A Ring of Hope

The text examines the current environmental challenges threatening the cenotes within the ‘Ring of Cenotes’ natural reserve in Yucatán State, Mexico. It briefly analyzes a case involving a large-scale pig farm and subsequently addresses the petition by a Mayan Committee to recognize the cenotes as holders of the Rights of Nature. Finally, the concept of biocultural rights is explored as a potential ally to the Rights of Nature framework.

An Overview of the ‘Ring of Cenotes’ Context

As a result of the impact of the ‘Chicxulub’ meteorite, which hit Mexico’s Yucatán Peninsula approximately 65 million years ago, geomorphological formations known as ‘cenotes’ (from the Mayan dzonot, meaning ‘abyss’) were formed. In this context, the ‘Ring of Cenotes’ emerged as an area delineated by the outer edge (diameter) of the Chicxulub crater, consisting of 99 cenotes located along the edge within a 5-kilometer-wide strip, according to a RAMSAR information sheet.

Due to its importance as a highly biodiverse and vulnerable natural area, the ‘Ring of Cenotes’ was registered in 2009 in the list of Wetlands of International Importance under the Ramsar Convention. In 2013, it was declared a Geohydrological State Reserve by the Government of the State of Yucatán through Decree 117. According to this Decree, designating the ‘Ring of Cenotes’ as a State Reserve restricts the use of its soil to activities and practices compatible with “the preservation and sustainable use of natural resources, as well as with the functional integrity and use capacities of ecosystems”.

However, the ‘Ring of Cenotes’ is not an untouched natural area. Within it, there are many cities whose residents are predominantly Mayans, along with dozens of large-scale pig farms. Regarding the former, the existence of an inextricable and sacred relationship between modern-day Mayan communities and the cenotes, a connection that dates to ancient Mayans, is well known. From this relationship emerges the long-standing guardianship role that they have played in preserving these ecosystems. As for the latter, it is important to note that many of these farms, to the present day, fail to meet all the administrative and ecological requirements. On this topic, a Greenpeace report has highlighted the lack of Environmental Impact Assessment. Moreover, free, prior, and informed consent from Indigenous Peoples is absent, the requirement of which is an international obligation enshrined in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) and the Convention No.169 on Indigenous and Tribal Peoples.

Six Mayan Children Stand Against a Large-Scale Pig Farm

In the mentioned above context, the case ‘Homún Pig Farm’ takes place. Specifically, a project to build and operate a large-scale pig farm called ‘Homún Pig Farm’ was granted all the necessary permits by the authorities of Homún municipality and the State of Yucatán despite not engaging in prior consultation with the Homún Indigenous community. This issue is of considerable importance, as numerous studies have shown that the negative environmental effects caused by this industry are leading to the degradation of local ecosystems, including cenotes, and impacting the livelihoods of Mayan communities.

In response to the aforementioned circumstances, in 2016, six Mayan children from Homún sought federal protection through their legal representatives by filing an ‘indirect amparo lawsuit’ against the company behind this large-scale pig farm project (PAPO), as well as against various Mexican authorities at local, state, and national levels. In the lawsuit, the children claimed that the following rights had been violated: the right to a clean environment, the right to water, the right to health, the right to free, prior, and informed consent of Indigenous Peoples, and the principles of intergenerational equity, as well as the principles of precaution and prevention in environmental matters.

After a lengthy legal process, during which the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation (Mexico’s highest court) intervened, the Second District Judge in the State of Yucatan ultimately ruled in favor of the complainants in 2024 (Judgment in Amparo Trial 1757/2019-IV-A), preventing the ‘Homún Pig Farm’ from continuing operations. While the closure of this farm marked a victory for environmental protection and justice, it is important to consider the large number of industrial macro pig farms that continue operating in and around the ‘Ring of Cenotes’. The situation becomes even more concerning when considering other mega-projects –such as the Mayan Train– that are negatively affecting both the ecological balance of the region’s ecosystems and the pre-Hispanic biocultural heritage of Indigenous communities.

By and large, the Mayan communities of the Yucatán Peninsula face harmful Western development in various forms, not only from the pig farming industry but also from “monocultures associated with genetically modified crops, tourism as well as real estate expansion, and other extractive projects that have polluted the aquifer of the Yucatán Peninsula […]”, as Jorge Calderón has pointed out in a recent Nature’s Rights in Mexico report. As noted by archaeologist Sergio Grosjean, around 70% of the cenotes in the Yucatán Peninsula are polluted by “waste, agricultural chemicals, farm residues, and other pollutants”.

The Path Forward: Advocating for the Rights of Nature

In response to the alarming pollution of cenotes in the Yucatan Peninsula, representatives of the Mayan Committee Kana’an Ts’onot (‘Guardians of the Cenotes’) submitted a petition to various administrative authorities requesting the recognition of those cenotes that make up the ‘Ring of Cenotes’ as legal entities with rights and the Indigenous communities as their guardians. Since the administrative authorities in question failed to provide a substantiated and reasoned response to the petition, the Mayan Committee filed an amparo lawsuit before the Fourth District Court of the State of Yucatán, seeking judicial enforcement of their requests. However, while the amparo and protection were granted to the plaintiffs through the judgment issued on May 7, 2024, the judge did not rule on the substantive merits of the Mayan Committee’s petition but instead addressed procedural matters, ordering the authorities involved to issue a substantiated and reasoned response to the initial petition submitted by the Mayan Committee.

To this day, no specific natural entity has been recognized as a subject of the Rights of Nature in Mexico, whether through the judiciary or the legislature. However, Latin American experience has shown that such designation can indeed be achieved either through the judiciary or the legislative field. It is well known that the first case in Latin America where the Rights of Nature were granted to a specific natural ecosystem was that of the Vilcabamba River in Ecuador in 2011, through a ruling issued by the Provincial Court of Justice of Loja. Though admittedly significant, the constitutional recognition of the Rights of Nature in Ecuador’s Constitution was a key milestone in the progress of such rights’ recognition. Since then, various Latin American States have followed similar steps, for instance, the cases of the Atrato River (2016) and the Colombian Amazon (2018), both in Colombia; and recently the Marañón River (2024) in Peru, to name just a few.

Biocultural Rights: A Key Ally to the Rights of Nature

There is still much work to be done in enforcing and truly protecting Subjects of Rights recognized as such throughout Latin America. However, taking a step forward, recognizing and protecting the inextricable relationship between Indigenous communities and the ecosystems they have historically inhabited could serve as a grand overarching strategy for advancing the Rights of Nature and for truly protecting the environment. Most Indigenous cosmovisions do not perceive an ontological gap between Nature and Culture. As Pierre Brunet has mentioned, the ontological and hierarchical dualism of Nature-Culture is almost non-existent in most of the Indigenous worldviews. Instead, their biocultural heritage has been profoundly shaped by this deep relationship with their natural surroundings.

In the field of Human Rights, the ideas explained in the previous paragraph have evolved into what is now known as biocultural rights. According to Cher Chen and Michael Gilmore, “the concept of biocultural rights assumes that Indigenous peoples ought to have the right to maintain their distinct biocultural heritage, which is essential to the maintenance of biodiversity and cultural diversity worldwide”. Moreover, within Indigenous communities, there is a sense of responsibility towards the natural surroundings, which challenges the Western concept of property as merely a commodity.

In this vein, the Colombian Constitutional Court, in the Atrato River’s ruling, has recognized the importance of incorporating the concept of biocultural rights and connected it to the legal figure called ‘Stewardship’ into the Rights of Nature legal framework. Specifically, in section 5.11 of this ruling, the Court stated that biocultural rights pertain to the right of “Ethnic communities to administer and exercise autonomous guardianship over their territories in accordance with their own laws and customs and the natural resources that make up their habitat, where they develop their culture, traditions, and way of life based on the special relationship they have with the environment and biodiversity”. This is not an isolated case. Recently, in the Marañón River case, a mixed court in Peru recognized and appointed both the State and Indigenous organizations as guardians, defenders, and representatives of the river.

Furthermore, biocultural heritage encompasses not only the environmental significance of a given ecosystem for a region but also “includes the social, spiritual, symbolic, religious, or economic relationships that the ecosystem maintains with a human group that has historically interacted with it”, as noted by legal scholars Medina Carrillo y Fernández Mendiburu. However, in Mexico, the biocultural heritage is at risk, according to the Mexican Center for Environmental Law. In fact, there is a lack of development and reinforcement of the biocultural rights of Indigenous communities within the country’s national legal framework.

The situation becomes even more urgent to address when considering that strengthening biocultural rights in Mexico could also reinforce the Rights of Nature. Other Latin American states are paving the way by recognizing Indigenous communities as guardians of natural entities that have been granted the status of holders of the Rights of Nature. Consequently, Mexico now has a significant opportunity to protect highly biodiverse and vulnerable ecosystems through the Rights of Nature framework, drawing on the deep historical relation between Indigenous communities and the ecosystems they long inhabited. Ultimately, this is a historical debt.