mesas de diálogo social conflict and community engagement in the mining sector of peru presented at...
TRANSCRIPT
Mesas de Diálogo Social Conflict and Community Engagement
in the Mining Sector of Peru
Presented at IFC Sustainability Exchange 2015
Washington, DC. May 20, 2015For internal discussion. Do not cite or circulate
Overview
1. Background: Mining and
Conflict in Peru
2. Institutional Responses to
Conflict
3. A new multi-stakeholder
approach: Dialogue Tables
4. The Tintaya/Espinar &
Quellaveco study
5. Lessons learned and
Recommendations
Peru is the World’s second largest producer of copper and silver, and has other major reserves
Mining has become the main driver of its fast-growing economy
Peru has the highest number of social conflicts associated to mining in LAC, together with Chile
The social and economic costs of conflict have increasingly put questions of equity, fairness, and sustainability on the national agenda
1. Background: Mining and Conflict in Peru
Jan-
05M
ay-0
5Se
p-05
Jan-
06M
ay-0
6Se
p-06
Jan-
07M
ay-0
7Se
p-07
Jan-
08M
ay-0
8Se
p-08
Jan-
09M
ay-0
9Se
p-09
Jan-
10M
ay-1
0Se
p-10
Jan-
11M
ay-1
1Se
p-11
Jan-
12M
ay-1
2Se
p-12
Jan-
13M
ay-1
30
50
100
150
200
250
300
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Conflictos mineros Conflictos totales % conflictos asociados a minería
# of conflicts% associated to Mining
Source: Peruvian Ombudsman and Central Bank
2. Institutional responses to conflict
National Office of Dialogue
Ombudsman
Regional governme
nts
Ministry of Mining
Traditionally, many government institutions have been involved in the prevention and management of social conflicts in Peru
Unclear distribution of competences among them
Different approaches and capacities
Not always direct engagement with relevant stakeholders at the local level
3. DialogueTables
Examples: Quellaveco and Tintaya dialogue tables
Dialogue Tables in
Peru
Innovative response of dialogue over
resource extraction (not only during the
conflict)
Multi-stakeholder and convened at different levels:
national, regional and local
Address community concerns &
aspirations through direct engagement
Diffuse tension & enable conflict transformation:
voice to excluded stakeholders
Facilitated by a trusted individual
4. The Tintaya & Quellaveco study
1. By comparing 2 large-scale copper mining projects in different contexts, the study aims to obtain:
Key observations and lessons for addressing future processes of dialogue
A set of policy recommendations that encourage the direct engagement of citizens in mining areas
2. This is a result of a multi-stakeholder combined effort:
Systematization of Quellaveco experience: CCPM (coordinated by The World Bank)
Systematization of Tintaya/Espinar: Societas/CooperAcción (coordinated by Oxfam)
Comparative analysis: Shift Group (Harvard University) and CSRM (U. of Queensland)
Workshop with stakeholders, Lima, July 2014: Futuro Sostenible
4. The Tintaya & Quellaveco studyCOMPARATIVE ANALYSIS (1/2)
QUELLAVECO TINTAYA/ESPINARTime 2011. The DT* was active for 18
months2002 (DT of Espinar) and 2011-12 (DT Tintaya)
Ownership
A single owner: Anglo American Numerous corporate owners over 15 years. Current owner: Xtrata
Drivers DT established in response to company-community conflict with reputational risk for the company
DT established in response to company-community conflict with reputational risk for the companies
Issues Water scarcity Contamination of water and legacy issues relating to land expropriation
Local context
Higher level of literacy. Urbanised context. Access and quality to health & education was a priority
Higher levels of poverty. The province became urbanised over time. Priorities for the communities: basic infrastructure and social services
Principles Decision-making by consensus. Principles and rules established prior to dealing with substantive issues
Decision-making by consensus. Principles and rules established prior to dealing with substantive issues
*DT= Dialogue Table
COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS (2/2)QUELLAVECO TINTAYA/ESPINAR
Scope The DT of Moquegua included regional concerns
The DT of Tintaya process was focused on affected communities
Structure Plenary and sub-working groups/committees. Regional government initiated and facilitated the DT, with national government support.
Plenary and sub-working groups/committees. Presence of third party factilitator (Oxfam). No government involvement in the first phase (2002); national and regional involvement in the second DT (2011-12).
Parties DT of Quellaveco was open and conducted with full transparency
DT of Tintaya was closed to participants only, while allowing community representatives time to consult with their constituencies
Company Process led by Anglo American Peru, but required corporate-level involvement in the initial stages
Process led by Xtrata Peru, but required corporate-level involvement in the initial stages
Outcomes Final reports and 26 agreements Final reports and agreements in both DT (2002 and 2012-13)
4. The Tintaya & Quellaveco study
Well-functioning dialogue tables
can be an operational-level
asset for companies
Capacity building can help address
power asymmetries
The involvement of third party
facilitators can be central to success
A constructive, even leading, role for government is
ideal
Regulation can play an important role (attention to its interpretation
and implementation)
Dialogue tables provide an
opportunity to enhance social
inclusion
New forms of ‘dialogue tables’
appear to be emerging
5. Lessons learned and Recommendations 1. Lessons learned
Build a coherent
regulatory framework
for community
engagement
Focus on the enabling role
of government
Recognize value in
meaningful dialogue
Continue to build
knowledge
5. Lessons learned and Recommendations 2. Recommendations
+ Regulatory frameworks require the consent of
all stakeholders. Unilateral
implementations are difficult and politically
costly
More coordination among private sector
players to improve their engagement with local communities and agree
on common E&S standards and practices
