Indigenous Peoples Issues - Mining and the Environment: From Ore to Metal - page 659

Mining on aboriginal land
inevitably reduces the isolation of
the indigenous community and
increases exposure to outside
values.

Mining on aboriginal land inevitably reduces the isolation of the indigenous commu-
nity and increases exposure to outside values. Some mining projects have been designed to
minimize impacts on Indigenous Peoples by largely or totally avoiding contact between the
mine workforce and the local community. Such projects use the 'l y in l y out' approach.
The Nabarlek Uranium Project which was located inside the Arnhem Land Aboriginal
Reservation in northern Australia was an early example of this approach, which is now
widespread. (There are other reasons for adopting 'l y in l y out', such as minimizing
capital costs). Elsewhere, attempts have been made to control the interactions between the
non-indigenous workforce and the Indigenous Peoples by the imposition of a 'Workforce
Code Of Conduct' which may include such matters as:
●

Limitations on visits to indigenous communities or to particular areas;

●

Restrictions on possession or use of alcohol, and

●

Prohibition of sexual contact with Indigenous Peoples.

Clearly, as with other company policies with potential to cause or alleviate social problems,
major decisions on contact and codes of conduct should be developed in consultation with
the indigenous community, whose wishes it should rel ect.
Incoming workers are more likely to respect Indigenous Peoples if they have aware-
ness, understanding and respect for their culture and values. Mining companies can assist
by avoiding recruitment of biased or bigoted employees, by including cultural awareness
among their goals and by providing all incoming workers with information on the impor-
tance of local indigenous culture as part of their induction.
Even more important is for the company to maintain a dialogue with the local com-
munity and to establish mechanisms through which misunderstandings, grievances, and
contentious issues can be identii ed and resolved before harm is done. Appropriate mecha-
nisms will vary depending on the nature of the indigenous community and the ways by
which the community addresses its own social issues.

Even more important is for the
company to maintain a dialogue
with the local community and to
establish mechanisms through
which misunderstandings,
grievances, and contentious
issues can be identifi ed and
resolved before harm is done.

Changes in Decision-Making Authority

All societies have well-developed rules with decision-making authority clearly dei ned.
Indigenous societies are no exception. Operating at the non-state level, authorities have
tended to base their legitimacy on kinship and locality grounds. Family heads, clan or
tribal chiefs, spiritual leaders, and healers all have well-understood areas of responsibil-
ity and levels of authority. There are also well-developed and generally accepted means of
conciliation, conl ict resolution, and dispensation of justice and punishment.
These authorities may be diminished as contact with the outside world leads to situa-
tions that are not covered by established rules or positions (i.e. rules and structures in the
non-indigenous community) that do not i t with the traditional hierarchical structure.
Questions such as:
●

How does a society with no experience of addictive drugs respond to the sudden avail-
ability of alcohol and other drugs?

●

Where does a merchant, a foreman or a person with wealth and possessions belong in
a hierarchy based on bloodline, religious ritual or prowess in a traditional activity?

As the lines of authority (which include respect and leadership) become blurred, conl ict
increases and the indigenous society's ability to manage its own affairs decreases. A resil-
ient community can usually adapt to these changes. However, a weakened fragile society
may be unable to adapt. Traditional chiefs may also feel threatened or ineffectual because