SOCIAL IMPACT OF MINING: A COMPARISON BETWEEN THE THE COMPANY’S AND THE COMMUNITY’S PERCEPTION
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.19094/contextus.v17i3.42618Keywords:
Social Impact Assessment; Mining; Local Community; Social Risk; Perception of social impactsAbstract
The purpose of this research is to compare a community's perception of a mining project's social impacts and the perception of the company responsible for the project. The instruments to achieve this were the Social Impact Assessment proposed by Aledo and Domínguez-Gómez (2018) and the proposed categorization of mining impacts by Mancini and Sala (2018). The methodology included interviews and two workshops with representatives of the mining company and the community. The results show that the company's process of selecting impacts focuses on the most immediate, often business-biased risks associated with the government's absence and inefficiency to support local development projects. The community's view, however, goes beyond the most immediate impacts, such as water supply and quality as well as the decrease in agricultural production, towards subjective and cultural issues associated with the processes of change. It is inferred that the partial view of impacts by the company weakens the strategy of compensatory social projects. The deeper issues associated with impacts, such as the loss of collective sentiment and the impact of the migratory process on the severity of family ties, are disregarded while choosing and implementing projects in the community.
References
ALEDO, A.; DOMÍNGUEZ-GÓMEZ, J. A. Evaluación de impacto social: teoría, método y casos prácticos. 1. ed. Alicante: Universidad de Alicante, 2018.
ALEDO, A.; GARCÍA-ANDREU, H.; PINESE, J. Using causal maps to support ex-post assessment of social impacts of dams. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, v. 55, p. 84–97, 2015.
ATIENZA, M.; LUFIN, M.; SOTO, J. Mining linkages in the Chilean copper suplly network and regional economic development. Resources Policy, 2018.
BARCLAY, M. A.; FRANKS, D. M.; PETTENDEN, C. Risk communication: A framework for technology development and implementation in the mining and minerals processing industries: Final report. Australia, 2009.
BRAIN, K. A. The impacts of mining on livelihoods in the Andes: A critical overview. The Extractive Industries and Society, v. 4, p. 410–418, 2017.
CLIMENT-GIL, E.; ALEDO, A.; VALLEJOS-ROMERO, A. The social vulnerability approach for social impact assessment. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, v. 73, n. April, p. 70–79, 2018.
CRESWELL, J. W. Projeto de pesquisa: métodos qualitativo, quantitativo e misto. 2. ed. Porto Alegre: Artmed, 2010.
EISENHARDT, K. M. Building Theories from Case Study Research. Academy of Management Review, v. 14, n. 4, p. 532–550, 1989. Disponível em: .
ESTEVES, A. M. et al. Adapting social impact assessment to address a project’s human rights impacts and risks. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, v. 67, n. January, p. 73–87, 2017.
ESTEVES, A. M.; FRANKS, D.; VANCLAY, F. Social impact assessment: the state of the art. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, v. 30, n. 1, p. 34–42, 2012.
ESTEVES, A. M.; VANCLAY, F. Social Development Needs Analysis as a tool for SIA to guide corporate-community investment: Applications in the minerals industry. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, v. 29, n. 2, p. 137–145, 2009.
FOO, N.; BLOCK, H.; SALIM, R. The optimisation rule for investment in mining projects. Resources Policy, v. 55, p. 123-132, 2018
FRANKS, D. M.; BRERETON, D.; MORAN, C. J. The cumulative dimensions of impact in resource regions. Resources Policy, v. 38, n. 4, p. 640–647, 2013.
FRANKS, D. M. et al. Conflict translates environmental and social risk into business costs. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, v. 111, n. 21, p. 7576–7581, 2014.
FRANKS, D. M.; VANCLAY, F. Social Impact Management Plans: Innovation in corporate and public policy. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, v. 43, p. 40–48, 2013.
GOODMAN, L. A. Snowball Sampling. The Annals of Mathematical Statistics, p. 148–170, 1960.
HANSEN, A. M. et al. Managing the social impacts of the rapidly-expanding extractive industries in greenland. Extractive Industries and Society, v. 3, n. 1, p. 25–33, 2016.
HARVEY, B.; BICE, S. Social impact assessment, social development programmes and social licence to operate: Tensions and contradictions in intent and practice in the extractive sector. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, v. 32, n. 4, p. 327–335, 2014.
JOYCE, S. A.; MACFARLANE, M. Social Impact Assessment in the Mining Industry: Current Situation and Future Directions. Mining Minerals and Sustainable Development, 2001.
KEMP, D.; WORDEN, S.; OWEN, J. R. Differentiated social risk: Rebound dynamics and sustainability performance in mining. Resources Policy, v. 50, p. 19–26, 2016. Disponível em: <http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2016.08.004>.
KOTEY, B.; ROLFE, J. Demographic and economic impact of mining on remote communities in Australia. Resources Policy, v. 42, p. 65–72, 2014.
LANE, M.; ROSS, H.; DALE, A. Social Impact Research: Integrating the Technical, Political, and Planning Paradigms. Human Organization, v. 56, n. 3, p. 302–310, 1997.
MANCINI, L.; SALA, S. Social impact assessment in the mining sector: Review and comparison of indicators frameworks. Resources Policy, v. 57, n. January, p. 98–111, 2018. Disponível em: <http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j. resourpol. 2018.02.002>.
MCMAHON, G.; REMY, F. (orgs). Grandes Minas y la comunidad: efectos socioeconómicos y ambientales en Latinoamérica, Canadá y España. Colombia: Centro Internacional de Investigaciones para el Desarrollo y Alfaomega Colombiana S. A., 2003.
MIRANDA, M. et al. Mining and critical ecosystems: Mapping the Risks. Washington, DC: World Resources Institute, 2003.
MITCHELL, R. K.; AGLE, B. R.; WOOD, D. J. Toward a Theory of Stakeholder Identification and Salience : Defining the Principle of Who and What Really Counts. The Academy of Management Review, v. 22, n. 4, p. 853–886, 1997. Disponível em: <http://www.jstor.org/stable/259247%0Ahttp://about. jstor.org/terms>.
ROSYIDA, I.; KHAN, W.; SASAOKA, M. Marginalization of a coastal resource-dependent community: A study on Tin mining in Indonesia. The Extractive Industries and Society, v. 5, p. 165–176, 2018.
SOLOMON, F.; KATZ, E.; LOVEL, R. Social dimensions of mining: Research, policy and practice challenges for the minerals industry in Australia. Resources Policy, v. 33, n. 3, p. 142–149, set. 2008.
VANCLAY, F. Conceptualising Social Impacts. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, v. 22, n. 3, p. 183–211, 2002. Disponível em: <http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0195925501001056>.
VANCLAY, F. International Principles for social impac assessment. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, v. 21: 1, p. 5–12, 2003.
WEBLER, T.; KASTENHOLZ, H.; RENN, O. Public participation in impact assessment: A social learning perspective. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, v. 15, n. 5, p. 443–463, 1995.
YIN, R. K. Estudo de Caso: Planejamento e Métodos. 5. ed. Porto Alegre: Bookman, 2015.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
The authors, while doing the submission, accept the notice below:
We authors hold the copyright related to our paper and transfer Contextus journal the right for the first publication with a Creative Commons’ international license of the modality Attribution – Non-commercial 4.0, which in turn allows the paper to be shared providing that both the authorship and the journal’s right for initial release are acknowledged.
Furthermore, we are aware of our permission to take part in additional contracts independently for non-exclusive distribution of the version of our work published in this journal (e.g. publishing it in an institutional repository or as a book chapter), while acknowledging both the authorship and the journal’s initial publication.
We also certify that the paper is original and up to this date has not been released in any other journal, Brazilian or of another nationality, either in Portuguese or another language, as well as it has not been sent for simultaneous publication in other journals.
Last, we not only know that plagiarism is not tolerated by Contextus but also certify the paper presents the sources of passages from cited works, including those authored by ourselves.