{"id":1435,"date":"2026-04-01T13:01:41","date_gmt":"2026-04-01T12:01:41","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/noapuertobaru.com\/?p=1435"},"modified":"2026-04-01T19:08:59","modified_gmt":"2026-04-01T18:08:59","slug":"when-the-impact-does-not-stay-in-one-place-unesco-warns-about-puerto-baru","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/noapuertobaru.com\/en\/articles-2\/when-the-impact-does-not-stay-in-one-place-unesco-warns-about-puerto-baru\/","title":{"rendered":"When the impact doesn't stay in one place, UNESCO warns about Puerto Bar\u00fa"},"content":{"rendered":"

This is an international call that Panama cannot ignore; more than a minor warning, it is a direct appeal from one of the world's most important conservation organisations.<\/span><\/p>\n

UNESCO has urged the Panamanian State to review the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) of the Puerto Bar\u00fa project, in view of the risk that its impacts may not be limited to the local area, but rather extend towards the ocean and reach one of the most valuable ecosystems on the planet, Coiba National Park, declared a World Heritage Site.<\/span><\/p>\n

What UNESCO warns is that the impacts do not affect just one ecosystem<\/b><\/h2>\n

In its official decision (see page 138 onwards), UNESCO highlights a key concern: the indirect effects of the Puerto Bar\u00fa project in Chiriqu\u00ed have not been sufficiently evaluated.
\n\"\"<\/span><\/p>\n

Source UNESCO State of conservation of properties WHC\/25\/47.COM\/7B, p. 47 inscribed on the World Heritage List <\/a><\/span><\/p>\n

In particular, the risk of sediment dispersion resulting from dredging; this point is critical because, in interconnected marine systems, what is removed in one place can travel kilometres driven by ocean currents.<\/span><\/p>\n

Scientific evidence had already warned about it<\/b><\/h2>\n

This risk is not hypothetical, it has already been documented in the independent technical analysis by Lynker, which points out that the dredging required for Puerto Bar\u00fa could stir up sediments, which may be dispersed by sea currents.<\/span>
\n<\/span>
\n<\/span>UNESCO's preparatory documents (see page 45 of the technical document) reinforce this concern: cumulative and distant impacts have not been sufficiently considered.<\/span>
\n<\/span>
\n<\/span>This reveals a structural flaw in the EIA, which evaluated the project as if the ecosystem were static, but the ocean is not. Currents connect mangroves, bays, reefs and protected areas in a single ecological network.<\/span><\/p>\n