In this sixth of seven columns on mining, I continue to elaborate the conditions to enable responsible mining.
The first condition is the identification of “no-go” areas. Despite provisions in the law that identify areas closed to mining, field implementation has been beset by conflicts. There is no clear-cut policy on mining in island ecosystems that are most vulnerable to environmental and social impacts. This has to be the priority and it can be done as the technical date available. It is only the “political economy of ignorance”, a phrase coined by Yale professor Michael Dove and popularized in the Philippines by Professor Owen Lynch, where lack of knowledge and competence is used to perpetuate an unjust situation, which has prevented us from identifying and establishing these no-go areas.
In this regard, there must be respect for the NIPAS law (on protected areas) and the special environmental law for Palawan that declares areas closed to mining. There must be respect for the right of local governments to close areas within their territorial jurisdiction to mining operations as a precautionary measure, in the absence of credible information on impacts and acceptable risks. Small island ecosystems should be excluded from mining, as they support small communities as special cases for environment and development, being ecologically fragile and vulnerable. The ocean and coastal environment of small islands of strategic importance and constitutes a valuable development resource. Their small size, limited resources, geographic dispersion and isolation from markets, place them at a disadvantage economically and prevent economies of scale.
As previously written, responsible mining also has to accurately assess and account for all relevant costs and benefits. The appropriate valuation mechanisms should be employed to ensure that the environmental and social responsibilities are accounted for, and that the negative impacts are mitigated and affected communities compensated. There must also be a more comprehensive articulation of risk assessment for disaster management, given that the Philippines is prone to geophysical disturbance and climate change-induced hazards. Regulations on environmental impact studies should be reviewed to account for the value of biodiversity and ethno diversity significance.
Responsible mining has to respect the decision of local stakeholders, especially indigenous peoples. Inconsistencies in the implementation of the requirement of Free and Prior Informed Consent raise serious doubts as to the validity of community consent and benefit-sharing agreements. The right of IPs and local communities to say “no” should be respected and not taken as a provisional decision subject to negotiation until communities finally say “yes.”
Responsible mining requires that small-scale mining should be held to the same high standards imposed on the big mining companies. In the first place, most small-scale mining today already employs tools and machines similar to those used by the big companies. There are also financiers with deep pockets behind many small-scale mining operations and such financiers must hold accountable for compliance with environmental, social and economic laws.
Government must define a policy to get the best deal for the people given that the current fiscal incentives and taxation regime in mining are inadequate and do not assume long-term national and local benefits. It must also identify clear and measurable indicators needed to track compliance and progress in reforms needed for responsible mining, including inclusiveness of economic benefits, as well as social, cultural, and environmental safeguards.
Massive capacity building of government personnel and agencies are needed to support stable, rational decision-making in mining. These include capacity to implement: (1) resources valuation; (2) equitable benefit-sharing schemes; (3) regular and science-based monitoring of environmental impacts; (4) enforcement of environmental and other laws; (5) validation of free and prior informed consent of IPs; (6) effective public participation mechanisms; and, (7) disaster risk assessment, management, and reduction.
The actions needed must be set in a clear, doable, time-bound, and adequately funded action plan, so that all stakeholders can reasonably expect accomplishment of the reform goals. The reforms are only as good as their implementation. While the private sector can help and communities can assist, government has to provide the manpower and resources needed to implement the reforms both at national and local government levels.
As we concluded in our policy brief, for decades, the shortcomings in mining governance have been ignored. This is no longer acceptable. A new mining policy is needed and we need it now.
E-mail: tonylavs@gmail.com Facebook: tlavina@yahoo.com Twitter: tonylavs
(Published in the Manila Standard Today newspaper on /2012/April/24) article source
No comments:
Post a Comment