Community Development - Mining and the Environment: From Ore to Metal - page 615

the day-to-day implementation should communicate closely, on a daily basis. Ideally, there
should be a clear division between community relations and community development,
including completely separate budgets.

Seeking Local Input to Design and Execution

Generally speaking, the objectives of most community development programmes are
simple in concept, tending to focus on improving health, public services, and education.
However, communities need to be included in the design and execution if a programme
is to be accepted. The process of planning and implementing a community development
programme often determines its success or failure.
In outmoded CD models, community development planning is undertaken by outside
experts, who then inform the communities what programmes are available for them and
seek their consensus and participation. The inherent risk in this approach is that commu-
nities correctly perceive that the mining company alone prescribes and decides what will
be done. Admittedly, with some effort and thought, numerous good community develop-
ment programmes can be conceived without community participation. However, without
the integration of the local community into the programme identii cation, selection, and
design processes, most programmes will realize limited success or fail entirely.
Community participation in the process is not always easy, requiring at least a proac-
tive engagement, sustained over a long period. The creation of a local institution or rep-
resentative committee to conduct this process may be necessary, or participatory resource
appraisal tools, described in a later section, can be applied. Some mining companies wish
to be closely involved in the process of determining community development priorities.
Others prefer a more 'arm's length' approach where, for example, an independent third
party such as an NGO is engaged to work with the community in planning the CD pro-
gramme. In this case, the company's role may be only to approve (or not) the commitments
of company resources.
Community development programmes identii ed and developed with the people who
are benei ting are more likely to be sustainable, and the people are likely to become more
self-sufi cient and self-reliant as a result. Participatory planning takes time, and can best
be achieved by starting early. Comprehensive dialogue, consultation, and involvement of
community members are essential elements of this strategy.

Communities need to be included
in the design and execution if a
programme is to be accepted.

Local Government Authorities should not be By-passed

While mining companies are usually in frequent contact and interaction with local and
regional governments, CD programmes are seldom well-integrated with ofi cial local and
regional development efforts. In many cases, CD initiatives actually address the same needs
(education, health, welfare, community infrastructure) that are the clear responsibility of gov-
ernments. In very remote areas or in highly impoverished societies this cannot be avoided.
However, unless there are no government institutions and none can be developed, it is pref-
erable for the mining company and government to coordinate resources, with the govern-
ment in the leading role and the mining company in the background. Many companies resist
this approach citing objections such as 'Only we can ensure that outcomes are achieved on
time and within budgets' or 'If the government is in control, money will be wasted'. These
concerns can be alleviated in several ways. For example, rather than committing funds for
government programmes, the company could elect to provide personnel and equipment. In

In many cases, CD initiatives
actually address the same needs
(education, health, welfare,
community infrastructure) that
are the clear responsibility of
governments. In very remote
areas or in highly impoverished
societies this cannot be avoided.