BROWNIES vs GREENIES: Does Mining make for Sustainable Development?
Panel
Dr Glenn Banks, UNSW ADFA
Dr Kuntala Lahiri-Dutt, Fellow RMAP
Dr John Burton, Fellow RMAP
Mr Wijayono Sarosa, PhD Candidate RMAP
Moderator
Dr Colin Filer, Convenor RMAP
 |
A recent film called Mine Your Own Business claims that environmental NGOs are being socially irresponsible, and even hypocritical, when they attack the development or continued operation of large-scale mines in countries or regions where mining can make a huge contribution to the alleviation of human poverty, where this economic benefit greatly outweighs the costs of environmental damage, and where the mining companies themselves apply strict standards of corporate social responsibility. Environmentalists have retaliated by attacking the film itself, which clearly takes a pro-mining stance and was partly funded by a company proposing to develop a new mine in Romania. A showing of an extract from the film will be followed by arguments from the panel and then open discussion.
ARGUMENTS>>
Dr Kuntala Lahiri-Dutt
Who is the local community? Who represents the interests of locals? Are environmental activitists ’successful in building up an opposition acting as part of the necessary suite of checks and balances’, benefiting local communities? Increasing demand for products is ‘pushing mining into the “last frontiers”‘, providing opportunity for joint ventures between transnational mining companies and governments. But, is this effective in improving resource rights of local communities? And what about the greenies; what role do they play? Read full argument.
Mr Wijayono Sarosa
This insider view of mining in Indonesia reveals the scope and role of mining companies in community development. But is business well placed to provide such services, replacing the functions of the State, ‘amid a paucity of adequate national guidelines or legal frameworks’? Are the greenies effective in the watchdog role of keeping coorporations honest? Read full argument.
Dr John Burton
In its edgy new combative format, yesterday’s RMAP Argument quizzed whether ‘native’ viewpoints had more legitimacy than environmental activists when it comes to mining. Read comment ‘Susanna, why I cry for you: ‘native’ viewpoints‘
2 comments
Comments feed for this article
Trackback link
http://rspas.anu.edu.au/blogs/rmap/rmap-arguments/mining-sustainable-development/trackback/
26 October, 2007 at 11:14 am
kuntala
In Argument 2 yesterday, we noted that mining, the ‘last frontier’, is continuously moving and expanding into TW countries. Digging up the Gobi desert in Mongolia got a mention. More or less similar expansion is taking place wherever minerals are found. Often these are heavily protected sites where the locals cannot access or get information on what is going on inside. A Pakistani friend told me recently that Chinese mining companies bring their own workers to work in fenced off minesites - effectively little piece of China in the middle of Baluchistan.
Now, here is some news about Afghanistan that RMAPpers might be interested in.
http://www.nature.com/news/2007/071024/full/449968a.html
26 October, 2007 at 11:47 am
kuntala
See for native informants feeding the Anthropologists see:
http://ojs.review.mai.ac.nz/index.php/MR/article/viewFile/7/7
My point isn’t which one of them to choose or which one to believe, John. It is about YOU (or the likes of you on 4-wheel drives), putting people under microscope and even giving judgment on them, from a position of superiority.
However, I am feeling gratified that although my 4-wheel drive question failed (for pure lack of cross-cultural understanding, alas!), the native informant has stuck the arrow right into the chest of bleeding heart (now, definitely) Anthropologists!
Gratified also, that place is getting its rightful place after all the gobbling up of it by the likes of you. Just wish the End of Geography hadn’t reduced the numbers to share my joys with.