EDITORIAL AND COMMENTARY — There’s more to mining than tonnage and grade Community relations

A recent communique from the Prospectors & Developers Association of Canada (PDAC) suggests that the Canadian mining industry needs to improve its ability to deal with the environmental and socio-economic realities of mine development in foreign nations.

The conclusion was contained in a paper delivered by Ian Thompson, vice-president of Orvana Minerals, and Susan Joyce, a Bolivian resource consultant, at a conference entitled “Mining and the Community,” sponsored by the World Bank and held in Quito, Ecuador.

The authors say mining companies operating globally should recognize that there is growing confidence on the part of many communities that they can exercise control over the timing, direction and process of social, political and economic development by exerting their rights, real or perceived.

“For a mining company, this means that communities want to question, manage, or challenge the presence of a company from the first appearance of its personnel in their area,” the authors state. “As a consequence, the need to address the social impacts of mineral development is being pushed into the exploration phase.”

Mining companies and local communities often have differing views about the role of exploration. Companies know, from experience, that not even one in a hundred mineral showings is worth evaluating; that barely one in 10 advanced projects goes to feasibility; and that there is no certainty as to which company will be the final operator of a project. Exploration may take place in spurts, with periods of intense activity alternating with periods when lack of funds translates into little or no activity.

The local community may have little or no understanding of these realities and may become fearful if certain expectations are not realized. As the authors point out, the absence of information from companies during the exploration phase can lead to misconceptions, ill-founded rumors and incorrect information.

The nature of the response will depend on past experiences. In areas with no history of mining, the community may have few expectations and remain passive to the work taking place around them. But, more often than not, there will be a high degree of sensitivity to what the community regards as an assault on its land or way of life. And without knowledge of the community, the exploration company may unintentionally provoke conflict, with negative consequences to all parties.

The authors say it is essential for mining companies to build a positive relationship with local communities during the exploration stage. “Some form of community relations program should be developed,” they advise, “based on an open exchange of information in which great care is taken to work with locally recognized authorities, and to avoid making false promises or creating unrealistic expectations on both sides.”

Above all, exploration has to respect the local community and its rights, real and perceived, the authors add. “Community hopes, fears and way of seeing the world must be listened to with open-Mindedness, not through the cultural filters of developed country value systems and/or predetermined categories. Only by fully accepting how the community thinks, what it values, and what kind of future its people want to see for themselves, can a company hope to develop, with them, a project that advances the interests of both parties.”

We agree with the authors when they say that maintaining a project in social and socio-economic “good standing” is a “value-Added” asset in the same way that exploration, which defines grade and tonnage of a mineral deposit, adds value to a property.