Eliciting Drivers of Community Perceptions of Mining Projects through Effective Community Engagement

Abstract

Sustainable mining has received much attention in recent years as a consequence of the negative impacts of mining and public awareness. The aim of this paper is to provide mining companies guidance on improving the sustainability of their sites through effective community engagement based on recent advances in the literature. It begins with a review of the literature on sustainable development and its relationship to stakeholder engagement. It then uses the literature to determine the dominant factors that affect community perceptions of mining projects. These factors are classified into five categories: environmental, economic, social, governance and demographic factors. Then, we propose a new two-stage method based on discrete choice theory and the classification that can improve stakeholder engagement and be cost-effective. Further work is required to validate the proposed method, although it shows potential to overcome some of the challenges plaguing current approaches.

Overcoming adverse stakeholder perception affecting tenement relinquishment

“…While it is usually not difficult to identify regulators and other government stakeholders relevant to relinquishment of a mine, it can sometimes be difficult to determine who forms the 'community' relevant to the mine. In mining industry terms, a community is generally defined as the inhabitants of the immediate and surrounding areas who are affected by a company's activities (Wang et al 2016), but in practice it can sometimes be difficult to define the zone of influence. Further, this can change as the mining company approaches and then enters the closure and relinquishment phases.…”

“…When mining companies look for a collective response from a community in relation to plans for relinquishment, or attempt to gauge community acceptance or resistance to custodial transfer of a former mine, they often aim to engage with 'key stakeholders' and 'community representatives' as if the views of these individuals are representative of the wider community. While this approach has merit, it means that companies sometimes overlook the fact that a community's response is shaped by the choices and strategic interactions of individuals within the community, by private rather than public responses, and individual rather than collective actions (Wang et al 2016). On this basis, it is important that the company develops a sound understanding of the range of stakeholders interested in and/or affected by a relinquishment project and the roles played by these stakeholders (including whether they are decision-makers, influencers, observers etc.…”

“…Stakeholder-related risk is one of the major non-technical risks responsible for delays to mining projects (Franks et al 2014), so it comes as no surprise that stakeholder engagement is seen as the best way to mitigate these risks and achieve sustainable outcomes (Wang et al 2016). Beecher et al (2005 note that what may matter most in risk communication is the credibility of the person providing the information and the level of trustworthiness, fairness and respect that the person (or organisation) demonstrates.…”

Peace with Hunger: Colombia’s Checkered Experience with Post-Conflict Sustainable Community Development in Emerald-Mining Regions

“…Mining corporations have adopted this governance approach in their social responsibility and sustainability agendas [14]. However, at the local level, corporations have encountered a major barrier when implementing this approach [15]. Corporate and government engagement with artisanal miners is very often challenging and therefore overlooked, or on the other hand being left out of conflict resolution processes in mining [13].…”

“…Local stakeholders in isolation are not able to guarantee lasting community development valuable for local communities. Wang et al [15] identified existing limitations in a governance scenario. Many issues not related to violent conflicts are left out of peace processes, such as inequality and fair access to mineral resources.…”