Sites, funds and spheres of exchange in a Clean Development Mechanism project

ABSTRACT

This article analyses the implementation and operation of a wind farm in ancestral indigenous lands in Colombia. A wind farm operates at different levels: creating energy, social programmes, jobs, carbon credits and revenues. However, such emerging objects are distributed unevenly. To understand the hierarchy in place in the carbon market, this article explains the disconnection between clean energy production sites and carbon funds in which credits are created. Given the fundamental need to understand the creation of objects of property that are, nevertheless, not fully interchangeable between the site and the fund, this article aims to draw renewed attention to the concept of spheres of exchange. The argument is built upon ethnographic fieldwork undertaken on-site in the Utility Company’s offices and the World Bank headquarters.

KEYWORDS:

• Clean Development Mechanism
• spheres of exchange
• property
• indigenous people
• Carbon Funds

Acknowledgements

This paper is the result of several research projects. The fieldwork was funded by a scholarship from the Latin American Council of Social Sciences (CLACSO). The analysis and writing process was supported by the project ‘Intervention Regimes and Expert Knowledge in Colombia’ (Uniandes – University of Antioquia); Newton Fund Researchers Link travel grant (British Council) by the UK Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS).

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Notes on contributor

Pablo Jaramillo is Associate Professor in the Anthropology Department at the Universidad de los Andes in Bogotá, Colombia. He received his PhD in Social Anthropology from the University of Manchester, UK.

Notes

1 In the case of Bank for Development and Reconstruction (World Bank proper) and International Development Agency. In the case of private companies, there is a different but related body called International Finance Corporation. IFC has its own safeguards, such as the Guidance Note 7. Indigenous Peoples (IFC, 2012). See also Eurus Wind – Mexico (http://www.ifc.org/ifcext/spiwebsite1.nsf/ProjectDisplay/ESRS28434).

2 The IDB also has a series of safeguard policies, which despite not being applicable to Jepírachi, are important to mention as the institution is interested in projects in La Guajira. The IDB safeguard policies are: ‘Involuntary Resettlement Operational Policy’ (1998), ‘Indigenous Peoples Policy (IPP)’ (2006), ‘Disaster Risk Management Policy’ (2007), ‘Operational Policy on Gender Equality in Development’ (2010), ‘Access to Information Policy’ (2010) (BID, 2011).

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by Newton Fund Researchers Link travel grant (British Council) by the UK Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS); CLACSO; Universidad de Antioquia; Universidad de los Andes.