Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
these examples would necessarily be sustainable in terms of providing employment beyond
the mine lifetime, both would involve development of signii cant local entrepreneurial and
management skills and capital formation that would almost certainly provide long-term ben-
ei ts to the community. It should be expected that many ventures based on seed money will
not be successful. Accordingly, investment in a wide range of ventures is preferred over a few
or a narrow range of initiatives, however compelling they might seem.
Benefi ting Both Community and Mining Company
A mining company exists to make proi ts for its shareholders. For a company to claim
altruistic motives for providing benei ts to the community is neither credible nor necessary.
Community development programmes need to be an integral part of the mining operation,
because the company needs a stable and improving socioeconomic environment in which
to operate successfully. Since even the largest mining companies have limited resources to
devote to community development programmes, companies should concentrate on those pro-
grammes with the potential for providing benei ts to the company as well as the community.
Companies should concentrate
on those programmes with the
potential for providing benefi ts
to the company as well as the
community.
Community has Ownership
All sustainable community development programmes should be planned to gain commu-
nity decision-making based on shared responsibility for success as well as failure. Without
community endorsement, ownership is unlikely to develop and failure is likely. Some
community development programmes suggest themselves without extensive consulta-
tion. A good example is where the mining company, with its own labour force, equipment,
materials, and funds, builds a community water supply system where none existed before.
However, if the water supply is seen as the company's system, all administration, mainte-
nance, extensions, upgrades, and replacements will be seen as the company's responsibil-
ity, and the water will cease to l ow soon after the mine closes. The preferred alternative is
that before a single well is drilled or pipe is laid, a local government or community based
entity is created or adapted, with responsibilities for collecting fees (however nominal) and
arranging maintenance. The company's support should be phased out as soon as practicable.
While this approach may lead to short-term inefi ciencies, it is more likely to be sustainable.
All sustainable community
development programmes
should be planned to gain
community decision-making
based on shared responsibility
for success as well as failure.
15.3 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROCESS
Community development is not a regulatory add-on, but rather a programme to allow
communities within the mining operation's impact area to realize sustained improve-
ments in standards of living and quality of life that exceed the direct effects of employ-
ment in, and higher levels of economic activity resulting from mining. The sequence for
programme formulation is illustrated in Figure 15.3 .
It is advisable to document in detail the consultations and rationale leading to the
approach adopted, for the record and to meet the ever-increasing need to demonstrate
compliance with the Equator Principles. This documentation is best formalized in a
Community and Indigenous Peoples Development Plan (CIPDP), ideally adopting rel-
evant guidance provided by leading international lenders such as IFC (1998, 2006) or
ADB (2004). Table 15.2 provides an example of the structure and contents of a CIPD.
Subsequently as the CIPD is implemented, outcomes and changes should be documented
 
Search WWH ::




Custom Search