CSR 2006
CSR 2006
CSR 2006
Heledd Jenkins, Research Associate, the ESRC Centre for Business Relationships, Accountability, Sustainability
and Society (BRASS), Cardiff University. Email: jenkinsHM1@cardiff.ac.uk, tel: 029 20876562, address: 55 Park
Place, Cardiff, CF10 3AT, web: http://www.brass.cf.ac.uk/
2
Louise Obara, Research Associate, the ESRC Centre for Business Relationships, Accountability, Sustainability and
Society (BRASS), Cardiff University. Email: obaralj@cardiff.ac.uk, tel: 029 20876562, address: 55 Park Place,
Cardiff, CF10 3AT, web: http://www.brass.cf.ac.uk/
Pressure groups have consistently targeted the sector at local and international
levels, challenging the industrys legitimacy. An example of this is the
numerous environmental, community and indigenous groups who oppose the
development of a uranium mine at Jabiluka in the Kakadu National Park in
Australia. Many large NGOs have campaigns specifically targeted at the
mining industry, such as Oxfams Mining Campaign3 and Friends of the Earth
Internationals Mining Campaign (resisting economic globalisation)4.
The financial sector is increasingly focusing on the sector from both risk
management and social responsibility perspectives. It is not unusual for
mining companies to be screened out of Socially Responsible Investing (SRI)
funds altogether (SRI Compass, 2002).
Maintaining a licence to operate is a constant challenge. For example,
resistance by numerous social organisations to the expansion of gold mining at
Mount Quilish Peru has led Newmont to suspend its activities5.
Keeping employees happy - CSR initiatives can often make staff feel more
positive about the company, and can increase motivation and efficiency. They
can also help to retain and recruit the best staff.
A key stakeholder for all mining companies, and therefore a strong focus for their
CSR initiatives, is the community. Mining has a huge impact on local communities;
positive effects include the creation of new communities and wealth, income from
export revenues and royalties, technology transfer, skilled employment and training
for local populations and improvements in infrastructure such as roads, schools and
health clinics (CAFOD, 2006; MMSD, 2002).The negative impacts of mining on local
communities have been well documented (see Table 1).
Widespread criticisms centre on the externalisation of the economic,
environmental and social costs of the industry, its negative impacts on
sustainable development of host communities, and the inequitable and
unsustainable distribution of its costs and benefits. The negative impacts of
mining are concentrated disproportionately on marginalised or disadvantaged
sections of society, including indigenous peoples, women and economically
disadvantaged rural communities... (Techa Beaumont, Director, Mineral
Policy Institute6).
The numerous social and environmental issues associated with the mining industry
include access to land issues at the exploration and mining stages, environmental
pollution, damage to the health of affected communities and the increased
mechanisation of the industry, which negatively impacts employment levels
(Mitchell, 1999; Cottrell and Rankin, 2000; Hilson and Murck, 2001).
Social impacts of mining companies on communities
Any benefits to the community may be unequally shared.
Corporate community initiatives may be seen as poor recompense for damage to livelihoods, the
environment and community.
Social tensions in communities due to the changes brought about by mining can give rise to
violent conflict.
Technical improvements in the mining industry can lead to a decrease in employment and an
increase in the level of skills needed.
The mining sectors isolation from other sectors can negate the multiplier effect often associated
with the location of a major industry in an area.
Land title disputes may occur between local groups, mining companies and the government.
Traditional cultures may have difficulty coping with vast industrial operations and the influx of
outsiders.
Poor local and national governance can lead to a company having too much power in the local
context.
Table 1. The possible negative social impacts of mining on communities (adapted from MMSD,
2002)
The effectiveness of CSR initiatives in the oil, gas and mining sectors has been
increasingly questioned; there is mounting evidence of a gap between the stated
intentions of companies and their actual behaviour and impact in the real world
(Frynas, 2005). Considerable effort has been made by the industry to highlight its
commitment to both protecting the environment and addressing the needs of
6
For more information on the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative see http://www.eitransparency.org/
LDCs are not able to take advantage of advanced technology and management
skills due to being relatively poor in capital and skills, and foreign
technologies compete unfairly with and destroy local production techniques,
creating a pool of unemployable marginalised people.
Holders of investments in LDCs demand annual returns for continued support
profits are taken out of the country or guaranteed by tax concessions.
8
See Mining, murder and mayhem: The impact of mining in the South by Danny Kennedy, Third World Network,
http://www.twnside.org.sg/title/mine-cn.htm [accessed 10/07/2006].
Regions and communities that depend on mining developments may realise huge
benefits, the industry can contribute to continuous learning leading to innovation, to
improving the health of people and the environment, and to developing vigorous and
diverse communities (Lapalme, 2003). However, resource-dependent communities
such as mining towns are also very vulnerable to fluctuations in the mining
industrys fortunes. The closure of mines and resultant loss of economic activity can
be devastating, including the legacy of environmental damage, the loss of jobs leading
to high local unemployment and associated problems, the impacts on residential
property values and the effects on infrastructure originally provided by the company
(Laurence, 2006). Heavy dependence on mining also correlates strongly with a wide
range of serious social problems, such as high levels of poverty, low levels of
education, and poor health care. Nearly half of the world's poorest countries show this
dependency: mining is their biggest export sector9.
When a new mining operation starts up local communities often view it as an
opportunity to be exploited, to be provided with resources and infrastructure that will
enhance their welfare (Auty, 1998; Frynas, 2005; Ite, 2005). However, many of the
social opportunities provided by CSR activities border on creating a culture of
dependency on a depleting asset with a finite life, which is an unsustainable process
(Auty, 1998).
Frynas (2005) describes a dependency mentality whereby communities look to a
company to provide them with resources as recompense for social and environmental
damage. This results in the attitude that as the company initially provided the resource
they are responsible should anything go wrong, i.e. communities perceive that they
dont own the project. Often communities do not have the required skills to maintain
a project as local resources were not utilised in its implementation. Initiatives
introduced in this way cannot remain functional without the continued support of
outsiders; they do not build local social capital and are therefore unlikely to contribute
to the sustainable development of communities. Unfortunately, many community
involvement initiatives introduced by mining companies follow this paternalistic
pattern. This is clearly illustrated by the following quote concerning Shells activities
in the Niger Delta
...gradually, the dependency culture became established and the communities
saw the development infrastructure provided by Shell not as charity, but as a
form of rent for Shells use (and abuse) of their environment and resources.
The result has been the evolution of a mind-set and culture of dependence on
Shell. (Ite, 2005, p. 921).
If services are dependent on the mining company for funds or operational capacity,
these services will then disappear with closure of the mine and withdrawal of the
mining company from the area (Lapalme, 2003). There is a possibility that a
community will come to depend exclusively on a mining development and find itself
deficient in social and economic resources once the mining development has run its
9
See Metals and the Wealth of Nations, No Dirty Gold Campaign
http://www.nodirtygold.org/pubs/DirtyMetals_Wealth.pdf [accessed 10/07/2006].
course. A lack of government presence can also mean that mining companies are
required to undertake a role that they believe governments should perform. This
blurring between state and corporate roles can lead to community dependency on illconceived and poorly consulted community development programmes that have not
been properly incorporated into overall government development plans for a region.
The environmental damage caused by mining may result in the loss of land for other
economic/livelihood uses e.g. agriculture, which leads to greater dependency on the
mine. Communities who are affected by mining operations, either by loss of land and
livelihoods or the need to relocate are dependent on mining companies for payouts to
remediate this damage, which leads to the imposition of handout dependency. The
social and environmental impacts of mining also undermine womens ability to
sustain their livelihoods, and they are unlikely to receive direct employment from the
mine. This leads to vulnerability, powerlessness and a lack of voice and greater
dependency on the mine and on men and those with power in the community.
Justice and equity are also key tenets of dependency. If the opening up of areas in
LDCs to foreign mining companies is seen as a window of opportunity, then fair and
equitable benefits should result (Hilson & Haselip, 2005). However, multi-national
mining companies have more access to information and the relevant skills to bargain
for benefits and to decide how those benefits may be distributed to the communities in
which they operate. Communities are then put into a position of having to depend on
what the companies decide is fair and equitable distribution of benefits. Consultation
is therefore key to ensuring the fair and equitable distribution of benefits and ensuring
that mining developments contribute positively to sustainable communities. However,
many communities lack the capacity to negotiate in the consultation process.
Communities may not be well organised around a leader or a civic movement and are
therefore unable to collectively negotiate. They are even weaker negotiating as
individual families. Some companies exploit this weakness by insisting on negotiating
with individuals who often end up getting a raw deal. Capacity limitations exacerbate
problems in the consultation process, such as:
There is a very fine line between CSR that creates dependency and CSR that develops
a community or region in a sustainable way. The challenge for mining companies
therefore is to develop CSR programmes that maintain good will for the company and
address the long-term developmental needs of communities in a sustainable way,
without creating a culture of dependency.
Case study: gold mining in Ghana
In recent years numerous multinational mining companies have rapidly expanded
their operations into rural reaches of the developing world, drawn in by attractive,
highly-liberalized investment regimes (Warhurst and Insor, 1996). As a precondition
for securing World Bank and IMF loans, recipient governments in mainly developing
countries have divested state mineral assets, privatised large-scale mining operations,
and implemented favourable mineral taxation and investment policies. Ghana is one
such country that has undergone a lengthy structural adjustment programme under the
auspices of the World Bank. Reforming the mining sector was seen by the World
Bank as a key factor in attempts to alleviate the economic crisis in Ghana. Since the
mid 1980s the Government has privatised its large-scale mining sector, attracting over
$4 million in foreign investment for the development and expansion of large-scale
gold mining and explorations activities alone (Hilson & Potter, 2003), and has, to
date, overtaken cocoa as the biggest single foreign currency earner11. The reform of
the mining sector, therefore, has produced a dramatic boom in investment flows and
the national economy has been quite dependent on the sector (Aryee, 2000:71).
Compared with other mineral-rich countries, however, Ghana is not solely dependent
on the mining sector and the contribution of other export commodities, such as cocoa
and timber, is also substantial.
The dependence is therefore on a few predominantly primary
commodities rather than just minerals. Admittedly this makes the economy
more susceptible to the vagaries of the volatile prices of primary
commodities (Aryee, 2000, p. 71).
Aryee (2000) also notes that Ghanas dependence on the mining sector could deepen
if the Government continues to implement measures that expand the sector without
ensuring that the country as a whole reaps the maximum possible benefit.
The environmental and social costs associated with the significant restructuring of
Ghanas gold mining industry have been dear. The national Coalition of Civil Society
Groups Against Mining argues that Ghanas growing foreign investment and
production in the mining sector has had a devastating affect on the countrys national
economy, environment, community livelihoods and human rights12. Communities
have been detrimentally affected in many ways by large-scale mining activities; entire
villages have been relocated to make way for surface mining operations13,
compensation packages for the loss of land as well as livelihoods have been heavily
11
Stickler A, 2006 Ghana's ruthless corporate gold rush. BBC File On 4. Available at
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/file_on_4/5190588.stm [accessed 25 July 2006].
12
See http://www.corpwatch.org/print_article.php&id=7772 [accessed 8th December, 2004].
13
For example, it is reported that between 1990 and 1998 more than 30,000 people were displaced in Ghanas
Tarkwa District, as well as rivers contaminated and farms and forest land destroyed (Hilson & Potter 2003, Akabzaa,
2000).
10
criticised for being woefully inadequate, and violent clashes have taken place between
communities and the security forces of mining companies and/or the police of the
Ghanaian Government14.
A further consequence of the mining sector reforms, which has negatively impacted
on a sizeable section of the Ghanaian population, concerns competition over land use
between large-scale and small-scale mining parties. The rapid proliferation of largescale mining activity has led to a sharp increase in the number of disputes between
multinational companies and Ghanas small-scale miners as productive goldmineralised land has become an increasingly scarce commodity (Hilson & Potter,
2005). The conflict between small-scale and large-scale miners in Ghana is deeplyrooted; large-scale miners argue that they have gone through the necessary legal
channels to secure concessions and should therefore have legal entitlement, and
indigenous groups and small-scale mining parties maintain that they have cultural ties
to land. Even though the Ghanaian Government formalised the small-scale mining
sector in the late 1980s implementing a streamlined licensing process for
indigenous grassroots operators the Government continues to marginalise smallscale miners by focussing on, and awarding large viable plots of land to large-scale
mining companies. Hilson and Potter (2005) argue that the Government fails to
recognise that, in a country with escalating levels of unemployment, the small-scale
mining industry generates a significant number of direct and indirect forms of
employment. In addition, as many as 85% of the countrys small-scale miners have,
for a number of reasons, opted to remain unregistered15 (referred to locally as
galamsey) and operate alongside Ghanas large-scale mining companies and licensed
small-scale miners, which has caused considerable tension within many rural areas of
the country. A negative public perception surrounds illegal small-scale mining who
are accused (often by the media) of causing widespread environmental damage,
promoting child labour, and most significantly, encroaching and causing grievances
on land plots demarcated to large-scale miners.
The environmental and social degradation that communities in Ghana have
experienced so far looks set to continue given the resolute focus of the government on
expanding large-scale surface mining and attracting foreign multinational companies.
Critics argue that the forthcoming new Minerals and Mining Bill, which the
government asserts will include better provisions for illegal miners and communities,
does not address the concerns of mining communities but actually worsens the already
unfavourable situation16. Moreover, there are increasing concerns that the government
will approve surface mining operations to take place in the countrys protected forest
reserves areas recognised as globally significant for their biological diversity
which could lead to the displacement of thousands of people who are directly
dependent on the forest for provision of basic needs and livelihoods (Hilson &
Nyame, 2006).
Having described the gold mining industry in Ghana and its associated impacts on
communities, the following section will present the community development
14
It is reported that two people were killed and thirteen injured as a result of five separate shooting incidences in
2005 alone. (Stickler A, 2006 Ghana's ruthless corporate gold rush. BBC File On 4. Available at
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/file_on_4/5190588.stm [accessed 25 July 2006]).
15
The reasons for this are varied and include insufficient institutional support, complications with the registration
process, and the presence of uncooperative large-scale mining companies (Hilson & Potter, 2003:250-251).
16
http://www.minesandcommunities.org/Action/press646.htm [accessed 20th July, 2006].
11
12
Company A
The community development approach of Company A is based on a Foundation
Fund, set up by the company, which is used to support various community
development activities. The fund is generated entirely by the company; for every
ounce of gold produced $1 is allocated to the fund, as well as 0.5% of the companys
annual profit before tax. This fund has been in place for a number of years and has
financed a variety of community development activities and projects such as social
investment support, assistance for the construction and repair of local infrastructure
(roads, sanitation, water supply, education facilities), and establishing sustainable
livelihood programmes. A board of key stakeholders manage and allocate the
Foundation Fund:
Trust Funds are independent from the companys office. Unlike maybe other
mining companies, the percentage of the profit that they give to the community
is solely managed by the mine. Here its not like that. On the board you have
some of the key community peoplefor instance you have two MPs
(Company A representative).
The company is now embarking on a five year community development plan, which
is more structured and comprehensive in its objectives than previous community
development work. A participatory approach was undertaken in the development of
the five year strategy and a number of stakeholders were involved, including a study
on galamsey operators. The companys community development activities over the
next five years will focus on primary stakeholder communities, which have been
13
14
15
extent the tension between the two parties is due to the sheer number of galamsey
situated on their concession. The heightened tension and conflict surrounding the
companys mining operations is partly responsible for the companys difficulty in
distinguishing key stakeholders to consult with and adds a complicating factor to its
development of community involvement initiatives.
and also trying to identify who they are, because one of the problems that
weve had is theres quite a lot of internal conflict exists within the
communities (Company B representative).
The company recognises that previous community development work has actually
contributed to conflict already present within communities as significant sections
were excluded from consultations the company undertook.
It can be seen how the companys previous consultation method not only exacerbated
conflict within/between communities but contributed to the dependency culture. Even
though the company is cognisant of the fact that previous consultations were
inadequate and exclusionary, they continue to deliberately exclude a significant
portion of the community, i.e. illegal small-scale miners. By interacting with key
individuals important sections of the community are excluded, not only illegal
miners, which can result in inappropriate community development projects and/or
creates conflict within/between communities as is already the case. It is well
documented that mining companies who adopt a thorough and all-inclusive
consultation approach are less likely to experience significant problems with
communities, and Company Bs approach will, in all likelihood, worsen the already
volatile situation with illegal miners on their concession.
Besides developing and maintaining relationships with key individuals in the
community, further community development activities have focussed on two main
aspects. Firstly, the company have provided funding for community assistance
programmes such as school improvements and equipment, libraries, community
centres, road improvements, and so forth. Future development work however will
focus predominantly on the provision of physical structures.
we are trying to move from that concept of support in terms of
maintenance and other things, to assets building (Company B
representative).
According to the company the reason for this shift in direction is twofold;
communities themselves have requested the construction of structures, and the
company can exhibit their commitment to community development more easily than
purely maintenance work. The company is also beginning to address the sustainability
of community development projects.
The problem is the community doesnt actually know how to manage their
resources, so this is one of our longer term projects, we understand that one of
our main objectives is to, whenever we build a new structure is to identify any
training (Company B representative).
16
The fact that the company is beginning to consider the sustainability of community
projects represents a step forward compared with the companys previous community
development work; however, there are still significant drawbacks with their approach.
Focussing on building physical structures, rather than developing the social capability
of communities, is likely to increase the communities dependence on the company.
As highlighted earlier, weaknesses in their consultation method suggests it is doubtful
whether the whole community were consulted and thus only the demands of key
individuals (who do not necessarily represent the community as a whole) will be
heard. More alarming is the tokenistic element of this strategy; using community
development as an opportunity to showcase the companys commitment to CSR does
not represent an approach that will benefit the community in the long-term, but
resembles a public relations act.
PR needs may, for instance, prioritise media-friendly projects such as
helping to construct a new hospital, rather than slow local-capacity building
or the training of village nurses (Frynas, 2005, p.585).
Like Company A the company has focussed on the establishment of alternative
livelihood projects for communities. These projects have a mainly agricultural focus,
such as fish farming, mulberry plantations, and silk production and processing. The
main rationale for this approach is to reduce community dependence on mining and
promote the growth of alternative and sustainable economic development.
The CSR approach of the companies analysed above have contributed in varying
degrees to the development of a dependency mentality. A core feature of both
companies future community development work concerns lessening the dependency
link and focussing on the sustainability of communities. This will be an extremely
difficult process, not least because they will need to address and rectify past mistakes,
which encouraged a dependency mentality to develop in the first place. Company B in
particular is likely to experience considerable difficulties in light of the significant
weaknesses in its CSR strategy, together with the fact that their catchment
communities are communities of occupation, i.e. communities who are
predominantly dependent on the mine. While the issue of dependency is highly
complex, multi-faceted and, to a large degree, context specific there are a number of
strategies that companies can take to break the dependency culture and maintain a
strong commitment to CSR.
Conclusions
There are a number of issues that must be addressed if mining companies community
involvement initiatives are to be effective, sustainable and prevent creating a culture
of dependency. These are discussed in turn.
Measurement
There is currently no assessment of the success or failure of community initiatives.
This is in part due to the difficulties inherent in conceptualizing the application and
measurement of the social dimension to sustainable development (Lapalme, 2003), as
well as a lack of independent measures of what constitutes a successful programme.
While an environmental report is often externally audited, the social aspects of
17
sustainability reports are very rarely externally audited, and even when they are these
are often conducted by consultants who are paid by the company in other capacities as
well, so are not wholly independent. Companies must demonstrate that resources are
being used effectively and that community initiatives positively contribute to
sustainable development. An important aspect of this is the transparency of revenue
flows to the government, money and resources spent on CSR initiatives.
Governments also need to be transparent about how revenues raised from mining
companies are used to improve the lives of those directly affected by the impacts of
mining. The key to accurate measurements is the collection of comprehensive
baseline data (which so very rarely exists in the remote regions where companies
operate) during the social audit process and maintain accurate records throughout the
life of the mine. This information must be made publicly available and be externally
and independently verified.
The accumulation of social capital
The highly mechanised nature of the mining industry means that companies cannot
guarantee employment for local communities so they need to find other means to add
value to communities and set in motion a long-term multiplier effect, through their
CSR initiatives. Both case study companies recognise the importance of economic
diversification of local communities through their focus on alternative livelihood
projects. However several issues with such strategies have been raised by local and
international NGOs:
...anytime they [women] want to bring their message across the men tend to shut
them up, sit down, sat on them and then it killed their interest to attend the
community meetings. Then they were also saying that anytime they want to attend
community meetings their husbands ask them to be at home, prepare food
andthese are the reasons why they are not attending community gatherings
(International NGO representative).
Auty (1998) notes that if national policy is effective, then local social capital is likely
to be accumulated but it is rarely the case that national policy is coherent enough to
be very effective at the local level, and this is often superseded by the power and
influence of the company. In Ghana, the government depends on companies to
support sustainable livelihoods projects, but the company is not necessarily best
placed to develop agriculture projects for instance when their expertise is mining.
18
These projects will need long-term support if they are to be successful, but the support
that companies can provide is finite; the question of what happens when the
companies leave has yet to be addressed.
NGOs in Ghana argue for community development to be integrated and coordinated
with local agencies such as district assemblies. Community projects should not just be
a direct response to community needs; rather it should be integrated into a
development plan so that genuine discussion of what is really needed takes place.
Collaboration between all stakeholders is very important i.e. government, companies,
international and local NGOs, communities.
Are mining companies best placed to contribute to community development?
It is arguable whether mining companies are best placed to decide whats best for the
community, what will build social capital and what will deliver long-term sustainable
development. CSR schemes are designed to suit corporate objectives and align with
the business case very well, but this causes a scenario of dependency rather than
helping the community to help itself. The company needs to act in the best interest of
the community. CSR does not of itself solve the negative impacts of the mining
industry on the environment, society, economy and local and national governance.
Companies should not be put in the position where they take on a developmental role
that should be provided by the government they should work in partnership with the
government and local agencies.
Its not just the community that ends up depending on the community, governments
look to the companies for answers too. It is extremely difficult for communities to
effectively challenge companies if the government relies on companies to solve
developmental problems. Communities need to be educated on the laws and policies
concerning them, what their rights are and what they can do about infringements of
their rights. Depending on companies undermines the power of governments to act
and ultimately gives the company more power a vicious circle. For example,
Company A stated there is a strong sense that the government and other agencies
believe that the company will take care of the communities and implement
development in the region.
...but we always have to look at multinational companies coming to develop
our economy, its not solutions, its not development (Local NGO
representative).
Consultation
The problem of superficial and inadequate consultation processes must be addressed
if community development programmes are to deliver genuine sustainable
development. Consultation needs to begin before any mine development takes place,
not after the mine has begun operating, which is often the case. Consultation needs to
take place with all members of the community, not just those that the company gives
salience too. Particular attention must be paid to hearing the voices of women, who
tend to suffer the worst from the social and environmental impacts of mining, and
from dependency, but have the least power to rectify their situation. Gender
inequalities must be addressed if communities are to fairly benefit from mining.
19
The World Banks Extractive Industry Review concluded that mining should go
ahead only if indigenous communities gave free, prior and informed consent based
on sufficient information and no undue pressure or interference from mining
companies. However, due to subsequent pressure from the mining industry and
governments this was changed to free, prior and informed consultation. Given the
problems outlined with consultation processes as they exist, the revised statement will
have no real impact, and in effect lets mining companies off the hook.
The case study companies have different approaches to consultation Company A
takes an inclusive approach and recognises that previous consultations created or
exacerbated tension within and between communities. Company B has also improved
its consultation process, but does not recognise that their current approach still has the
potential to create problems by excluding sections of the community i.e. galamsey and
consulting with key individuals. In Ghana these key individuals are often village
chiefs, and it has been suggested that working relationships between mining
companies and chiefs benefit individuals more than whole communities.
Thats one thing about these areas is that most of the chiefs condone it and
team up with the mining companiesa bribe, you know money, the power of
money (International NGO representative).
Companies must be careful how they define their community, and not exclude salient
groups just because they are difficult to deal with this leads to conflict and
undermines the CSR efforts of the company. Close relations and open dialogue need
to be maintained at all times (not just when it suits the company, when they are
starting up or when they are launching a new scheme). Events such as accidents or
social conflict can change the nature of relationships or lead them to break-down.
Good communication helps deal with such situations better as they arise. The social
audit process must be improved and the effectiveness and sustainability of revenue
deployment must be measurable and transparent. Governments must take more
responsibility for regional development considering community needs at a macro as
well as micro level. A successful and sustainable corporate community involvement
strategy must:
Assess and address the basic rights and needs of the community.
Recompense any material losses.
Allow all members of community to participate effectively in decision making
processes.
Be fair and equitable in distribution of mining benefits and decisions made.
Contribute to a net benefit for social and economic capacity.
Contribute to long-term sustainable development.
Ensure that mining revenues are distributed locally and equitably and that
there is transparency in this process.
Not engender dependency.
...theres no sense in mining for mining sake if its going to bring such misery to
people... (Local NGO representative).
20
References
Ahiakpor, J.C.W. 1985. The success and failure of dependency theory: the
experiences of Ghana, International Organization, 39(3): 535-552.
Akabzaa, T. 2000. Boom and Dislocation: The Environmental and Social Impacts of
Mining in Wassa West District of Ghana. Third World Network, Accra, Ghana.
Aryee, B.N.A. 2001. Ghanas mining sector: its contribution to the national economy
Resources Policy, 27: 61-75.
Auty, R.M. 1990. Resource-Based Industrialization: Sowing the Oil in Eight
Developing Countries, Oxford University Press, New York.
Auty, R.M. 1998. Social sustainability in mineral-driven development, Journal of
International Development, 10: 487-500.
Ayling, R.D. and Kelly, K. 1997. Dealing with conflict: natural resources and dispute
resolution, Commonwealth Foreign Review, 76(3): 182-185.
CAFOD. 2006. Unearth Justice: Counting the Cost of Gold. London.
Cohen, A. P. 1985. The Symbolic Construction of Community. London: Routledge.
Cottrell, G. and Rankin, L. 2000. Creating Business Value through Corporate
Sustainability: Sustainability Strategies and Reporting for the Gold Industry,
PriceWaterHouseCoopers.
Cowell, S.J., Wehrmeyer, W., Argust, P.W., Graham, J. and Robertson, S. 1999.
Sustainability and the primary extraction industries: theories and practice, Resources
Policy 1999, 25(4): 277-286.
Epps, J.M. 1996. Environmental management in mining: an international perspective
of an increasing global industry, The Journal of South African Institute of Mining and
Metallurgy, 96(2): 67-90.
Frynas, J.G. 2005. The false developmental promise of Corporate Social
Responsibility: evidence from multinational oil companies, International Affairs,
81(3): 581-598.
GolfdFields Limited. 2004. Creating Sustainable Growth: Annual Report 2004.
Guerra, M.C.G. 2002. Community Relations in Mineral Development Projects, The
CEPMLP Internet Journal, 11: 1-31
Gylfason, T., Herbertsson, T.T. and Zoega, G. 1999. A mixed blessing: Natural
resources and economic growth, Macroecomic Dynamics, 3: 204-225.
21
Haselip, J. and Hilson, G. 2005. Winners and losers from industry reforms in the
developing world: experiences from the electricity and mining sectors, Resources
Policy, 30: 87-100.
Hilson, G. and Murck, B. 2001. Progress towards Pollution Prevention and Waste
Minimization in the North America Gold Mining Industry, Journal of Cleaner
Production, 9(5): 405-415
Hilson, G. 2002. An overview of land use conflicts in mining communities, Land Use
Policy, 19(1): 6573.
Hilson, G. and Potter, C. 2003. Why is illegal gold mining activity so ubiquitous
throughout rural Ghana? African Development Review, 15(2): 237-270.
Hilson, G. and Potter, C. 2005. Structural Adjustment and Subsistence Industry:
Artisanal Gold Mining in Ghana, Development and Change, 36(1): 103-131.
Hilson, G. and Nyame, F. 2006. Gold mining in Ghanas forest reserves: a report on
the current debate, Area, 38(2): 175-185.
Ite, U.E. 2005. Poverty reduction in resource-rich developing countries: what have
multinational corporations got to do with it? Journal of International Development,
17: 913-929.
Jenkins, H.M. 2004. Corporate Social Responsibility and the Mining Industry:
Conflicts and Constructs, Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental
Management, 11: 23-34.
Kambani, S.M. 2000. Policy and strategy options for small-scale mining development
in Zambia, Minerals Energy, 15: 2230.
Kapelus, P. 2002. Mining, Corporate Social Responsibility and the "Community":
The Case of Rio Tinto, Richards Bay Minerals and the Mbonambi, Journal of
Business Ethics, 39(3): 279-296.
Lapalme, L. 2003. The Social Dimension of Sustainable Development and the Mining
Industry, Natural Resources Canada, Minerals and Metals Sector, Ottawa.
Laurence, D. 2006. Optimisation of the mine closure process, Journal of Cleaner
Production, 14: 285-298.
Mikesell, R.F. 1997. Explaining the resource curse, with special reference to mineralexporting countries, Resources Policy, 23(4): 191-199.
Mitchell, A. 1999. The Environmental Challenge Facing Gold Mining, Journal of
Mines, Metals and Fuels, 47(12): 352-357
MMSD. 2002. Breaking New Ground: Mining, Minerals, and Sustainable
Development, World Business Council for Sustainable Development.
22
23