Indigenous Peoples Issues - Mining and the Environment: From Ore to Metal - page 656

In some countries the opposite occurs where the national government claims all mining
revenues, and there is no special treatment of the communities affected by the mine devel-
opment. Under these circumstances, the indigenous group that is directly involved feels
unfairly treated because it receives the adverse effects of the development with no com-
pensating benei ts, or only a small share. This was the case in Indonesia until 1999 when
the Law No. 22 Act was promulgated, ensuring that part of government revenues from a
project l owed to the region involved.
Mining companies are faced with difi cult choices in distributing benei ts among stake-
holders and would-be stakeholders (see also Chapter Fourteen on compensation). Often,
the community expects the company to compensate for the inadequacies of government,
but most companies would not view this as their responsibility and, in many cases, govern-
ment policies can restrict the means by which this can be done. It is therefore essential that
discussions, negotiations, and decisions involve the government as well as the community
and the company.

Alienation of Land or Access

The availability of land and access to land and related resources are usually the most
sensitive and crucial issue between Indigenous Peoples and mining companies. Most
Indigenous Peoples have already lost much of their traditional lands. For some, the land
remaining may already be insufi cient to sustain their traditional way of life.
Land access is culturally and historically important for Indigenous Peoples. It is consid-
ered by many a source of spiritual and physical well-being (Togolo 1997). In some cases,
access to land is a matter of physical survival and, therefore, alienating land can compro-
mise the ability of Indigenous Peoples to meet their own needs. In most cases, Indigenous
Peoples have strong beliefs about land use, including understandings about the origins of
land areas, special values of certain areas, and prohibitions or taboos. Some sites are con-
sidered by Indigenous Peoples as sacred. The most sacred sites are of such signii cance that
any alienation or damage is unthinkable. There are also customary land tenure systems
that dictate ownership and use of some land. Finally, aborigines generally do not regard
traditional land as a tradable asset.
For these reasons, land transaction and access arrangements must be negotiated care-
fully and sensitively. Some areas will be strictly unavailable to mining companies; others
will be accessible but only under certain circumstances. The opportunities that arise or can
be created will depend on the outcome of negotiations over land and access. Most projects
have sufi cient l exibility that land issues can generally be satisfactorily resolved. An excep-
tion would be if the ore body was itself a sacred site. A mining company needs to be pre-
pared to forego mining in such a case. The Ranger Uranium Mine in northern Australia
provides an interesting example. Three ore bodies were discovered, but one was excluded
from mining because of its close proximity to a sacred site.
There is also the reasonably common situation where a community is divided in its will-
ingness to allow mining at or near a sensitive area. Such situations may take many years to
resolve if, in fact resolution is possible.

The availability of land and access
to land and related resources are
usually the most sensitive and
crucial issue between Indigenous
Peoples and mining companies.

Compensation

Compensation is, in concept, relatively straightforward. Payments are nearly always in
cash, following which the compensated surrenders rights of ownership or privilege to the