A Proposal on the Conduct of Mining Study entitled “Examining Mining in Mindanao: A Multidisciplinary Appraisal of Policies, Programs, and Practices of Mining in Mindanao using the Framework of Peace and Development and Employing the Critical Adaptation of 7 Questions to Sustainability
- PROJECT TITLE:EXAMINING MINING IN MINDANAO: A MULTIDISCIPLINARY APPRAISAL OF POLICIES, PROGRAMS, AND PRACTICES OF MINING IN MINDANAO USING THE FRAMEWORK OF PEACE AND DEVELOPMENT AND EMPLOYING THE CRITICAL ADAPTATION OF 7 QUESTIONS TO SUSTAINABILITY
II.Project Description:The Mindanao Studies Consortium Foundation, Inc.will conduct a multidisciplinary appraisal of mining policies, programs, and practices in Mindanao using the framework of peace and development and employing a critical adaptation of 7 Questions to Sustainability.
- Project Proponents:MSCFI Member-Institutions:
Alternate Forum for Research in Mindanao (AFRIM)
Ateneo de Davao University (AdDU)
Capitol University (CU)
Dansalan College Foundation, Inc (DCFI)
Mindanao Economic Development Council (MEDCo)
MindanaoStateUniversity-GeneralSantosCity (MSU-GSC)
MindanaoStateUniversity – Iligan Institute of Technology (MSU-IIT)
MindanaoStateUniversity – MarawiCity (MSU-Marawi)
NotreDameUniversity (NDU-Cotabato)
University of Philippines in Mindanao (UP-Min)
University of Southeastern Philippines(USEP)
UriosCollege
WesternMindanaoStateUniversity(WMSU)
Fr. Albert E. Alejo
Project Study Director
Contact number: 09177045474
E-mail Address:
IV.Target Areas: Sagittarius Mining Corporation (Large-scale)
Mining Firm in Surigao del Norte(Medium-scale)
Mining Firm in Marawi and in Zamboanga del Norte (Small-scale)
V.Total Project Cost:PhP 1,540,000.00
VI.Rationale
Mining has been identified by the government and influential private sectors as the “new driver of economic growth.” Is mining an opportunity or a threat?
President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo’s administration has declared mining as its main strategy for development. PGMA’s government contends that the major cause of poverty in the country is the underutilization and mismanagement of the Philippine’s natural resources particularly its minerals (MTPDP, 2004).
Of the 9 million hectares of mineralized areas, only 500,000 hectares are being explored or developed for mining. The government estimates that by fully harnessing the country’s mineral potentials, the Philippines will be able to pay off its foreign debt of Php 1.7 trillion.
However, the cost of mining is high. The spill of Marcopper tailings in Marinduque in the 1990s and Rapu-Rapu in Albay in 2005 are grim reminders of the environmental and health hazards of this extractive industry (Doyle et al, 2007, Coumans 2002, Oxfam Australia 2005, Regis 2006).
Its social and cultural consequences are also serious. Communities are being divided while traditional organizations and practices of indigenous communities are being reengineered (Nettleton 2004, Sanz 205). Mining’s impact to downstream agricultural and fish-farming communities are equally important as water, its quality and source, gives life and livelihood to thousands of dependents. Yet, mining offers alternatives to impoverished areas like in the hinterlands of Mindanao.
Clearly, the issue of mining is complex and multifaceted. Many actors have registered their voices and some have even raised their fists. The battle has been waged from the ore sites to the halls of the Supreme Court. In this complex exchange, the academe and the research community in Mindanao rises and presents itself as a responsible and respectable actor. The MSCFI, in particular, following its earlier initiatives, proposes to conduct a series of studies touching on the policies, practices, and programs of mining in Mindanao. It proposes to approach this with its consortium decision to look at Mindanao from the paradigm of “Peace and Development” using the analytical tool of “7 Questions to Sustainability” that considers not just economic prosperity but also social responsibility and ecological stewardship.
Peace and Development Perspective
The Joint Needs Analysis of the several stakeholders in Mindanao has in a way simplified the meaning of what it means to use the lens of peace and development. What does JNA mean when it says that it employs a “conflict sensitive approach and peace and development framework”? This means that
“Interventions or activities must pass through the peace lens or prism. Simply put, assistance will be primarily extended to contribute to help reduce tension and conflict, in helping build and restore trust and confidence within, between and among communities, and between the state and the CAAs. Activities that can lead to opposite results (i.e intensifying tension or conflict, undermining trust and confidence) will not be pursued no matter how economically and financially viable they are (JNA p. 20).”
Does mining really bring in development tothe country? Granted that it does, we still need to ask what happens when we put a mining operation in areas where there is conflict. In peaceful areas? To what extent will mining be a source of conflict or a resource for peace and development?
VII. Analytical Tool
The mining study team will employ the “7 Questions to Sustainability: How to Assess the Contribution of Mining and Minerals Activities” as the analytical tool. The said analytical tool was a result of a Project by the International Institute for Environment and Development entitled Mining, Minerals and Sustainable Development. It has a set of practical principles, criteria, and/or indicators that could be used to guide or test the exploration for, design, operation, closure, post-closure and performance monitoring of individual operations, existing or proposed, in terms of their compatibility with concepts of sustainability. The use of such tool can substantially contribute in clarifying the economic, environmental, social and cultural benefits, costs and risks of bringing the idea of sustainability from theory to practice and in so doing, brings clarification to the overall case of sustainability in general and the business in particular.
The analytical tool consists of seven components. For each component, a question is posed as a means of assessing whether the net contribution to sustainability over the long term of a mining/mineral project or operation will be positive or negative.
Figure 1. Seven Components in Assessing for Sustainability
Source: Seven Questions to Sustainability: How to Assess the Contribution of Mining and Minerals Activity. International Institute for Sustainable Development
Component 1: Engagement: Are processes of engagement committed to, designed and implemented that:
(1)ensure all affected communities of interest (including vulnerable or disadvantaged sub-populations) have the opportunity to participate in the decisions that influence their own future; and
(2)are understood, agreed upon by implicated communities of interest and consistent with the legal, constitutional, and cultural characteristics of the community where the project is located.
This component consists of the following sub-components:
(1)Engagement Processes
(2)Dispute Resolution Mechanism
(3)Reporting and Verification
(4)Adequate Resources
(5)Informed Voluntary Consent
Component 2: People: Will the project/operation lead directly or indirectly to maintenance of people’s well-being (preferably an improvement):
(1)during the life of the project or operation?
(2)In post-closure?
This component consists of the following sub-components:
(1)Community Organization and Capacity
(2)Social/Cultural Integrity
(3)Worker and Population Health, Safety and Well-being
(4)Availability of Basic Infrastructure
(5)Consideration of all Direct, Indirect, Induced or Diffuse Effects
(6)Full Social/Cultural Costs, Benefits and Risks
(7)Distribution of Costs, Benefits and Risks
(8)Responsibilities and Sureties
(9)Cultural/Social Stress and Restoration
Component 3: Environment:Will the project/operation lead directly or indirectly, to the maintenance or strengthening of the integrity of biophysical systems so that they can continue in post closure to provide the needed support for the well-being of people and other life forms?
This component consists of the following sub-components:
(1)Ecosystem Function, Resilience and Self-Organizing Capacity
(2)Ecological Entitlement
(3)Full Ecosystem, Costs, Benefits, and Risks
(4)Responsibilities and Sureties
(5)Environmental Stress and Action to Ensure Ecosystem Integrity
Component 4: Economy: Is the financial health of the project/company assured and will the project or operation contribute (through planning, evaluation, decision-making, and action) to the long-term viability of the local and regional economy in ways that will help ensure sufficiency for all and provide specific opportunities for the less advantaged?
This component consists of the following sub-components:
(1)Project or Operation Economics
(2)Operational Efficiencies
(3)Economic Contributions: annual/total
(4)Community/Regional Economies
(5)Government/Broader Society Economics
Component 5: Traditional and Non-market Activities: Will the project/operation contribute to the long-term viability of traditional and non-market activities in the implicated community and region?
This component consists of the following sub-components:
(1)Activity/Use Levels
(2)Traditional Cultural Attributes
Component 6: Institutional Arrangements and Governance: Are the institutional arrangements and systems of governance in place to provide a reasonable degree of confidence that the capacity to address project or operation consequences will continue to exist through the full-life cycle including post closure?
This component consists of the following sub-components:
(1)Mix of rules, market incentives, voluntary programs and cultural norms
(2)Capacity
(3)Bridging
(4)Confidence that commitments made will be fulfilled
Component 7: Overall Integrated Assessment and Continuous Learning:Has an overall evaluation been made and is a system in place for periodic re-evaluation based on:
(1)Consideration of all reasonable alternative configurations and designs at the project level (including the no-go option in the initial evaluation)
(2)Consideration of all reasonable alternatives at the overarching strategic level for supplying the commodity and the services it provides for meeting society’s needs
(3)A synthesis of all the factors raised in this list of questions, leading to an overall judgment that the contribution to people and ecosystems will be net positive over the long term.
This component consists of the following sub-components:
(1)Project Level Alternatives
(2)Strategic Level Alternatives
(3)Overall Synthesis
(4)Continuous Learning and Improvement
VII.Objectives
The overriding objective of the study is to conduct a multidisciplinary appraisal of policies, programs and practices of mining in Mindanao using the framework of peace and development and employing the 7 Questions to Sustainability. In the process, it aims to suggest approaches and strategies for effective implementation.
Specifically, it aims to do the following:
(1)Discuss the worldviews of Christians, Muslims, and Indigenous People and how they relate with the mining issues;
(2)Assess the operation of 3 mining firms based on seven components, namely, Engagement, People, Environment, Economy, Traditional and Non-market Activities, Institutional Arrangements and Governance, and Overall Integrated Assessment and Continuous Learning;
(3)Engage the host communities in the assessment process of the mining firms;
(4)Identify the policy gaps in monitoring the operations of the mining system; and,
(5)Provide information to key stakeholders such as the local government units and national line agencies concerned on the net contribution of the operations of the 3 mining firms concerned
VIII.Approach
The examination of mining policies, programs and projects is done through various themes and cases. One extensive discussion on the worldviews of Christians, Muslim, and Indigenous People and how they relate with the mining issues will be conducted. Three case studies will be conducted, specifically, Sagittarius Mines Inc. in Tampakan, a medium scale in Surigao del Norte, and a small-scale firm in Diwalwal. The case studies will employ the Peace and Development Framework and the 7 Questions to Sustainability. The case study concerning SMI will have an intense discussion regarding mining and water. The case study on a mining firm in Surigao del Norte will have an intense discussion on the relationship between mining and food security. Mining and social cohesion will be the added focus in the case study on a mining firm in Marawi and Zamboanga del Norte. Gender will be the cross-cutting theme.
IX.Expected Output
(1)Discussion on Christian, Moro, and Indigenous worldviews and how they relate to mining
(2)3 full-length studies on the operation of mining firms
(3)A review on the policies governing the mining sector
(4)Documentation on the level of community’s participation in a mining activity
XTools for Validation
Results of the Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) and Key Informant Interviews (KIIs) conducted by the ACT for Peace Programme will be processed to “double check” the results of the clustering of PDCs using the quantitative approach. A Team composed of Dr. Malou Nanaman of MSU-IIT, Prof. Canuday of NDU-Region 12, and Prof. de Ungria of UP will handle the processing of the FGDs and KIIs.
XIProject Duration
The proposed Project Study will be conducted in four months from November 2008 to February 2009.
- Project Flow
XII.Project Management
The MSCFI Board will set the strategic directions in the conduct of the mining study. The MSCFI will approve the program of activities of the mining study.
Fr. Albert Alejo, S.J of Ateneo de Davao University is the Project Director of the Mining Study. He is tasked to supervise the 4 teams engaged in the said Study. He will report to the Board for updates regarding the Study. An advisory group composed of experts in the areas of business and environment will be under the Project Director for consultation. He will be assisted by (1) Technical Assistant and (1) Administrative Assistant.
XIII.Source of Funds
The proposal will be submitted to various funding agencies.
XIV.Funding Requirement
Expenditure Item / AmountResearch Proper
Meals (PhP 30,000.00 x 3 teams) / PhP 90,000.00
Transportation and Communications
(PhP 60,000.00 x 3 teams) / PhP 180,000.00
Materials and Supplies (PhP 20,000 x 3 teams) / PhP 60,000.00
Honorarium:
(1) Project Study Manager (PhP 15,000/month x 4 months) / PhP 60,000.00
(1) Project Study Director (PhP 15,000/month x 4 months) / PhP 60,000.00
(3) Anthropologists (PhP 10,000/month/ x 3 months x 3) / PhP 90,000.00
(3) Economists (PhP10,000/month x 3 x 3 months) / PhP 90,000.00
(3) Environmentalists (PhP 10,000/month x 3 x 3 months) / PhP 90,000.00
(3) Hydrologist (PhP 10,000/month x 3 x 3 months) / PhP 90,000.00
(3) Sociologists (PhP 10,000/month x 3 x 3 months) / PhP 90,000.00
(3) Engineers (PhP 10,000/month x 3 x 3 months) / PhP 90,000.00
(6) Researchers (PhP 1000/day x 15 x 6) / PhP 90,000.00
(3) Documenter (PhP 5,000/month x 3 x 3 months) / PhP 45,000.00
(1) Fund Manager / PhP 20,000.00
Presentation of Outputs
Meals / PhP 30,000.00
Transportation and Communications / PhP 20,000.00
Materials and Supplies / PhP 10,000.00
Publication / PhP 150,000.00
Sub-total / PhP 1,355,000.00
Institutional Fee / PhP 135,500.00
Audit Fee / PhP 20,000.00
Insurance Coverage (for researchers) / PhP 30,000.00
TOTAL PROJECT COST / PhP 1,540,000.00
1