Community Development - Mining and the Environment: From Ore to Metal - page 611

Simplifi ed notions of what
comprises a community, and
expectations of a homogenous
response to development are
ill-founded because of the many
competing and diverse interests
represented.

community, an ethnic community, and a i shing community. Communities are as varied as
the individuals of which they are comprised.
Each community has unique attributes, understanding, and respect which are essential
for effective community development planning. Simplii ed notions of what comprises a
community, and expectations of a homogenous response to development are ill-founded
because of the many competing and diverse interests represented.

Indigenous Peoples, Culture, and Vulnerability

Indigenous Peoples are those people regarded as original inhabitants of an area, and
are usually acknowledged as the traditional owners of land, which is commonly termed
'ancestral land'. World Bank (1989) proposes the following six criteria to identify IP:
1. Close attachment to ancestral territories and to natural resources in these areas;
2. Self-identii cation and identii cation by others as members of a distinct cultural group;
3. Often use a language different from the national language;

4. Presence of customary and political institutions;

5. Primarily subsistence-orientated production; and

6. Vulnerability to being disadvantaged as a social group in the development process.

Past experience from mining operations in many parts of the world, coni rms that where
ancestral land is involved, especially in the case of small IP communities, they are espe-
cially vulnerable to being disadvantaged - economically, socially, and politically - by a
mine development. It is now widely accepted that many IP and traditional cultures have
world heritage values. IP serve as custodians of the last remaining pristine territories of
the Earth (ADB 2004). These territories remain largely unaffected by the environmental
degradation that has occurred elsewhere as a consequence of economic growth and are
now seen as resources of competitive advantage. Developed countries have few if any such
areas and most are legally protected.

Insulation versus Integration

There are two approaches to CD for a proposed project: to insulate the local community
from the project or to integrate it into the project. A decision on which approach to take
is best made jointly with the affected community. Both have merits (see also Table 14.1 ).
Mining companies often prefer to insulate the mine construction from the local community
to the extent possible. Practical measures include fencing off the construction site and con-
struction camps (practising the saying 'A good fence makes a good neighbour.'). Access to
the construction camp is restricted so there is minimum interaction between the construc-
tion workforce and community, except for any villagers employed by the mine construction.
Often the construction workforce is employed and accommodated on a single status basis.
This approach is selected to minimize the worker's impact on the areas outside the camp
and plant area, including hunting, and to minimize security disturbances or issues arising
between local communities and the construction workforce, in particular in regard to poten-
tial sexual harassment of local women. The arrangement to insulate construction from the
communities also recognizes the safety hazards that are present at any large construction site.
Insulation becomes less practical during the mine operation. The presence of a min-
ing project will bring about many unavoidable changes in the lives of people in nearby
communities. Some community members may i nd it difi cult to accept changes that are
the result of the project activities, such as the increased number of outsiders in the project
area. In under-developed regions where the carrying capacity of the local area is low and

Mining companies often prefer
to insulate the mine construction
from the local community to the
extent possible.