This article analyzes the dewatering practices in Türkiye’s Afşin-Elbistan region through the lens of global environmental justice and climate law. What begins as a local case study reveals the systemic problems created by extractive industries’ company towns worldwide and the crisis of environmental law effectiveness in developing countries.

Global Climate Crisis and Türkiye’s Water Paradox

Türkiye burned. Forest fires raged uncontrolled for days. Cities face water cuts. Yet simultaneously, in Afşin-Elbistan, millions of cubic meters of fresh water are extracted from underground through dewatering operations and discharged into the sea without serving any productive purpose.

Dewatering, in the mining sector, refers to the pumping and disposal of groundwater. This process depletes water tables over the long term and destroys ecosystems. Widespread in coal mining and metal extraction industries globally, this practice particularly threatens the water security of future generations in climate vulnerable countries.

Drought on one side, floods on the other. This represents one of the most distorted manifestations of climate change: a year’s worth of rain falls in a single day, sometimes within hours. These are precisely the extreme weather events emphasized in IPCC reports. Due to inadequate infrastructure, these usable waters often end up in sewage systems.

This is not a contradiction; it’s a sign of systemic collapse.

This pattern, frequently observed in Global South countries, reflects the contradiction between environmental injustice created by extractive industries and climate adaptation needs. Türkiye’s situation presents a developing country example in this context.

The country’s water paradox is exactly this: drought and water waste occur simultaneously. While precipitation patterns become irregular, systems for protecting and efficiently using existing water resources cannot be established. When floods come, water cannot be stored; when drought arrives, there’s no water left to use.

Global water governance research shows this pattern across climate vulnerable regions: the same communities bearing the burden of environmental extraction are those most affected by climate impacts. Türkiye’s case demonstrates how environmental injustice and climate vulnerability intersect in developing countries, creating what environmental justice scholars call “double exposure” – simultaneous exposure to environmental degradation and climate risks.

This represents a fundamental challenge to intergenerational equity, a core principle of international environmental law. The 1987 Brundtland Commission defined sustainable development as meeting present needs without compromising future generations’ ability to meet their own needs. The Afşin-Elbistan case directly violates this principle, as current dewatering operations systematically deplete groundwater resources that future generations will desperately need for climate adaptation.

Furthermore, this situation exemplifies what environmental economists call “resource curse“ – how resource-rich regions often experience worse environmental and social outcomes due to extractive activities. The fresh water being pumped and discarded represents not just H₂O, but future drinking water, agricultural irrigation potential, and ecosystem resilience in a climate-changing world.

İzmir’s Water Crisis: Concrete Manifestation of Climate Stress

Starting August 6th, İzmir began implementing nighttime water cuts. The Tahtalı Dam has reached critical levels. The Gördes Dam is completely out of service. İzmir’s daily water demand is 700,000 cubic meters.

Türkiye’s third-largest city faces water scarcity. This represents a typical example of urban water security crisis. It’s the concrete manifestation in Türkiye of water stress concepts frequently discussed in climate change literature.

According to IPCC projections, the Mediterranean basin is among the regions that will be most affected by climate change. Türkiye’s water crisis reflects the local manifestation of this global trend. The Gördes Dam recorded its lowest filling rate at 0.08 percent, while the Tahtalı Dam’s water level remained at only 8.88 percent.

This crisis illustrates what climate scientists call “aridification” – a more permanent shift toward drier conditions beyond normal drought cycles. Unlike temporary droughts, aridification represents a fundamental change in regional water availability, making traditional water management approaches obsolete.

Climate change delivers blow after blow. Urban areas, which consume 70% of global water resources according to UN-Water data, become increasingly vulnerable as climate patterns shift. İzmir’s crisis exemplifies how rapid urbanization in climate vulnerable regions creates compound risks: growing populations demand more water precisely when climate change makes water less available.

The timing is particularly significant. Summer water cuts in a major Turkish city coincide with global discussions about climate adaptation finance and urban resilience. İzmir’s situation demonstrates the immediate need for what climate policy experts call “transformative adaptation” – fundamental changes to water infrastructure and governance, not just incremental improvements.

International development banks increasingly recognize that climate adaptation in urban areas requires integrated approaches combining infrastructure investment, governance reform, and social protection. İzmir’s water crisis shows why the World Bank’s recent emphasis on “climate-smart cities” has become urgent for middle-income countries like Türkiye.

Environmental Injustice in Afşin-Elbistan: Systematic Exploitation

A different story unfolds in another region of the same country. In the Afşin-Elbistan lignite basin, groundwater equivalent to İzmir’s 150-day water needs is extracted annually. Simply to keep the mining site dry.

According to TEMA Foundation’s 2022 report “Effects of Coal Mining and Thermal Power Plants on Water Resources: Afşin Elbistan Case Study”: 105 million cubic meters of groundwater are extracted annually from two geological formations. This figure represents a significant data point within global dewatering operations.

This process serves:

• Not drinking water
• Not irrigation water
• Not industrial water
• Only disposal

The system chooses to exclude rather than utilize this fresh water. This represents a clear example of environmental racism: environmental harm is normalized in areas where poor, rural communities live.

This practice exemplifies what environmental justice scholars identify as “sacrifice zones” – areas where environmental degradation is deemed acceptable to support economic activities elsewhere. Environmental justice research shows that such sacrifice zones disproportionately affect communities of color, indigenous peoples, and economically disadvantaged populations worldwide.

The scale of water extraction in Afşin-Elbistan equals the annual domestic water consumption of approximately 1.5 million people, based on WHO standards of 50-100 liters per person per day. This massive volume of fresh water, suitable for human consumption, agricultural irrigation, or ecosystem support, instead flows unused into the Mediterranean Sea.

From a human rights perspective, this situation potentially violates multiple international commitments. The UN General Assembly’s 2010 recognition of water and sanitation as human rights established that states must ensure water availability, accessibility, and quality. Türkiye’s simultaneous experience of urban water crises and massive water waste challenges the progressive realization of these rights.

Environmental economics literature identifies this as a classic case of “negative externalities“ – costs imposed on society that are not reflected in market prices. Arthur Pigou’s foundational work on welfare economics argued that such externalities require government intervention to align private costs with social costs. The Afşin-Elbistan case demonstrates the failure of Türkiye’s regulatory framework to internalize environmental costs.

Moreover, this situation contradicts ecosystem services valuation approaches increasingly adopted in international environmental policy. The extracted groundwater provides critical ecosystem services including aquifer storage, drought buffering, and biodiversity support. The 2021 EU Biodiversity Strategy explicitly recognizes groundwater’s role in ecosystem resilience and climate adaptation.

Company Towns: Global Capitalism’s Local Manifestation

This story isn’t unique to Çoğulhan. “Company towns“ have been widespread throughout world history. Coal cities in the US, mining towns in Australia, oil regions in Africa. The same scenario everywhere:

• Single large employer
• Economic dependency
• Social control
• Environmental destruction

Hollywood’s “Dark Waters“ film depicts the Parkersburg community in West Virginia. For 70 years, DuPont Corporation contaminated groundwater with toxic chemicals. The town remained silent because DuPont was the sole employer. Until farmer Wilbur Tennant’s cattle started dying and lawyer Rob Bilott began his 20-year legal battle.

The Afşin-Elbistan case displays environmental injustice patterns similar to Parkersburg:

• Corporate impunity (corporate immunity from consequences)
• Regulatory capture (regulatory agencies co-opted by corporate interests)
• Environmental health impacts
• Community silencing

Rob Bilott‘s legal victory against DuPont established important precedents in corporate environmental liability. His case demonstrated how companies systematically hide environmental health risks from communities, and how environmental litigation can breakthrough corporate secrecy. The Afşin-Elbistan situation shows these same patterns of corporate behavior in Türkiye’s extractive industries.

Historical analysis reveals that company towns emerged during industrial capitalism’s expansion. From 19th-century Pullman, Illinois to contemporary mining communities in the Global South, the pattern remains consistent: “total institutions” that control workers’ economic, social, and political lives while externalizing environmental costs.

Academic research on company towns identifies several common features relevant to understanding Çoğulhan’s situation. Sociologist James Allen’s comparative study found that company towns typically exhibit:

• Economic monoculture creating dependency
• Spatial isolation limiting alternatives
• Paternalistic control over community services
• Environmental externalization of industrial costs

The Jefferson County, Alabama coal region provides a particularly relevant historical parallel. During the 1930s, coal companies controlled entire communities while polluting air and water. Like Çoğulhan today, residents faced the impossible choice between environmental health and economic survival.

Contemporary examples globally demonstrate the persistence of company town dynamics. Australian mining towns like Moranbah show how resource extraction creates boom-bust cycles that devastate communities when resources are exhausted. South African mining communities around Johannesburg illustrate how corporate control perpetuates environmental injustice even after political transitions.

These global comparisons reveal that Afşin-Elbistan’s problems aren’t unique Turkish failures but manifestations of extractive capitalism’s universal logic. The solution requires not just local reforms but systemic transformation of how extractive industries operate worldwide.

Environmental Evidence from Legal Discovery: From Courtroom to Field Reality

On June 25, 2025, we conducted an inspection with the Administrative Court and expert committee. This was part of a lawsuit opposing the addition of new units to Çelikler Thermal Power Plant. The legal struggle by Greenpeace and local residents provided a rare opportunity for environmental litigation in Türkiye.

This inspection proved highly valuable for environmental evidence collection. In international environmental law, court inspections play a critical role in documenting environmental damage. The transparency provided by judicial oversight allowed independent documentation of environmental violations typically hidden from public view.

Observed Environmental Violations:

• Soil covered with 20-30 centimeters of ash
• Clear violations of air quality standards
• Rehabilitation failure
• Water contamination risks

During the inspection, we witnessed the power plant site where soil was covered with ash layers. Workers operate in these conditions daily, raising serious occupational health concerns. International Labor Organization standards on occupational safety in hazardous industries were clearly being violated.

The rehabilitation failure observed contradicts mining industry claims about post-extraction restoration. Recent amendments to Türkiye’s Mining Law opened olive groves to mining activities, with industry defense citing tree relocation or double tree planting. However, at the Afşin-Elbistan A Plant site, no planting by the private company has occurred in recent years, despite privatization promises.

Even trees planted during public ownership aren’t growing. The soil is contaminated, air is polluted, water is extracted. Rehabilitation promises remain on paper while massive environmental destruction persists. This represents the clearest evidence of how seriously post-mining rehabilitation is taken in Türkiye.

This situation reflects broader patterns documented in environmental restoration literature. Studies of mining rehabilitation globally show systematic failures when restoration requirements lack enforcement mechanisms. The European Union’s 2019 revision of mining waste directives specifically addressed such rehabilitation failures, requiring financial guarantees for restoration costs.

International best practices for mining rehabilitation, developed by organizations like the International Council on Mining and Metals, emphasize the importance of progressive rehabilitation during mining operations rather than post-closure restoration. The Afşin-Elbistan case demonstrates the inadequacy of Türkiye’s regulatory framework compared to international standards.

The court inspection methodology itself represents an important innovation in environmental law enforcement. While countries like the United States rely heavily on regulatory agency inspections, Türkiye’s judicial inspection approach provides independent oversight that could serve as a model for other developing countries struggling with regulatory capture by extractive industries.

Dewatering Operations: Technical Process, Ecological Catastrophe

The most striking sight was the dewatering operation. Countless wells have been drilled throughout the area. Groundwater is extracted and discharged into channels. The water emerges crystal clear initially. Then it flows to channels, from there to streams, to the Ceyhan River, and finally to the Mediterranean Sea.

This scene demonstrates how distorted global water governance has become. On one side, cities struggle with water scarcity; on the other, millions of cubic meters of clean water are lost without serving any productive purpose.

Dewatering’s environmental impacts extend beyond the local level:

• Groundwater depletion
• Ecosystem disruption
• Future water security threats
• Intergenerational equity violations

The technical process observed represents what hydrogeologists call “mining dewatering” – systematic extraction of groundwater to maintain dry conditions for resource extraction. Global studies show that such operations can lower water tables for decades or permanently, depending on geological conditions and extraction rates.

International research on dewatering impacts, published in journals like Hydrogeology Journal and Environmental Earth Sciences, documents similar patterns worldwide. Australian coal seam gas extraction, Canadian oil sands operations, and South African gold mining all demonstrate how dewatering creates long-term aquifer damage extending far beyond mining sites.

The quality of extracted water adds another dimension to this environmental tragedy. Laboratory analysis would likely show this groundwater meets drinking water standards established by the World Health Organization. Instead of contributing to Türkiye’s water security, this resource literally flows down the drain.

Climate change projections make this waste even more unconscionable. The IPCC’s Sixth Assessment Report emphasizes that groundwater depletion represents one of the most serious threats to climate adaptation in arid and semi-arid regions. Türkiye’s National Climate Change Action Plan acknowledges water scarcity as a primary climate risk, yet permits massive groundwater waste simultaneously.

From a systems thinking perspective, this represents what environmental scientists call “solution aversion” – rejecting solutions that challenge existing power structures. The technology exists to treat and distribute this water for beneficial uses. The economic justification exists given İzmir’s water crisis. Yet the institutional framework prioritizes extractive industry convenience over public interest.

International water law principles established by the UN Watercourses Convention emphasize “reasonable and equitable use” of shared water resources. While this groundwater isn’t technically transboundary, the principle applies to intergenerational sharing. Current dewatering practices violate future generations’ reasonable expectation of groundwater availability.

Corporate Environmental Crimes: Systematic Violations

Çelikler Holding’s environmental violations aren’t merely current issues but can be categorized as systematic environmental crimes. According to court documents, administrative monetary penalties totaling 9.2 million TL were issued in just the last 8 months:

• July 11, 2024: Hazardous waste/soil contamination – 5.8 million TL
• December 5, 2024: By-pass violation – 1.4 million TL
• February 11, 2025: Repeat by-pass violation – 2.0 million TL

The most striking issue involves environmental permit violations. This represents a classic example of corporate impunity in international environmental law: penalties are issued but operations continue.

Environmental permit chaos characterizes the facility’s operations. Only the 4th unit has environmental permits, yet Ministry data shows that the unpermitted 3rd unit has also operated, often exceeding pollution thresholds. It was operating even the day before our inspection. No environmental permit, no problem!

The contradictory situation: The IV Unit, described as having “completed environmental improvements,” received a Temporary Operating Permit on December 26, 2023. However, just 6 months after this official permitting process, the same facility experienced a 5.8 million TL environmental disaster.

2024 Continuous Emission Monitoring System (CEMS) data completes the picture: Unit 4 exceeded dust emission limits for 32 days, with 470 hours of continuous limit violations, and SO₂ emissions exceeded limits for 12 days.

This pattern reflects what environmental criminology literature identifies as “organizational deviance” – systematic violation of environmental regulations as standard business practice. Research by environmental sociologists like David Kauzlarich demonstrates how corporate environmental crimes often involve:

• Normalization of deviance within corporate culture
• Regulatory arbitrage exploiting enforcement gaps
• Cost-benefit calculations treating fines as business expenses

International comparisons reveal similar patterns. The US Environmental Protection Agency’s analysis of corporate environmental violations shows that repeat offenders often view penalties as “licensing fees” for continued pollution. The European Environment Agency’s 2021 report on environmental crime estimates that inadequate penalties encourage corporate recidivism.

Environmental justice research emphasizes how such systematic violations disproportionately affect marginalized communities. Environmental sociologist Robert Bullard’s foundational work shows that corporations strategically locate polluting facilities in areas with limited political power to resist.

The deterrence theory in environmental law suggests that penalties must exceed the economic benefits of non-compliance to be effective. Clearly, current Turkish environmental penalties fail this test, as companies find it profitable to continue violating regulations while paying fines.

International best practices for corporate environmental accountability include mechanisms like environmental management systems, third-party auditing, and criminal liability for corporate executives. The Afşin-Elbistan case demonstrates the need for Türkiye to adopt such comprehensive approaches rather than relying solely on administrative penalties.

Climate Justice and Intergenerational Equity

This case represents the concrete manifestation of climate justice theory in Türkiye. Environmental burdens are placed on the weakest links:

• Spatial injustice: Environmental damage concentrates in poor regions
• Temporal injustice: Today’s decisions usurp future generations’ rights
• Procedural injustice: Local people have no voice in decision-making processes

The IPCC’s just transition concept targets exactly this: fair sharing of social costs in transitioning from fossil fuel economies to renewable energy. The Afşin-Elbistan case demonstrates what happens when just transition principles are ignored – environmental burdens concentrate on vulnerable communities while benefits accrue elsewhere.

Environmental justice scholarship, pioneered by scholars like Robert Bullard and Laura Pulido, emphasizes how environmental risks systematically concentrate in communities of color and low-income areas. While Türkiye’s ethnic dynamics differ from the US context, the class-based environmental injustice is clear: wealthy urban areas consume energy while poor rural areas bear extraction costs.

Ministry for the Future: Inspiration from Kim Stanley Robinson

Kim Stanley Robinson’s “Ministry for the Future” poses a striking question: “How can you improve a system’s outcomes without changing the system?”

Robinson’s novel tells the story of an international institution established after climate catastrophe. The “Ministry for the Future” was created for intergenerational representation: defending future generations’ rights against today’s decisions.

The novel’s central argument: System change is essential to solve the climate crisis. Current economic models and political institutions are inadequate. Robinson advocates for new institutional structures, new economic models, and new governance forms.

From this perspective, the Afşin-Elbistan case provides evidence of Türkiye’s need for systemic transformation. The novel’s “Plan B” concept – alternative systems prepared for deployment when current systems collapse – offers a framework for thinking about fundamental reform rather than incremental change.

International environmental law increasingly recognizes the need for such systemic approaches. The UN Environment Programme’s 2021 report “Making Peace with Nature” explicitly calls for “transformative change” across economic, social, and political systems. The Afşin-Elbistan case demonstrates why such transformation is urgent.

Türkiye’s Water Plan: Systemic Solutions

Drawing inspiration from the “Plan B” concept, Türkiye needs a systemic water plan:

Legal Framework Reform requires comprehensive Water Law adoption, strengthened groundwater protection measures, and constitutional guarantee of environmental rights. Institutional Transformation demands integrated water management approaches, inter-agency coordination mechanisms, and establishment of a Ministry for Future Generations.

Economic Instruments should include water pricing reform, polluter pays principle implementation, and environmental liability mechanisms. Democratic Participation must ensure free, prior, informed consent principles, environmental justice mainstreaming, and community-based water management.

International cooperation becomes essential. Türkiye’s water challenges connect to broader Mediterranean climate risks requiring regional coordination. The EU’s Green Deal and Mediterranean climate adaptation strategies offer frameworks for collaborative approaches.

International Significance and Recommendations

This Turkish case offers important lessons learned for the international environmental community:

Academic Research needs comparative dewatering studies, environmental justice indicators development, and corporate accountability mechanisms research. Policy Development should focus on global dewatering standards, strengthened transboundary water cooperation, and climate finance for just transition.

Civil Society can build international environmental litigation networks, community-to-community solidarity, and corporate accountability campaigns. The case demonstrates how local environmental struggles can contribute to global environmental justice movements.

Conclusion: From Local Struggle to Global Movement

The water emerging from underground in Afşin-Elbistan represents more than H₂O. Future generations’ living rights, ecological continuity, and public interest conscience also disappear with that flow.

This case deserves prominent placement on the environmental justice movement’s global agenda because it offers:

• Methodological innovation: Court inspection-based environmental evidence
• Legal precedent: Environmental law enforcement in developing countries
• Social movement: Community resistance models
• Academic contribution: Dewatering impacts documentation

Bottom line: The Afşin-Elbistan case demonstrates that climate justice isn’t only a Global North issue – systematic environmental injustice occurs in developing countries too. This case holds reference value for international environmental law and the global climate movement.

For water rights.

For climate justice.

For the future.

---

This analysis aims to integrate local environmental struggle into the global climate justice framework, offering an international environmental law contribution emerging from Türkiye.