Free working paper on mining, CSR and politics out now!

The Effective States and Inclusive Development Research Centre have just published a working paper by yours truly on ‘Corporate social responsibility and political settlements in the mining sector in Ghana, Zambia and Peru’. It’s really a first cut at some of the findings from my work in 2014 which I’m currently writing up into some papers and a book. The abstract reads thusly:

This paper explores and compares the political effects of corporate social responsibility in the mining sector in Zambia, Ghana and Peru. The paper adopts a political settlements approach to answer the question: How do the CSR practices of mining companies affect local and national political settlements? After setting out the main tenets of the political settlements approach, this is articulated with literature on the politics of natural resource extraction and CSR. The paper then sets the wider context of the international drivers of increased attention to CSR in the extractive sector and before exploring the impact of the CSR practices of mining companies on the political settlement in Ghana, Peru and Zambia at the national and local levels. The final sections offer a comparative discussion of what the findings mean for understanding CSR’s role in inclusive development and natural resource governance. The paper argues that recent increased CSR expenditure does not necessarily translate into development for those living near mining companies, particularly in contexts of exclusionary political settlements, of which all case studies exhibited characteristics. There are a great many institutional and contextual limitations placed on the ability of CSR to deliver development for affected communities. Across the case studies, the opportunities CSR programmes afford tended to aimed at those with the greatest capacity to disrupt operations rather than those with the greatest need. In concluding, I argue that, despite some obvious limitations, the political settlements approach can generate new insights through its focus on the politics of development, and, in particular, the politics of stability.

Available here – Go check it out! All feedback welcome.

Mining industry says mining is good for development

Taking a leaf from the playbook of ‘Dogs Pro Walking’ and ‘Turkeys Against Christmas’, the ICMM has today launched the 3rd edition of its Role of Mining in National Economies report which highlights how “mining can be a major driver of sustainable development.”icmm-romine-cover
To be honest, this may well be a very good report, and I am sympathetic to the notion that mining has an important role to play in a countries development … if managed correctly. I’ve not looked at this report long enough to make a judgment as to its true strengths and weaknesses. What it does remind me of, however, is how I saw their report on the role of mining in Zambia ridiculed at a conference about mining while I was in Zambia in 2014. At that conference a respected Zambian academic told the audience that the best use of the report was as toilet paper. The comment was met with laughter, rueful nodding and zero contradiction. I know people at Oxford Policy Management who were involved in writing the report and am sure they worked hard and well. The simple fact of the origin of the report precluded it ever being taken seriously in Zambia.

So here’s my question, who is swayed by a report from the mining industry about how great the mining industry is? I would really love to know.

Listen to my talk on politics, CSR and development

Following the success of my last podcast I’ve decided to record my talks and stick them on this blog. So, here is the audio for my talk ‘Talking about politics: corporate social responsibility and development in Ghana, Perú and Zambia’ at Mining and Communities Solutions 2016, University of British Columbia, 5-8 June 2016.

Despite this being my first talk at a mining industry conference, it went down really well and provoked quite a bit of discussion. Listening again I hear it mainly as a masterclass in saying ‘erm’ a lot (I was rather nervous) but I did get my main points across quite well. I had little reason to be nervous it seems as my message – that we need to talk about CSR as a political intervention into host countries and communities – was broadly well received. This conference was a gathering of people who really do what to improve the impacts and benefits of mining for local communities and therefore very encouraging. I’ll be posting about my ‘take homes’ in the coming days.

Do let me know what you think.

Samarco tailings disaster: this changes everything?

The recent collapse of a tailings dam at the Samarco project in Brazil has caught widespread attention. It was clearly truly awful and exposed, in connection with the Mt Polley dam failure last year, a key weakness in the the mining sector’s efforts to clean up its act. A good source to read on this is Saleem Ali’s blog over at The Conversation. One quote that caught my attention however was this tagged on to the bottom of an interview with Stuart Kirsch about his book on the OK Tedi mine published last year:

 

“the response to the Brazilian disaster suggests that the default assumption now seems to be that corporations are responsible for their environmental impacts, at least when they are caused by sudden events. This is very different than the way BHP dragged its feet for more than a decade after the problems downstream from the Ok Tedi mine became well-known”

 

The times, they are a changin’. What BHP could get away with 10 years ago it can’t now. The mining industry needs to up its game. This strikes me as very similar to Hevina Dashwood’s argument that in the 1990s the mining industry found itself thoroughly out of step with a new discourse of sustainable development. The industry was forced to up its game or lose influence and investment.

 

Of particular note is that this was no frontier cowboy junior operation, this project was co-operated by two of the worlds largest mining companies. Companies that really should know better. The usual excuses do not apply. If these two companies can’t build a facility that doesn’t dump sixty million cubic meters of down a valley, wiping a village off the map, killing at least 13 people, and destroying a river, who can? What hope does the mining industry have when its leading lights cause these kind of catastrophes?

 

These questions may explain quite how many press releases the ICMM has put out in the last few weeks, a remarkable 5 since the beginning of December, including, importantly, a global tailings management review. If nothing else, the industry needs to be seen to be taking this issue seriously. However, if history is anything to go by (and, in all honestly, it may not be) the industry will drag its feet. I think more than any other issue, if the mining industry fails to get tailings management right, it will never stop being the global whipping boy for environmental mismanagement.