our arguments and fail to address our main findings. The problems with the LAPOP study that we identified still stand, as does the validity of our conclusion: LAPOP's study cannot support the conclusion that intervention caused the areas subject to treatment in the CARSI programs to improve relative to those areas where no intervention took place.

Funding for Small-scale Fisheries A Landscape Overview

October 31, 2016

This report examines support for small-scale fishery projects, and provides an overview of Rare's Fish Forever initiative.Key findings include:Funding from Foundations-Between 2007 to 2015, we identified $91 million in grants directed towards small-scale fishing (SSF) projects. An additional $136 million in grants was directed towards projects that may be relevant for small-scale fisheries, but it is not clear from the grant description –most of these grants are for marine protected areas. In sum, this is ~$10-$23 million per year in grants to projects that are potentially relevant for SSF.-Approximately 0.5% of all foundation grantmaking goes to marine conservation, and  we estimate that between 5-12% of that is directed to SSF relevant projects.Funding from DFI's-Based on a review of the funding of seven major DFIs (World Bank, GEF, IADB, ADB, KfW, AfDB, and CAF) from 2000-2016, we identified $1.825 billion of investment in SSF related projects. An additional $4.351 billion was invested in projects that may be relevant for small-scale fisheries (e.g., coastal zone management). In sum this amounts to  ~$107-$363 million per year of funding from these DFIs for projects that are potentially relevant for SSF.-SSF related projects made up less than 0.5%on average of the DFI's portfolios.

U.S. Foundation Funding for Central America in Context

September 12, 2016

This fact sheet describes U.S. foundation funding in the larger context of funding by U.S. foundations for international causes more generally.

Aportes filantrópicos de fundaciones estadounidenses a Centroamérica en su contexto

September 12, 2016

This fact sheet describes U.S. foundation funding in the larger context of funding by U.S. foundations for international causes more generally.

Have US-Funded CARSI Programs Reduced Crime and Violence in Central America? An Examination of LAPOP'S Impact Assessment of US Violence Prevention Programs in Central America

September 7, 2016

In October 2014, the Latin American Public Opinion Project (LAPOP) at Vanderbilt University published an impact assessment study of community-based violence prevention programs that have been implemented under the umbrella of the US State Department's Central American Regional Security Initiative (CARSI). The study looked at survey data measuring public perceptions of crime in 127 treatment and control neighborhoods in municipalities in El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, and Panama where the violence prevention programs have been implemented. The study's authors stated that the data shows that "in several key respects the programs have been a success" and note, for instance, that 51 percent fewer residents of "treated" communities reported being aware of murders and extortion incidents during the previous 12 months, and 19 percent fewer residents reported having heard about robberies having occurred.As the LAPOP study is, to date, the only publicly accessible impact assessment of programs carried out under CARSI -- a notoriously opaque regional assistance scheme that has received hundreds of millions of dollars of US government funding -- a thorough review of the LAPOP study data seemed appropriate.The following report examines the data collected during the LAPOP study and subjects them to a number of statistical tests. The authors find that the study cannot support the conclusion that the areas subject to treatment in the CARSI programs showed better results than those areas that were not.This report identifies major problems with the LAPOP study, namely, the nonrandomness of the selection of treatment versus control areas and how the differences in initial conditions, as well as differences in results between treatment and control areas, have been interpreted. In the case of reported robberies, if the areas subject to treatment have an elevated level of reported robberies in the year prior to treatment, it is possible that there is some reversion to normal levels over the next year. The LAPOP methodology does not differentiate between effective treatment and, for example, an unrelated decline in reported robberies in a treated area following a year with an abnormally high number of reported robberies. The series of statistical tests in this report indicate that this possibility is quite plausible, and cannot be ruled out; and that the LAPOP study, therefore, does not demonstrate a statistically significant positive effect of treatment. The same can be said for the other variables where the LAPOP study finds significant improvement.