Transcript Anthropology and mining: Ethical issues in conducting social impact studies among indigenous peoples

Anthropology and mining:
Ethical issues in conducting
social impact studies among
indigenous peoples
By Rosa Cordillera A. Castillo
Acknowledgements




Center for Environmental Concerns/Kalikasan
PNE
Legal Rights and Natural Resources/Kasama sa
Kalikasan/Friends of the Earth Philippines
Anthropology Watch, Inc.
Researchers
Large Scale Mining in the
Philippines




$1 trillion worth of unexplored mineral
resources
3rd worldwide in gold deposits, 4th in copper, 5th
in nickel, and 6th in chromite
294 mining agreements in existence as of
January 2008 covering over 600,000 hectares of
mineralized lands
2,626 mining applications are currently being
processed

The Mining Act of 1995
Allows transnational companies to own 100% of the
mines
 Repatriate 100% of capital and profits
 Evict communities from mine areas
 Gives companies complete water and timber rights
over mineral-rich lands, capital tax exemption and
10-year tax holidays

Environmental and social costs of
mining
Marcopper mine disaster (Source: Oxfam and
saverapurapu)
Marcopper mine disaster (Source:
Coumans)
Maricalum mine disaster
(Source: bulatlat)
Rapu Rapu island fish kill
(Source: saverapurapu)
Antamok open pit (Source: CPA)

Social costs
Displacement of communities
 Destruction of livelihood sources and economic
activities
 Breaking apart of communities who are divided
between pro- and anti-mining
 Human rights violations committed against
communities and their advocates who oppose
mining
 Militarization

Barricade of indigenous peoples to
bar entry of mining equipment in
Kasibu (Source: CEC/Kalikasan PNE)
Militarization in Kasibu, Nueva
Vizcaya (Source CEC/Kalikasan
PNE)
Mining and indigenous peoples


53% of the 15 million hectares that have been
opened for mining applications and 16 of the 24
priority mining areas are in indigenous peoples'
lands
Development aggression
Indigenous peoples of Mindanao (Source:
Anthropology Watch)
Mines in Mindanao (Source:
Anthropology Watch)
Legal framework for FPIC and social
acceptability

Indigenous Peoples Rights Act (IPRA) of 1997
The State "recognizes and promotes the rights of indigenous
cultural communities within the framework of national unity
and development"
 The State, "subject to the provisions of this Constitution and
national development policies and programs, shall protect the
rights of indigenous cultural communities to their ancestral
lands to ensure their economic, social and cultural well-being."
 National Commission on Indigenous Peoples


Free and prior informed consent

“consensus of all the members of the indigenous peoples to be
determined in accordance with their respective customary laws
and practices, free from any external manipulation,
interference, and coercion, and obtained after fully disclosing
the intent and scope of the activity, in a language and process
understandable to the community.”

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA)
Requirement for Environmental Clearance
Certificate
 Aims to protect the environment as well as the
community's welfare

Anthropology and mining






Looking into potential social impacts of the project
Providing baseline data
Tapped to make social feasibility studies for a mining
company wanting to enter a community
Conducting information and education campaigns in the
communities for the company
Drawing up strategies that can convince people to become
pro-mining
Others are hired as community liaison officers and
community organizers to convince people to become promining
Problems with the legal framework





Cases of fraudulently obtained FPICs in various indigenous
communities, bribery and harassment
Unclear definition of "socially acceptable"
Lack of disclosure of project information to the public
Lack of accountability on the part of the preparers of the
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) which would have
prevented falsification of data
Lack of an independent and third party body that could
conduct the EIA

The protective mechanisms in the various laws
are not adequate in protecting the community;
instead they are being used to serve the interests
of mining companies even though these are in
violation of the community’s rights


Are people able to freely decide in a context
where they do not have much option to begin
with?
"The political exercise of FPIC cannot be
divorced from the reality of economic
inequities" (Leonen 1998)
Ethics in anthropology

Problems encountered
 Conducting the study in the guise of academic
research even though said study was financed by the
company
 Unclear objectives of the study even for the
researcher
 Researcher lacks ownership over the data gathered
and the freedom to write about it in other
publications
 Researcher not allowed to divulge that mining
company financed the study
Furthermore…



Copies of research not provided to the
community
Anthropologists become party to divide and rule
tactics
Devising strategies so that communities become
pro-mining is potentially unethical
Ethical guidelines violated

American Anthropological Association (AAA)





The anthropologist's responsibility is to those they study
especially when there is a conflict of interest
The rights and welfare of those studied must be
safeguarded and protected, and their dignity and privacy
honored
Risks and benefits must be communicated clearly to those
being studied
Reports must be equally available to the sponsors, general
public, and to the community studied
Anthropologists should not engage in secret research or
researches whose results are not publicly reported and
freely available

Anthropological Association of the Philippines
(UGAT)




Anthropologist must be sincere to the host community
Researcher must explain the research objectives and
implications to the host community
Research product must be returned to the community
preferably in a language the community can understand
Research product must be made available to the larger
community

UGAT: focus on ethics

Recently formed the ethics review board that, among
others, serves as a venue for complaints to be filed
by individuals/parties against anthropologists who
commit unethical research practices, and
recommend possible sanctions

Issue of fair benefit sharing in mining


Lack of public disclosure of information


How could the loss of a sacred ground to mining be
compensated? How could the sense of uprootedness
and loss of identity be compensated? The loss of
traditional relations to land and traditional utilization
of resources and the eventual loss of indigenous
knowledge and practices rooted in their lands?
Public participation and FPIC is compromised
Conflict of interest
Recommendations
UGAT





Formulate more explicit ethical principles with
details on sanctions and mechanisms on how
communities can access the services of the
organization
Inform the public about its services
Link with indigenous people’s organizations and
networks to monitor the activities of
anthropologists working for mining companies
Advocate the teaching of ethics in schools
NGOs and indigenous organizations and
communities





Demand accountability from researchers
Report unethical researchers to their institutions,
organizations, and to the general public
Sanction unethical researchers by blacklisting them from
the community and other community networks
Provide indigenous communities with research capability
to enable them to conduct their own investigations and
determine potentially risky researches
Provide wider reach for information and education
campaigns regarding indigenous peoples rights in
research
 Pressure the government to give more teeth to the
FPIC and EIA processes to protect the interests of
the community and not that of the mining
company's
 Pressure the government to form an independent
body free from vested interests who will conduct the
EIA
