(PDF) Conceptualizing household livelihood needs in mining-induced displacement and resettlement: a case study from Ghana

Conceptualizing household livelihood needs in mining-induced displacement and resettlement: A case study from Ghana Alidu Babatu Adam BA, MA A thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy at The University of Queensland in 2019 Sustainable Minerals Institute Abstract Development-induced displacement and resettlement (DIDR) is a significant socio-economic problem. Recent estimates suggest that approximately 20 million people are displaced every year to make way for the construction and operation of large-scale development projects, such as dams and mining. More than forty years of scholarship show that people displaced by these projects often experience worse levels of poverty and, in the majority of cases, struggle to recover from this impoverishment. International finance institutions have attempted to address project-induced impoverishment by putting forward resettlement policy frameworks and guidelines. These policy measures have been complemented by scholarly models for planning and implementing resettlement that aim to prevent impoverishment. However, despite numerous policies, impoverishment remains a predominant outcome in most displacement settings. This thesis focuses on mining-induced displacement and resettlement (MIDR). It engages scholarly works and literature on displacement and sustainable livelihoods and argues that continuing widespread impoverishment — in the face of ‘improved’ resettlement policy and practice — is a result of inadequate engagement with the human scale dimensions of household livelihood development. The thesis is based on an ethnographic case study from Ghana and examines a resettlement exercise as it occurred at the Akyem gold mine project. Based on constructivist perspectives, it uses a combined conceptual lens from the Sustainable Livelihoods Frameworks, Sen’s (1999) Capabilities Approach, and concepts from industrial sociology to examine the human scale issues in MIDR. These issues are examined at three levels: household, policy platforms and institutional practices. Habermas’ (1984) idea of “communicative action” is also deployed to conceptualise potential areas of intersection across these levels. Primary data is analyzed from interviews with a sample of 82 participants and informants, comprising twenty-five (25) randomly selected household participants and fifty-seven (57) key informants. Documents are analysed as primary sources for understanding the legal and regulatory instruments, policies and guidelines pertaining to MIDR within Ghana and the international context. At the household level, the findings from the research confirmed the established pattern of impoverishment and vulnerability resulting from MIDR. The pressures of being dispossessed, combined with the rapid transformations associated with industrial scale mining, were prominent and directly explained the impoverishment process facing the households. Attempts Page | i by the households to embark on livelihood reconstruction were undermined by key structural constraints, foremost the inadequate access to productive land for agriculture. At the policy level, the findings show notable instances where the material concerns of household livelihood development were not well represented across key policy platforms. While institutional actors in mining and resettlement demonstrated common knowledge about these concerns, the research highlights that much of the legislative and programmatic response put forward to address impoverishment in this case context did not account for these critical human scale concerns in the resettlement process. By bringing a disparate set of insights together across a range of institutional actors, the thesis concludes that there is potential to improve livelihood outcomes by placing enhanced focus on the human scale considerations in resettlement policy and practice. Page | ii Declaration by author This thesis is composed of my original work, and contains no material previously published or written by another person except where due reference has been made in the text. I have clearly stated the contribution by others to jointly-authored works that I have included in my thesis. I have clearly stated the contribution of others to my thesis as a whole, including statistical assistance, survey design, data analysis, significant technical procedures, professional editorial advice, financial support and any other original research work used or reported in my thesis. The content of my thesis is the result of work I have carried out since the commencement of my higher degree by research candidature and does not include a substantial part of work that has been submitted to qualify for the award of any other degree or diploma in any university or other tertiary institution. I have clearly stated which parts of my thesis, if any, have been submitted to qualify for another award. I acknowledge that an electronic copy of my thesis must be lodged with the University Library and, subject to the policy and procedures of The University of Queensland, the thesis be made available for research and study in accordance with the Copyright Act 1968 unless a period of embargo has been approved by the Dean of the Graduate School. I acknowledge that copyright of all material contained in my thesis resides with the copyright holder(s) of that material. Where appropriate I have obtained copyright permission from the copyright holder to reproduce material in this thesis and have sought permission from co- authors for any jointly authored works included in the thesis. Page | iii Publications included in this thesis Adam, A. B., Owen, J. R., & Kemp, D. (2015). Households, livelihoods and mining-induced displacement and resettlement. The Extractive Industries and Society, 2(3), 581-589. Page | iv Submitted manuscripts included in this thesis No manuscripts submitted for publication. Other publications during candidature Book chapter Ampofo, K., & Adam, A. B. (2019). Mineral investment decision-making in Africa: a real options approach in integrating price and environmental risks. In S. Ali, K. Sturman, & N. Collins (Eds.), Africa's Mineral Fortune. London: Routledge Peer-reviewed papers Danoucaras, A. N., Adam, A.B., Sturman, K. Collins, N. K., & Woodley, A. (2016). "A pilot study of the Social Water Assessment Protocol in a mining region of Ghana." Water International: 1-17. Conference papers Adam, A. B. (2017). Households, livelihoods and mining-induced displacement and resettlement. Paper presented at the IAIA Special Symposium on Livelihoods and Resettlement, Manila, Philippines. Adam, A. B. (2016). Mining, involuntary resettlement and livelihood restoration: policy and practice dimensions. Paper presented at the Sustainable Minerals Institute Research Higher Degree Conference, Brisbane, Australia. Contributions by others to the thesis No contributions by others. Statement of parts of the thesis submitted to qualify for the award of another degree No works submitted towards another degree have been included in this thesis. Page | v Research Involving Human or Animal Subjects The research proposal, methods and approach to this research were reviewed and approved by the student research ethics committee of the Sustainable Minerals Institute, the University of Queensland. The research was assigned ethics approval number 15.005. See Appendix 2-7. Page | vi Acknowledgement I would like to acknowledge, and share my appreciation for the following individuals, institutions and groups, whose contributions enabled me to complete this thesis. Foremost, I express my utmost gratitude to my lead academic advisors, Professor John R Owen and Professor Deanna Kemp. You coached and mentored me throughout this PhD journey. You believed in my ideas, although you did not leave them unchallenged. You offered constructive criticism and provided intellectual guidance. It was always intellectually enriching working with you, and I look forward to a promising future. Your generosity and friendship helped me to confront difficult personal challenges and I am truly grateful. To Dr Kathryn Sturman – a key member of my academic advisory team – thank you so much for helping me navigate the resource governance questions that became apparent in the course of this research. Your critical reviews of the chapters provided both quality control and assurance. Associate Professor Cameron Parcell, from The University of Queensland School of Social Sciences, and Associate Professor Nick Bainton, from the Sustainable Minerals Institute (SMI), reviewed Chapters One, Six and Seven of this thesis. Your feedback enhanced my framing of the research findings and discussion; thank you so much. Similarly, Dr Vivoda Vlado, SMI, and Dr Abdulai Darimani, from the Institute of Local Government Studies, Accra, Ghana, reviewed Chapters Two and Three. Both suggested useful comments which have been incorporated into the thesis. When I presented excerpts from Chapter Seven at the 2017 IAIA Special Symposium on Resettlement and Livelihoods, in Manila, Professor Frank Vanclay (University of Groningen, Netherlands) offered me useful feedback on the themes covered in Chapter Eight. Professor Vanclay, thank you. This study was funded by The University of Queensland, with additional financial contribution from the Centre for Social Responsibility in Mining (CSRM). This financial support was truly appreciated, as I could not have undertaken this study without the scholarship funding. The leadership and management of Newmont Ghana kindly accepted my request to use the Akyem gold mine project as a case study. They granted me access to the mine site, Page | vii responded to calls for interviews and provided relevant corporate documents. In granting my request, the company demonstrated its commitment to learning and continuous improvement in its social performance, in particular its commitment to improving resettlement outcomes. In the course of this thesis, I realised that each and every person who participated in the research hoped for the same outcome. I would like to express my appreciation to Newmont, government officials, household heads and other key informants who shared their experiences and insights. I am hopeful that that this thesis reflects the thoughts and aspirations of the households and the officials and offers pathways for improving resettlement outcomes. My peers at The University of Queensland — Gillian Cornish and Dr Rebekah Ramsay — were always available to test out and debate ideas. We spent many hours on UQ’s lawns, reviewing literature and peer-reviewing each other’s work. Each of these review sessions was a wonderful learning occasion for which I am grateful. Thanks to Michelle Rowland of CSRM for her extensive administrative support. My travel tickets, invoice processing, printouts and mailings were regular features on Michelle’s ‘to do’ list. Thanks also go to Julia Keenan, Sarah Mackenzie, Lynda Lawson, Dr Paul Rogers and all my other colleagues at the CSRM. I am also grateful to Vicki Ford, Bardon, and Lindel Greggery, Wagtail Media, for editing this thesis. To my wife Rabiatu and children (Hamdan, Faatimah and Samaarah), thanks for being my constant source of amazing grace. I sacrificed family time and resources in order to undertake this research, which proved to be highly challenging at times. I acknowledge your strength, encouragement, emotional support and prayers during the past four years. Indeed, I extend similar appreciation to my mum, Hajia Fati, and my siblings (Ahmed, Latif, Mashood, Mohammad and Nasir). Finally to my friends – Dr Kwasi Ampofo, Dr Julius Kotir, Shilla Alesser, Dr Philip Nkrumah, Paul Andoh, Eric Stern, Mohammed Aminu, and Dr Yussif Salifu – and my ‘family’ in Brisbane: the Kemp family and Anthony and Rose Lewis – I feel blessed that I could always count on you. Thank you so much for providing me with great memories as well as tangible support. Page | viii Financial support This research was supported by a University of Queensland International Scholarship. Page | ix Keywords mining, displacement, resettlement, households, livelihoods, development Australian and New Zealand Standard Research Classifications (ANZSRC) ANZSRC code: 160801, Applied Sociology, Program Evaluation and Social Impact Assessment 65% ANZSRC code: 150303, Corporate Governance and Stakeholder Engagement, 20% ANZSRC code: 160505, Economic Development Policy, 15% Fields of Research (FoR) Classification FoR code: 1608, Sociology, 65% FoR code: 1503 Business and Management 20% FoR code: 1605, Policy and Administration, 15% Page | x Table of Content Abstract ....................................................................................................................................... i Declaration by author ............................................................................................................... iii Acknowledgement ...................................................................................................................vii Keywords ................................................................................................................................... x Table of Content ....................................................................................................................... xi List of Figures .......................................................................................................................... xv List of Tables ........................................................................................................................... xv List of Abbreviations .............................................................................................................. xvi CHAPTER ONE ........................................................................................................................ 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Research context .............................................................................................................. 3 1.2 The Research problem ...................................................................................................... 6 1.3 Research questions: primary and secondary questions .................................................... 7 1.4 The case orientation ......................................................................................................... 8 1.5 Concepts and definitions ................................................................................................ 12 1.6 Approach and methods ................................................................................................... 14 1.7 Structure of thesis ........................................................................................................... 15 CHAPTER TWO ..................................................................................................................... 18 2.0 RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS .................................................................... 18 2.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 18 2.2 Socio-cultural considerations ......................................................................................... 18 2.3 Research design and approach ....................................................................................... 19 2.3.1 Ethnography and the role of the researcher ............................................................. 21 2.3.2 Epistemological approach........................................................................................ 22 2.3.3 Case study and case selection .................................................................................. 23 2.4 Methods: sample, data collection and analysis .............................................................. 26 2.4.1 Sample and sample selection ................................................................................... 26 2.4.2 Data, data collection sequence, tools and techniques .............................................. 30 2.4.3 Data analysis ............................................................................................................ 36 2.5 Trustworthiness: scale for validity and integrity ............................................................ 38 2.6 Ethical considerations .................................................................................................... 40 2.7 Research challenges ....................................................................................................... 42 2.8 Chapter summary ........................................................................................................... 43 CHAPTER THREE ................................................................................................................. 46 3.0 DEVELOPMENT, DISPLACEMENT AND HOUSEHOLD LIVELIHOODS .......... 46 3.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 46 Page | xi 3.2 Planning and inherent complexity in development induced displacement events ......... 47 3.2.1 Involuntary Resettlement: policy evolution and planning ....................................... 47 3.3 Force and choice in displacement and resettlement ....................................................... 55 3.3.1 Voluntarism and negotiated arrangements .............................................................. 56 3.4 Livelihoods, development and the role of households ................................................... 59 3.4.1 Mining, resettlement and households’ livelihoods .................................................. 61 3.5 Chapter summary ........................................................................................................... 66 CHAPTER FOUR .................................................................................................................... 69 4.0 MINING AND THE LIVELIHOODS CHALLENGE IN GHANA ............................ 69 4.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 69 4.2 Mining in Ghana............................................................................................................. 70 4.3 Policy landscape of Ghana’s mining industry: a historical perspective ......................... 74 4.3.1 The pre-independence colonial Gold Coast (1900 to 1957) .................................... 75 4.3.2 Post-independence period from 1957 to 1983 ......................................................... 76 4.3.3 The economic reform period of 1983 to 2000 ......................................................... 77 4.3.4 Recent mining sector policy reforms (2001 to 2018): an overview ........................ 84 4.4 Mining and livelihoods in the Birim North District ....................................................... 87 4.5 The Akyem Gold Mine Project: the case study mine..................................................... 88 4.6 Chapter summary ........................................................................................................... 94 CHAPTER FIVE ..................................................................................................................... 95 5.0 HOUSEHOLD LIVELIHOODS NEEDS IN MIDR: A CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK........................................................................................................................ 95 5.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 95 5.2 Household livelihoods needs in MIDR: a conceptual framework ................................. 95 5.3 Exploring post-displacement livelihoods in MIDR ....................................................... 97 5.3.1 Household context ................................................................................................... 98 5.3.2 Policy and regulatory context ................................................................................ 100 5.3.3 Institutional context ............................................................................................... 100 5.4 Post-displacement livelihood reconstruction: towards ‘communicative action’ ......... 101 5.4.1 The lifeworld of displaced households .................................................................. 103 5.4.2 The systems world of MIDR policy and institutions ............................................. 104 5.5 Chapter summary ......................................................................................................... 104 CHAPTER SIX ...................................................................................................................... 106 6.0 HOUSEHOLDS, LAND AND POST-RESETTLEMENT LIVELIHOOD RECONSTRUCTION............................................................................................................ 106 6.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 106 6.2 Mining-induced vulnerability: households and livelihood security ............................. 108 Page | xii 6.2.1 Households ............................................................................................................ 108 6.2.2 Notions of livelihood security ............................................................................... 109 6.2.3 Mining-induced vulnerability ................................................................................ 111 6.3 Livelihood assets and capabilities ................................................................................ 113 6.3.1 Productive land ...................................................................................................... 113 6.3.2 Cash compensation ................................................................................................ 116 6.3.3 Physical relocation ................................................................................................. 122 6.3.4 Livelihood restoration programs ........................................................................... 128 6.4 Chapter summary ......................................................................................................... 133 CHAPTER SEVEN ............................................................................................................... 135 7.0 MINING, RESETTLEMENT AND LIVELIHOOD RECONSTRUCTION: POLICY AND INSTITUTIONAL DIMENSIONS .............................................................................. 135 7.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 135 7.2 Overview of perspectives on MIDR in Ghana ............................................................. 137 7.3 MIDR: provisions in law, corporate policy and practice ............................................. 141 7.3.1 Compensation: adequacy and fairness ................................................................... 141 7.3.2 Physical relocation and resettlement housing ........................................................ 148 7.3.3 Livelihood restoration planning............................................................................. 155 7.4 Chapter summary ......................................................................................................... 164 CHAPTER EIGHT ................................................................................................................ 166 8.0 DISCUSSION ............................................................................................................. 166 8.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 166 8.2 Impoverishment risks in MIDR: reconciling perspectives ........................................... 169 8.2.1 Homelessness – more than housing ....................................................................... 171 8.2.2 Landlessness .......................................................................................................... 174 8.2.3 Cash Compensation ............................................................................................... 178 8.3 Resettlement planning and implementation ................................................................. 180 8.3.1 Knowledge for planning ........................................................................................ 182 8.3.2 Planning and resourcing norms ............................................................................. 186 8.4 Social interaction in mining settings ............................................................................ 190 8.5 Chapter summary ......................................................................................................... 193 CHAPTER NINE ................................................................................................................... 195 9.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION: RESETTLEMENT POLICY AND PRACTICE .. 195 9.1 Key findings ................................................................................................................. 195 9.2 Responsibility for resettlement risk.............................................................................. 196 9.3 Recommendations ........................................................................................................ 200 9.4 Conclusion.................................................................................................................... 202 Page | xiii Bibliography .......................................................................................................................... 203 APPENDICES ....................................................................................................................... 228 Page | xiv List of Figures Figure 1-1 Location map of the Akyem gold mine project ..................................................... 11 Figure 2-1 Sample of research participants and informants .................................................... 27 Figure 2-2 Sequence of data collection activities .................................................................... 32 Figure 4-1 Map of Birim North District, Ghana ...................................................................... 88 Figure 4-2 Akyem mine infrastructure layout and local communities .................................... 90 Figure 5-1 A framework for exploring post-resettlement livelihood reconstruction in MIDR98 Figure 5-2 Framework for exploring interactive relationship between lifeworld and systems world in MIDR ....................................................................................................................... 103 Figure 6-1 Grievance and Complaints, 2012-2015 ................................................................ 112 Figure 6-2 Akyem resettlement village.................................................................................. 123 Figure 6-3: location of farms established by farmers under the livelihood restoration program ................................................................................................................................................ 130 Figure 7-1 Gold price - share price behaviour of Newmont (from Qtr1 2009 to Qtr4 2016) 162 Figure 8-1 Sustainable Livelihoods Framework .................................................................... 168 List of Tables Table 2.1 Step-wise process of the research ............................................................................ 19 Table 2.2 Summary of documents collected and analyzed ...................................................... 36 Table 4.1 Legislation and reforms governing the mining sector in Ghana .............................. 78 Table 4.2 Major mining companies operating in Ghana.......................................................... 80 Page | xv List of Abbreviations ADB Asian Development Bank AfDB African Development Bank AIIB Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank AMV Africa Mining Vision CPRs Common Property Resources CHRAJ Commission for Human Rights and Administrative Justice, Ghana CSOs Civil Society Organizations CSRM Centre for Social Responsibility in Mining DCDR Development-caused Displacement and Resettlement DFDR Development-forced Displacement and Resettlement DIDR Development-induced Displacement and Resettlement ERP Economic Recovery Programme ESS Environmental and Social Standards of the World Bank EITI Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative ESIA Environment and Social Impact Assessment FDI Foreign Direct Investment FPIC Free Prior Informed Consent GDP Gross Domestic Product ICMM International Council on Mining and Metals IFIs International Finance Institutions IFC International Finance Corporation IMF International Monetary Fund IRR Impoverishment Risks and Reconstruction LI Legislative Instrument MIDR Mining-induced Displacement and Resettlement MMSD Mining, Minerals and Sustainable Development MNCs Multinational Corporations NGOs Non-governmental Organizations OECD Organization for Economic Corporation and Development PAPs Project-affected Persons RAP Resettlement Action Plan S&P Standards and Poor Page | xvi SIA Social Impact Assessment SLF Sustainable Livelihoods Framework SLTO Social License to Operate UNECA United Nations Commission for Africa WBG World Bank Group WACAM Wassa Association of Communities Affected by Mining WCD World Commission on Dams Page | xvii CHAPTER ONE 1.0 INTRODUCTION This thesis is about large-scale mining and the displacement of households living in nearby local communities. The case study used to explore this issue is the Akyem Gold mine in the researcher’s home country of Ghana. Mining is often presented as an engine of economic growth and development. The 2018 Mining Contribution Index (MCI) from the International Council of Mining and Metals (ICMM) indicates that “many of the world’s most mining- dependent countries continue to depend on their natural resources as the primary driver of economic activity” (ICMM, 2018; p.4). Research commissioned by the World Gold Council estimated that the mining industry contributed approximately 83.1 billion US dollars to the global economy in 2013 (Britton and Lakhdari, 2015). The scale of this wealth and its distributional effects in developing countries has raised questions among scholars (Einbinder, 2017; Pegg, 2006). In a foreword to a recent report on mining in Africa, the World Bank Vice President for the Africa region remarked; “although the resource boom has underpinned growth in the region’s commodity producers, it has been less successful in improving people’s welfare” (Chuhan-Pole et al. 2017). In remote poor locations where mining projects acquire land and displace households, the evidence of the sector’s positive contribution is difficult to visualise. Research from India, for example, indicates that mining in and around these communities routinely leads to deepening poverty amongst displaced people (Fernandes, 2007). Mining involves prospecting, exploring, designing, engineering, constructing, and operating a mine for a mineral resource. This process requires land. By its very nature mining projects typically impose heavy footprints on the surrounding geography and can induce long- term social and environmental impacts for host communities. Mining companies must access or acquire land before mining activities can proceed. In many countries, land required for mining is already being used by local populations to support their livelihoods. Research by Messerli et al (2014) indicates that large-scale land acquisition projects in the global south tend to occur in populated areas where land is used for cropping. Under these circumstances land use conflicts abound. In an empirical study on the determinants of social conflicts in the mining sector, Haslam and Tanimoune (2016) demonstrate that livelihood concerns, competition for arable land, and scarcity of agricultural opportunities exacerbate tension and conflicts between mining and local communities. If mining proceeds, people can be displaced or put at risk of Page | 1 displacement; that is, they face the risk of losing their assets or access to those assets. There is much evidence that shows that when people are displaced, impoverishment sets in (see, for example, Satiroglu and Choi, 2015; Bennett and McDowell, 2012; Cernea and McDowell, 2000). This thesis does not attempt to measure the extent of this impoverishment. To do so requires extensive baseline and monitoring data that is unavailable. Instead, the thesis focuses on material measures taken by key actors to determine and respond to this globally recognized problem. For three decades international finance institutions (IFIs) have grappled with initiatives to reverse impoverishment caused by development. In 1980, the World Bank became the first IFI to develop and formally adopt a resettlement policy.1 Michael Cernea (1991), one of the architects of the underlying contemporary safeguards logic, argues that this first step by the Bank laid the foundation for a generation of global resettlement policies and standards. Today, nearly all major IFIs have resettlement policies and standards that govern their development financing and operational activities.2 Similarly, methodological models for conceptualizing and addressing impoverishment risks have emerged and continue to evolve. The principal idea across these global resettlement policies and standards is that by intentionally avoiding or identifying and addressing adverse social impacts of large-scale infrastructure projects, developers can contribute to reducing poverty and enhance sustainable development. A review of corporate websites and publicly available sustainability statements indicates that most global companies have embraced the international resettlement standards. By extension, it is assumed that these companies draw guidance from the policies and standards to inform their land acquisition and resettlement activities.3 However, in most case studies of mining, displaced households are shown to experience reduced asset holdings, poor livelihood outcomes, and diminished sense of well-being (see, for example, Narasimham and Subbarao, 1 This policy sought to regulate displacement and involuntary resettlement caused by Bank-assisted development projects by instituting safeguards against displacements and requirements for investing in resettlement initiatives for addressing impoverishment, and assisting affected populations to re-establish livelihood systems. The Bank’s policy has since been revised and adjusted, the latest one took effect in October 2018. In this thesis, resettlement means “the comprehensive process of planning, displacement, relocation, livelihood restoration and support for social integration” (Vivoda et al, 2017a; p.iv). 2 The International Finance Corporation (IFC), the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), the Equator Banks, the African Development Bank (AfDB), Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), and others have adopted resettlement policies and safeguard standards during the 1990s. 3 The principal objective of the IFC (2002) performance standard five on land acquisition and involuntary resettlement-the most referenced by global multinational mining corporations that resettlement should “improve or restore the livelihoods and standard of living of displaced persons” (p.2). Page | 2 2018; Akiwumi, 2011; Munarriz, 2008). Kemp and Owen (2013) suggest that failure by mining companies to deliver better livelihood outcomes can have knock-on effects in terms of company-community relations. These relationships can become stressed, spiral into multiple social risks, threaten the sustainability of the global mining industry, and derail the prospects of economic benefits that governments and communities desire from mining investments. Research in search of better outcomes is imperative. This thesis takes cognisance of previous relevant research as it has unfolded during the past three decades. 1.1 Research context Since 2000 research about mining and its broader implications for society has evolved. Following two years of research, the Mining, Minerals and Sustainable Development (MMSD) project released a grand report in 2002 titled Breaking New Ground: Mining, Minerals and Sustainable Development. This report set the stage for a consistent account of the social, economic and environmental impacts of the minerals industry.4 By any measure, the MMSD project was a landmark event. The report (MMSD, 2002; p.xiv) observed that the sector was largely “distrusted by many of the people it deals with day to day”. At the core of this mistrust, the report highlighted failures of resettlement, noting that “local resistance to mining-induced displacement and resettlement (MIDR) [was] building in many places, as people and governments try to shield themselves from its transferred social and economic cost” (p.158). Theodore Downing’s seminal report (2002a; p.3) ‘Avoiding new poverty’, commissioned by the MMSD, highlighted MIDR as a “major risk” to sustainability due to its effect of communities losing livelihood assets and resources, homes, productive land, safety net systems, and in some instances their sense of cultural identity. Further to the MMSD, the World Bank and the International Council of Minerals and Metals (ICMM) have undertaken separate studies on the extractives and their social performance. In 2000, the World Bank commissioned a global review following petitions from civil society groups about the adverse impacts of Bank-assisted extractive sector projects on local communities. The review examined the sector’s impacts in the light of the Bank’s mission to end extreme poverty and promote shared prosperity. It concluded that while the sector 4 The MMSD was a research project commissioned by nine of the world’s largest mining companies and dedicated to examining the industry’s contribution to sustainable development. See http://www.iied.org/mining-minerals- sustainable-development-mmsd Page | 3 appeared to perform satisfactorily on economic and financial indicators, this performance was undermined by unsatisfactory outcomes in relation to its social and environmental impacts (Liebenthal, Michelitsch and Tarazona, 2005). In April 2014, the Bank concluded a major review of its social safeguards standards in an attempt to enhance the policy infrastructure for resettlement. As a consequence of the review, the Bank has adopted a new framework for managing social and environmental impacts for Bank-assisted projects, including a stand-alone performance standard on Land Acquisition, Restrictions on Land Use and Involuntary Resettlement (World Bank, 2017). This new framework represents a departure from previous safeguard policy statements, as it details specific standards for addressing a wide range of social and environmental impacts of Bank-assisted projects.5 The Bank has presented these new standards as a benchmark for improving performance even as scholars (see, for example, Cernea and Maldonado, 2018) have started to question this prospect. Likewise, the ICMM recently launched its Lessons Learned report on the industry’s land acquisition and resettlement activities. The report identified “companies’ failing to fully understand community and household structures” as one of the challenges confronting resettlement and livelihood restoration efforts (ICMM, 2015; p.30). Additionally, the mining sector has generated policy interest across continental Africa as resource-endowed countries aim to accelerate their progress in meeting the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). In its study report on Minerals and Africa’s Development (UNECA, 2011), the United Nations Commission for Africa (UNECA) raised concerns about the net value of mineral revenue in developing countries. The report stated that mineral dependent economies in Africa carried an “environmental burden of mining, whose effects also 5 The new Environmental and Social Standards (ESS) include: Assessment and Management of Environmental and Social Risks and Impacts (ESS1); Labor and Working Conditions (ESS2); Resource Efficiency and Pollution Prevention (ESS3); Community Health and Safety (ESS4); Land Acquisition, Restrictions of Land Use and Involuntary Resettlement (ESS5); Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Management of Living Natural Resources (ESS6); Indigenous Peoples/Sub-Saharan African Historically Underserved Traditional Local Communities (ESS7); Cultural Heritage (ESS8); Financial Intermediaries (ESS9); and Stakeholder Engagement and Information Disclosure (ESS10). Prior to these standards, the Bank used 10 Safeguards and Sustainability Policies, including OP/BP 4.01 Environmental Assessment; OP/BP 4.04 Natural Habitats; OP/BP 4.09 Pest Management; OP/BP 4.10 Indigenous People; OP/BP 4.11 Physical Cultural Resources; OP/BP 4.12 Involuntary Resettlement; OP/BP 4.36 Forests; OP/BP 4.37 Safety of Dams; OP/BP 7.50 Projects in International Waterways; and OP/BP 7.60 Projects in Disputed Areas. These policies were promulgated in the 1980s, and gained prominence following the Morse Commission’s 1992 report on the Sardar Sarovar Dam disaster which “highlighted significant failures in enforcing social and environmental policies” (World Bank, 2010; p. xiii). By the Bank’s own evaluation (ibid), these sustainability policies “helped to avoid or mitigate social and environmental risks of projects”, albeit with challenges including inconsistencies in risk categorization, a focus on mere compliance rather than social and environmental performance, lack of client ownership, and weak supervision. These challenges informed subsequent iterations (see footnote 22) of the policies with the final one being the new ESS. Page | 4 reduces whatever it [Africa] receives from the benefits of its minerals” (ibid, p.46). In particular, the “displacement of populations and resulting disruption of livelihoods” as well as “increased poverty through degradation of community resources” (p.49) were highlighted as having adverse consequences. This study followed the adoption of the African Mining Vision (AMV) by African leaders in 2009, which proponents position as a new framework for conducting mining that balances the rights of various stakeholders, including local communities. The literature has also drawn firm connections between the generally poor social performance of the mining sector and MIDR outcomes. A common element according to Kemp et al (2016) is the absence of a coherent approach to defining social risk. The International Finance Corporation (IFC) defines social and environmental risks as “a combination of the probability of certain hazard occurrences and the severity of impacts resulting from such an occurrence” (IFC, 2012; p.1). However, in the mining context, social risks may refer to the probability that a mining activity will induce harm on local communities or equally that community issues will become an operational impediment for the project. Owen and Kemp (2015), strongly influenced by Downing’s seminal work, outlined a range of industry specific social risks, and examined the readiness of companies to understand and address these risks (see Kemp et al., 2017). Their work highlights two critical points. First, a persistent pattern of under-reporting across resettlement cases. Like Downing, Owen and Kemp (2015) concluded that MIDR continues to be a neglected field of research. Second, that a high number of cases were identified as occurring during the “operations” phase of mine life – or what Owen and Kemp (2015) refer to as “brownfield effects”. Any attempt at understanding and addressing performance needs to be contextualized against those effects. The policy context surrounding the mining sector has evolved over the past decade. Discussions about displacement in the mining industry are increasingly being tied to contemporary debates, such as ethics and human rights (Penz, Drydyk, & Bose, 2011; de Wet, 2009a), gender (Jenkins, 2014; Ahmad and Lahiri-dutt, 2006), corporate social responsibility (Gilberthorpe and Banks, 2012; Hilson, 2011), ‘Social licence to Operate’ (Debrah, Mtegha, & Cawood, 2018; Owen, 2016), and more recently “Free Prior Informed Consent (FPIC)” (Owen and Kemp, 2014; Mahanty and McDermott, 2013). These themes highlight complexities in the mining industry and provide an indication of the range of concerns raised by observers. Page | 5 1.2 The Research problem This thesis focuses on the problem of livelihood restoration in mining-induced displacement and resettlement (MIDR) events. Put simply, when large-scale mining displaces people, and dismantles the resource base underpinning their livelihood systems, it restricts their livelihood options, and as Downing puts it, “induces new poverty” (Downing, 2002a). According to Fenandes (2007) the result is almost always perpetual impoverishment because displaced people rarely manage to recover from the effects of dispossession. The response by IFIs and regulators to this problem is to have mining proponents establish structured management plans known as “resettlement action plans” or RAPs. Taking a planned approach to resettlement is one way by which companies can avoid the long term negative effects that have commonly been associated with unplanned displacements, such as natural disasters and conflict.6 A key feature of the planned approach is the emphasis on livelihood restoration as the central measure of programmatic success, recognising that unsupported displacement has and will continue to result in intergenerational impoverishment for project-affected people. While major mining companies, through the ICMM, have adopted the IFC Performance Standards on Involuntary Land Acquisition and Resettlement as the industry standard, many resettlement legacy projects pre-date the IFC Standards. The extent to which a planned approach to resettlement is having a positive effect on outcomes is difficult to determine given that, for most cases, compliance with the IFC Standards is voluntary and undocumented (Owen and Kemp, 2016). Moreover, the acceptance of the IFC Performance 7 Standards has not been universal and does not apply, for instance, to junior companies. Evidence from recent reports suggests that the industry’s performance in this area of practice is not improving, despite the shift towards greater institutional level safeguards (Owen and Kemp, 2016; Lillywhite et al, 2015). 6 This thesis does not address displacement induced by conflicts and natural disasters, although the literature on these types of displacements are broadly acknowledged. See, Muggah (2000) and Price and Singer, 2016. 7 The IFC Standards were established in 2006 and then progressively became more mainstream among industry groups between then and 2012. There are many resettlement cases that occurred before 2006, where displacement and restoration outcomes are generally accepted to be poor, but where it is difficult to retrospectively impose emerging standards. It must be noted that the Standards, and indeed all other standards of development finance corporations, are typically applicable where there is financial or transational relationship between lenders and developers. When developers use the standards as source guidance, they do so with discretion on which elements are technically and financially feasible for their circumstances. Page | 6 In exploring the topic of livelihood reconstruction in MIDR, the researcher is mindful about other interconnected literature on the subject. Two points of connection are most noteworthy. First, the broader literature on development-induced displacement and resettlement (DIDR) has contributed a vast repository of cases describing the failure of livelihood reconstruction efforts. While generally relevant, much of this literature is structured around the construction of hydroelectric dams, irrigation and commercial agriculture, as well as transport and communication infrastructure (Terminski, 2012; 2015; Koenig, 2002). Second, the rural sociology and development in practice literature contain three decades of schematics, case studies and lessons focused on household livelihood strategies. This literature holds great potential in terms of its application in the mining sector, and serves as an important scholarly basis for this thesis, but there is little evidence to indicate uptake from the industry. In drawing attention to this potential, this thesis focuses primarily on examining the human scale dimensions of MIDR policy and practice relative to how households are prioritized and/or their interests negotiated. 1.3 Research questions: primary and secondary questions The primary research question guiding this thesis is: How can MIDR policies and practices better respond to the livelihood needs of households? In other words, in what form(s) can resettlement policies, social safeguard standards, institutional processes and procedures be reformed to better respond to the livelihood reconstruction needs and aspirations of mining- displaced households? This question reflects existing gaps in the literature, and points to specific dimensions of the research problem, namely, i. the displaced-households who bear the brunt of displacement effects and who are depicted in the various policy frameworks as social units of livelihood restoration; ii. resettlement policies which constitute source guidance for mining operators when they develop displacement and restoration plans; and iii. institutional actors who hold responsibility for authorizing and moderating activities that will result in displacement and for designing and assuring reconstruction efforts. To operationalise these three dimensions, three secondary research questions were developed, namely, Page | 7 1. What have been the experiences, aspirations, and expectations of households throughout the displacement and reconstruction process? 2. How are household livelihood needs conceptualized across the various MIDR policy platforms? 3. How do state institutions, mining companies, and relevant organizations determine household livelihood needs in MIDR processes? The first question guided retrospective enquiry of the interface between the households on one hand, and the instituions of power and authorty in MIDR on another. In displacement and resettlement, households are not just the locus of adverse social impacts, they are also central to resettlement and livelihood recovery efforts. A journal article by Adam et al., (2015), which was published as part of this thesis draws attention to the centrality of households. This emphasises the relevance of the first research question. The second question focused on understanding MIDR policy and regulatory frameworks and the directions and limitations they offer to developers during resettlement planning. This question was considered relevant given the content and objectives carried in the global resettlement policies and national regulatory instruments. The guidance the instruments offer to institutional actors when they decide on displacement, resettlement and livelihood restoration programs is immediately important. Secondary question three explores how people in formal organizational settings (including government, mining corporations, and civil society organizations) determine or act upon, the different aspects of the displacement, resettlement, and livelihood restoration process. According to Terminski (2015), the process of displacement itself and ensuing resettlement programs are results of decisions made by actors in government, corporations, and other organisations. While resettlement policies and regulations offer direction and guidance for such decisions, de Wet’s (2006) work points to the need for examining other institutional, contextual factors that influence the way people arrive at decisions and subsequently act upon them. These factors take centre stage in this research. 1.4 The case orientation This research was conducted in Ghana. The country has a rich history of industrial mining, a relatively advanced mineral policy environment, and has experienced multiple cases of MIDR. Ghana is one of the top ten gold producing countries in the world (Campbell, 2009) and presently hosts 12 major mining projects at different stages of development and operation, Page | 8 including the case study mine, Akyem, which is owned and operated by Newmont Mining Corporation (henceforth, Newmont). Mining contributes on average five percent to the GDP, and more than a third of the country’s export revenue (ICMM and Ghana Chamber of Mines, 2015). Ghana is considered as a mining policy trailblazer with a relatively advanced set of sector specific regulations (Ayisi, 2015; Akabzaa and Darimani, 2001; Addy, 1998). Like many resource-driven economies, policy makers and indeed the public in Ghana often draw direct links between the country’s mineral wealth and its poverty reduction objectives especially in resource-affected communities. In contrast, the country is also home to several cases of MIDR. At different times and on separate projects, a direct correlation has been established between MIDR and trends of deepening impoverishment in Ghana (see, for example, Schueleret al 2011; Owusu-Ansah, 2011; Yankson, 2010).8 According to the Ghana Chamber of Mines eight separate MIDR events between 2005 and 2015 resulted in the displacement of almost 12,700 persons or 2,540 households.9 With multiple mining companies, operating open-cast mines, and numerous MIDR events, Ghana provides a rich context for research. Newmont, a Denver-based multinational corporation, is one of the leading mining companies in the world. The company is one of the world’s largest gold producers with projects on four continents: Australia, Africa, North America, and South America. Information from the company’s website indicated that the company was recognized by FORTUNE magazine as one of the most admired companies in the world in 2018, with an Environmental, Social and 8 Schueler et al. (2011) focused on the impact of surface mining on land use systems in the Western region of Ghana. Their results showed among others that surface mining resulted in deforestation (58 percent) and a substantial loss of farmlands (45 percent) within mining concessions with significant spill-over effects. Yankson (2010) highlighted deepening impoverishment in the mining district of Wassa West in the Western region of Ghana. He associated impoverishment with loss of farmlands for mining projects and the lack of viable economic and employment opportunities. Owusu-Ansah’s (2011) thesis focused on mining-displaced households in the Asutifi District of Ghana. He concluded that more than 80 percent of his study household farmers were likely to slide into vulnerability and further impoverishment. He noted a combination of principal constraining factors including nature of land transactions, inadequate compensation, inability of farmers to invest in alternative livelihood enterprises, and disintegration of family structural dynamics are in operation. 9 These events include two events conducted by Newmont – Ahafo resettlement in the Asutifi North district of the Brong-Ahafo region and the Akyem resettlement in the Birim North district; two conducted by Adamus Resources Ltd in the Nzema district of Western region involving 3600 individuals; three conducted by AngloGold Iduapriem mine in the Tarkwa Nsuem district of the Western region involving 357 households; and one conducted by Perseus Mining Ltd – Ayamfuri Resettlement – involving 1147 individuals Note: there is no consistent way of reporting on displacement. Some companies report in households, others report in actual individuals. Inconsistencies in reporting are part of the problem of MIDR. The researcher provided this indicative estimate by multiplying number of households by five which is the official average household size in Ghana. Page | 9 Governance (ESG) rating of 95 out of 100.10 In Ghana, Newmont owns and operates two large- scale open-cast gold mine projects: namely the Ahafo and Akyem mine projects. Gold production in Ahafo and Akyem commenced in July 2006 and October 2013 respectively. In 2015, the company’s total reported global reserves stood at 73.7 million ounces of gold and 5.7 billion pounds of copper. As at December 2017, annual gold production for the Ahafo and Akyem sites was estimated at approximately 349,000 ounces and 473,000 ounces respectively.11 The company’s land acquisition activities at the Ahafo and Akyem mines caused the displacement and resettlement of over 11,000 individuals. In both project settings, the company planned and implemented resettlement programs, ostensibly to offset impoverishment risks and to restore livelihoods of the displaced households. For the purpose of this thesis, the study focuses on the resettlement planning and programming events at the Akyem project. In a few instances, comparisons are made between the two projects, but this is only for enriching the discussion about the Akyem site. Akyem project The Akyem project is located in Eastern Region of Ghana, in the Birim North District (see figure 1.1 below). According to the most recent national population and housing census (Ghana Statistical Service, 2014), the district is predominantly rural (90 percent), with only 6.5 percent of its population having attained a high school education. Fifty-nine percent of the households in the district live in single room dwelling units. 10 See https://www.newmont.com/newsroom/newsroom-details/2018/Newmont-Ranked-as-Top-Miner-in- FORTUNEs-2018-List-of-Worlds-Most-Admired-Companies/default.aspx 11 See http://www.newmont.com/operations-and-projects/default.aspx Page | 10 Figure 1-1 Location map of the Akyem gold mine project Source: provided by Newmont Golden Ridge Ltd, August 2016 Having obtained an environmental permit in March 2009 and a mining lease from the Government of Ghana in January 2010, Newmont proceeded to develop the mine (S&P Global, 2019). The project involves a 2km long main pit, a small satellite pit, waste rock disposal facility, water storage facility, process plant, haul and access roads, and other auxiliary mine infrastructure. First gold pour was achieved as a project milestone on 4th October 2013. The project is expected to produce approximately 7.7 million ounces over the life of the mine (Newmont, 2015; 2011). The mining area covers 1907 hectares. To make way for the project, significant tracts of land were acquired from landowners and farmers in 8 communities, causing the physical and/or economic displacement of an estimated 1600 people. This number translates to approximately 346 households being displaced during the construction of the Akyem project. The communities include New Abirem, Old Abirem, Mamanso, Afosu, Yayaaso, Adausena, Hweakwae, Ntronang, and about six scattered farmsteads (see figure 4.2). Given the pre- Page | 11 existing poverty context in the district, Newmont anticipated that certain impoverishment risks could arise from the displacement of these households. Against these risks, the company planned and implemented social programs specifically to counteract impoverishment among the displaced populations. The extent to which these programs affected households’ journey towards livelihood recovery is covered in Chapter Six. 1.5 Concepts and definitions Disciplinary discourses are constructed around concepts and terminology. While development- induced displacement and resettlement (DIDR) is not a conventional academic discipline, leading scholars in displacement and resettlement, including Cernea (1999, 1995) and Oliver- Smith (2009) have asserted its emergence as a sub-discipline of social science worthy of study. This section identifies and defines some of the established concepts that are central to this thesis. This is relevant especially as there are debates around some concepts in DIDR. Conceptually, ‘development’, as constructed in the DIDR literature, is debated (Choi, 2015; Koenig, 2002). Development in this context is understood to include “any enhanced production or distribution of perceived public or private goods” (Penz et al, 2011; p.6). Several scholars (Cernea, 1997; Cernea and McDowell, 2000; Drydyk, 2007; Einbinder, 2017) have questioned the intrinsic contradictions between economic development projects on one hand and displacement and impoverishment on another. Displacement in DIDR, occurs “when people are targeted for land clearance” to make way for the construction and operation of big economic infrastructure projects such as hydropower, mining, agricultural plantations, transport, ports and harbors, conservation, and urban development (ibid, p.5). In questioning the contradictions, the scholars provide the basis for evaluating development objectives and the so-called ‘development ethic’, that is, poverty reduction, participation, social justice, and improvement in standards of living. Cernea (1997), for example, frames this question as a social justice issue, and examines why some people enjoy the gains, while others bear the pain of these projects. The common justification for development-induced displacement is two-fold: first, that the source of the development is necessary. That is, “the development” will bring positive change to a sufficiently large group of people. Second, that after considering alternative design configurations, displacement is deemed to be unavoidable. The International Finance Corporation (IFC, 2012; p.1) describes this phenomenon as “involuntary resettlement” referring to both “physical displacement (relocation or loss of shelter) and economic displacement (loss of assets or access to assets that leads to loss of income sources or other Page | 12 means of livelihood) as a result of project-related land acquisition and/or restrictions on land use”. In this thesis, the researcher is concerned only with instances where land acquisition and the subsequent displacement has occurred on an involuntary basis. The presumed necessity of the development and the absence of alternatives are essential factors in this context. The IFC considers displacement as involuntary when affected persons or communities “do not have the right to refuse land acquisition or restrictions on land use that result” in their displacement (IFC, 2012; p.1). According to Price (2009; p.269), the term “forced displacement” or “involuntary resettlement” denotes a “lack of choice to remain in situ”. Literature around choice and force are discussed in detail in Chapter Three. The denotation of resettlement as involuntary helps to differentiate it from population movement that is voluntary, such as under a willing buyer/willing seller arrangement. Nayak (2000) argues that all displacements should be considered involuntary because people only ever move as a result of factors and conditions that impede their life prospects. For the purposes of this thesis, the concept of involuntary resettlement is considered a useful differentiating concept. There are a range of debates around other concepts, which are relevant but not central to the topic at hand. In the mining industry, for example, topics such as ‘Social License to Operate (SLTO)’, and ‘social risks’ are used at the operational level. According to Prno (2013), mining companies conceptualize SLTO as non-legal socially acceptable trust and relationship license that they earn from local communities and stakeholders within the project’s immediate and regional environment. The very essence of SLTO suggests that mere compliance with regulatory requirements is insufficient to demonstrate commitment to sustainable development. Presumably, when a company has social license to operate, project operations are insured against social risks. MIDR provides a useful test case for this framework of thinking given that resettlement events directly imply risks to at least the displaced population. Kemp et al. (2016) have argued that the industry’s use of “social risk” conflates “risks to people” with “risks to project”, and that the potential for one party to transfer risk onto the other is rarely considered. In this thesis the researcher is primarily concerned with “resettlement risks” as they affect displaced people but recognizes that failure to manage these risks can result in consequences for all parties. Page | 13 1.6 Approach and methods This research is designed as a case study and has used ethnographic methods for data collection and analysis. The case study involved two field visits to the project location. For the first visit the activities were structured around scoping out the general resettlement context. This involved developing a practical sense around the level of interest and participation the researcher could expect from research informants across the proposed sample. The first field visit was undertaken from December 10, 2014 to January 15, 2015. The second period of fieldwork lasting almost six (6) months, commenced on September 1, 2015 and ended on February 10, 2016. The second visit involved multiple formal and informal conversations with householders, company employees and government representatives. During this period, the researcher made regular visits to people’s houses and accompanied them on their trips to local markets and to farmlands. The ‘structured’ sample consists of 25 project affected households located in and around the Akyem mine site, 17 government officials from across different levels of national regional and district administration, 26 corporate officials working with Newmont, and 14 key informants drawn from civil society organizations, IFIs, and consulting firms. 12 The research relies on qualitative data drawn from interview with household heads and reflecting a focus on household experiences throughout the displacement process, how these experiences are represented in formal policy systems, and how institutional actors interpreted and responded to these experiences. Primary documents, such as Social Impact Assessments, Social Monitoring Reports, Resettlement Action Plans (RAPs), Livelihood Restoration Plans (LRPs), and Government policies and regulations, were reviewed as they were received. In most cases, these documents were obtained during the scoping visit allowing the researcher to incorporate key questions into the semi-structured instruments ahead of the second and more substantive field visit. The use of ethnographic methods is informed by the research context, where it was necessary to both ask questions and to observe actions in parallel. In some cases, the researcher reviewed primary and secondary documents with interview participants especially people with formal responsibilities with companies or government representatives. This proved to be a valuable opportunity in terms of ensuring that documents were being read as the institutions had intended and for curious material to be discussed in context. The thesis used a combined conceptual lens from the Sustainable Livelihoods Frameworks, Sen’s (1999) Capabilities Approach, and concepts from industrial sociology to examine the human scale 12 One respondent worked with Newcrest, a mining company in Australia with subsidiaries in West Africa. Page | 14 issues in MIDR. These issues are examined at three levels: household, policy platforms and institutional practices. Across these levels and consistent with the livelihood framework, the thesis emphasis household perspectives to bring attention to ‘households’ as central units of displacement impact and livelihood development. Habermas’ (1984) idea of “communicative action” is also used to complement the analysis especially in conceptualizing potential areas of intersection across these levels. 1.7 Structure of thesis This thesis comprises nine chapters including this introductory chapter. Chapter Two is a methodological statement of the thesis and presents the research design and methods used to organise and carry out the research. At the outset of the chapter, the researcher briefly describes relevant contextual issues in the case study area, outlines the research design and presents social constructivism as the epistemological underpinning of the thesis. The methods used to generate and analyze data are also described in this chapter. Chapter Three provides a review of the relevant literature. The review centres on three dominant issues in the global literature on development-induced displacement and resettlement as well as the sustainable livelihoods literature: (i) planning and complexity in displacement events, (ii) force and choice in cases of involuntary resettlement, and (iii) households as project-affected units of analysis. The purpose of the review was to develop the research question, and to clarify the extent of the current knowledge base as it relates to households and MIDR events. Chapter Four discusses the country and site context of this case study. Policy developments from the 20thC to 2015 are discussed with an emphasis on how governance frameworks in Ghana have conceptualised project-induced risks and the responses expected of developers in mitigating those risks. The chapter concludes with a summarized description of MIDR in the Akyem gold mine site. Chapter Five presents the conceptual framework used to operationalize the research questions. The framework draws from social science disciplines and scholarly works to provide the conceptual anchors for examining the research questions. The Sustainable Livelihoods Framework (SLF) of the UK Department for International Development (DFID) (DFID, 1999) is used to operationalize the first research question and focuses on understanding household level experiences through MIDR in the case context. Key elements of the framework, including “asset capitals”, “livelihood strategies” and “transforming structures, processes and policies” are useful for examining the question, and have been applied to understand the impact of Page | 15 displacement and resettlement on household asset holdings, functioning and provisioning. In displacement settings such as the case context, assets, for example, are the focus of project impacts and constitute the bases upon which project proponents determine and apply compensation and other restoration efforts. Sen’s (2009) Capabilities Approach lends support to the SLF and emphasises the individual’s ability to access opportunities in a given context. As such, Sen’s approach is used to provide an additional lens for examining the overall effect of resettlement policies and institutions on the livelihood reconstruction of displaced households. On questions two and three, the researcher used the “Inhabited Institutions Approach” from the work of Hallet and Ventresca (2006) to examine the policy and institutional dimensions of MIDR in the case context. The Inhabited Approach conceptualizes organizations as ‘inhabited’ with social actors; and associates the decisions and actions from such inhabited spaces with the “situated interactions” that occur within such organizations. The thesis takes the view that MIDR is a human phenomenon, and as such, the Inhabited Approach is drawn upon to augment the discussion about how actors in government, mining companies, and civil society organizations reach meaning and give effect to key decisions and actions that ultimately influence or constrain the capabilities of displaced households. Chapters Six and Seven describe the results of the study. Chapter Six describes the livelihood reconstruction experiences of the twenty-five (25) sampled households. Conventional studies tend to present policy prescriptions first, and then use those as a lens for examining practicalities and lived experiences of people based on those policies. Such approaches appear to consider the solution before the problem. In this thesis, the researcher chose to reverse-order the findings to avoid being constrained by the limitations of the policy frameworks. The results in Chapter Six are drawn primarily from interview data with project affected households and explore the structural foundations of impoverishment in MIDR. Chapter Seven responds to research questions two and three, focusing on the policy environment and the institutional arrangements that see projects, policy and people come together in practice. In this chapter, the experiences and aspirations of the households as presented in Chapter Six are examined against the policy-practice landscape of MIDR, to show how the various organisations engaged with the policy and practice dimensions of resettlement in the case study context. Chapter Eight is the discussion chapter. The discussion is contextualized and evaluated against existing resettlement literature, resettlement policies and theories, as well as Page | 16 impoverishment risks. The chapter briefly draws from the results of the study to respond to the research questions. At the core of the discussion, the chapter argues that specific human scale factors in the MIDR process give rise to situations where critical livelihood reconstruction needs of displaced households are compromised in the impoverishment risk assessment and reconstruction process. If these factors cannot be addressed, impoverishment will remain the dominant outcome. A pathway for change is for IFI and government institutions to embed better systems for incorporating human scale factors into the design of projects, and to ensure accountability for all elements of the MIDR process. Chapter Nine concludes with a series of recommendations for improving the functionality of the policy landscape. Not only is it important that livelihood reconstruction activities must be informed by policy and practice guidelines that reflect the needs and conditions of affected households, but that institutions responsible for remedying the impacts of MIDR must be accountable. Changes in the World Bank Group’s overall Environmental and Social Framework have been interpreted as marking a shift away from holding developers, and States, accountable for their practices. The recent trend toward giving equivalence to Country Safeguard Systems, that is, treating them as proxies for the international standard, has been received among scholars with grave concern for the future. While Ghana has a relatively advanced set of policy mechanisms compared to other West African nations, the regulatory landscape contains critical flaws that have allowed poor practices to become standard fare in the country. In the final sections of this thesis the researcher offers concluding arguments in favour of greater government responsibility over MIDR outcomes. Though these conclusions are drawn from the results of a single case study, they hold prospects for addressing resettlement issues in MIDR elsewhere, on the understanding that wherever large-scale mining has been, it has in its wake comparable adverse impacts. Page | 17 CHAPTER TWO 2.0 RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS 2.1 Introduction This research is an ethnographic case study designed to explore household livelihood concerns in the Akyem mine context. This chapter describes the design and the methods used and is presented in five sections: (i) Socio-cultural considerations; (ii) the research approach; (iii) the methods and sample for collecting and analysis; (iv) trustworthiness and validity of the data; and finally, (v) ethical considerations. 2.2 Socio-cultural considerations The context of any research is believed to have effects on its subjects, process, and outcome. Researchers are encouraged to institute measures that enhance or safeguard the quality of data against the potential impacts of contextual factors (Maxwell, 2009). In this research, key socio- cultural factors of the Akyem area were considered in the design and choice of methods. One defining socio-cultural construct for this study is the concept of ‘household’. Hanson (2004) tested the conceptual relevance of the concept in analysing non-Western societies like the Akan of Ghana, arguing that the locational and residential fixity of the concept is less appropriate when studying these societies. According to Adjaye (1987; p.72), “the Akan is an ethnographic and linguistic term used to refer to a cluster of culturally homogeneous groups living in central and southern Ghana and parts of the eastern Ivory Coast who share a mutually intelligible language”. The Akyem communities, where this research took place, are part of this group and speak Twi. These groups practice a matrilineal system of descent. In place of the household concept, Hanson recommends the Akan concept, ‘Bokyea’, which he considers better placed, linguistically and culturally, for similar studies. Bokyea is used to describe living and cooking arrangements with an embedded social and economic interdependence among people who share kinship, but not necessarily a living space (ibid). As a Ghanaian, the researcher is familiar with another concept among the Akan, that of ‘Efipam’, describing living and cooking arrangements which is limited to a particular household head. In composition and function, Bokyea and Efipam are conceptually equivalent with the working definition of a household established in the literature review chapter of this Page | 18 thesis. While the term ‘household’ is used in the thesis, Bokyea and Efipam were used in identifying and engaging households during the research. Other sociocultural factors that were considered include the language, proverbs, metaphors, beliefs and taboos of the Akyem people. In addition to the native Twi speaking people, there were other minority migrant groups in the study area who spoke languages that are predominant in other parts of Ghana, and include Ewes, Dagaabas, and Fantes. Proverbs and metaphors are part of everyday conversation among the Akan (Yankah, 2012). These factors were considered critical to upholding ethnographic methods (Fetterman, 2011). Taboos among the Akan are culturally-specific “prohibitions and restrictions” that moderate human behaviour and utterances that do not measure up to the standard norms and values of the society (Agyekum, 2002; p.370). For example, in Akyem, on-the-farm work is prohibited on particular days. People are generally expected to be at home on such days. 13 The researcher maximized opportunities for interviews during these taboo days as the household participants were generally available. 2.3 Research design and approach Research processes involve a sequence of steps ranging from choosing a topic to reporting about the findings of the study (Neuman, 2000). The researcher conceived and undertook this research as an ethnographic study in a seven-step process, culminating in this thesis (see Table 2.1 below). While the process is presented in a step-wise logic, in reality, some activities (e.g. literature review) were iterative and spanned the entire research period. Table 2.1 Step-wise process of the research Step Process Output Step 1: • Researcher: • Developed initial topic Formulating the o reviewed his previous work diaries. ideas and aims of the research idea o Moments of reflexivity through the research. researcher’s professional lens. • 3-page concept note on o Conversations with colleagues and MIDR and livelihood academic advisors. reconstruction. • Researcher followed mining-induced • The concept note was displacement and resettlement events as they discussed with occur in Ghana and elsewhere. academic advisory 13 The people of Afosu, New Abirem, Old Abirem, and Mamanso do not go to farm on Tuesdays; while the people of Adausena, Hweakwae and Yayaso do not go to farm on Fridays. The Ntronang community observed this taboo on Wednesdays. Page | 19 Step Process Output • Reflection on researcher’s professional team and industry objectives i.e. advancing MIDR practice. colleagues. • Researcher produced this table to guide the process of this research. Step 2: • Based on the topic ideas and concept • Literature review Reviewing the developed at Step 1: chapter included in literature • Researcher retrieved and reviewed three sets this thesis (see Chapter of literature: DIDR, MIDR, and the Three). (This activity was Livelihoods literature. • Research context iterative and • Literature include major publications - Chapter included in evolved all books, journal articles, global (IFI) this thesis (see Chapter through the resettlement frameworks, and grey literature Four). research period) - company policy documents and plans. • Sections of the review • Review focused on identifying gaps, major co-authored and ideas, frequent themes, intersections, areas published as a journal of emphasis, strengths and weaknesses of the article (see Adam et literature. al., (2015). • Developed literature review chapter outline • Publication was and discussed with advisors. designed to validate literature gaps and key knowledge base through peer review. Step 3: • Researcher visited the case study area to test • Research aims and Developing the field readiness for the research. objectives were research • Researcher revisited the literature, and was crystalized. questions guided by relevant and prominent themes in • Research questions the literature. formulated based on • Three MIDR domains appeared relevant: the literature review. displaced households; the policy and • Research context regulatory framework governing MIDR; and (Ghana and Akyem) the institutions responsible for constructing, identified. moderating, and addressing MIDR. • Initial considerations • Researcher aimed to explore where these of research design and domains converge or differ; gaps in approach (see literature; and more importantly how Appendix 2-1: livelihood concerns were addressed. Research concept). Step 4: • At this stage, the researcher considered • Conceptual framework Formulating the additional literature; i.e. industrial sociology, formulated around the conceptual political science and development practice. research questions and framework • Additional review focused on scholarly objectives (see debates about the role of the state and IFIs in Chapter Five) setting norms and guidelines to shape corporate behaviour, role of institutions (as people operating in a structure), and how people respond to state policy and practice. Page | 20 Step Process Output • This additional literature was combined with the livelihoods literature to formulate a conceptual framework. Step 5: Designing • Consulted SAGE encyclopedia of social • Research design the research research (Given, 2008; Lewis-Beck, developed, revised, Bryman, & Liao, 2004). and firmed up with • Consulted designs of previous research on academic advisors. similar topics in similar settings. • Data collection • Initial scoping of the Akyem case study area, instruments developed including retrieving and reviewing corporate and discussed with and site information. advisors (see section • Development of interview guides and 2.4). protocols. • See Chapter Four for information on the Akyem case study area. Step 6: Data • Constructed and recruited the sample of • Research data collection (6- participants. collected and months field • Hired and trained a Field Liaison who helped synthesized. work in Ghana) to mobilize participants and supported interview process with language translation. • Applied and received ethics clearance from the Ethics committee of the Sustainable Minerals Institute at the University of Queensland. • Organized field logistics. • Conducted interviews. • Collected and reviewed documents. Step 7: Analyzed, • Analysed data using Nvivo to organize data interpreted, and on predominant nodes which helped to read Thesis written and reported on the and interpret the data. submitted for examination. data. • Produced mind-maps to guide presentation of the research findings (see Appendix 2-2) • Data interpreted and written up in thesis. • Theoretical framework applied to explore how resettlement policy and practice interacts with the material concerns of households and household livelihoods. Researcher’s construct, September 2014. 2.3.1 Ethnography and the role of the researcher Ethnography enables the study of human behaviour through systematic interactions, interviews and observations to produce detailed accounts of participants’ perspective and experience on a particular matter (Hammersley, 2016). It allows the researcher to “elicit the insider’s or emic Page | 21 perspective of the reality”, drawing on multiple sources of data (Fetterman, 2011; p.2) The researcher adopted the ethnographic perspective in order to understand multiple actor perspectives and processes through which resettlement policies and practice can better respond to household livelihood concerns in displacement settings. The approach is suited to the focus on households, and the aim to document detailed narration about the households’ personal experiences and aspirations about the MIDR reality. It is also useful for analysing the ‘how’ of resettlement policy and practice by building knowledge of the strategic and practical motivations and assumptions that give rise to decisions in MIDR. Ethnography requires the researcher to immerse themselves to some extent in the cultural context of study. Fetterman (2011; p.5) notes that “the ethnographer is a human instrument”, with an inherent risk of subjectivity. In this research, the researcher had previous professional familiarity and work in the case study. For example, the researcher worked as part of the social assessment team for the project in 2005 and later formulated the household vulnerability assessment framework for the company in 2009. This framework informed the selection criteria for households who benefited from the company’s transitional hardship support for vulnerable households. This familiarity presented challenging methodological considerations including the potential for bias. These challenges are not new to this research. In fact, such situations present opportunities too. Robert Chambers’ (1981; p.95) dual principles of ‘optimal ignorance’, that is, “knowing what it is not worth knowing” and ‘proportionate accuracy’ – “recognising the degree of accuracy required” were helpful in this instance. The researcher’s previous knowledge served as a readily available resource. It enabled access to participants and helped to focus on exploring key aspects of the households’ lived experiences in displacement and resettlement. At the same time, the researcher employed multiple methodological choices to minimize or eliminate bias in the data (see section 2.4 below). 2.3.2 Epistemological approach The central focus of the research questions as noted in Chapter Four is on the human scale dimensions of MIDR. The main research question is focused on understanding ‘how’ rather than ‘what’ resettlement policies and practice condition livelihood needs and concerns of households. Based on this focus, the research, and indeed the thesis, is grounded in social constructionism; that is, the perspective that knowledge and the meaning it presents are Page | 22 products of situated social interactions (Crotty, 1998). Compared to objectivism and subjectivism, constructivism presented ‘good match’ features with the focus of the primary research question and the theoretical orientation of the study. Social constructivists perceive meaning as a function and product of a social context, consider objects and events as products of social and conversational means, and view social institutions and functioning as systems for constructing and interpreting meanings (Hathcoat and Nicholas, 2014; Kenneth and Mary, 2008; Crotty, 1998). These features are broadly consistent with the key elements of this research. 2.3.3 Case study and case selection The research was based on a single case study. A case study as defined by Simons (2009) is an in-depth exploratory enquiry focused on understanding the complexities and uniqueness of a contemporary phenomenon in its real-life context. Robson (2011) and May (2010) consider case studies as best-suited for exploring complex social phenomena, in this case, MIDR and its impoverishment effects. A case is a “bounded entity”, and may include an individual, organization, event, or other social phenomenon (Yin, 2012; p.145). The boundaries of this case are described in Chapter four, that is, the Akyem mine as a planned MIDR event in a localized environment with its embedded and intersecting social actors, namely, i. the households located in eight communities directly impacted by the mine ii. government officials – at national, regional and district levels – with formal and bureaucratic responsibilities related to mining and resettlement in Ghana iii. corporate officials and workers with direct administrative and functional responsibilities related to mine land access and acquisition, resettlement and livelihoods, community affairs, and corporate sustainability iv. civil society actors with knowledge of and interest in mining and community issues, and v. global resettlement specialists with experience in MIDR in Africa. These actors and the policy and regulatory context within which mining operates in Ghana are broadly theorized in the conceptual framework (see figure 4.1), and represent data points within the case. Yin (2012; p.145) highlights the blurred boundaries between the entity as defined and its “contextual conditions” traversing “spatial and temporal dimensions”. Mine projects, like the Akyem case, are determined by both local and extra local factors: geology, finance, Page | 23 commodity markets, industry standards, corporate policies, investment decisions, government regulations and revenue drivers, land and other factors. Some of the institutional actors in this case study did not necessarily reside within the immediate geographical boundary of a project, though their actions are considered critical in exploring displacement and resettlement in the area. The key informants in this research resided in five countries, including Ghana. Regardless, the focus of the researcher in a case study, as Johnson and Christenson (2008) explain, is to understand the complex issues within the case with a view to generating new learning. Compared to a multiple case study, a single case, as long as it is representative, allows the researcher to thoroughly explore the phenomenon at hand (Yin, 2009). A single case was considered precisely for this reason, and in the light of the constructivist design informing the research. Drawing from the conceptual framework, the research questions emphasize ‘how’, and aim to reveal processes (rather than establish direct causality) about resettlement policies and practice as they occur in the case environment to give effect to livelihood conditions of the sample households. The researcher considered both empirical and practical factors in selecting the Akyem case. The manifestations of MIDR are prominent in mineral-exporting developing countries including Ghana. These countries produce around one fifth of the total global minerals output (Bice, 2016). Between 2005 and 2012, 20 new gold mines were established in West Africa.14 In 2013, the gold subsector in Africa was projected to increase by fifty-three (53) percent in output by 2017.15 At the same time, the majority of the people in these countries are land- dependent peasants (Messerli et al., 2014). The opening of each new mine presents displacement risks. Meanwhile, the regulatory frameworks for safeguarding people against the adverse impacts of mining in those countries are generally weak (Bice, 2016). Empirically, these countries present MIDR in its ‘real-life’ context. Ghana was chosen as a study context (see figure 1.1). 14 See http://www.perseusmining.com/ghana.14.html 15 See https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/docserver/aeo-2013- en.pdf?expires=1553479643&id=id&accname=ocid177546&checksum=DCD52730647787F797635FA21A743 F3F Page | 24 The choice of Ghana is appropriate as it represents a ‘thick’ context of MIDR. Tsikata (1997) describes the country as the vicissitude of mining. The country is considered as a pacesetter and best performer in mineral sector reforms in sub-Saharan Africa (Ayisi, 2015, 2009; Banchiringa, 2006). The country’s performance is evidenced in its ability to attract mining-related foreign direct investment (FDI) when compared to other countries in the region (Ayisi, 2009). Paradoxically, the improved fiscal performance of the sector has not translated into broad-based development. Local communities in Ghana believe that “mining has brought little to no benefit” (Hira et al., 2018; p.1; Owusu-Koranteng, 2008). The impoverishment effects of MIDR in Ghana have been well documented (Lawson and Bentil, 2014; Downing, 2002a). This thesis contributes to explaining this paradox and offers pathways towards resolving some of the underlying causes of impoverishment induced by MIDR. In terms of logistics, Ghana is the researcher’s home country. With limited resources, the researcher leveraged other resources throughout the research. Access to internal structures of mining companies are notably difficult (Kemp et al., 2017). With time and resource constraints, the researcher leveraged his past professional relationship with gate-keepers at the Akyem site to enable this research. When this research was being planned, the Akyem project was the most recent mining- induced displacement event in Ghana. The circumstances surrounding the displacement and resettlement of households in Akyem have been discussed in Chapter Four. When the resettlement was being considered in this project, company officials envisaged drawing lessons from the company’s resettlement experiences in Ahafo. Unlike Ahafo, Akyem was not financed by the World Bank Group (WBG) or any internal development lender. Yet the company declared its intent to develop and operate Akyem using the IFC performance standards. An IFC-commissioned audit in Ahafo concluded that resettlement outcomes were relatively satisfactory (Barclay and Salam, 2015). If Ahafo was satisfactory, it was expected that Akyem would be better. The researcher chose the Akyem site because the processes of displacement and resettlement were relatively ‘live’ at the time of the research. This offered the context to explore resettlement from the perspective that the project was exposed to the benefits of what may be considered as IFC-engineered best practice in Ahafo. Page | 25 2.4 Methods: sample, data collection and analysis 2.4.1 Sample and sample selection The sample of participants and informants interviewed for primary data in this study were eighty-two (82) individuals, comprising twenty-five (25) randomly selected household participants and fifty-seven (57) key informants selected using purposive sampling. The key informants were drawn from organizations related to mining (mining in general and/or specific to the Akyem mine) in Ghana, and considering the bounded limits of the Akyem mine and its operating context. Fifteen (15) of the twenty-five (25) participating households suffered both physical and economic displacement, meaning that they lost residential dwellings as well as farms and other economic activities. The rest of the sample households were only economically displaced, and mostly resided in the other 7 communities other than Yayaaso which was relocated to the new resettlement village. The key informants included: seventeen (17) government officials, twenty-six (26) company officials, and fourteen (14) others drawn from industry associations, resettlement consultants, IFIs, and civil society organizations (CSOs).16 The informants represent the institutional domain as broadly theorized in Chapter Five (see figure 5.1). Twenty-two (22) females compared to sixty (60) males were interviewed. The gender disparity of the sample was heavily influenced by what may be considered as the existing patterns of gender-gaps in access and asset ownership at the community level (Quisumbing, et al., 2014), and a male-dominated official representation over which the researcher had no control. 16 The government officials were drawn from the Ghana Mineral Commission, the Ministry responsible for mining and natural resources, the Parliament of Ghana, as well as regional and district government authorities. The company officials were community relations managers, project managers and field staff while other key informants were drawn from civil society organizations, IFIs, and global resettlement specialists. Page | 26 Figure 2-1 Sample of research participants and informants Total Key Informants Corporate Officials Government Officials Affected-Households 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Affected-Households Government Officials Corporate Officials Key Informants Total Male 11 15 25 9 60 Female 14 2 1 5 22 Male Female Researcher's construct, 2015 Sampling was used based on limitations articulated by Carruthers et al, (1999). The population of over 1600 displaced households was too large to be studied within the time and resource constraints. Even if the researcher had time, the participation of each displaced household in the research could not be guaranteed. People had been displaced and some moved out of the Birim North District. Sampling is appropriate where the study population is homogenous (ibid). Displaced people regardless of the cause of displacement share a “family resemblance” in terms of the social consequences of displacement events (Button, 2009; p.255; Cernea, 1990). Specific to the social consequences of MIDR and for purposes of sampling, the researcher considered the displaced population as fairly homogenous. The sample of twenty-five (25) household participants was not designed to be numerically representative, but rather to represent the significant aspects of the MIDR phenomenon as they relate to household experiences in the Akyem context. The focus on significant aspects of the the phenomenon is line with key qualitative sampling principles from Morse (2004; p.4), broad enough to represent the phenomenon, adequate to achieve data saturation, and appropriate through “the deliberate selection of best participants”. To ensure Page | 27 broader representation on the phenomenon at the household level, the sample included two clusters of displaced households: (i) fifteen (15) households who suffered both physical and economic displacement; and (ii) ten (10) households who suffered only economic displacement.17 The researcher considered physical and economic displacement as proxy variables for constructing the scale and magnitude of material loss caused by the displacement at the household level. The fifteen (15) households who suffered both physical and economic displacement were drawn from the resettlement village. The others were selected from the other Akyem mine impacted communities (see section 4.5 in Chapter Four). The homogeneity of the participants, combined with broader representation of key aspects of displacement ensured data saturation. As shown in figure 2.1 above, the sample selection considered gender, recognizing that gender influences experiences in impacts and ‘benefits’ (Ahmad and Lahiri-Dutt, 2014). The fifty-seven (57) key informants were purposively selected, based on the individual’s past or present formal responsibilities, knowledge and practice in MIDR, and representation of mining-focused interest, or several of these factors. The sample was managed using criteria for inclusion and exclusion (see Appendix 2-3). Recruitment of participants and informants In recruiting the household participants, the researcher first selected and contacted the first participant (household head) from each cluster based on previous familiarity with the Akyem communities, and with the help of a field assistant. The rest of the participants were then selected through snowballing, also known as chain referral, allowing the index participant to nominate the next participant to the researcher based on the predetermined characteristics of the cluster (Carruthers et al., 1999). The researcher considered snowballing appropriate as it allowed flexibility of recruiting participants and informants without risking data quality. For participants in the Yayaaso community, the first point of entry was a traditional courtesy call on the Queen mother of the community. This was because Yayaaso is a resettled community, and outsiders’ contact with one of them was viewed suspiciously by others if it was not communicated previously to the Queen mother. The courtesy call was then followed by visitation to recruit household participants. 17 These clusters were not mutually exclusive, but nonetheless maintained to guide sample selection. Page | 28 Unlike the household participants, the informant group (i.e. company officials, government officials, CSO representatives, IFIs, and resettlement experts) were recruited through formal and official means including emails and letters. Research in organizational settings presents particular ethical challenges, such as requirements for ‘document secrecy’ and publishing rights (Pettigrew, 1997). Issues about secrecy and publishing were negotiated with Newmont officials ahead of the field work. The directorate of the Centre for Social Responsibility in Mining (CSRM) contacted the company’s corporate office in Denver formally and discussed both ethical and practical considerations of the research. 18 This formal contact secured the company’s buy-in and willingness to participate in the research. The researcher followed up with emails, phone calls, and informal contacts with personnel at the company’s regional and site offices in Ghana. Based on the focus and data requirements of the research, the leadership of the company’s sustainability department authorized access for the researcher to contact and interview managers and staff of his choosing. All company officials the researcher contacted consented and granted the interviews willingly. In each case, the recruitment was guided by an ethical process (Aguinis and Henle, 2008). Participants and informants were recruited only for interviews and data collection purposes. Most participants and informants were visited twice. On the first visit, the researcher aimed to attain three key pre-requisites for interviews as prescribed by May (2010): that the interviewee had access to relevant information, cognition to understand what was required of her/him and the motivation to participate. The researcher verbally informed the interviewees about the objectives and data requirements of the research, and requested their participation. The participant or informant is given a copy of the research information sheet (see Appendix 2-4) and encouraged to double check the research focus if in doubt. Individuals were then given the chance to indicate their preference for venue and language of interview, keeping in mind the need for confidentiality. The researcher then requested the participant’s consent, and agreed on an interview date. On the second visit, the researcher visited the chosen venue and conducted the interview. Interviews were preceded by the administration of consent of the interviewee. Interviewees either signed the consent declaration form (see Appendix 2-5) or verbally communicated their consent. In cases of the latter, the researcher audio-taped the verbal authorization. In a few instances, the researcher visited some household participants more than twice to gain more insight about household livelihood activities. 18 CSRM is one of the centres of the Sustainable Minerals Institute – the researcher’s enrolling institute at the University of Queensland Page | 29 The recruitment of government officials, IFIs, CSO representatives, and resettlement experts followed a similar process to that of the company’s, although with less rigidity and bureaucracy. The researcher hand-delivered letters, sent emails, and made phone calls to selected informants on first contact or visitation, followed by interviews. For government officials, a first line of respondents were identified as target informants, but in subsequent interviews they were allowed to snowball to their chosen representatives or next in command so long as the replacements met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Snowballing was also applied when engaging with participants from IFIs, resettlement experts, and civil society organizations. 2.4.2 Data, data collection sequence, tools and techniques Following Holliday’s (2007) chapter on qualitative data, data in this research included: (i) verbatim transcripts representing personal narratives from the research participants and informants; (ii) the researcher’s notes from field work and observations which described ethnographic events (i.e. spontaneous and pre-arranged visitations to homes, farms, markets, places of worship, meetings, cultural and recreational events). The notes also included facial and bodily expressions that occurred during interviews; (iii) notes taken from document review and analysis; and (iv) photos showing the appearance of objects, symbols, and people. Transcripts from seventy-three (73) interviews translated to over 200,000 words. Forty-three (43) documents from government and corporate sources were retrieved and analyzed, and included survey or similar reports, legal and regulatory instruments, plans and blueprints, policy guidelines and standard operating procedures (SOPs), and web-based information. Three (3) of these documents were classified as confidential corporate material and have been de-identified (doc/number) in the thesis. These documents will be deleted from the researcher’s library when this thesis is fully examined. The data collection process was sequenced along the order shown in figure 2.2, and used multiple methods. The sequence enabled the researcher to establish a chain of evidence (Yin, 2011). For example, the researcher established a deeper understanding of prominent MIDR themes by reviewing grey literature, which then led to establishing a frame of potential issues that emerged from interviews. At each step, the researcher generated data that fed into subsequent steps. The researcher interviewed household participants first, established a Page | 30 knowledge base about their experiences and aspirations living through displacement and resettlement, before proceeding to examine these experiences from policy and institutional perspectives. It is noted that the process was equally iterative as the researcher retrieved additional documents and confirmed or de-confirmed data for validity and credibility. Page | 31 Figure 2-2 Sequence of data collection activities Researcher's construct, October 2015 Page | 32 Using multiple methods The use of multiple methods is an essential requirement in qualitative research (Yin, 2012; May, 2010). Multiple methods helped the researcher to obtain “rich descriptions”, and bring depth to the data (May, 2010; p.234). Social constructivism is central to this research and requires a deeper understanding of how social actors construct value and meaning in their natural settings. Hallet and Ventresca’s (2006; p.228) Inhabited Institutions Approach inherently requires “using a variety of empirical data to reveal a […] complexly-textured” institutional environment. The researcher used a combination of interviews, observational, and documentary data collection techniques in this research. In addition, based on Yin (2011; p.149), the following data collection procedures were applied throughout the field work: “using a protocol to guide data collection, preserving a chain of evidence, triangulating data from different sources of evidence, and appealing to rival explanations”. Interviews Fetterman (2011; p.5) posits that “interviewing is the ethnographer’s most important data-gathering technique”. This researcher conducted individual and group interviews using different semi-structured interview instruments for each participating group (see Appendix 2- 6). Semi-structured interviews provide flexibility to probe answers and generate dialogue for deepening understanding of data (Ritchie et al., 2013). The instruments were marked with both “grand tour” questions to elicit participants’ broader worldviews about MIDR, and “specific questions” to understand specific MIDR themes such as resettlement policies, compensation, resettlement housing, and livelihood restoration (Fetterman, 2011; p.5). The interviews with household heads aimed at eliciting meaning, gaining understanding, and building knowledge that responds to secondary research question one. The interviews with official key informants provided contextual detail to secondary question two whilst directly responding to secondary research question three. Interviews started in September 2015 and were completed in September 2016. Overall, seventy-three (73) interviews were conducted, and included sixty-five (65) individual and eight (8) group sessions. The group interviews are a useful data collection technique, allowing several participants in a given social context to be interviewed simultaneously (Frey & Fontana, 1991). Based on convenience, safety, and ethical considerations, interviews were held at residences, offices, market sheds, and hair dressing salons. In the case of the household participants, the interviews occurred mostly at homes across the 8 mine-impacted communities Page | 33 including the ‘new’ resettlement village. In two instances, the researcher held individual interviews at a hotel location as an additional measure to guarantee confidentiality. Eight (8) interviews were held via Skype or other electronic means, the rest were in face-to-face settings.19 The total interview time was approximately 45.20 hours, averaging approximately 40 minutes per interview session. All interviews with official informants were conducted using the English language. In the case of the household participants, twenty-three (23) of the twenty-five (25) interviews was held using the Twi language and the remaining two (2) using the Ewe language. The researcher has a working knowledge of Twi, and hired a male local Twi-speaking assistant to support the interview process. The local assistant also facilitated access to household participants. When metaphors and proverbs were used during interviews, the researcher probed for clarification and insight. All but two interview sessions were audio-taped, transcribed, and analyzed. In the two interview sessions, the researcher took only notes. Interviews with household heads centred on the state of their livelihoods and their sense of livelihood security (pre and post-displacement), changes in life, livelihood adaptation, and aspirations following displacement, and on MIDR themes such as resettlement and livelihood restoration. Some questions (e.g. what was life like before resettlement?) were designed to enable participants to deconstruct their life experiences before the mine. Male household heads tended to invite their spouses’ input when trying to narrate the household food situation, reflecting existing gendered responsibilities. The role of civil society organisations (CSOs) in MIDR is well-established (see, for example, Marston, 2012; Holden, 2005). Interviews with CSO representatives centred on constructing civil society views about mining-community relations, mining-development discourse, mining and community livelihood, and their perspectives about policy responses to community concerns in mining. The researcher also focused on CSOs’ perspectives about the existing company resettlement practices. This data was valuable in evaluating corporate responsiveness to livelihood reconstruction constraints. 19 All eight interviews were conducted as part of a previous resettlement research project implemented by the Centre for Social Responsibility in Mining (CSRM) at the University of Queensland. The researcher participated in this research and directly interviewed the 8 informants. The use of the data as part of this thesis received the explicit permission of the Centre’s Directorate. Page | 34 Interviews with officials of the company, IFIs, and resettlement specialists focused on how household livelihood needs were conceptualized in policy frameworks, policy requirements, assumptions and motivations, and the institutional systems and processes that shape resettlement and livelihood restoration. The critical links between policy norms and company actions were assessed during these interviews. The interpretive roles of resettlement experts and consultants was also noted in the literature review. In interviewing government officials, the researcher focused on public policy response to impoverishment in MIDR. The interview focused on understanding the current suite of government policies and regulations in support of resettlement and livelihood restoration, and also deconstructing historical motivations underlying these policies and regulations. It also focused on understanding institutional functions, systems and processes for safeguarding and protecting people against the adverse impacts of mining on local communities. Observations Throughout the field work the researcher observed, noted and examined both “verbal and non-verbal behaviours” as they occurred in the research context (Bottorff, 2004). The observations were in-person, participant and non-participant, allowing the researcher to take part, whilst maintaining professional distance from the context and participants. The researcher visited homes and farms to observe day-to-day livelihood activities, drove to farms to appreciate their distance from resettled households, visited markets to take note of economic activities and price trends, visited recreational centres and places of worship to observe cultural routines, toured key mine installations to observe spatial transformations induced by the Akyem mine, and sat in meetings to follow proceedings. The observational data was recorded in a field note book and used to validate data, gain deeper insights about particular data points, and to place the MIDR event and its manifestations in its life context. Document analysis As noted above, the researcher retrieved and analyzed about 43 documents during this research. The documents include open and restricted access material from the following sources: government, IFIs, CSOs, and Newmont. The documents were retrieved through formal request from relevant authorities, professionals, peers, as well as web and library search. Page | 35 Table 2.2 Summary of documents collected and analyzed Document type Number Comment Legal and regulatory 6 Constitutional provisions, Acts of instruments Parliamentary, and Legislative Instruments relating to mining, land acquisition, resettlement, compensation and livelihood restoration. Policies, guidelines , and 16 Global resettlement policies and standards, SOPs Country level sector policies, corporate resettlement policies and SOPs. Plans and blueprints 10 Resettlement action plans, community development plans, stakeholder engagement plans, social investment plans, and others Surveys and assessments 9 Standard EIS reports, social and health impact assessments, Population influx assessment reports, population and housing census and statistics, and similar baseline reports Reports 2 Internal corporate reports from specialized studies Researcher's construct, 2016 Consistent with Bowen’s (2009) work, the analysis of the documents served multiple purposes in this research. They contained knowledge about the research context, informed the research questions about legislative requirements on resettlement, and provided direct data to respond to secondary question two. In addition, interview data relating to legislative provisions for key aspects of mining (i.e. land acquisition, compensation, resettlement, and impact assessment) were triangulated against the legal and regulatory instruments to gain insight, and to confirm or de-confirm evidence. 2.4.3 Data analysis The researcher analyzed the data, first, by reading all transcripts to establish the relevance of data and the prevalence of key MIDR themes.20 This process was guided by the objectives of the research and the themes embedded in the primary research question – resettlement, policies, planning (practice), households, and livelihood reconstruction. Some transcripts provided richer data than others. Based on the ‘thickness’ and relevance of the data, the researcher graded the quality of each transcript. Sixty-one (61) of the seventy-three (73) transcripts were very good or good. The remaining twelve (12) were either fair or poor. Second, the researcher used 20 The reading of transcripts spanned the entire data analysis and reporting phase of the research. Page | 36 both a manual approach and the Nvivo data analysis software to organize data along major themes and sub-themes. Third, the researcher analyzed the data using content and thematic analysis. Content and thematic analysis share common features, although the former allows for quantification where necessary (Vaismoradi, Turunen, Bondas, 2013). In analysing, the researcher relied on data from the very good/good transcripts to established patterns and formulate interpretive opinions, before adding the data from the other transcripts. Effectively, all transcripts were considered in the final analysis. Content analysis In research, “content analysis is the process of organizing information into categories related to the central questions of the research” (Bowen, 2009; p.32). This method of analysis is considered appropriate for organizing and making inferences from text and other meaningful matter with respect to the context of their use and the meaning they confer (Druckman, 2005; Krisppendorff, 2004). The researcher used content analysis in two ways to analyze the documents collected for the research. The first instance involved mechanical counting and interpretive analysis of phrases and themes as they occurred in the text. The second involved detailed review of full or sections of documents with focus on the meaning they present. To illustrate, the researcher analyzed legal and regulatory instruments in terms of appearance of themes, combined with interpretive meaning of the text in terms of: authorization/regulation (prescriptions, prohibitions, or recommendations), direction of message (progressive or minimal), ‘force’ behind the message; and space allocation in the document. The researcher considered space as a proxy for deconstructing emphasis and relevance of the issue at stake. This analysis helped to reveal trends, where emphasis was placed on various relevant subjects across different documents and complemented the thematic analysis of transcripts. For instance, when interviews from households reveal emphasis on livelihood conditions and access to productive in resettlement, the researcher reviewed sector laws and regulation to determine the extent to which these issues were addressed. This informed the researcher’s interpretation of regulatory coverage and lapses. This technique also enabled a comparison of coverage on households and livelihood reconstruction across the various policy platforms. The researcher observed how key documents related to each other, as well as their conceptual alignment or mismatch. Page | 37 Thematic analysis Braun and Clarke (2006; p.78) consider thematic analysis as a “foundational method for qualitative analysis”. It involves “identifying, analysing and reporting patterns (themes) within data” (p.79). This method was applied in analysing transcripts and helped to highlight data trends and patterns that may inform improvements in resettlement policy and practice. The conceptual framework in Chapter Four allowed the researcher to induce and deduce themes from the transcripts. The themes for organizing the data were derived from the research questions, the MIDR literature, and the sustainable livelihoods framework. As noted above, the researcher relied on ‘good’ transcripts to establish a pattern and then added data from all other transcripts. The data analysis and interpretation centred on establishing patterns within each ‘nested’ group and across categories of interviewees. At the household level, the research focused on households’ livelihood experiences and aspirations. This data comprised personal testimonies, experiences, feelings and narratives about displacement and resettlement. The substance of these narratives was framed in the context of key concepts that define the social and economic relationships between mining companies and local communities, that is, compensation, resettlement housing, livelihood restoration programs, and community health and safety. How these were perceived and understood had implications for the livelihood reconstruction experiences of the households. In turn, people’s experiences partly inform their relationship with the company as well as inter household relationships. 2.5 Trustworthiness: scale for validity and integrity The essential features of trustworthiness are transferability, credibility, dependability, and confirmability (Saumure and Given, 2008). This study used trustworthiness to achieve rigor and validity. Transferability relates to the ‘generalizability’ of the research findings (Jensen, 2008). Put simply, how well can the findings of the research be applied to a similar context, even with the explicit recognition of its unique circumstances? The context (see Chapter Four), and design (see section 2.3 above) and methods (see section 2.4 above) have been sufficiently described. The researcher also documented challenges that emerged during the research. This descriptive information can inform other researchers and help to determine how relatable the research findings are for similar contexts without losing sight of the unique characteristics of this research. Page | 38 Credibility is about accuracy and completeness of the research data; making sure it describes the phenomenon thoroughly, and minimizes or eliminate threats to data interpretation (Robson, 2011). The researcher maintained audio recordings with notes from the data collection activities. The transcripts that have been analysed retain the spoken words of participants and informants. The researcher also checked each transcript for missing words and phrases. The researcher also used triangulation of transcript data with documents, and spot data validation to confirm or de-confirm prior to considering them in the analysis. The observational data as described above allowed an additional layer of data validation and cross referencing with official documents for factual (in)consistencies. In one instance (September 6, 2015), a participant reported that the resettlement community goes ‘dump and quiet’ by 7 or 8pm, a suggestion that there was ‘no money and no life’ in the town. The researcher visited the town at night and confirmed this was the case. In another, a participant reported that the company had not provided him with a replacement cocoa seedlings. The researcher double-checked this report with official records from the company. In addition, the researcher debriefed research participants before leaving the field, ensuring that their narratives had been captured accurately. The researcher’s previous professional work in the area also aided his ability to fact-check some of the data that might otherwise have been misinterpreted. In some instances, the same questions were asked of different people in the same organization to establish consistency in organizational response to an issue. With regards to threats to theory and interpretation, the research questions in this study were broad enough to collect data that did not necessarily fit the conceptual framework. This allows for flexibility in operationalizing the theory. To guard against threats to interpretation, the researcher held regular debriefs with his academic advisors, all experienced in various aspects of the topic of study. Lastly, the researcher’s professional immersion in MIDR, and continuous engagement with the literature and practitioners, was a clear demonstration of acquaintance with the topic of study. Peer exchange with other researchers on specific issues that were relevant to the research (e.g. the phenomenon of sale and rent of resettlement housings) also helped to sustain the objectivity of the analysis. Page | 39 Dependability in qualitative design is conceptually equivalent to reliability in traditional fixed design (Saumure and Given, 2008). To ensure dependability is to lay out the research “procedure and research instruments in such a way that others can attempt to collect data in similar conditions. The idea here is that if these similar conditions are applied, a similar explanation for the phenomenon should be found” (p.4). To meet this requirement, this chapter lays out the research design and the methods used. The contextual considerations, epistemology, field activities plan, and techniques of data analysis have all been described. It is expected that other researchers can replicate the procedure given similar conditions and context. Confirmability, the last of the four features of trustworthiness, emphasizes the need for data and data interpretation that is free of bias. The researcher background as a potential source of bias, and an asset for fact-checking has been described in the introduction section of this chapter. When interpreting the data, the researcher also took account of verbal exclamations and non-verbal facial/ bodily expressions that added context and weight to the data. As the data was audio-taped, transcribed and shared with the researcher’s advisory team, it provided an opportunity for them to assess claims in the interpretation of the data. 2.6 Ethical considerations The research was bounded by the ethical requirements for research at the University of Queensland. The research proposal and the methods used to collect the data were fully reviewed and approved by the student research ethics committee at the Sustainable Minerals Institute of the University of Queensland, and assigned ethics approval number 15.005 (see Appendix 2-7). Ethics are part of the researcher’s relationship building with the participants (Mauthneret al., 2002; Potter, 2006). The following ethical considerations were fully observed throughout the research: (i) seeking informed consent; (ii) guaranteeing anonymity and confidentiality; and (iii) maintaining privacy and safety of research participants and informants. All participants and informants in this research were allowed the liberty to voluntarily participate or leave the research at any point in time. The researcher also complied with context-specific ethical issues (e.g. document secrecy issues) following Pettigrew’s (1997) observations. Page | 40 Desai and Potter (2006) outline the critical requirements for demonstrating consent to include: sharing honest information about the research with participants and informants and requesting their participation without coercion. As noted above, the researcher presented and explained the research factsheet to each participant or informant verbally. For the household heads who did not speak English, the local assistant translated the purpose, the data requirements, and the intended use of the outcome/report of the research to them in Twi or Ewe whichever was preferred. All the participants and informants received a copy (paper or electronic) of the research factsheet and were asked to seek additional interpretation from persons of their choosing or verify information about the research with the University of Queensland. Ahead of interviews, all official and literate participants, except for those who were interviewed by electronic means, signed a consent form to acknowledge that they had been informed about the research, that they understood the purpose of the research, and that they chose to participate without coercion or any material reward. The consent form included notation by which participants authorized the use of the data. For those that were interviewed by electronic means, consent was confirmed via emails or verbally declared. The requirement for participants’ signatures or thump prints on the consent form did not apply to the household heads. Instead, they declared their consent verbally which was then audio-taped and recorded by the researcher. The exception for household heads was informed by two reasons. From previous experience with the research context, documents and signage were considered as potentially contentious in Akyem and raised suspicion among project impacted persons. Some of these impacted persons had previously experienced contested accounts of asset inventory and compensation claims with company officials during their displacement and resettlement, and felt unable to counteract records which they had signed during asset surveys. Moreover, information from the pre-test of the household interview guide suggested a tendency for some household heads to perceive the researcher as a company official. Based on these reasons, a strict requirement for participating households to sign the consent form could potentially have disturbed participation in the research. Ensuring anonymity and confidentiality involved avoiding actions that could expose the identity of interviewees. Key measures were implemented to conceal the identity of participants, and to prevent the traceability of their responses in the research data. There were inherent challenges in upholding this ethic. Standard household-based research procedures require collecting data on demographics and basic socioeconomic characteristics of Page | 41 respondents. One other challenge is that in rural community settings, it is common to find community members ‘standby’ interview sessions, most of the time uninvited. Some of the respondents were interviewed at the market sheds. On such occasions, it was difficult to request uninvited ‘by-standers’ to leave especially when the participant appeared comfortable with it. Despite these challenges, the research implemented the following measures to ensure anonymity and confidentiality. Transcripts from interviews were saved with passwords. In place of names, each transcript was assigned a unique alphanumeric code. These codes served as pseudonyms and contained some attributes of the interviewee. The attributes include gender of the participant, the institutional setting of the participant, and a serial number to mark counts. Also, the data was aggregated during data analysis and interpretation, and did not contain references to individual narratives, other than the pseudonyms. Throughout data presentation and interpretation, the thesis used pseudonyms to trace quotes from transcripts. Three household participants verbally provided consent to being named alongside their narratives. However, this was unnecessary. On the ‘by-stander’ challenge, participants were given the option to continue or discontinue interviews when uninvited observers showed up during the interviews. If a participant chose to allow ‘by-standers’, she/he did so with full acknowledgement of its implication for revealing their identities to third parties. The researcher also took steps to ensure the privacy and safety of the participants and informants. The interviews were conducted with some level of consciousness (and sometimes empathy) about sensitive issues without getting emotionally involved. For the safety of the participants, informants and the researcher, all interviews were conducted at locations that were free of potential hazards to life and property. 2.7 Research challenges The researcher encountered the following key challenges: i. Research fatigue: One household head declined to participate in the interviews. She had participated in other research encounters, narrating her experiences with life after displacement and resettlement, and was yet to witness any positive material outcome from such interviews. In expressing frustration with life after displacement, she noted that she had invested her compensation funds in constructing rooms for rental. But as Page | 42 several others undertook similar investments, demand for rental accommodation and rental values dropped following closure of construction when population influx was declining. The researcher noted this experience as one of several testimonies as the interviews unfolded. It is also noted that people appeared to be a growing wary about research when they perceived that no change occurs thereafter. ii. Dynamics of the interview settings: It was difficult to build rapport with informants who were interviewed via phone or Skype. The researcher could not discern feelings from the facial expression and body language that accompanied the verbal expression of such key informants. It is expected that not much meaning was lost, however, as most of their responses were likely grounded in professional experiences and facts. Conducting interviews at government or company offices with superiors watching on tended to elicit very formal types of responses. At the household settings, there were instances where the primary participant sat together with several household members or friends. In some instances, such household members responded to questions mostly at the request of the primary participant. About thirteen (13) such members responded to interview questions. Such situations occasionally made it difficult to record and manage. However, it offered the opportunities for spot-verification of information internally within the social group. Sometimes it was difficult to get a single viewpoint on issues, but that reflects the reality of the household situations since a household is usually made up of several members. 2.8 Chapter summary This chapter has provided insight into the research design, and techniques employed to collect, analyse and interpret the data. The researcher assured the trustworthiness of this study data using multiple strategies. During the field work, some interview sessions stimulated memories about the social processes leading to some of the programs that were being implemented by the company to manage the adverse impacts of displacement and resettlement in the area. The researcher used such memories as a quality control mechanism, checking consistency with company program documents and other interview data. The data was analysed and interpreted to serve a coherent thesis presentation. In doing so, some of the researcher’s values and professional beliefs may have influenced the research, Page | 43 which the researcher acknowledges. Throughout the analysis and interpretation, the researcher maintained an “etic” and “holistic” perspective (Fetterman, 2011; p.4), taking note of the context in which the data was embedded. Chapters Six and Seven present the findings of this research. Chapter Six responds to secondary research question one by exploring household level data, representing their experiences and aspirations through displacement and resettlement, and more importantly personal perspectives about their livelihood reconstruction needs. Chapter Seven responds to secondary research questions two and three, draws on data from key informants, and focuses on the policy and institutional perspectives of mining, displacement, resettlement and the challenges of responding to household livelihood needs. Before presenting the findings, Chapters Three presents a review of relevant global literature related to the subject of study, Chapter Four describes the country and case context of the study, and finally Chapter Five which describes the conceptual framework used in the study. Page | 44 Statement of authorship The following chapter includes material drawn directly from the journal article below in which the researcher is the lead author: Adam, A. B., Owen, J. R., & Kemp, D. (2015). Households, livelihoods and mining-induced displacement and resettlement. The Extractive Industries and Society, 2(3), 581-589. The researcher has satisfied the requirements of the University of Queensland Authorship policy (PPL 4.20.04 Authorship) as follows; • The researcher conceived the concept of this article based on his review of the literature. • The researcher retrieved, reviewed and synthesised key aspects of the literature (both published and grey literature), which informed the body text of the article. • The researcher drafted sections one (introduction), two (mining, resettlement and the livelihoods challenge), three (livelihoods and the mining and resettlement landscape), and four (households and the mining and resettlement landscape) of the article which constitute about 65 percent of the article. The researcher duly acknowledges the contribution of the co-authors. • The researcher reviewed and edited the other sections of the article. Section 3.4 of chapter three is drawn from this article and duly cited as Adam et al., (2015). Page | 45 CHAPTER THREE 3.0 DEVELOPMENT, DISPLACEMENT AND HOUSEHOLD LIVELIHOODS 3.1 Introduction This chapter reviews relevant literature related to this study. It has three main objectives: to situate the study in its scholarly context, to establish the basis for the primary research question, and to support the development of the conceptual framework used in later chapters to analyze the findings of the thesis. Given the focus of the study, the review is situated in two broad sets of relevant literature: (i) development-induced displacement and resettlement (DIDR), including displacement caused by industrial mining; and (ii) the sustainable livelihoods literature. Much of the literature on development-induced displacement is centred on impoverishment risks and the evolution of resettlement policies and programs to address the risks. The review considers key debates about population displacement, involuntary resettlement, and the attempts by development finance institutions, governments, and multinational corporations to address the impoverishment risks and impacts associated with displacement. These debates are organised into three themes: (i) planning and complexity in displacement events; (ii) force and choice under cases of involuntary resettlement; and (iii) households as social units of analysis in displacement and resettlement events. The structure of the chapter is as follows. It begins by reviewing debates about the role of planning in inherently complex social settings, in this case, displacement and resettlement in project settings (section 3.2). This forms the context for reviewing the set of scholarly literature that deals with the key social processes around displacement and resettlement, and the extent to which ‘induced displacements’ are characterised by force and choice (section 3.3). The livelihood literature and its intersection with displacement and resettlement is presented in section 3.4. This section reviews a literature that is separate from the development displacement research but is nonetheless concerned with households and household dynamics. In summarizing, the chapter highlights key literature gaps and areas of knowledge for further development. These gaps and opportunities are then used to inform the key thesis questions. Page | 46 3.2 Planning and inherent complexity in development induced displacement events There is, following half a century of research and policy development, a scholarly consensus that people displaced by ‘big infrastructure’ projects end up worse-off (Gans, 1968; Colson, 1971; Scudder, 1982; Cernea and Guggenheim, 1993; Bennett and McDowell, 2012; Cernea and Maldonado, 2018). Displaced people often lose ownership or access to productive lands temporarily or permanently; their production systems are broken; their livelihoods left in jeopardy; and their social networks degraded (Cernea, 1990). The reasons for these worse outcomes are varied and wide ranging. This section of the literature review focuses on two key explanations. The first explanation, in broad terms, is that governments, development finance institutions, corporations and other project proponents do not exercise an adequate level of responsibility and oversight over displacement and resettlement events (Cernea and Maldonado, 2018; Cernea and Mathur, 2008). Planning, in this instance, can be considered as a proxy for asserting the right of displaced people to have known risks and harms properly accounted for and addressed by institutions of power and authority. The second explanation is that displacement events occur in what can be understood as already complex and dynamic environments (de Wet, 2009b; Koenig, 1997). This layering of complex social processes creates a landscape in which large-scale transformational projects, like mining, are but one factor in the overall scheme of change. In the following paragraphs, the planning aspect of the debate is considered. This order reflects both the chronological development of the literature and the special significance attributed to the planning and responsibility perspectives offered over the course of the past five decades. 3.2.1 Involuntary Resettlement: policy evolution and planning Michael Cernea is recognized for his pioneering role in creating the global institutional agenda on resettlement policy and planning in DIDR settings. His work with the World Bank as a sociologist, starting in 1974, set the stage for contemporary resettlement policies and practice. In February 1980, the World Bank formulated and adopted its very first resettlement policy guidelines as a step towards safeguarding people against harm and adverse impacts induced by development projects (Cernea, 1996).21 Since then, the policy has been revised several times, 21 The policy was first called “Operational Manual Statement (OMS) 2.33 Page | 47 with the most recent iteration – The World Bank Environmental and Social Framework (ESF) – taking effect in October 2018. 22 By any account, scholars consider this first policy initiative as a landmark development with a significant influence in defining the role of development finance institutions in addressing impoverishment caused by development projects (Oliver- Smith, 2009; Clark, 2009). Today, nearly all major international finance institutions have similar policies, generally reflecting the World Bank policies.23 Collectively, these policies have influenced country legislations and systems for governing compulsory land acquisition and involuntary resettlement (Modi, 2013; Mathur, 2011).24 Cernea (1991) explains that this landmark policy step was motivated by years of social and anthropological enquiry into the loss and pain of development-caused displacement on local communities. At the Bank, Cernea led a series of major internal reviews of involuntary resettlement cases linked to Bank-funded projects.25 In one such review involving 192 Bank- funded projects (between 1986 and 1993), Cernea expressed conviction in the fact that resettlement, when planned and implemented well would address impoverishment (World Bank, 1994). At the same time, he noted systemic shortcomings in planning and weak institutional oversight in most projects, with an overall unsatisfactory performance in restoring livelihoods of displaced people (ibid).26 The focus on addressing shortcomings and improving livelihoods is the central objective of most global resettlement policies and standards. The standards require developers to avoid or minimize displacement. Where unavoidable, developers are required to plan and implement resettlement programs with the aim “to assisting displaced persons in their efforts to improve, or at least restore, their livelihoods and living standards” (World Bank, 2017; p.54). The policies specify both programmatic steps and normative requirements (i.e. informed consultation, participation, and choice) that proponents must observe when conducting resettlement. According to Cernea 22 The policy received further iterations in 1986, 1988, and 1994 (Cernea, 1996). Subsequent iterations occurred in 2001 (Downing, 2002b) and 2018 (Cernea and Maldonado, 2018). 23 For example, the Inter-American Development Bank adopted its involuntary resettlement policy in 1990; the OECD adopted Guidelines for Aid Agencies on involuntary displacement and resettlement in development projects in 1991; the African Development Bank adopted its involuntary resettlement policy in 1995; the Asian Development Bank in 1995; the Equator Banks adopted the “the Equator Principles” in 2003; IFC in 2006, further revised in 2012. In this thesis, these policies are collectively referred to as global resettlement policies and standards or contemporary resettlement policies and standards. 24 See Tagliarino (2018) for an overview of country systems on compulsory land acquisition and resettlement in 50 countries around the world. 25 See, for example, Cernea (1986); Cernea (1995); World Bank (1996). 26 Approximately 2.5 million people were displaced over the lifetime of the 192 projects. Page | 48 (1999; p.6), “the primary goal of any involuntary resettlement process is to prevent impoverishment and to improve the livelihood of resettlers”. This policy goal is entrenched across all global resettlement policies and standards (see, for example, World Bank, 2017; IFC, 2012; ADB, 2012). Along with these policy standards, resettlement scholarship has evolved since the 1980s, with particular significance for institutional responsibility and resettlement planning in displacement events. Scholarly conceptual models have emerged and focus on theorizing displacement and providing guidance for resettlement planning. These models include Scudder and Colson’s (1982) stress-based four-staged model; Cernea’s (1997) Impoverishment Risk and Reconstruction (IRR) Model; de Wet’s (2004) ‘Inherent Complexities’ Approach; Downing and Garcia-Downing’s (2009) ‘Routine and Dissonant Cultures’ model; and Penz et al. (2011) right-based ‘Responsibility Approach’.27 These models emphasis different aspects of displacement and resettlement, although they also converge on a central message. The central focus of these models is for developers to have long-term commitment to planning and resourcing resettlement programs in a way that they serve the livelihood reconstruction needs of resettlers. Over time, these planning models, combined with the resettlement policies presented by global development banks, have become standard defining references for contemporary resettlement practice. Policy responses to known displacement risks Focusing on resettlement policy and planning as social safeguarding instruments, Cernea (2000) along with Mathur (2013) argue that systemic weakness in resettlement policies, together with poor planning, resourcing and implementation account for the persistent poor outcomes of resettlement. This argument is broadly expressed in the introduction chapter of Cernea and McDowell’s (2000) edited book entitled Risks and Reconstruction, with Cernea (2000; p.13) stating; 27 The four-stage model developed by Scudder and Colson (1982) was first designed for voluntary resettlement and later expanded to include involuntary resettlement. The model comprises four stages of resettlement, i.e. planning and recruitment, adjustment and coping, community formation and economic development, and finally, handing over and incorporation. The model is back-end oriented and helps to study how communities and families adapt to resettlement over time; Downing and Garcia-Downing’s (2009) social geometry model focuses on identifying and addressing factors that are largely connected with socio-cultural disruption and reordering of resettlers’ lives over space and time; and Penz et al. (2011) ‘Responsibility Approach’ foregrounds ethics and actor-responsibility in displacement and resettlement events. They argue that the multiple stages of decision making across displacement events need to be unpacked and discussed along with ethics and respect for human rights. Page | 49 “The conventional planning approaches that cause many to be displaced and allow only a few to be ‘rehabilitated’ do not adequately protect against risks and loss of entitlements and rights […] In most cases, they have been incapable of preventing the victimization, decapitalization, and impoverishment of those affected. But the repeated instances of resettlement without rehabilitation point sharply also to congenital defects in the current domestic policies of many countries, not just in planning procedures. We argue that such development policies, and the resulting planning methodologies, be corrected or changed”. From this statement, two points are of immediate interest. First, it would seem that weak policy environments render poor planning, leading to resettlement with unsatisfactory outcomes. As Cernea (2000; p.34) argues, “the general risk pattern inherent in displacement can be controlled through a policy response that mandates and finances integrated problem resolution”. In making a case for stronger policy response against impoverishment, Cernea (1996; p.1519) posits that “public policy response to the problems of resettlement should focus first on enacting policies, and on building up institutional capacity” as vehicles for implementing the policies. Country laws, he argues, must protect project-affected persons and influence the social processes around displacement and resettlement with the view to improving livelihoods (ibid). The focus on strong policy frameworks is further reinforced by Cernea and Maldonado (2018). Other scholars have raised similar policy concerns with some noting that the successive policy iterations by the World Bank have all but weakened remedies for displaced people (see, for example, Tagliarino, 2018; Mathur, 2011; Downing, 2002b; Clark, 1997). Mathur (2011) notes that laws governing compulsory land acquisition and involuntary resettlement in many jurisdictions tend to protect the interest of the developer better than the displaced. In a recent global study on country systems on land acquisition and resettlement, Tagliarino (2018; p.288) found “significant gaps in national legal frameworks”, noting that such weak policies left “displaced persons without adequate legal protections to ensure that not only physical relocation but also socio-economic reconstruction post-displacement are provided”. Focusing on mining, Vivoda et al. (2017b) observed similar policy gaps, concluding that it could lead to situations where key aspects of resettlement are neglected. Page | 50 The emphasis placed on policy gaps as a proximate cause of impoverishment is based on the assumption that ‘strongly’ crafted policy frameworks, when implemented well, will protect displaced people against harm, and in the best scenario, mandate developers to plan and allocate adequate resources towards resettlement (see Clark, 2009). As Rogers and Wilmsen (2019; p.4) argue, there is an “assumption that resettlement can be controlled by planners to achieve favourable and relatively predictable outcomes”. Further implicit in Cernea’s statement above is the positioning of resettlement planning as both the cause and the solution for impoverishment risks. Cernea (1997; p.1570) argues that “the planning approach which causes many to be displaced but only a few to be rehabilitated has proven itself a big failure, unsuitable to prevent impoverishment”. Put simply, impoverishment risks will materialize where developers fail to plan, plan badly, or fail to allocate sufficient resources to mitigate impacts and/or create development opportunities. As a solution, Mathur (2013; p.91) argues that “resettlement planning provides the means to mitigate the adverse impacts of displacement and to create development opportunities for project- affected people”. Taken as both the cause and the solution, Cernea (1997; p.1570) appeared convinced that not only did conventional planning approaches fail to account for impoverishment, but that people with formal responsibility “[were] deprived of a compass that can guide them in how to allocate financial resources equitably and to prevent or mitigate the risks of impoverishment”. To address these failing approaches, Cernea (2000; 1997) proposed the Impoverishment Risks and Reconstruction (IRR) Model, as an analytic framework for addressing flaws in resettlement policy and practice. The model as he states, aims “to create a theoretical and safeguarding tool capable of guiding policy, planning, and actual development programs to counteract” the adverse effects of displacement (2000; p.14). The IRR is the most cited in the displacement literature. Some scholars consider it as the central framework for the formulation and iteration of the World Bank’s resettlement policies, with unparalleled influence on resettlement planning (Wilmsen, 2018; Oliver-Smith, 2010; Koenig, 2006). Page | 51 IRR Model: A diagnostic for project induced displacement risks The IRR models eight predominant impoverishment risks: landlessness, homelessness, joblessness, marginalisation, food insecurity, loss of access to common property resources, increased morbidity and social disarticulation; and advances four planning functions comprising: predicting, diagnosing, problem-solving, and researching the complex issues associated with resettlement. Social disarticulation sets in when displacement erodes the protective and risk-sharing capacity of social networks that people previously relied upon. Cernea (1997; p.1572) considers these risk factors as the most predominant impoverishing factors in all displacement events, and “the most important ones” deserving particular attention. These risk elements are mutually convergent, often occurring simultaneously, and resulting in “rapid onset of impoverishment” (ibid). To illustrate, landlessness, Cernea explains, decapitalizes displaced people, breaks down their ability to produce, which can then lead to food insecurity. Oliver-Smith (2009; p.12) emphasizes the probability for these predominant risk factors to “produce serious consequences in badly planned or unplanned resettlement”. As a problem-solving tool, the model is presented as capable of anticipating “displacement’s major risks”, explaining “the behavioural responses of displaced people”, and guiding “the reconstruction of resettlers’ livelihoods” (Cernea, 1997; p.1570). The functions advanced by the IRR underpin contemporary resettlement practice. Through its predictive and diagnostic functions for example, project planners are expected to assess ex ante the potential for projects to cause displacement and induce impoverishment. Proponents of planning believe that the results of such assessments can inform better resettlement planning, resourcing, and implementation to address impoverishment (Mathur, 2011; Cernea, 2000; Lassaily-Jacob, 2000; Thangaraj, 1996). Across the literature, scholars have engaged different elements of the IRR, although much of these works is focused on public-sector led dam projects, not on the specific context of mining and resettlement (see, for example, Wilmsen et al 2018; Gizachew, 2017; Wilmsen, 2016; Mahapatra, 1999; Mathur, 1998).28 Through these scholarly engagements, critiques and clarifications have been offered on the IRR, although the model itself remains unadjusted (Adam et al., 2015). For example, Mahapatra (1999) applied the model on the resettlement 28 The case examples around the IRR are not contained only in the works cited above. See, for example, Alexandrescu (2011) and Muggah (2000) for other examples. Page | 52 experiences of displaced people in India, confirmed its ability to account for major impoverishment risks, and recommended that it be revised to include risk related to losing education as a critical human capital input. Whilst acknowledging the influence of the IRR in standardizing resettlement practice, scholars have sought to highlight its limitations, and in some cases outright misjudgements when deployed as a planning tool. Smyth and Vanclay (2017) note that the model appears to be a “deficit model” as it emphasises losses whilst ignoring the potential for projects to trigger social change with positive outcomes. In the context of mining, Cochrane (2017) notes that the neglect of project potential to transform local communities sometimes leads proponents towards preserving (or restoring) the status quo, rather than investing in transformational programs. Wilmsen et al. (2018; p.10) argues that the IRR is simplistic and produces “systematic blind spots” with regard to important social, political and economic configurations of resettlement that may get neglected in practice. Proceeding, they call attention to the many complex power and social relations as they shape and impact displacement events. Koenig (2006; 2002) critiques the IRR as overly centred on economic and social aspects of resettlement while overlooking politics and power relations in displacement events. After all, “to be resettled is the most acute expression of powerlessness” (Oliver-Smith, 2010; p.14). Koenig (2006) argues that attention to these power relations brings to light the inherent power asymmetry and conflict of interest that characterizes development, and helps account for the administrative decisions and responsibilities that give rise to displacement and involuntary resettlement. The lack of attention to these elements leads to de Wet’s (2006) alternative approach. Inherent complexity: an alternative approach to problem-identification In a book chapter – Risk, Complexity and Local Initiative in Forced Resettlement Outcomes – de Wet (2006) asked: why forced resettlement so often go wrong? The answer to this question, he argues, goes beyond the absence of inputs to include the ‘inherent complexities’ that characterize displacement and resettlement events. Inputs, in this instance, are taken to mean resettlement policies, country laws and regulations, finance, surveys for knowledge, political will, as well as planning and consultation (ibid). Inputs, de Wet argues, are necessary but insufficient for explaining or resolving the impoverishment process. Drawing attention to inherent complexities, de Wet (2006; p.190) notes that: Page | 53 “there is a complexity in resettlement, which arises from the interrelatedness of a range of factors of different orders: cultural, social, environmental, economic, institutional, and political – all of which are taking place in the context of imposed spatial change and of local-level response and initiatives”. Such complexities, he posits, must be considered when conceptualizing, deconstructing or proposing “policy practice” response to the impoverishment process. The complexities alluded to include the loss of inputs and extend to the context within which the loss occurs. Not only is the context imposed and accelerated, it is also manifested in pressure on land and local resources, market distortions, monetization of assets, ‘forced’ incorporation of local people into national, regional and global affairs, and the “mutually reinforcing critical shortages” of time and resources as constrained by the project intervention. The absence of inputs, de Wet agrees, can induce impoverishment. Yet, the very presence of the inputs constitute complexities by itself especially when examined in the context of large-scale movements (ibid). Taking resettlement policy to illustrate, de Wet argues that policies, policy implementation, and policy outcomes are negotiated and transformed by complexities, in which case issues of politics and power relations come into play. This is because policy implementation can be mediated or transformed by a number of factors including officials’ understanding and interpretation, time, resources and local culture. To this end, de Wet urges caution about the prospects of resettlement policies in reversing impoverishment. Beyond policies, de Wet also highlights the significant influence that complexities exert on planning and institutional responsibility. As he argues, the complexities make resettlement undertakings a problematic institutional process which is not amenable to rational planning. “Both planners and people find themselves having to respond in an ad hoc way to unfolding events, and their responses feedback into the process, but often in an unplanned manner- all of which renders rational planning and procedures, and positive outcomes increasingly unlikely (2006; p.10)” Page | 54 As a set of factors converge to create impoverishment for displaced people, another set converge to create administrative crisis for officials in power and authority. Rew’s (1996) research demonstrates the complexities involved in trying to master and administer multiple local level issues as projects unfold in localized settings. As de Wet (2009b) notes, factors including political objectives, conflicting timelines, and the simultaneous occurrence of legal, administrative, institutional, and financial commitments are complex issues that are rarely amenable to planning. The literature seldom discusses crises confronting institutions in displacement settings. Proceeding on the basis of complexity, de Wet critiques Cernea’s IRR as being linear, inputs-driven and technical in character with little recognition for these inherently complex factors in displacement events. de Wet (2006) posits: “to overlook [these complexities], is to undermine the basis of both livelihood and community” (p.5). de Wet (ibid) proposes a planning approach – “Inherent Complexities” – which takes account of these complexities with flexibilities to accommodate open-endedness, trade-offs, attention to project contexts, and participatory process that empowers displaced people to participate in the resettlement planning process and to share in project benefits. The argument for an open-ended approach raises questions surrounding responsibilities for key resettlement activities across the project life cycle. These questions are critical especially in mining where the entire displacement and resettlement revolves around a mine that is scheduled on a ‘discover, build, operate, and close’ basis. 3.3 Force and choice in displacement and resettlement Contemporary resettlement standards prohibit forced eviction of people on the Right of Way of development projects (World Bank, 2017; IFC, 2012; ADB, 2009). In place of force, the standards promote negotiated arrangements whereby project proponents negotiate with people, ahead of works, to decide how displacement will occur and make plans to offset adverse project impacts through resettlement programs. The preference for choice and participation of people in displacement events is further expressed in the report of the World Commission on Dams, as the commission sought to place these norms as central features in project-decision making (WCD, 2000). There is a supposition across the resettlement standards that negotiations render opportunities for affected people to exercise choice and volition over their resettlement, with prospects for better resettlement outcomes. In few voluntary resettlement programs, this postulate may prove right (see, for example, Lo and Wang, 2018). However, questions remain Page | 55 about the reach of negotiated arrangements, and the extent to which these arrangements guarantee meaningful choice for people facing compulsory acquisition and involuntary resettlement. 3.3.1 Voluntarism and negotiated arrangements A key distinguishing feature of development-induced displacement is that it is involuntary; that is, “the lack of choice to remain in situ” (Price, 2009; p.269; Cernea, 1996). In the World Bank’s (2004; p.4) source book on involuntary resettlement the term “involuntary connotes the lack of informed consent and power of choice on the part of people directly affected by the acquisition” of land. The lack of power of choice brings to focus issues of power dynamics when considering negotiated settlements in DIDR settings. Johnston (2009) argues that the lack of consent and choice violates basic human rights and compounds impoverishment risks facing project-affected people. Rather than being forced, Penz et al. (2011; p.3) posit that “displacement for development can be voluntary and negotiated”. Some scholars have sought to overcome the divide between voluntary and involuntary, arguing that both situations must be seen as a continuum, rather than a dichotomy (Wilmsen and Wang, 2015; Schmidt-Soltau and Brockington, 2007). This is because even in typically designated voluntary resettlements, there are subtle elements of coercion or force which push or compel people to move (see, for example, Witter, 2013; Morris-Jung and Roth, 2010). In such situations, volition is either induced or becomes difficult to characterise (Milgroom and Spierenburg, 2008). The works of Garibayet al (2011) and Milgroom and Spierenburg (2008) highlight the subtle influence of national and local political economy, power and information asymmetry, regulatory restrictions, and intervening power of state officials in shaping negotiated outcomes. According to Schmidt-Soltau and Brockington (2007), the difficulties of ascribing the voluntary and involuntary markers to displacement events become more tenable in displacement context where market forces operate. Market transactions, they argue, frequently mask coercion, and further blur the boundaries of voluntarism and the volition that it promises. This observation is critical in private sector led displacement events. In mining for example, it is common for companies to justify displacement having negotiated and paid cash compensation for project impacts. Ironically, contest over compensation is also a regular Page | 56 trigger of conflict between companies and local communities (Conde, 2017). Regardless of any inducement to facilitate voluntary relocation, Oliver-Smith (2009; p.4) considers all development-forced displacement as “entirely involuntary”. In this thesis, the researcher prefers and uses the term ‘involuntary’ as a differentiating concept. Contemporary resettlement policies promote participation and negotiation as procedures by which projects can extend volition. The World Bank ESF, for example, requires developers to identify and consult project-affected persons, making sure that consultation is devoid of manipulation, interference, and coercion. Project proponents are required to build the capacity of project-affected persons and implement measures that empower them to participate in negotiations (World Bank, 2017; ADB, 2012; 2009). It is assumed that choice combined with participation, and better resettlement planning and resourcing, will ultimately enhance the chances of resettlement success. Yet, the circumstances surrounding participation, negotiation, and choice are questioned. The conditions that force displacement Aronsson (2009) questions the conceptual contradictions between the terms ‘participation’ and ‘involuntary resettlement’, as the latter fundamentally includes lack of informed consent and the power of choice. The inherent incompatibilities between these concepts, Aronsson explains, extends to contradictions between negotiations and the fait accompli decisions leading to displacement and resettlement. In other words, what is the value in negotiating with the knowledge and certainty that one will be displaced? Questions of this nature raise concerns about the value of negotiation which produces predetermined outcomes and the context within which such negotiations take place. Oliver-Smith (2010) following Cleaver (1999) draws attention to the inherent structural factors in projects, and the limitations those factors impose on the ability of local people to influence the negotiation process. These factors include the very ones outlined by de Wet (2006). Oliver-Smith (ibid) argues that political imperatives, timelines, and resource constraints can reduce participation to a mere bureaucratic function designed to service projects, rather than empower people to exercise volition. Cleaver (1999) notes that the focus on these factors tends to stifle the opportunities for understanding how people might participate or exercise agency within the confines of their social configurations – subgroups and identities, including gender, age, and social and economic status. Page | 57 In negotiations around displacement, such social configurations can sometimes exert significant influence over the choice to move, not to move, and where to move to? Schmidt- Soltau and Brockington (2007; p.2185) term this as “politics of collective decisions”, whereby individuals appeal to powerful rhetoric or their sense of moral goods. Given the influence of power relations, Cleaver (1999) directs attention to “the links between inclusion and subordination” when examining the effects of participation. In other words, some people might participate not because they want to, but simply to respect hierarchy and power. Proceeding on this basis, Cleaver argues that both participation and non-participation must be accepted as legitimate strategies, to the extent that each strategy allows people to influence a process to their overall advantage. It is not clear in the literature at what point non-participation can be considered as a sign of withdrawal of support or a strategy to maximize benefits from an event. Beyond community level, power relations also characterize negotiations between developers and displaced people. Price (2015) argues that asymmetry of power and information between developers and affected people sometimes undermines the prospects and renderings of negotiations. In extending the limitations of power and information asymmetry, de Wet’s (2009a; p.80) wonders what constitutes choice and whose choice(s) count? when he asks, “who gets to define general welfare, how are costs and benefits to be identified and priced, and what assumptions are made about the commensurability of values across cultures to monetary terms?” Excepting few cases (Kidido, Ayitey, & Kuusaana, 2015; Mares, 2012), many of the critiques around power imbalances are drawn from studies in the broader DIDR literature, emphasising the power of the state against that of the affected people, with varied implications for volition. Wilmsen and Wang (2015; p. 612) focus on the extent to which increased volition leads to better outcomes in resettlement events. In a comparative study, they concluded that “it is not volition that leads to better [resettlement] outcomes, rather people-centred practices that are embedded in policy, planning and implementation” of resettlement. The focus on people and their needs resonates with Oliver-Smith (2009) and Cleaver (1999), and indeed this thesis. For Cleaver (ibid; p.600), the prospect of participation in the context of ‘outside interventions’ need to be reconceptualised with a focus on understanding “the non-project nature of people’s lives” and their “complex livelihood inter-linkages”. Page | 58 3.4 Livelihoods, development and the role of households This thesis focuses on how resettlement policy and practice can better respond to the livelihood reconstruction needs of displaced people. In other words, how can resettlement policies and practices of actors executing the resettlement better respond to the livelihood reconstruction needs of households? How should the planning processes and approaches capture the lived experiences and livelihood trajectories of persons being displaced and resettled? A review of the conceptual constructs of households and household livelihood needs is a necessary first step towards demarcating the boundaries of the study. Households: a working definition Throughout the vast body of literature on livelihoods and development, households are central actors. Within this literature, households are conceptualised as complex units which make decisions about provisioning and whose functional objective is to support social production and reproduction (Bryceson, 2002; Bernstein, Crow, & Johnson, 1992; Deera and Janvry, 1979). Households access and hold assets and create and participate in strategic networks to achieve social and economic goals. According to Davidson (1991; p.14) the attractiveness of household studies can be attributed in part to their ability to “traverse this seemingly insuperable gap between individual and structure, drawing together micro- and macro-levels of analysis”. As a foundation concept, the household “is conceived of as an intermediate unit linking the behaviour of individuals to the wider socioeconomic environment”. In development theory, households are also seen as the “locus of resources and labor” (Davidson, 1991; p.14) forming the basis of highly popularised ‘assets’ orientated approaches. Chimhowu and Hulme (2006; p.729) identify several frameworks: the Sustainable Livelihood Framework (SLF) (Carney, 1998, 1999), the Framework for Thinking about Diverse Rural Livelihoods (Ellis, 2000), Capitals and Capabilities Framework (Bebbington, 1999), and the UNDP’s Sustainable Livelihoods Diamond (1999). As Chimhowu and Hulme (2006; p.729) point out, “these frameworks have different emphasis, rather than fundamental conceptual differences”. The common conceptual footing, they argue, is that each framework attempts to “integrate assets, constraints and human capabilities” in order to “analyze the status, form, nature and condition of livelihoods over space and time”. Page | 59 Siegel (2005; p.6) defines assets as “the productive, social and locational” resources that “determine the opportunity set of options for livelihood strategies (the household’s revealed behavior)”. For Siegal, the scope and effectiveness of a given opportunity set “depends on the interface between a household’s assets and the prevailing context”. In this context, the strategic management of assets by households can be understood as constituting its livelihood strategy (Ellis 1998 and Carney et al, 1999 cited in Siegel 2005; p.12). Assets and capabilities Across the multiple frameworks on sustainable livelihoods, assets are categorised into five types of capital: Human, Natural, Social, Physical and Financial. These asset categories, representing the potential range of resources that households may draw upon, are further complimented by what Nussbaum (2000), Sen (1999), and Sen and Muellbauer (1987) refer to as ‘human capabilities’. The simplest expression of the idea of capabilities is offered by Sen (2005; p.153), that is: “the opportunity to achieve valuable combinations of human functionings — what a person is able to do or be”. More elaborate definitions of capability draw on the notion of “entitlement”, reflecting a complex set of economic, legal, political and social relations and arrangements in which people are able to exercise rights and fulfil obligations. Whether linkages between entitlements and livelihood outcomes are expressed through individual units, “livelihood cells” or “livelihood networks”, households remain the central reference point of activity (Chimhowu and Hulme, 2006; p. 729) Scoones (1998; p.5) suggests that livelihoods be defined as “capabilities, assets (including both material and social resources) and activities required for a means of living”. He argues that “a livelihood is sustainable when it can cope with and recover from stresses and shocks, maintain or enhance its capabilities and assets, while not undermining the natural resource base”. The relationship between shocks, household networks and livelihood strategies is especially relevant in the context of livelihood restoration following a physical and economic displacement. Within the broader DIDR literature, the connection between development- imposed shocks and household vulnerability has received little attention (McDowell, 2002, Downing and Garcia-Downing, 2009). In the context of mining, understanding the relationship between prior vulnerability and how households respond to the prospect of impoverishment risks should be considered a critical part of the resettlement planning and livelihood reconstruction processes. As noted in section 3.1, the literature on resettlement shows sub- optimal outcomes even in the face of what might be considered an ‘improved’ policy and Page | 60 practice. At the same time, the sustainable livelihoods literature has evolved over time, putting people at the centre of household provisioning and sustenance. Drawing from the sustainable livelihood literature, this thesis seeks to re-orient resettlement policies and practice toward addressing the material concerns of households in MIDR. 3.4.1 Mining, resettlement and households’ livelihoods It was noted in the introduction chapter that the knowledge base on mining and resettlement is poor. In the past 17 years there has been a consistent acknowledgement in the literature that displacement and resettlement resulting from mining is understudied (Downing, 2002a; Bennett and McDowell, 2012; Owen and Kemp, 2015; Cernea and Maldonado, 2018). In his seminal report, Downing (2002a) noted the collective inability of the industry to account for the number of people displaced by large-scale mine projects. Thirteen years after this report, Owen and Kemp (2015; p. 479), in their critical appraisal of MIDR highlight “the absence of dedicated mining scholarship” within the broader literature of development-induced displacement and resettlement (DIDR). The lack of consistent data is attributed to the fact that mining tends to occur in remote regions where governance is weak and in a corporate culture where social practices are largely undocumented (Narasimham and Subbarao, 2018; Kemp et al., 2017; Madebwe et al 2011). Research dedicated to mining is evolving and shows a consistent pattern of poor resettlement outcomes (Wilson, 2019; Narasimham and Subbarao, 2018; Fernandes, 2007; Aubynn, 2003). These outcomes are considered against a bold aspiration by the industry to improve livelihoods of displaced people through resettlement (Adam et al., 2015). In essence, most displaced people, even after ‘benefiting’ from resettlement plans remain impoverished and worse off. Consistent with the planning debate in literature (see section 3.2), there are two key mining-specific explanations to this problem. The first relates to levels of institutional control over the planning function, and the specific complexities of mine operations which may render planning less effective (Owen and Kemp, 2016). The second is associated with how households are represented in MIDR policy and practice (Adam et al., 2015). Planning and complexity in MIDR Debate about the utility of planning in MIDR is nascent, and relates to the limitations of planning in the unique context of the mining industry. Owen and Kemp (2016) highlight two Page | 61 critical factors that impact the utility of planning as a device against impoverishment. First, they raise questions about institutional responsibility across the different aspects of resettlement planning in which companies are but one actor. They argue that companies appear to have an appreciable control over the discrete elements (e.g. baselines, compensation negotiation, budgets, livelihood plans, and resettlement housing) of resettlement as against the overall control of resettlement. Other equally important and complementary responsibilities such as supervision and compliance monitoring from governments and lender organizations are not always upheld and thus affect the effectiveness of resettlement plans. Second, they argue that mining is characterized by unique features with significant complexities for planning. These features include: the tendency for projects to acquire land on an incremental basis rather than upfront; cohabitation; complexities of governance; and the patterns of leveraging.29 To illustrate, mine operations are generally exposed to business risks such as volatilities in commodity markets and uncertainties with a knock-on effect on a company’s ability to predict requirements for land upfront. There is a general preference under the circumstances to acquire land on on-the-need basis. In such situations, it becomes practically difficult to fully predict the scale of impact on land, for example. When impacts cannot be fully assessed, planning becomes difficult to achieve or deficient to start with. Bank’s (2013) work highlights the absence of guidance in policy frameworks and the limitations of mainstream social impact assessment approaches to account for project impacts arising from major variations. Owen and Kemp (ibid) did not consider situations where companies acquire more land than immediately required and the limitations of those acquisitions for the resource needs of displaced people. Representing households in displacement and safeguards policies One area of concern in the MIDR policy and practice is the lack of clarity on households. This lack of clarity begins with definitions and extends to responsibilities, rights, protections and obligations. The review considered the formal status of households within three distinct but related MIDR domains: the global safeguards on involuntary land acquisition and resettlement; corporate level public policy statements; and planning and implementation norms at the operations level. 29 Only complexities related to incremental land acquisition are discussed in this review. The other factors are revisited in Chapter Eight. Page | 62 The detail relating to households in the current suite of global standards is problematic to discern. In the most recent edition of the IFC’s Performance Standard 5 (PS5) (2012) on Involuntary Land Acquisition and Resettlement, several social units are mentioned: persons, families, households and communities. The standards hardly define the circumstances under which different social units will take priority over others. Broadly speaking, the global standard refers to households as entitlement bearing units. A content review, however, shows minimal focus on these units with only three brief mentions throughout the entirety of the standard. In the first reference, the standard suggests that in order to better understand the gendered nature of livelihood change and resource usage, an “intra- household analysis” may be required (p.3). In the second reference, the standard recommends that “[d]ocumentation of ownership or occupancy and compensation arrangements should be issued in the names of both spouses or heads of households” (p.4). In the third mention, the standard suggests that “[w]here appropriate, benefits or compensation associated with natural resource usage may be collective in nature rather than directly oriented towards individuals or households” (p.7). While these three references identify households as units through which resources and entitlements may be transferred, no connection is made between the composition, functionality or strategizing of households and the difficult task of restoring or improving livelihood conditions. This observation is broadly consistent across the suite of performance standards and safeguards. A review of corporate policy on mining and resettlement suggests two themes. First, that ‘diligent deferral’ can be used to describe the way in which mining companies utilise IFC Performance Standard 5 (IFC PS5). Most of the larger companies, including Anglo American, Rio Tinto, Glencore, BHP Billiton, AngloGold Ashanti, Newmont and Barrick Gold, defer to the standard as their performance benchmark. The global standards are incorporated into corporate policy in their generic form, without clarification or elaboration as to how they apply to the mining industry or the context within which the companies operate. This is despite the unique characteristics of MIDR relative to resettlement in other sectors (Owen and Kemp, 2016). Downing’s (2014) work in Kosovo and Szablowski’s (2006) in Peru highlight several difficulties that become apparent when attempting to translate global resettlement policies into practice in a context where domestic laws are relatively weak. As Szablowski (2006; p.37) notes terms such as “living standards,” “displaced persons,” and “participation” all expressed Page | 63 in the global resettlement standards “are far from self-defining, particularly when transplanted into different socio-economic environments”. Outside of country-level systems and guidance, the operationalization of the policy requirements at the site level may also be left to the discretion of companies or constrained by the level of expertise and resources at the disposal of the company. In weak policy environments, discretion can become grounds for non- compliance or a minimalist approach, far less than what may be required to support adequate livelihood restoration (Tagliarino, 2018) Second, reference to households is minimal. There is less emphasis, for instance, on the importance of families and households in the livelihood restoration process; no reference to intra-household dynamics, communities or broader societal structures. In fact, the industry’s peak body, the International Council on Mining and Metals (ICMM), completely overlooks the question of livelihood restoration. Instead, the policy simply requires member companies to “minimise” resettlement (which is not as strong as the IFC PS5 requirement of “avoiding” involuntary resettlement) and to compensate fairly for loss. The question of impoverishment risk and livelihood restoration does not rate a mention. This review also considered how households are positioned in contemporary MIDR practice and observed where they are present and absent. A useful approach is to consider how households are conceptualised at specific stages of resettlement planning. In the pre- resettlement period, household-level research is typically required as part of the regulatory and permitting processes, where companies formulate environmental and social impact assessments (ESIA) and related resettlement action plans (RAPs). In practice, the information collected through these studies is often used to establish criteria to determine eligibility cut- offs and entitlement levels for resettlement packages. Scholars note that the ‘the social content’ of mainstream ESIAs are weak and poorly institutionalized in many jurisdictions (Dendana and Corsi, 2015; Suopajärvi, 2013; Tayloret al., 2001). They argue that the social knowledge, in this instance household and community data, is frequently marginalized through the ESIA process or the process is biased towards meeting technical and official imperatives, rather than what is technically required to inform mine preparedness towards mitigating notable risks. Applying concepts and principles in practice: households and mining Regulatory frameworks for MIDR position households as the point of engagement for agreeing compensation for loss of land and other assets. Developers are required to engage Page | 64 with affected persons as a condition of the global standard, but this does not automatically mean that all members of a household will be consulted or engaged in a negotiation process. Cernea’s (1997) IRR model which is considered the dominant model contains some potential for assisting communities in predicting, diagnosing and problem solving around known resettlement issues. However, actualizing these functions requires communities to have forward knowledge (or consistent access to third party specialists) at the outset of the planning process. When households are physical relocated, they require special attention and engagement. Under the global standard, developers are required to take the lead in resettlement planning and implementation. This includes making a determination about the quantum of resourcing and engagement the company will devote to the resettlement, and to households in particular. One prominent tendency is for companies to place a greater emphasis on the building of “houses” as opposed to the development of ‘households’. According to Kemp et al. (2017), companies are more able to understand the resources needed to provide physical infrastructure (i.e. houses, school buildings, roads) than what the engagement and livelihood needs are of displaced households. This proposition is generally evident in DIDR as developers find housing and other physical infrastructure the easiest risks to fix (Cernea, 1999). There are several practical explanations as to why households are not brought more sharply into focus in mining. To begin with, the results of household surveys and other routine social monitoring activities collected by developers are often presented in aggregate form based on thematic or trend data (Dendena and Corsi, 2016). In the process of reporting on changes in the social context, the needs of individual households and the dynamic interactions between them become less prominent. Emerging macro-scale frameworks such as the Global Reporting Initiative rarely feature locally-focused impacts such as land-use and demography (Mancina and Sala, 2018); and recent forms of social analysis in mining, such as human rights impact assessments (HRIA) and gender impact assessments (GIA), do not focus on intra or inter household relations either (Adam et al, 2015). These assessments typically prioritise individual or collective rights, which include rights bearing cohorts, such as ‘workers’, ‘women’ or ‘ethnic minority’ groups, but typically not households. Households are positioned as the backdrop to gender relations or human rights enjoyment (Wheelock, 1996; Nathan, 2009). Page | 65 Another possible explanation for the neglect of households in MIDR relates to resourcing. In mining, resettlement planning is considered to be a specialist activity, undertaken by external experts with some corporate oversight. The responsibility would sit with the equivalent of a community relations department with the remainder allocated to ad hoc steering committees or government agencies. Despite this responsibility, evidence suggests that the community relations function is often considered peripheral to the core business of mining with negative implications for their ability to realize socially-oriented goals, including paying attention to household level issues (Owen and Kemp, 2016; Kemp and Owen, 2013). Under the current approach, the onus is on households to come forward or ‘speak up’ if they have issues, enabling companies to respond to households ‘as needed’. Evidence suggests that this lack of focus limits livelihood restoration and recovery (Nathan, 2009). 3.5 Chapter summary It is established that the knowledge base in support of mining and resettlement is poor. This knowledge deficit is characterized by the lack of systems to consistently account for the number of people who are displaced by large-scale mining and the absence, albeit evolving, ‘dedicated mining scholarship’ in support of mining-induced displacement and resettlement. In contrast, the knowledge base on the broader subject of development-induced displacement and resettlement has evolved with appreciable case examples for addressing mining-specific resettlement problems. Contemporary resettlement policies and standards provide generic guidelines for addressing impoverishment risks and impacts of development-induced displacement and resettlement. These policies combined with scholarly works on impoverishment risks and reconstruction approaches provide guidance for resettlement planning and implementation as a typical response to impoverishment. Broadly speaking, the policy consensus is that resettlement should be avoided, minimized or mitigated through adequate planning, resourcing, and implementing resettlement programs to assist displaced people to recover and/or improve their standard of living over pre-displacement levels. It is argued that the focus on displaced people especially when they are provided with avenues to participate, exercise meaningful choice, and negotiate with developers will enable them to exercise volition with prospects for better resettlement outcomes. This is increasingly the norm, with governments, corporations and most civil society organizations asking for project proponents to do more in this regard. Page | 66 Meanwhile, the overwhelming outcome of involuntary resettlement, both DIDR and MIDR alike, is that displaced people are mostly left impoverished and destitute. This outcome suggests that resettlement policies and practice require improvement to better respond to the material concerns of household livelihood reconstruction following displacement and resettlement. It is noted that; • Contemporary resettlement policies and standards show notable weaknesses in the way household level issues are conceptualized and addressed. • Both Cernea’s IRR (1997) and de Wet’s (2006) Complexities Approach appear centred on institutional perspectives of displacement and resettlement. In other words, the debate is about the ‘dos and don’ts’ for institutions of power and authority when approaching resettlement. This thesis takes the household perspective as a lens for reading both ‘inputs’ and complexities in a mining context. • From institutional perspectives, the unique context of mining can sometimes constrain the reach and prospects of planning (Owen and Kemp, 2016). How do these contextual issues impact livelihood reconstruction efforts of households? • Normative processes including participation, negotiations, choice, and power relations are recognized in the literature as critical in generating volition. Much of this literature is on government-led dam projects. How do these social interactions occur in a mining context? What liabilities and trade-offs are brought to bear on negotiations leading to resettlement? The review has demonstrated several areas where this literature connects with the problems of displacement and involuntary resettlement in mining. The focus on households as the centre of interventions is but one such area. In development-induced displacement settings, households are recognized as units of analysis and engagement. The review shows that this recognition is not consistently carried across the entire life cycle of mining and resettlement events. Against this backdrop, this thesis argues that improvement in resettlement policies, practice and outcomes will require addressing material concerns of households. Page | 67 In the next chapter, the thesis focuses on providing contextual detail to the research problem by examining the state of mining, resettlement and the challenge of household livelihood reconstruction in Ghana. Page | 68 CHAPTER FOUR 4.0 MINING AND THE LIVELIHOODS CHALLENGE IN GHANA 4.1 Introduction This chapter presents the country and site context of the case study used in this research. The chapter provides contextual detail to the research problem by describing the state of large-scale mining and the prevalence of mining-induced displacement and impoverishment in Ghana. Based on the Minerals and Mining Act, 2006 (Act 703) as amended by the Minerals and Mining (Amendment) Act, 2015 (Act, 900), any mining operations in the country occurring over a contiguous area of land which is greater than 25 acres can be considered as a large-scale mine. Ghana has an ancient history of mineral exploitation dating back to the 4th century A.D. By the 11th century ancient Ghana was also known as “the Gold Coast” due to its mineral endowment. Throughout its history, mining has played a significant role in the country’s economic development. However, the overall net contribution of the sector to the country’s development has been questioned (Bebbington et al., 2018). For those who question the net impact of mining, the predominant reference points are its effects on the level of impoverishment and on the environment. At the recent 25th Mining Indaba in South Africa, the President of Ghana was quoted as saying “many of the areas [mining takes place] look like the most deprived areas on earth”.30 This chapter considers this debate by highlighting the role of mining in the country’s development in section 4.2. In this section, the key dimensions of the economic contribution of mining are presented, including direct payments from mining operations to the government, employment and supply chain opportunities, and corporate social and community development at site level where mining takes place. These economic benefits are then weighed against the social and environmental costs of mining on local communities. Section 4.3 then presents the historical evolution of mineral sector policy and regulatory frameworks in Ghana since the 1950s. It focuses on how these policies and laws, at different times in modern history, sought to safeguard local communities against the adverse impacts of mining. Also included in this section is an overview of mining sector policy reforms since the 2000s, and a critique of these reforms in relation to their limitations in addressing 30 See http://mlnr.gov.gh/index.php/some-mining-areas-look-like-most-deprived-places-on-earth-akufo-addo/ Page | 69 impoverishment. While the sector is subject to numerous policy and regulatory instruments, the discussion in this section addresses only those that directly relate to the social and environmental impacts of large-scale mining in Ghana. Continuing, Section 4.4 focuses on the sub-national level and describes the state of industrial mining in the Birim North District, one of several local government districts hosting large-scale mining operations in Ghana. Finally, Section 4.5 presents a concise description of the local context of the Akyem gold mine project. 4.2 Mining in Ghana The mineralogy of Ghana is diverse and includes mining, oil and gas resources. While there are diverse mineral holdings, a joint report by the International Council on Mining and Metals (ICMM) and the Ghana Chamber of Mines indicates that gold, diamond, manganese and bauxite are the most commercially exploited minerals (ICMM and Ghana Chamber of Mines, 2015). Gold is, by far, the largest non-fuel mineral being produced in the country, contributing about 95 percent of the country’s mineral revenue. A report issued by the Ghana Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI) secretariat indicates that the country holds 3.1 percent of global gold reserves, and is the second largest gold producing country in Africa after South Africa, and tenth in the world (GHEITI, 2015).31 In a foreword to Bainton (2010; p.ix), Martha Macintyre remarked that “the search for mineral wealth has long been associated with colonisation, economic exploitation, and economic transformation”. Jackson (1992) traces the country’s history of gold mining back over 2500 years. Large-scale mining in Ghana commenced with the advent of British colonial rule in the 1880s in the then Gold Coast (Jackson, 1992; Tsikata, 1997; Hilson, 2002a). The late 19th century witnessed a transition from what was predominantly locally-driven artisanal mining to industrialized large-scale mining led by foreign capital. Bebbington et al, (2018; p.163) conclude that “the advent of colonial and expatriate-led capitalism […] marked the beginning of the commercialization of mineralized lands and the subtle decline in chiefly control over such lands” in Ghana. The incorporation of the African Gold Coast Company, a European mining company, in 1878 in the country was also considered as a significant marker of this transition (Hilson, 2002a). This development stimulated further foreign interest in the mineral reserves of the country. By 1930, about 50 foreign mining companies had registered, acquired concessions, or were operating mines in the country (ibid). 31 See https://eiti.org/ghana. Page | 70 Throughout the 20th C, the mineral sector remained a significant economic activity in Ghana, albeit with intermittent ‘boom-bust’ cycles. The sector plummeted in the decades before and after Ghana’s independence in 1957, with extended consequences for the scale and output of mining. Hilson (2002a) reported that in the decades leading to independence, the dip in the sector led to a reduction in the number of companies from 50 in the 1930s to only 11 by 1948. There was a further slump in investment during the four decades leading to the 1980s. During this period, no new large-scale mines were established (Aryee, 2001). Scholars attribute this downturn to several factors, namely post-independence resource-nationalization, excessive state control over mine operations, tightening global regulation of commodity exports, capital contraction, institutional bottlenecks, and growing operational inefficiencies (see, for example, Addy, 1998; Etemad and Salmasi, 2003; Hilson, 2004; Campbell, 2009). Jackson (1992) highlights that the overall effect of this downturn was evident in the fall in value of mining by more than 60 percent between 1971 and 1983. Since the early 1980s, there has been a resurging interest in Ghana’s mining sector, bolstered by an elaborate Economic Recovery Program (ERP), which was initiated in 1983. After decades of economic decline, the Government of Ghana jointly initiated the ERP with the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF). The ERP was designed to reduce the country’s debt and improve its competitiveness in trade and foreign investment through a liberalized fiscal and regulatory environment. The mining sector received priority attention in terms of legislative and fiscal reforms (Addy, 1998; Aryeetey et al., 2000; Akabzaa and Darimani, 2001; Amponsah-Tawiah and Dartey-Baah, 2011). The reforms stimulated foreign investment in the mining sector. Capital investments increased substantially during the period of the reforms with a corresponding increase in the number of mine operations. According to Aryee (2001), an estimated $4 billion USD was invested in starting and expanding mineral exploration and/or developing new mines between 1983 and 1998. A government-commissioned paper reported that foreign capital inflows in the sector increased from $165 million USD in 1995 to $1 billion USD in 2012, representing an average annual growth rate of 28 percent (Osei-Assibey, 2016). The mineral sector accounted for about 50 percent and 38.5 percent of foreign capital inflows to the country in the years 2013 and 2014 respectively (GHEITI Report, 2015; Ghana Chamber of Mines and ICMM, 2015). Page | 71 By 1998, there were about 237 mining companies operating in Ghana, 83 of them foreign (Hilson, 2002a). These companies either held concessions, were conducting exploration, or operating active mine projects. Active large-scale mining operations increased from seven in 1986 to 16 in 2005 (Campbell, 2009; Aryee, 2001). The total mineral output grew by 700 percent in 20 years following economic reforms (Hilson, 2002a). Output in gold increased from about 282,299 ounces in 1984 to 2,143,000 ounces in 2005, manganese increased from 267,996 tons to 1,719,589 tons, and diamonds increased from 341,978 carats to 1,065,923 carats over the same period (Campbell, 2009). Output in gold has increased further reaching 4,397,304 ounces in 2014 (ibid). The mineral sector contributes significantly to the economy of Ghana. Together, the mining and quarrying sectors accounted for about six percent of the country’s GDP in 2017. The sector is the leading source of the government’s domestic revenue and foreign exchange earnings. Annual reports from the Ghana Chamber of Mines indicate that the sector paid approximately GHS 2.16 billion in taxes and levies to the Ghana Revenue Authority in 2017. This amount represented 16.3 percent of the total domestic revenue collected by the Authority in that year (Ghana Chamber of Mines, 2018). Export earnings from gold, manganese, diamonds and oil also increased from $108 million USD in 1985 to about $5,141 billion USD in 2013 (Osei-Assibey, 2016). Royalties paid by mining companies in 2005 were estimated at $26.76 million USD, $38.46 million USD in 2006, and $53.80 million USD in 2007 (Aryee and Aboagye, 2008). In addition to direct fiscal contributions, the sector also generates employment for the local workforce. Based on the industry’s own reports, the total Ghanaian workforce hired by the sector stood at 21,670 in 2014, although a recent commodity downturn depressed the hiring capacity of the sector to approximately 11,628 workers in 2016 (Ghana Chamber of Mines, 2014; 2018). On face value, the size of the workforce employed by the sector may be considered insignificant when compared with, for example, the public and civil service sector which employs approximately 700,000 workers. However, what remains indisputable is that labor is better remunerated in the mining sector than many other sectors of the economy (Ghana Statistical Service, 2016). Despite its contribution, public opinion about the net benefits of mining to the country is divided. Industry organizations (e.g. the Ghana Chamber of Mines) and pro-mining scholars argue that mining is an essential economic activity for the country’s growth and development (Addy, 1998; Kapstein and Kim, 2011; Bloch and Owusu, 2012; ICMM and The Ghana Page | 72 Chamber of Mines, 2015). Mining companies and the Ghana Chamber of Mines highlight that the sector’s contribution transcends its fiscal contributions at the national level. They argue that companies do not only help generate central government revenue, they also invest directly in public infrastructure, jobs and supplier chain opportunities at the local level. In contrast, some civil society actors and researchers have questioned the actual contribution of the sector, arguing that mining, especially open-cast mine operations, generates a disproportionately negative social and environmental cost in comparison to what it contributes. They argue that this cost is often externalized to local communities, with devastating consequences for their livelihood systems (Andrews, 2018; Taabazuing et al., 2012; Hilson and Banchirigah, 2009). For these opposing actors, mining operations displace local communities, dismantle their livelihood systems, and invest too little in avoiding or mitigating these impacts. Further to this view, some civil society actors argue that mining has had limited impact on reducing poverty and vulnerability in mining-impacted communities in Ghana (Akabzaa, 2009; Agbesinyale, 2003; Ross, 2001;). In a recent study on Mining Community Benefits in Ghana, Hira et al. (2018; p.1) found “strong perceptions that mining had brought little to no benefit to the communities”. A World Bank study in 2011 concluded that the sector’s overall contribution to the country’s development was disappointing (Ayee, Sⱷreide, Shukla, & Le, 2011). Mining is not the only cause of population displacement in Ghana. During the country’s development history, scholars have highlighted displacement caused by other development projects such as dams and hydropower projects (see, for example, Obour et al 2015; Futa, 2009). Nonetheless, mining in Ghana, as highlighted by Downing (2002a), Terminski, (2012), and Taabazuing et al. (2012), is a frequent cause of displacement, involuntary resettlement, and impoverishment of local communities across the country. A rapid review of corporate websites, supported by data from the Ghana Chamber of Mines, indicates that operational activities at 32 seven mines led to population displacement between 2005 and 2015, and involved an estimated 12,700 persons or 2,540 households.33 A recent United Nations Human Rights review (A/HRC/26/25/Add.5; p.11) of business in Ghana noted the displacement effects of mining on local communities, and the ensuing struggles of previously self-sufficient communities to recover stable livelihoods years after experiencing MIDR.34 32 See note 9 in the introduction chapter 33 See http://www.gsr.com/investors/news/news-details/2013/Golden-Star-Announces-Signing-of-the- Negotiated-Resettlement-Agreement-for-the-Community-of-Dumasi/default.aspx 34 See https://www.ohchr.org/en/issues/business/pages/reports.aspx Page | 73 Fiscal contributions of mining to Ghana's economy are significant. However, when people are displaced for mining projects, what is the cost for locally affected people? Localized negative impacts of mining are but one driver dividing public opinion about the risks and benefits of mining in Ghana. A risk perspective provides a useful entry point for engaging this question. In examining the implications of risks for both business and people, Kemp et al., (2016) note that impoverishment risks caused by mining projects often materialize into business risks. This view is supported by recent research in Ghana. Amoatey et al., (2017, p.29) identified “displacement of communities, high cost of living and lack of community acceptance” as material risks in the Ghanaian mining context. These material risk factors and costs of displacement and impoverishment are evident across the mining regions of the country. These risk factors continue to challenge mining companies and put operations at risk. For civil society and local communities, these risks are disproportionate; companies externalise the cost of mitigating the risks and communities carry the burden. For mining to operate sustainably in Ghana, developers and regulators must bring into perspective the distribution of risk and benefits across stakeholder groups. This is the core of this thesis. During the country’s mining history, the government, mining companies, and other stakeholders have used various response systems to address MIDR problems. In this study, the response systems collectively refer to government policies, regulations, administrative measures and institutional practices. They also include the processes that public institutions apply when conceptualizing, assessing, planning, and mitigating potential adverse impacts of mining on people. For example, the producing members of the Ghana Chamber of Mines reportedly spent approximately $21 million USD in financing livelihood and social infrastructure projects in 2014 (Ghana Chamber of Mines, 2014). The effectiveness of these formal response systems has been questioned (see, for example, Owusu-Koranteng, 2008; Yankson, 2010; Lawson and Bentil, 2014). Questions about the effectiveness of these mechanisms underscore the need to examine them. The next section presents the history of mineral sector policy development in Ghana and implications for MIDR. 4.3 Policy landscape of Ghana’s mining industry: a historical perspective Ghana has undergone successive reforms in mining legislative regimes, with varying implications for mining-affected local communities over time. This section outlines the evolution of mineral sector policy of the country over four periods: (i) the pre-independence Page | 74 colonial period between 1900 and 1957; (ii) the post-independence period from 1957 until the early 1980s; (iii) the economic reform period from 1983 to 2000; and finally (iv), the more recent reforms from 2001 to 2018. This periodisation of Ghana’s mining laws is informed by the works of several scholars with close knowledge about the country’s mining history, notably Jackson (1992), Tsikata (1997), and Hilson (2002a). Across this periodization, Bebbington et al. (2018; p.153) suggests an overall sector governance which has consistently marginalized the broader interests of local communities, although policy constructs at each point in time also offered varying levels of representation of community concerns. 4.3.1 The pre-independence colonial Gold Coast (1900 to 1957) The evolution of Ghana’s mineral sector policy framework can be traced to the advent of British colonial rule and oversight of the country’s mineral sector beginning in the 1900s (Hilson, 2002a). Tsikata (1997) notes that British interest in the country’s mineral resources influenced the formulation and implementation of mineral policy in colonial Ghana. The colonial mineral sector policy agenda aimed at establishing a legal and administrative framework for the sector, ensuring security of tenure for mineral rights holders, helping to manage community relations with companies, generating government revenue, and contributing to preserve the British Empire. With increasing foreign interest in the colony’s mineral reserves, the British colonial administration enacted the Concession Ordinance of 1900, the first official mining law in Ghana. The ordinance regularized land acquisition, fiscal arrangements, compensation negotiation arrangements between mining investors and local chiefs, and guaranteed security of tenure for concession holders (Hilson, 2002a; Tsikata, 1997). Social and environmental impacts of mining received minimal coverage in the ordinance. Hilson (ibid) explains that mining companies operated largely underground, and their impacts on land, surface water, and other local livelihood resources were contained from interfering directly with community livelihoods. With sparse population over vast tracts of land, communities had options to move to other lands if they felt disturbed by mining operations. In addition to operating contained mines, companies negotiated royalties and paid compensation directly to local chiefs and communities (Hilson, 2002a). In commenting on the aims of the colonial mineral sector policies, Hilson (ibid) highlights the significance of its principles on managing community relations, noting that the Concession Ordinance recognized negotiation with local chiefs as the means by which land could be acquired for mining. Page | 75 Historically, chiefs in Ghana assumed full responsibility for promoting community wellbeing and social development. Mineral royalties and other benefits from mining investments provided resources for upholding this responsibility. In the period following independence, changes in legislative regimes governing the mining industry occurred with consequential shifts in royalty arrangements. 4.3.2 Post-independence period from 1957 to 1983 Following independence in 1957, the new government of President Kwame Nkrumah embarked on mineral sector legislative reforms. The government nationalized mineral rights, operations, and the accruing of revenue. Etemad and Salmasi (2003) explain that resource nationalization in most newly independent countries at the time was underpinned by an urgent quest for revenue and claims about sovereign wealth for intergenerational equity. Despite these claims, some scholars observed that the nationalist movement tended to prioritise the centre over the peripheral interests of local communities that were directly impacted by mining (see, for example, Gedicks, 1973; Williams, 1975). In the case of Ghana, post-colonial reforms in mining legislation had at least two significant features, notably, changes in ownership of mineral rights and control over mineral revenue. Nkrumah’s government had an urgent need to strengthen its political legitimacy through investment in social and economic infrastructure. Pushed by resource constraints to realize this objective, the government looked to the mining sector as a readily available source of revenue. In 1959, the government embarked on nationalization of mining operations, taking over full ownership and control of mineral rights and exports. Nationalization was further consolidated by legislative and institutional reforms (Tsikata, 1997). In 1962, the government passed the Minerals Act (Act 123), which vested all mineral resources in the presidency, and provided for state equity of 55 percent in mines operated under private ownership. The Administration of Stool Lands Act (Act 123), 1962, simultaneously passed with the Minerals Act, also replaced direct company-community royalty agreements with state-community royalty sharing agreements. Act 123 established a state authority for collecting and distributing rents from stool lands using a formula predetermined by the state. 35 These reforms effectively centralized mineral revenue and distanced local communities from direct access to this revenue, 35 Refer to Articles 17, 19, and 20 of Act 123 Page | 76 as the state captured local mechanisms and stewardship over mineral revenue (Tsuma, 2010). The new set of laws weakened the negotiation power of local communities with companies as royalties were centrally determined and collected by the government. The state also assumed significant operational responsibilities in mining. Hilson (2002a) points out that a public mining company - the State Mining Corporation (SMC) - was incorporated in 1961 as the government’s mineral investment vehicle. The new state miner took over mining operations that were previously operated by private companies. By 1966, all private mines had been nationalized, except for the Obuasi mine, which was nationalized in 1972 and subsequently incorporated as the Ashanti Goldfields Corporation (Ghana) Ltd (ibid). It is worth noting that changes in the legislative framework and ownership of mines throughout the post-colonial phase occurred without a significant shift in type of mining. Mining operations remained largely underground. Generally, the spatial footprints of mining were contained, without extensive impacts on community livelihoods. However, the ’mining- community’ coexistence was to change, following the Economic Recovery Program (ERP) in the 1980s. 4.3.3 The economic reform period of 1983 to 2000 Aryeetey et al, (2000) reports that the economy of Ghana declined by 6.2 percent by 1982 with devastating social consequences. In part, this decline was precipitated by cycles of military coups d’état, resource nationalism, and general macroeconomic crises in the period leading up to the 1980s. In response to this decline, the government subscribed to, and implemented the ERP in 1983, followed by the Structural Adjustment Program from 1986 to 1991 (Bebbington et al., 2018). Both programs were promoted and financed by the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF). It was noted in section 4.2 that the mining sector was the centre of the government’s reform agenda, and experienced policy and institutional reforms. It is by no means surprising the World Bank plays an influential role in the reforms of the mining sector (Ayisi, 2015). Table 4.1 provides the list of legislative and institutional reforms governing the mining sector of Ghana since 1986. The period of reforms from 1986 to 2000 generated rapid expansion of large-scale mining projects with corresponding displacement of local populations and loss of livelihoods. Page | 77 Table 4.1 Legislation and reforms governing the mining sector in Ghana Reforms Year Minerals and Mining Law, PNDC 153 1986 Mineral Commission Law, PNDC 154 1986 Minerals (Royalties) Regulations, LI1349 1987 Small-scale Gold Mining Law, PNDC 218 1989 Precious Minerals Marketing Corporations Law, PNDC 219 (including the 1989 establishment of the Precious Minerals Marketing Corporation) Minerals and Mining (Amendment) Act (Act 475) 1994 Office of the Administrator of Stool Lands Act (Act 481) 1994 Environmental Protection Agency Act (Act 490) 1994 Drawing up of mining environmental guidelines 1994 Review of mining environmental guidelines 1999 Divestiture of state-owned mines 1992- 1999 Environmental Assessment Regulation, 1999 LI1652 1999 Minerals and Mining Act (Act 703) 2006 Minerals and Mining (Amendment) Act (Act 794) 2010 Minerals and Mining (General) Regulations, LI2173 2012 Minerals and Mining (Support services) Regulations, LI 2174 2012 Minerals and Mining (Compensation and Resettlement) Regulations, LI 2175 2012 Minerals and Mining (Licencing) Regulations, LI 2176 2012 The Minerals and Mining (Health, safety and Technical) Regulations, LI 2182 2012 Minerals and Mining (Explosives) Regulations, LI 2177 2012 Minerals and Mining Policy of Ghana 2014 Minerals and Mining (Amendment) Act (Act 900) 2015 Mineral Development Fund Act (Act 912) 2016 Source: ICMM and Ghana Chamber of Mines (2015). Mining in Ghana – what future can we expect? Updated by the researcher, 2016. For the purposes of this thesis, Table 4-1 lists laws, regulations and policy frameworks that apply directly to social and environmental impacts and include the principal Minerals and Mining Law (PNDCL 153), 1986 that regulates mining operations: The Mineral Commission Law, 1986; the Environmental Protection Agency Law (Act 490), 1994; and their associated guidelines and regulations. The Mineral Commission is the state agency that administers Page | 78 mining operations. The PNDC Law 153 reasserted the vested interest of the state in mineral resources and the state’s right to exercise eminent domain over such resources, including compulsory acquisition of land. Akabzaa (2009) argues that the law and its supporting government policies focused on promoting a friendly investment climate for the mining sector through tax breaks and reductions, exemptions from custom and import duties, royalty variations, liberalizing foreign exchange regime, and allowing the transfer of dividends. The Mineral Commission Law established the Minerals Commission of Ghana as a state regulator of the mining sector; while the Environmental Protection Law established the state agency for regulating the environmental and social impacts of mining. Generally, the reforms in the mineral sector have resulted in long-standing positive outcomes. This is evident in the scale and production outputs of the sector. A review of the mineral concession map of Ghana as at September 2018 shows there were 323 mining companies (both foreign and local) actively holding 92 reconnaissance, 249 prospecting and 92 mining licenses, all at various stages of exploration, development, and operations. 36 The reforms have shifted mine ownership from the state to foreign-owned companies, with the government holding 10 percent minority shares in most of the mines (ICMM and Ghana Chamber of Mines, 2015). Some industry observers consider the fiscal contribution of the sector including the 10 percent shareholding as low and inadequate (Akabzaa, 2009; Darimani, 2007). Ampofo and Adam (2019; p.197) report that there are “about fifteen medium to large- scale operations mining in commercial quantities, in addition to others in the exploration and reconnaissance stages”. These operations are owned mostly by subsidiary companies belonging to multinational mining corporations from Australia, Canada, China, South Africa, and the United States (see, Table 4.2). It is important to note that all the 15 projects, except for the AngloGold Ashanti, are open-cast mines, meaning that they require extensive amounts of land to operate, and by extension have displaced local livelihood systems. Recent production records show this is an increasing trend. Gold production increased from 2,970,079 ounces in 2010 to 3,167,755 ounces in 2014. 36 Based on the Minerals and Mining Act 703 (as amended Act 900), prospecting license is granted for a period not exceeding three years, and renewable after expiration. Mining licenses can be granted for a period not exceeding 30 years and renewable after expiration. Page | 79 Table 4.2 Major mining companies operating in Ghana Company Name Government Type of Location in Ghana Country of origin Annual Share operation output Adamus Resources 10 percent Gold Teleku-Bokazo and Australia 105,215 ounces Nkroful (Western Region) AngloGold Ashanti 1.7 percent Gold Obuasi (Ashanti Region) South Africa 239,052 ounces Chirano Gold Mines 10 percent Gold Chirano (Western Region) Canada 274,683 ounces Ghana Bauxite Company 20 percent Bauxite Awaso (Western Region) China 826,994 tonnes Ghana Manganese 10 percent Manganese Nsuta (Western Region) Australia 1,997,911 Company tonnes Gold Fields Ghana 10 percent Gold Tarkwa and Damang South Africa 785,421 ounces (Western Region) Golden Star Resources 10 percent Gold Prestea and Wassa Canada 330,807 ounces (Western Region) Newmont Ghana 0 percent Gold Kenyasi (Brong Ahafo) USA 699,366 ounces and New Abirem (Eastern Region) Perseus Mining (Ghana) 10 percent Gold Ayanfuri (Central Region) Australia 198,608 ounces Prestea Sankofa Gold 10 percent Gold Prestea (Western Region) Ghana 22,853 ounces Source: Mining in Ghana: What future can we expect? ICMM and Ghana Chamber of Mines, 2015; p.18 Page | 80 The reforms revitalized the mining sector but not without shortcomings. Conditions that triggered or exacerbated the adverse impacts of mining on local communities emerged following the reforms. These included the increasing social and environmental footprint of mining, mine intensification, and change from underground to open-pit mining, all resulting in displacing local communities and exposing them to new levels of poverty. Several scholars highlight that the social risks of mining, including displacement and impoverishment of local populations, increased following the reforms (Schueler et al., 2011; Campbell, 2009; Aubynn, 2003). Amponsah-Tawiah and Dartey-Baah (2011; p.66) argue that the reforms lacked corresponding measures “to accommodate the potential impacts arising from the accelerated growth in the mining industry”. The lack of preparedness to address impacts exposed local communities to harms and allegations of human rights violations. In 2008, the mining industry became the subject of official scrutiny by Ghana’s Human Rights Commission over its alleged human rights violations, including forced displacements and neglect of their responsibilities towards addressing the adverse impacts of their operations (CHRAJ, 2008). Given that these reforms were driven by growth imperatives, it would seem that the regulatory provisions for protecting people against the adverse social and environmental impacts of mining were marginalized and appeared tangential to the reform process. In the period following the reforms, Tsikata (1997) observed that the government had no developed environmental regulatory system until 1994 when the environmental consequences of mining became apparent. Even then, specific regulations to address social impacts of mining took even longer to legislate. A review of the PNDC law 153 revealed a disproportionate emphasis on environmental impacts as against specific social impacts such as displacement and impoverishment of local communities. For instance, the law specifically required proper account of environmental impacts as a condition of grant and revocation of mining leases (Article 46, 4[b]). The same level of account did not exist for the displacement impacts of mining and its associated effects on the loss of income and livelihood systems. Rather than oblige companies to minimize the negative impacts of mine operations on local livelihoods, the law merely requires companies to compensate for such loss. Specific to compensation, Ayisi (2009; p.79) critiqued the law stating that “the main issue was that the compensation system did not recognize the deprivation of the use of land even though many mining rights involving significant surface disturbance were granted for 30 years”. For lands under cultivation, “there was no regard to the loss of expected income and the types of crops”, Page | 81 neither did compensation considered “the nature of the land tenure system and the customary right of the communities with regard to the use of land”. The EPA law, 1994 (Act 490) require companies to conduct environmental impact assessment (EIA) to identify and propose a plan of action for addressing potential project impacts. In Ghana, the EIA process is the default mechanism for assessing social impacts of projects, including land and livelihoods, and no separate requirement for social impact assessment exists. Notwithstanding this, experience in the mining sector and World Bank- funded government projects indicates that developers commonly conduct separate social impact assessment (SIA) or environmental and social impact assessment (ESIA). Under the EIA regulations, companies must consult communities that are potential subjects of displacement and make impact assessment reports public. Bawole’s (2013) research, although focused on oil and gas sector, questions the companies’ engagement process, arguing that the process is mostly rhetoric rather than purposeful in inviting genuine community consultation and consent. In some instances, the consultation practices of mining companies are inadequate. The UN human rights review report (A/HRC/26/25/Add.5) noted, for example, that essential project related information is sometimes transmitted to local people in English, rather than their local language, is limited in distribution, and that consultation takes place in the shortest time possible. The increase in the number of mining companies occurred with a shift in mining technology from underground to open cast. Open-cast mining “greatly increases the surface footprint” of mines bringing with it “new threats to the material and cultural bases of livelihoods” in adjacent areas (Bebbington et al., 2008; p.2891). A single large-scale mine in a geographic area is enough to have major impacts on agricultural land and economic displacement of local people. But when two or several large-scale mines converge in the same geographic region, as is the case in the western region of Ghana, mining does not only displace farmers, but also makes it harder for them to find alternative lands close by. In their study on the impact of mining in the western region of Ghana, Schueler et al. (2011) found that large- scale surface mining accounted for approximately 58 percent of deforestation and 45 percent of loss of farmlands. They concluded that these trends in mining impacts are degrading the resource systems upon which community livelihoods are founded. Page | 82 Girvan (1976) observes that the natural tendency of multinational mining corporations is to remain competitively strong by expanding their resource base and maximizing outputs through operational efficiency. Corporations do this by acquiring mineral rights over large tracts of land sometimes beyond their immediate need, to keep their competitors at bay. It may well be, given the constraining effects of this practice on farmlands, that the corporate economies of scale translate into diseconomy of scale for local communities. Finally, the effects of mineral revenue on broader development outcomes have also been questioned, both at the macro and micro-economic levels. At the macro-economic level, Campbell (2009) argues that the reforms offered excessive fiscal concessions and by so doing reduced the impact of the sector’s growth on government revenue. The reforms lacked accompanying mineral development policy framework, which some scholars argue, is critical in facilitating the translation of mineral revenue into real development outcomes. At the micro level, the government established the Mineral Development Fund in 1992, ostensibly to provide direct financial resources for offsetting harmful mining impacts through targeted investments in mining-impacted localities.37 Yet these resources are typically misdirected away from this intent. The negative impacts of mining and perceived lack of development returns has generated intense community-company conflicts and social movements for change (Aubynn, 2003). In the Western region of Ghana, where large-scale mining is highly concentrated, the Wassa Association of Communities Affected by Mining (WACAM), was incorporated in 1998 as the first community-based group of its kind against mining impacts. The organisation quickly became the centre of local movements and advocacy for the rights of mining-impacted populations and better mining practice. The National Coalition on Mining-Ghana was also formed as a network of over 15 country-based civil society organizations (CSOs) and mining- impacted communities. With technical and financial resourcing from The Third World Network and other aid agencies, the network advocates for better mining practice that 37 The Mineral Development Fund was created by an administrative arrangement to provide financial resources for mitigating impacts of mining. Twenty percent of mineral royalties are paid into the fund. 50 percent of this fund is allocated to state mining agencies for their administrative expenses. The other 50 percent is then allocated to the Office of the Administrator of Stool Lands (OASL). Per the Administrator of Stool Lands Act (Act, 481) 1994 the OASL retains 10 percent of its allocation for administrative expenses; and then distributes the rest as follows: 45 percent to traditional authorities and 55 percent to the local government assembly for development in mining-affected communities. Page | 83 adequately addresses negative impacts of mining, while seeking to enhance its development functions.38 In the context of mining-induced displacement, these civil society perspectives help to illuminate impoverishment risks as well as the policy and programmatic initiatives for addressing such risks (Kemp et al., 2017). 4.3.4 Recent mining sector policy reforms (2001 to 2018): an overview Since the year 2000, the government has ramped up mining sector policy reforms aimed at positioning the country as a better investment destination for foreign capital. In the light of growing community resistance against mining, these reforms also include policy attempts to address the negative impacts of mining. Table 4.1 summarize key mining sector policy developments since 1986. As shown in the table, ten separate regulatory and policy initiatives occurred between 2006 and 2014. Significantly, these instruments included notable landmarks with regards to MIDR. Foremost, a new Mining and Mineral Law (Act 703) was adopted in 2006. A key feature of this law relates to the principles for compensation, making it easier for mineral right holders to determine which assets to compensate for. In 2012, specific legislative instruments (LIs) were enacted to give full effect to this law. These instruments included one on Compensation and Resettlement (LI 2175) dedicated specifically to addressing MIDR problems. This LI 2175 is the first regulation of its kind focused on addressing MIDR problems in the country. In fact, Vivoda et al., (2017b) suggest that the LI is the only one of its kind in the world specific to the mining industry. The law combined with the regulation, provide some directives on how companies ought to respond to various components of resettlement. Another landmark development is the recent adoption of a Minerals and Mining development policy in November 2014, after a century of mining without one. This policy articulates the government’s intent and framework for using mining to catalyse the country’s sustainable development agenda. A review of these recent developments reveals some improvements over the previous legislative framework. This is particularly evident in the principles they express for conceptualizing and addressing key resettlement activities, for example, physical relocation, compensation and livelihood reconstruction. 38 see http://twnafrica.org/ncom.html, Page | 84 The old Mining and Mineral Law of 1986 did not recognize or provide procedures for planning and implementing physical relocation of mining-displaced households. Project impacts on immovable structures including dwellings and business facilities were addressed only through cash compensation, with no regard for supporting investments towards improving community well-being. Given this regulatory loophole, mining companies conducted physical relocation at will, based on their internal guidance and operating procedures. This unregulated practice led to serious company-community conflicts, as companies mostly failed to address the full scale of impacts from physical displacement. In contrast, the new law and its subsidiary LI 2175 include legal provisions and procedures for conducting physical relocation in a way that conforms to minimum regulations for town planning. At the time of the passing of this law, the then minister responsible for mines believed that the law would protect the rights of displaced people. He said that “resettlement of inhabitants safety valve” had been built into the bill, and that a future resettlement program “has to conform with our national Constitution and no rights would then be infringed upon unnecessarily because the resettlement has to be at the whims and caprices of the mining company concerned”. “Such resettlement also has to conform to our town planning laws and regulations”, he added. (Ghana. Parliamentary debates. Official report, Parliament of Ghana. 27 July 2005; Vol.50, col.2654). On compensation, the current law includes key principles, and expands the scope of impacts that must be compensated for in the event of mining-induced displacement. Section 73 of Act 703 reasserts the right of lawful owners and occupiers of land to negotiate and claim compensation for impacts on their land. Section 74 expanded the scope of impacts from previous limitations to loss of or damage to immovable property, cropped land, and loss of expected income to include, “deprivation of the use or a particular use of the natural surface of the land or part of the land” (p.35). The recognition of loss of right or deprivation of use of land as a loss worth compensating for is a significant development. Before the current law, mining companies were only required to compensate for crops on actively cultivated land and/or immovable physical structures. They were not required to compensate for depriving people the right of use of their lands. In other words, the loss of access to fallow land by affected-persons was not to be compensated for. With the new Mining Act, compensation is required for deprivation of use of land, including fallow land. On livelihoods, the law recognizes the need to conduct relocation with due regard for socio-economic wellbeing. Companies are required to conduct resettlement on “suitable land Page | 85 with due regard to economic well-being and social and cultural values” (p.35). This principle is reinforced in the minerals and mining policy, whereby companies are encouraged “to develop sustainable means of livelihoods for displaced persons and [to] demonstrate that such livelihoods provide equal or greater benefits than those previously enjoyed” by displaced persons (Ministry of Lands and Natural Resources, 2014; p.50). These policy sets reinvigorate the relevance of land as a critical input for livelihoods recovery among displaced households. Moreover, the government also adopted the Mineral Development Fund Act (Act 912), 2016 to provide legal prescriptions on how mineral royalties should be utilized to support community development in areas where mining takes place. This act seeks to curtail potential for misapplication of mineral royalties through earmarking for community development schemes. At the time of completing the research, this act had not received presidential assent. The effects of these new policy and regulatory frameworks are unfolding and will become clearer with further research. In the meantime, there are notable shortcomings. Kidido et al. (2015) made some preliminary observations. They argue that whilst the law recognizes deprivation of use of land as an impact deserving compensation, it fails to provide guidance on methods for valuing deprivation of use of land and the rightful recipients of compensation for this loss. They conclude that the lack of an operational framework for implementing deprivation of use of land created ambiguities for mining companies with potential for conflicts over compensation. From the discussion above, it can be concluded that policy frameworks in Ghana have over time resulted in generating foreign interest and investment in the mining sector. This outcome is manifested in the increased number of companies, mine operations, mine intensification, and the growing frontiers of mining across the country. At the same time, social and environmental impacts of mining have intensified even in the face of generally improved policy settings. Indeed, MIDR in Ghana, like many other countries around the world, remains a significant undercurrent of impoverishment among mining-displaced households. The performance of these ‘improved’ policy settings measured against existing trends in mining- induced displacement and impoverishment in the country is the focus of this study. The focus is on the Akyem gold mine in the Birim North District of Ghana as a case study. In the following sections, mining in the Birim North District of Ghana is discussed and the description of the case study mine included. Using this case project, the study examines on-the-ground Page | 86 operationalization of the regulatory framework as well as the institutional roles relevant to MIDR in Ghana. The results are discussed in Chapters Six and Seven. 4.4 Mining and livelihoods in the Birim North District The Birim North District is one of the 216 decentralized administrative districts in Ghana. It is located in the eastern region of Ghana with a total land area of about 566 square kilometres. Historically, the district was considered as predominantly rural, deprived, and one of the least developed in the country. In 2010, official government statistics put the population of the district at 78,907, with an even gender ratio. Ninety percent of the population live in rural settlements (Ghana Statistical Service, 2014). A district census report shows that the total number of households in the district is 18,511, with an average household size of 4.2 persons. Fifty-nine (59) percent of households live in single-room occupancy. Quality of housing is generally poor and nearly half (44 percent) of the population live in dwellings that are made of mud-bricks and earth walls. In 2010, only 6.5 percent of the population had attained high school education (ibid). These indicators generally point to a context characterized by poverty and vulnerability. Before mining, company records noted a high incidence of poverty in the district (60 percent) with an additional 20 percent of people living in extreme poverty (Newmont, 2011). Livelihoods in the district are heavily based on agriculture. Seventy-four (74) percent of households in the district engage in subsistence agriculture, cultivating both food (e.g. plantain, cassava, and maize) and commercial tree (e.g. cocoa, oil palm and citrus) crops (Ghana Statistical Service, 2014). Government reports indicate that 90 percent of households in the rural settings of the district can be considered as subsistence agricultural households who own and work on small farming plots. At the district level, farm sizes averaged 1.22 hectares (3.01 acres). Among households displaced by the project it was not uncommon to encounter much smaller land holdings of approximately 0.6 hectares (1.5 acres). Along with agriculture, households keep poultry, livestock and sometimes migrate for work to complement income and nutritional needs. Company records suggest that six (6) percent of households were considered as seasonal residents, people who migrated in and out of the district for work and complementary livelihood activities (Newmont, 2011). Some household members, especially youth, engage in small-scale gold mining, evidence that the district is geologically endowed Page | 87 with mineral deposits.39 The arrival of the Akyem mine marked the first large-scale gold mining operation in the recent history of the district. Figure 4-1 Map of Birim North District, Ghana Researcher’s construct, 2015 (with data from Africa Data Sampler Digital chart) 4.5 The Akyem Gold Mine Project: the case study mine The Akyem project is located at New Abirem, the district capital of Birim North District, approximately 111 miles northwest of Accra, the capital city of Ghana. The project is owned and operated by Newmont Golden Ridge Ltd, a subsidiary of the Denver-based Newmont Mining Corporation (“Newmont”). As shown in table 4.2, Newmont operates two mines in Ghana, Ahafo and Akyem, the case study mine. Put together, annual output of gold from both projects is estimated at 699,366 ounces, including 470,000 ounces from Akyem.40 Following a recent merger with Goldcorp Inc. (a Canada-based mining company), Newmont is now 39 In Ghana, persons between the ages of 15 and 35 are considered as youth (Ministry of Youth and Sports, Ghana, 2010) 40 The figure represents the company’s estimates as at December 2016. See http://www.newmont.com/operations-and-projects/africa/akyem-ghana/operation-facts/default.aspx. Accessed, Saturday February 10, 2018. Page | 88 reported to be the largest gold producer in the world. Bury (2004; p.80) notes that the company has a track record of being the “the lowest cost producer of gold in the world”. In 2002, Newmont acquired an exploration license over demarcated areas in the district from the Government of Ghana. According to Blochert (2006; p.169), land in Ghana is the country’s “most valuable asset and the foundation of the national resource base”. For a livelihood context that is founded on subsistence agriculture, the company’s acquisition set in motion a long process of project intervention in a localized rural setting, isolated conflicts, negotiations over assets and livelihoods losses and needs, and a constant push to balance the interest of mining with the livelihood concerns of local communities especially on land and agriculture. Lands and farms belonging to the local population in eight communities and adjoining farmsteads became the basis for transaction and relationship building between Newmont and local communities. These communities include New Abirem, Old Abirem, Mamanso, Afosu, Yayaaso, Adausena, Hweakwae, Ntronang, and about six scattered farmsteads. At first the company’s exploration activities co-existed with farming activities with fewer impacts. After almost a decade of successful exploration, the company confirmed potential gold reserves of about 7.7 million ounces in the area with 12 to 17 years mine lifespan, and the process of large-scale land acquisition began for the development and operation of the Akyem mine. Page | 89 Figure 4-2 Akyem mine infrastructure layout and local communities Source: Newmont EIS, 2008 By 2012, the company had acquired a total of 1,907 hectares of land to support direct mining activities as well as the construction and operation of mine infrastructure (Newmont, 2011). This acquisition represents about 3.36 percent of the district’s land area. While this percentage may appear small, the impact of such acquisition in a context of land-based livelihood can have Page | 90 devastating consequences. As noted in the company’s own records most of the land acquired was occupied by local communities who lived and farmed on it. Land acquisition for development and operation of the Akyem mine resulted in displacement and dispossession of a local population with adverse consequences on local livelihoods. Company records indicate that a total of 1,686 households were displaced through its direct land acquisition activities. The project impacted the eight (8) nearby villages in a major way. Mining is an uneven process, and the decisions made by the proponent can determine who gets moved, irrespective of geological factors. In this case, of the eight (8) villages in the direct area of impact of the project, the Yayaaso village and surrounding farmsteads (see figure 4.2) were physically and economically displaced, while farmers living in the other 7 were mostly displaced economically. Each of the households experienced physical and/or economic displacement, meaning that they lost either dwellings, farmlands, business structures or an accumulation of these impacts. About 340 previously resident households at Yayaaso and nearby farmsteads were displaced physically and lost their homes and other immovable infrastructure. The negotiations for, compensation and subsequent acquisition of land by the company need to be understood in the context of land ownership and tenure arrangements in the Akyem area. Land ownership and tenure in Ghana is governed by a hybrid system of formal and customary practices (Ministry of Lands and Forestry, 1999). Whilst the former system is based on enacted legislation, the latter “draws from the customs, norms and traditions of a given” ethno-tribal and family groups (Yeboah and Shaw, 2013; p. p.23). In the light of this system, the national land policy of Ghana (1999) identifies three types of land ownership in the country: public/state lands, private lands, and vested lands. Public lands, as defined in the policy (1999; p.2), refer to lands that are “compulsorily acquired by the government through the invocation of the appropriate legislation, vested in the President and held in trust by the state” for the people of Ghana; whereas private lands include “lands held in trust for the community or group by a stool or skin as a symbol of traditional authority, or by a family”. 41 Various policy instruments (see, for example, the national land policy,1999) refer to the role of customary authorities as stewards over land and land rights in their respective traditional jurisdictions. 41 The skin or stool refers to the Customary authority of the group normally lead by a king or Chief and a cabinet of clan and divisional heads or elders. Page | 91 Vested lands are “a form of split ownership between the state and the traditional ownership”. A recent World Bank-commissioned report (2017; p.110) noted that “an estimated 80 percent of land in Ghana is under the control of customary authorities and subject to the continued application of various customary tenure rules”. Land ownership and tenure arrangement among the Akans including the Akyems is predominantly governed by customary practices (Mireku et al, 2016), bringing to focus the significant role of chiefs in land matters including land acquisition activities for large-scale mining. In Akyem, the Chiefs of the Adausena, Abirem and Afosu stools as well as the heads of land-owning families exercise authority and control over lands under their respective constituencies. As stewards over land and land use, they hold allodial rights over land, allocate land to individuals and groups, determine land-use arrangements, and in some instances, help in resolving disputes over land. Company-commissioned studies noted that individual ownership of land is uncommon in the area, rather people may acquire land by lease, rental, share tenancy, and inheritance (Newmont, 2011). Ownership and user rights can be held for a defined period or in perpetuity and passed down through inheritance. Given the matrilineal lineage of Akans, women as much as men can be allocated land by their matrilineal kin, although Quisumbinget al (2001) observed that they are frequently excluded from land inheritance. While farmers in Akyem have engaged in small scale cash cropping over the last three decades, these customary practices of land tenure have not resulted in the alienation of land rights or commercialization of farmlands but have instead continued to operate within the boundaries of traditional land relations in the area. The stability in land tenure and relations is particularly important in a subsistence context such as Akyem where access to land and forest resources are critical determinants of household livelihood decisions especially cropping strategies (Yelsang, 2013). Mining, as observed by some scholars, do not only lead to displacement of people but also the negation of these rights even in context where laws and regulations exist for assessing, evaluating and managing the impacts of land acquisition and resettlement for industrial mining purposes (see, for example, Kidido et al., 2015; Garibay et al., 2012) Page | 92 In the Ghanaian regulatory context, mining companies are required first to assess the scale and magnitude of impacts of their land acquisition activities and to plan and mitigate these impacts. Like many mining jurisdictions, the preparation of an EIA is a legal requirement. Section 18(1) of the Minerals and Mining Act, 2006 Act (703) as amended, 2015 (Act, 900) states “Before undertaking an activity or operation under a mineral right, the holder of the mineral right shall obtain the necessary approvals and permits required from the Forestry Commission and the Environmental Protection Agency for the protection of natural resources, public health and the environment”. An EIA is a mandatory step towards complying with this provision. Based on the laws of Ghana, Newmont commissioned a series of social and environmental impact assessment studies along with its feasibility and design studies of the mine. Along with these studies, the company initiated regular consultations with communities and other stakeholders. A separate social impact assessment study was completed in 2010 and provided baseline information about the scale and magnitude of potential impacts that could result from displacement. Subsequently, the company initiated a process of negotiation with diverse stakeholder groups about project impacts and mitigation measures, paid cash compensation to eligible households, provided resettlement housing to those who were physically displaced, and implemented a land-based livelihood support for displaced households to assist them towards improving their livelihoods. As noted in section 4.3 the Minerals and Mining Act (2006) of Ghana defines the scope of compensation as including project impacts relating to loss of access to land, crops, immovable structures, and deprivation of use of land. These impacts constituted the basis of the company’s negotiations with local communities. It must be noted that the Ghanaian laws lack explicit requirements for livelihood restoration or addressing vulnerability among mining- displaced households. The Minerals and Mining (Compensation and Resettlement) Regulations only require developers to resettle mine-displaced people on “suitable alternative land and the resettlement shall have regard to the economic well-being and sociocultural values of the persons to be resettled, with the objective to improve the livelihoods and standards of living of those persons”. Notwithstanding this gap, the scope of the company’s impact mitigation measures included measures for assisting displaced households to recover stable livelihoods. These measures are discussed in Chapter Six. As will be explained, the decision by the company to include support for livelihood restoration programs was a response to the Page | 93 company’s subscription to international social safeguards and performance standards on DIDR, especially the IFC performance standards. The company’s sustainability and social engagement policy states inter alia that its “land acquisition is conducted in compliance with applicable laws, regulations, and international best practice as defined by the International Finance Corporation (IFC) performance standards for resettlement, compensation, and livelihood restoration activities” (Newmont, 2014; p.2). By mid-2011, the company had concluded negotiations with local communities and their representatives on all the compensable impacts and other mitigation measures. Implementation of these measures followed along with the construction of major mining infrastructure. Impacted households were compensated for crops, immovable structures, and land deprivation. Chiefs and landowners received compensation for deprivation of use of land. Those who lost dwellings also received newly constructed houses at a newly established resettlement village. Company records show that about 240 physically displaced households received new housing, together with cash to support their movement to the ‘new’ village. Months before movement began, the company commenced implementation of livelihood restoration measures, including a farm-reestablishment program complemented by a food basket support program for identified vulnerable households (Newmont, 2010). From the company’s perspective these measures were designed and implemented to offset the adverse impacts of its land acquisition on livelihood assets and activities. The livelihood restoration measures were also designed to assist households to recover acceptable livelihoods. As the results of this study will show (Chapter Six), the objectives of these measures were far from being realized. 4.6 Chapter summary Based on the context described above, this study focuses on exploring the different dimensions of mining, displacement, and involuntary resettlement as it occurred in the Akyem area. In particular, how households in Akyem experienced displacement and the measures that were implemented to mitigate the impacts constitute the primary concerns of the research. The context as described and the different factors influencing MIDR in Ghana constituted the basis for the research design as presented in chapter two above. Page | 94 CHAPTER FIVE 5.0 HOUSEHOLD LIVELIHOODS NEEDS IN MIDR: A CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK 5.1 Introduction Following the literature review (see Chapter Three) and considering the research context in Chapter Four, this chapter presents the conceptual framework used as a guide in framing, analyzing and discussing the findings of the research. The framework is used to emphasize the human scale at which displacement events occur, and the household as the social unit where resettlement activities and outcomes are experienced. Four conceptual themes, drawn from sociology and development studies are used to inform the framework: the UK Department for International Development’s (DFID) (1999) Sustainable Livelihoods Framework (SLF); Amartya Sen’s (1999; 2009) Capabilities Approach; and the “Inhabited Institutions” Approach drawn from the work of Hallett and Ventresca (2006). These conceptual devices are mutually reinforcing and provide the lens for examining the different perspectives and roles of various social actors in resettlement risks and reconstruction efforts. It must be noted that the SLF is used in the thesis only as a conceptual device - not in an evaluative sense – to show the various ways by which local livelihoods can be disrupted in displacement settings such as large-scale mining. The fourth theme, Habermas’ (1984) “Communicative Action”, is deployed in section 5.4 to help conceptualize potential areas of intersections between the various dimensions of MIDR. Consistent with the conceptual framework, the data as presented and analysed in the next chapters are largely expressed with the view to highlighting household perspectives. 5.2 Household livelihoods needs in MIDR: a conceptual framework The conceptual framework is informed by two key elements of the study: first, the research problem, which identifies and characterizes the status of households in contemporary resettlement policy and practice; second, the focus of the research questions, which are centred on scoping livelihood reconstruction needs with respect to resettlement policy and institutional practice. These elements underscore the significance of human dimensions and institutional factors in shaping MIDR policy, practice and outcomes. In the literature review for example, the roles of resettlement consultants, community relations departments, and ad hoc steering committees at different times in a typical livelihood restoration program were highlighted. The review also noted the resourcing challenges between operations departments and community Page | 95 relations departments in relation to corporate budgets for addressing livelihood issues. In some respects, the level of disjointedness among actors and processes may partly explain the continuing poor performance of resettlement programs in terms of identifying and incorporating the interests of displaced households. Against this backdrop, understanding the various dimensions of the research problem requires an examination of the human and institutional factors that condition livelihood reconstruction efforts of displaced households. Based on the research problem, the research addressed only three selected dimensions of MIDR; namely, the household domain; the policy domain; and the institutional domain. Each dimension is marked by a secondary question. The secondary questions helped to explore the influence of the structure and agency of the various domains on the household livelihood reconstruction process. In the subsequent parts of this section, the conceptual framework is presented in two components. The first component is presented in Section 5.3, and provides the theoretical lens for understanding the livelihood reconstruction in MIDR with respect to the individual structure and agency of the identified domains. For this component, the framework draws on various SLFs to conceptualize the household domain (Carney, 1998; Ellis, 2000; Bebbington, 1999; UNDP, 1999). In deploying the SLF, the researcher acknowledges its limitations in engaging issues of power, power relations and the processes of economic globalization (Scoones, 2009) which are relevant when trying to understand the mediating influence of institutions and organizations on household livelihood strategies in industrial mining settings. In negotiations for resettlement benefits, for example, power asymmetry may become apparent as much as institutions may fail to guarantee adequate protection for affected people (Mares, 2012; Price, 2009). Against these dimensions, the framework applies Hallett and Ventresca’s (2006) “Inhabited Institutions Approach” to better understand the social-institutional factors in MIDR settings as they affect livelihood reconstruction efforts. The second component (Section 5.4) explores the existing and potential relationships between household livelihood on one hand and the policy and institutional context on the other. In doing this, the framework borrows from Habermas’ (1984) concepts of society as ‘lifeworld’ and ‘systems world’. These concepts are used only as descriptors to explore the relationships between households as a marker of ‘lifeworld’ and the policy and institutional context as ‘systems world’. It has to be noted that the policy and institutional context is marked as system worlds with full recognition that institutions are not only made up of systems, but people as well. For this reason, the lifeworld Page | 96 and systems world constructs are not static exclusive markers; they are dual constructs and intersect. People may work in an institution – which has features of the systems world – while at the same time, have their primary relationships in the lifeworld. This recognition allows for examining not just organizational procedures but also relationships within and across the constructs. 5.3 Exploring post-displacement livelihoods in MIDR This component of the conceptual framework is used to explore the effects of structure and human agency within the MIDR domains on the livelihood reconstruction process. As described in the literature review chapter, MIDR policy and practice occur within organizational settings, including government regulatory bodies and mining corporations. To understand how policy and practice condition the post-resettlement livelihood reconstruction process, it is instructive to account for the role of structure and human attributes. In particular, the actors, actions, and interactions in each domain and how they produce meaning and processes that shape livelihood reconstruction are relevant to the scope of this thesis. The diagram below depicts three circles, each representing household context, policy platforms, and institutional actors. Based on the constructivist perspective, each domain is considered as a unique social context with a subculture that influences how actors in that domain comprehend and respond to livelihood reconstruction. This help to explore and deduct inferences in respect of the influence of each domain on the livelihood reconstruction process. For a case study, Yin (2012; p.145) considers these individual units of analysis as “nested units within the main unit” which helps to bring depth to the study. Page | 97 Figure 5-1 A framework for exploring post-resettlement livelihood reconstruction in MIDR Researcher’s construct, 2015 5.3.1 Household context In this domain, the context of household livelihood reconstruction is explored using key concepts from various SLFs (Carney, 2002, 1998; Ellis, 2000; Bebbington, 1999; UNDP, 1999). The framework relies on the SLF for two reasons. First, such livelihood frameworks have multivariate qualities (Scoones, 2009), which provide the theoretical lens to explore the structure, dynamics, and context of post-resettlement livelihood reconstruction. Second, livelihood methodologies applied in the context of displacement and resettlement, enable multiple-level analytical consideration of livelihood reconstruction (Chimhowu and Hulme, 2006; McDowell, 2002). By applying these methodologies, the nuances of household dynamics, asset transformations, livelihood strategies, and “input-strategy-outcome” processes were collected and analyzed. In Figure 5.1 above, the household context is represented by secondary research question one. Secondary question one is centred on understanding how displaced populations go about reconstructing their livelihoods. According to McDowell (2002), understanding livelihood reconstruction includes an analysis of both the facilitating and constraining factors relating to the process. Across the various livelihood frameworks, the structure of a household livelihood is constituted by its access to and control of assets. Assets are taken as conceptually equivalent to livelihood capitals and include all “productive, social, and locational” resources Page | 98 that “determine the opportunity set of options for livelihood strategies (the household’s revealed behaviour)” (Siegel, 2005, p.6). Generally, there are five categories of livelihood capitals: social, natural, human, physical, and financial assets (Carney, 2002; DFID, 1999).42 Closely related to assets are household capabilities. Capabilities include education, skills, as well as social and economic arrangements at their disposal of people which allows them to translate assets into productive activities and to attain “human functioning” (Sen, 1999, p.153; Bebbington, 1999). For this reason, the interview questions for households in this study were centred on household asset holdings, livelihood experiences and strategies following displacement and resettlement. The human agency in household livelihood development is manifest in the decision- making processes as well as the strategies and activities that people undertake towards attaining livelihood security. According to Sen (1999, p.4), the “free agency of people” is both constitutive and instrumental in enhancing their substantive freedoms.43 Agency includes capabilities and opportunities to function, to engage in activities, to exchange, and to participate in social and economic activities. In this research, decision making drivers, livelihood strategies, activities, and notions of livelihood security are the reference points for understanding agency in relation to livelihood reconstruction. In the livelihood reconstruction process, multiple human factors may impact upon structure and agency. For instance, given a portfolio of assets, resources and capabilities, households may engage in self-provisioning through activities, exchange, and resource allocation (Ellis, 2000). In self-provisioning, households make decisions. Such decisions may relate to choice of livelihood activities to engage in and/or how to allocate resources towards fulfilling predetermined notions of livelihood security and aspirations. These predetermined notions may be subject to individual or group interests, and driven by economic and/or moral imperatives. Similarly, individual or group motives, incentives, gender and socioeconomic considerations among other reasons, may influence the household decision making process 42 Social capital includes social networks and relationships whom individuals within the household or the household as a unit may draw claims from or reciprocate claims to. Natural capitals include the natural endowment of land and ecosystems households have rights to and/or can access. Natural capitals are usually common property resources and include land, grazing pastures, rivers, forests, wild fruits, and bush meat. Human capital includes individual capabilities, education, skill, labor and good health. Physical assets include homesteads, vehicles, and farm equipment. Financial assets include disposable income, cash savings, jewellery, stored fabrics, animals, poultry, and so on. 43 Substantive freedoms in this thesis is borrowed from Sen (1999) and simplified as household livelihood Page | 99 (Rakodi, 2002; Bernstein et al., 1992). These factors inform the analysis of household livelihood structure and agency in this thesis. 5.3.2 Policy and regulatory context Secondary question two focused on understanding the role and influence of global and national resettlement frameworks, policies, and standards on the livelihood reconstruction process of households. Global resettlement policies and national regulations play key mediating roles in the way resettlement unfolds in a typical project setting. By their very nature, they extend formal responsibilities and obligations on the part of project proponents to assess impoverishment risks and to take steps to address them (Szablowski, 2002). It is expected that key elements of these policies including rules, directives and procedures, order and moderate the behaviour of proponents, and by so doing, constitute the basis upon which official actors decide or justify decisions about planning, resourcing, and managing resettlement programs. Sarat and Scheingold (2005) argue that the structural elements of laws and the meaning people make of them are replete with human and institutional factors that are worth examining. In examining the policy domain, the research focused on understanding the extent to which global and country resettlement policies and standards influence formal response mechanisms and regulate official decisions about livelihood reconstruction of households in the study context. 5.3.3 Institutional context Secondary question three focuses on institutional processes and factors as they relate to livelihood reconstruction in MIDR. Policy outcomes partly reflect the institutional processes that govern their implementation (de Wet, 2004). The literature reviewed in Chapter Three observed that contemporary resettlement policies and institutional practices overlook material issues at the household level. To understand the underlying factors of this problem, this thesis draws on the work of Hallett and Ventresca (2006) on the “Inhabited Institutions Approach” to examine the role and influence of institutional actors who hold formal responsibilities in relation to livelihood reconstruction in mining. This approach conceptualizes institutional bureaucracy as part of social interactions that gives “force and meaning” to institutional activities. The meaning people draw from organizational processes is a product of “situated interactions”, but is also shaped by the Page | 100 immediate and broader organizational systems that “provide, authorize, and organize the elements of on-going activity” (ibid; p.227). This feature of the “inhabited” approach is the concept that the researcher uses to understand how people in organizations interpret and act upon MIDR policies, regulations, industry norms, internal organization standards, and behaviour in relation to livelihood reconstruction. Considering “situated interactions” in MIDR, issues about power and information asymmetry, for example, may become apparent in negotiations as stakeholders exercise authority over others. The approach also includes some methodological recommendations for a sceptical stance of enquiry. Rather than accept typically assumed narratives about the structure and meaning of institutions, the researcher is encouraged to use “a variety of empirical data to reveal a complexly-textured institutional environment” (Hallett and Ventresca, 2006; p.228). Thus, Hallett and Ventresca recommend the use of multiple data collection methods to adequately understand the complexities of organizations. For example, it is common for government regulators in developing countries to assume that multinational mining companies (MNCs) will self-regulate in a way that resonates with the laws and regulations in their countries of origin where regulations are comparatively stronger and more effective. This approach enables the researcher to explain why this is not always the case. While each of the three domains above can be examined separately, it is often the case that the process of mining-induced displacement and resettlement, and the impoverishment that follows is the result of the combined effect of the influences, interactions and relationships that traverse the various domains. Given these multiple interactions, the second component of the conceptual framework provides for exploring interactions and relationships across these domains with the aim of finding common grounds for reconciling perspectives on impoverishment risks and reconstruction. 5.4 Post-displacement livelihood reconstruction: towards ‘communicative action’ The first component of the conceptual framework provides a theoretical lens for studying the influence of individual structural and human factors in each identified domain of MIDR as they relate to the household livelihood reconstruction process. This second component enables us to explore the relationships and interaction between these domains, with emphasis on a cooperative and supportive process that may support better livelihood reconstruction Page | 101 experiences. In this thesis, these processes within and among these domains for better livelihood reconstruction experiences of displaced households are conceptually aligned with what Habermas (1984) described as “communicative action”. “Communicative action relies on a cooperative process of interpretation in which participants relate simultaneously to something in the objective, the social, and the subjective worlds, even when they thematically stress only one of the three components in their utterances” (Habermas, 1984; p.120) These relationships are explored using the concepts of lifeworld and systems world, noting some consistencies with the “inhabited institutions approach”. Not only does the ‘systems world’ of organizations provide structure, codes, and procedures for social interaction, they are also inhabited by people “and propelled forward by interactions that provide them with force and meaning” (Hallett and Ventresca, 2006; p.229). In this thesis, lifeworld refers to the household and livelihood space and is characterized by the ‘informal’ and unofficial subculture of everyday life of project-impacted persons in mining and resettlement. The actors in the policy and institutional space on the other hand are marked as systems world and characterized by a subculture of ‘formalized’ procedures, standards, prescriptions, systems, and norms, and are often governed by standardized logics of legitimacy and behavior. In his book on industrial sociology, Turner (1971) highlights the influence of subcultures as conduits of knowledge and observes that every organization has a subculture which is replete with meaning making processes based on information, understanding, experiences, and context. In MIDR, each of these worlds is preoccupied with different goals, and a different sense of legitimacy, and is characterized by different logics of planning and delivery. Another level of analytic difference between these worlds is the context within which they operate as well as the processes that order their behaviour patterns. Notwithstanding, the better livelihood reconstruction process is a common space for both worlds, and requires a cooperative and interactive understanding and action. Through communicative interactions, different stakeholders can generate rationalized actions that respond to individual goals with an inherent consensual understanding and balance with competing interest. Rationalized actions may be Page | 102 instrumental and programmatic or strategic to facilitate decision making (Habermas, 1984). In figure 5.2 below, the framework re-presents the identified domains of MIDR with particular emphasis on their relationships and intersections. The explanatory notes that follow the diagram point to the need for communicative action. Figure 5-2 Framework for exploring interactive relationship between lifeworld and systems world in MIDR Researcher’s construct, 2015 5.4.1 The lifeworld of displaced households As social units of production and reproduction, self-provisioning exercised within the context of asset holdings, human functionings, and vulnerability to shocks is a minimum goal of households. Scott (1976, p.6) frames this goal as “subsistence ethic” which is firmly “rooted in the economic and social exchanges”, arrangements and choices that households engage in. To this extent, the legitimacy of households relies on their ability to satisfy and sustain this requirement and to reassert their identity as part of a larger community. Displacement and resettlement have transformative impacts on asset portfolios, induce social change, and expose households to new levels of impoverishment (Bebbington, et al., 2008; Bebbington, 2000), but do not necessarily change this minimal requirement. Any effort Page | 103 towards livelihood reconstruction, this thesis argues, must take into account not just this requirement but also the implications of these transformative impacts on the day-to-day lifeworld of households. 5.4.2 The systems world of MIDR policy and institutions In contrast to the lifeworld of households, multinational mining corporations and investments are profit-making ventures. In developing countries, guaranteed security of tenure, fiscal returns on investments, and revenue sharing arrangements, among others, underlie the legitimacy of companies and their relationships with host governments (Ayisi, 2009; Bosson and Varon, 1977). In addition, governments owe their legitimacy to fulfilling the social objectives of their people. The systems world of companies and governments is marked with official structures, standards, and norms, within their immediate and wider institutional settings. Organizations formulate structures and processes to perform functional imperatives, and evaluate these processes relative to their contribution to maintaining and sustaining the system (Habermas,1987). Yet individuals inhabit organizations and their actions and inactions may or may not necessarily represent the organizations. Adding to these human behaviors, other contextual factors of the mining industry have implications for the way companies act. Following Owen and Kemp (2015), the literature review section highlights the implications of ‘brownfield effects’, global metal prices, and the typical mine life cycle on the decisions mining companies make on land access and resettlement. Although these contextual, systemic, and human agencies have implications for the industry’s response to livelihood reconstruction, they are quite removed from the day-to- day lifeworld of households, the primary units of MIDR. This thesis explores how the systems world can be further reoriented towards the lifeworld – the human scale dimensions of resettlement policy and practice. 5.5 Chapter summary The focus of the research questions on understanding ‘how’, reveals the emphasis of the thesis on processes (rather than outcomes) as they occur in a socio-engineering space such as large- scale mining, and the multi-dimensional implications of that space for the mine and people alike, and specifically, the livelihood reconstruction efforts of mining-displaced households. In the livelihoods literature, households are the central focus of livelihoods development. Page | 104 Through the lens of social constructivism, an in-depth enquiry into that space requires specialized focus on both the structural and human elements of MIDR. Recognizing the import of these elements, the conceptual framework draws on sociological (including industrial sociology) underpinnings to examine structural and human scale conditions of MIDR. The framework recognizes that the science and practice of MIDR, can be improved by reorienting the scope of resettlement systems - policies, norms, knowledge, responsibilities, and processes - towards a stronger focus on the household as a primary unit of engagement. The framework as outlined above provides for both deductive and inductive logics of enquiry. In other words, the framework is both analytic and prescriptive, as it provides a deductive lens to observe existing narratives about resettlement experiences whilst allowing operational exploratory questions from which inductive inferences about resettlement may be drawn. The research process was guided by both logics including the methods with which the researcher collected, analyzed and interpreted the data. In the following chapters (Chapter Six and Seven), the research findings are presented. Page | 105 CHAPTER SIX 6.0 HOUSEHOLDS, LAND AND POST-RESETTLEMENT LIVELIHOOD RECONSTRUCTION 6.1 Introduction This chapter responds to the first research question posed by this thesis: how do households reconstruct their livelihoods following displacement caused by mining? The findings are based on field interviews with 25 household heads and other household-level observations within the community of displaced persons in the Akyem area. Fifteen of the households were displaced physically and economically, as their residential dwellings were impacted concurrently with their farms and other economic facilitities. On the account of loss of assets and access to assets, it may be noted that these 15 households suffered the adverse impacts of MIDR, more than those who who were only economically displaced. The company replaced impacted dwellings with new housing units at a newly constructed resettlement village, approximately 3km north of the mine (see figure 6.2). Interview data from government and company representatives, and relevant secondary data, is used to supplement and confirm narratives provided by household respondents. In this chapter, priority is given to data as it relates to the lives of the household members through displacement and resettlement. In particular, the chapter presents households’ notions of livelihood security following resettlement, with respect to their access to, and control over, livelihood assets, strategies and capabilities. In presenting this data, the chapter takes note of the pre-displacement livelihood conditions of the households as described in section 4.4 and highlights changes in such conditions as described by household participants. Before presenting the findings, it is important to recall the focus of the overarching research question; which is, understanding household level material issues as a basis for considering MIDR policy and practice. Conventional studies typically use policy prescriptions as the basis for analysing the practical dimensions of policy decisions. Kangave (2012), Thomas (2002), and Szablowski (2002), for example, use policy and policy structures to examine social problems of displacement and involuntary resettlement. This approach considers the solution before the problem. While there is value in this type of ‘front-end’ or ‘top down’ analytical approach, this thesis adopts a different approach and reverses this order. This chapter first explores the structural underpinnings of impoverishment risks and household livelihood reconstruction in MIDR. In Chapter Seven, these experiences are then examined Page | 106 against the policy landscape of MIDR, to identify the policy and institutional dimensions of resettlement in light of household level data. In interpreting the data, the researcher emphasises the importance of examining the structure (i.e. assets and productive resources) of households and their livelihoods as embedded in the project context. There are three merits of reverse-ordering the analysis. First, policies are designed to regulate and address social problems. In other words, policies ought to be responsive to social problems and expectations. Considering displacement as a social problem, Thomas (2002), for example, describes the evolution of the World Bank resettlement policies as a direct response to the persistent harms that displacement causes to people. Secondly, policy formulation requires strong consideration of the participation of social agents; in this case, the households that are displaced and resettled to make way for industrial mining. Society and social problems are the focus of social policy. Finally, the focus of the central research question is designed to inform resettlement policies, frameworks, and practices to provide better responses to the material concerns and needs of household livelihood reconstruction in MIDR. Addressing the research question requires a clear demonstration of the linkages between the actions and inactions of actors, and the broader livelihood reconstruction landscape. In this case study, the householders’ views on livelihood security and their experience of interacting with the company’s livelihood restoration programs were predominantly negative. This negative finding is indicative of the frailty of post-displacement household livelihood structures. The chapter provides deep insight into the state of these structures and the degree to which this condition offers any real prospect for households to recover a viable level of livelihood security. The analysis is undertaken against the backdrop of significant localized transformations that occur with the advent of industrial-scale mining, and in the light of changes in livelihood assets and activities since resettlement. Mining-induced transformations have a significant effect on the asset holdings of project-affected households and, as will be demonstrated, are central in generating impoverishment risks. These risks have far-reaching consequences for livelihood recovery, as they expose households to multiple levels of vulnerability. In the Akyem area, the displaced households confronted unfamiliar economic and livelihood pressures induced by the rapid industrialization and monetization of their local economy. Some of these pressures were recognized by company officials as social risks that could service business risks during the Page | 107 project planning stage. To moderate these pressures and assist in the recovery process of the affected households, the company instituted a range of livelihood restoration programs. Some company personnel described these programs as holding promise for reducing business risk. However, a range of systemic programming issues, including budget limitations, constrained the reach and effectiveness of these programs. The effect of these constraints led to sub-optimal outcomes for livelihood restoration programs. The sub-optimal outcomes of these programs, combined with land dispossession and a national social welfare system that does not account for poverty caused by project displacement, gives rise to a new lifeworld in which displaced people struggle to cope. This chapter is structured around four themes: vulnerability, productive land, physical relocation and compensation. These themes are induced from the data sets, and reflect the experience of project-affected households. Each theme contains sub-themes with in depth descriptive primary accounts of the households’ lives through resettlement. The relationships across these themes are highlighted where they are significant to the experiences of households. Based on the findings, the chapter concludes that impoverishment was a foreseeable outcome in the Akyem case. 6.2 Mining-induced vulnerability: households and livelihood security 6.2.1 Households In Chapter Two, it was stated that the Akan concepts of Bokyea and Efipam were used in identifying and engaging households throughout this study. When engaging a household, the first approach was made to the household head. In five instances, other household members – adults and teenagers – were present at the time of interviews and participated in responding to interview questions. To gain insight into how people understood their household unit, participants were asked to comment on the state and conditions of their household. The participants used both kinship and economic participation as a basis for inclusion in the household. Household heads mostly talked about their spouses, children, grandchildren, and nephews and nieces. Children were not always the biological offspring of household heads but were related through extended family ties. Page | 108 Across the various members, participants discussed household composition in the context of their shared “food pot”, shelter and self-provisioning. When talking about provisioning, household heads outlined member involvement in activities, responsibilities towards each other, and the limited economic opportunities available for attaining meaningful livelihoods. Participants expressed difficulties about self-sustenance relative to their capacities to provide food and other basic needs for all household members. Women highlighted extreme difficulties when trying to provide food for their children. These difficulties are discussed in the sub-sections below. It is instructive to note that household members did not always share shelter. Rather, they assumed and responded to respective obligations and responsibilities. For example, married adult children, living in urban centers, remitted their elderly parents at the village, and the latter in turn served as chaperones, and provided for the needs of their grandchildren living with them. 6.2.2 Notions of livelihood security To understand livelihood processes, household notions of livelihood security must be put into perspective. In the sustainable livelihood literature, notions of livelihood security in rural settings occur in the form of reduced vulnerability, and improved food security and wellbeing (Ellis and Bahiigwa, 2003; Carney, 2002). Carney (2002), for example, posits that the fundamental principle of sustainable livelihoods thinking is to reduce poverty and vulnerability. Based on this thinking, household participants were asked to describe their livelihood priorities before and after resettlement. The responses centered on food, shelter, and access to assets and economic opportunities for household sustenance. The ability to meet daily food consumption requirements was expressed as a high priority. A male participant summarized the common notions of livelihood security among the households when he said: “The only reason we struggle in life is to guarantee basic food needs. If you have food, you do not have a problem. I could wear the same set of apparel for a year as long as I keep it clean. But the stomach demands food every day. And if you don’t have income or food, how can you eat? If you have income to feed your family and sponsor your children’s education, there will be no problem” (XAPM 09, Adausena). For this household, and indeed the majority of the households interviewed, access to productive land and opportunities to guarantee basic food requirements, shelter, and income to finance Page | 109 minimum livelihood activities were considered top livelihood priorities. They assessed the outcome of involuntary resettlement on their lives against these priorities. When asked to describe how resettlement affected their quality of life, twenty (20) of the twenty-five (25) household heads claimed that resettlement affected them negatively. They explained that dispossession by the company triggered food insecurity, reduced income opportunities, worsened poverty and created circumstances that made their lives miserable. Even households that had previously self-identified as poor claimed that their life circumstances had deteriorated. Only one respondent, an employee with the company, found that their life was better following resettlement. For the majority of participants, the outcome of their resettlement was what some people described as a ‘fear-come-true’. Overall, the majority of the households concluded that displacement was a major setback in achieving self-sustenance. Some household heads claimed that misery, borne out of idleness, joblessness, hunger and lack of viable employment options, affected their mental and physical health. They suggested that they were being driven towards desperate measures, including an inclination to out-migrate from the community, selling or renting out the resettlement house, engaging in transactional sex, or stealing from farmers in nearby communities. Female household participants explained that the tendency for teenage girls to resort to transactional sex was driven by the poor state of household livelihood conditions following displacement and resettlement. Desperation and the tendency to steal food from neighbours’ farms can pose a risk of social disorder, especially when young people contemplate this behaviour. A male teenager from a female-headed household (XAPF13, Resettlement Village) said: “Over here when you wake up and do not have money, you have to starve for the whole day. If one is unable to find manual labor to do, you will most likely go hungry for the day. The opportunities for such labor work are not even available. Now, we have nephews. It is hard to watch them starve and suffer. I do not know how to steal. But when you are hungry, the temptation is to steal because there is nothing else to do”. From interview data and field observations, the incidence of selling or renting out resettlement houses was an emerging phenomenon among households that were physically relocated to the newly established resettlement village. This phenomenon involved the conversion of physical assets to cash and was connected to decisions to out-migrate. The researcher co-investigated this phenomenon with two other researchers who were in the field and shared common research Page | 110 interest. Seven relocated households were reported to have sold their new houses and left the village. Two were on the market for sale. Overall, household participants expressed deep dissatisfaction with their current state of livelihood and attributed their daily exposure to hunger and vulnerability to the displacement effects of the mine project. 6.2.3 Mining-induced vulnerability Drawing from the SLF framework (DFID, 1999), vulnerability involves a predictive quality and conceptualizes the ability of households to respond to shocks, trends, and seasonality; in this case, displacement and relocation manifested as shock events. Prior to displacement, company-commissioned studies suggested that some of the affected households may have been already “more vulnerable due to their comparatively smaller farm sizes” (Newmont, 2011; pp.5-18). Other defining features of existing vulnerability as noted by these company studies included households with orphans, disability, widows, and elderly persons. Following MIDR, the households described exposure to food insecurity and more limited opportunity to engage in self-provisioning or respond to the pressures of MIDR. Access to food was the lead livelihood pressure point among resettlers. In other words, vulnerability among the households was a sum of today’s hunger and lack of (or limited) options to escape tomorrow’s starvation. Vulnerability among the household participants was characterized by growing economic distress. Every one of the research participants reported that displacement had induced some additional level of hardship and poverty in their lives. Female-headed households, more than their male counterparts, characterized their hardships by their daily struggles to provide basic food for their families. An analysis of the company’s Grievance Register showed results that were broadly consistent with this food narrative. As in figure 6.1 below, there was a surge in complaints from displaced households about livelihood failings, following their relocation in 2014. These complaints included 122 requests to the company for food rations. Page | 111 Figure 6-1 Grievance and Complaints, 2012-2015 250 200 Administrative issues 150 Compensation Community project Employment & 100 Labor Environment Impacts & Inventory 50 Livelihood Resettlement housing Others 0 2012 2013 2014 2015 Source: Author’s construct (based on company supplied data), January 2015. The vulnerability among the households was worsened by the dearth of forest resources. Before mining, forest resources provided complementary food items and generally served as a buffer against food insecurity. Following resettlement, the households lamented their reduced stock and constrained access to ‘free’ fuelwood, kontommere, abedru, mushrooms, snails, cocoyam, and kola. 44 Interview data, supported by the results of the company’s social assessment studies, indicated that women and children relied on forest products to complement domestic consumption and income. Men mostly complained about the lack of access to bush meat. Vulnerability was also worsened by the breakdown in coping mechanisms, including opportunities for claims from social networks. Social networks were weakened by displacement. This, coupled with intra-household conditions of ill-health, physical disabilities, divorce, spousal neglect, and petty squabbles, were cited by several households as additional pressure points which they struggled to address. Five (5) female-headed single-parent respondents attributed the intensity of their hardships to the fact that they had lost their 44 Kontommere is a wild (and domesticated) green leafy crop, indigenous to the forest belt of western, central, and eastern parts of Ghana, mostly used as an accompaniment to main meals. Abedru also known as ‘Turkey berry’ can be eaten raw or used to make sauce, with nutritional qualities in iron, production of red blood cells, and locally recommended for the use of expectant mothers. Page | 112 husbands, and had to face provisioning by themselves. Specific to the new resettlement village, social networks had not recovered enough to restore previous mutual claims and support systems. A male participant at the resettlement village said about their new life: “Here, if you enter somebody’s farm they will pronounce you a thief. The Adausena and Hweakwae people do not allow us closer to their farms. At the old site, there were good relations amongst us. You could go into your neighbour’s farm and fetch food. I had kola farms and sometimes met women from other households picking kola from my farm. I did not complain because we are one … now, when friends visit me, we all have the same complaint. Life in this village is very difficult for everyone” (XAPM02). This statement highlights the effects of weakening social networks among displaced households. It also suggests tensions between the resettlers and the host communities of Adausena and Hweakwae who do not share resources with the ‘newcomers’. In general, displacement and resettlement had brought about a new life with new economic pressures and demands for regular and routine expenditure. Since resettlement, attempts by the households to invest in livelihood recovery was replete with challenges. These challenges are further elaborated in the subsequent sections. 6.3 Livelihood assets and capabilities 6.3.1 Productive land In rural agrarian settings, ownership or access to productive land is a significant factor of household livelihoods security. Rammohan and Pritchard’s (2014) study in rural Myanmar is a case example of the significant linkages between household landholding and food security. Specific to this thesis, government statistics indicate that more than 90 percent of the households in the Birim North district depend heavily on land for agriculture (Ghana Statistical Service, 2014). Company data also indicate that 70 percent of the households displaced by the Akyem mine practised agriculture as their primary economic activity, with 44 percent depending exclusively on farming (Newmont, 2011). Households cultivated food crops (e.g. cassava, maize, plantain, and cocoyam) for consumption and grew economic tree crops (mainly cocoa and oil palm) for government-controlled international commodity markets. The participation of the affected households in these commodity markets, combined with local sales Page | 113 of surplus food crops, provided income to acquire products and services that households did not produce themselves. Following resettlement, this livelihood pattern changed significantly. All household participants were asked to describe their current lives as against their lives before resettlement. All but one of the households indicated that their current status was worse than in the past. The dissenting view was a female staff of the company. A significant number of respondents attributed their current conditions to the fact that the mine had dispossessed their household of farmlands and limited their access to forest resources. Being unable to access quality land to re-establish farms was described by households as unbearable. Young household members lamented the lack of jobs as compounding the problem of land loss. A single mother at the resettlement village explained that land was both a resource for primary production and coping with hardships: “Things were good at the old village because everyone had land or a farm. So whatever hardship there was, it was easier to cope. In this resettlement village, things are difficult. You cannot go into somebody’s farm and look for kontommere or fuelwood. Life is really difficult here” (XAPF15). The predicaments around access to productive land, as described by the households, were attributed to the negative impact of the mine’s acquisition of available land. They described general travails in locating suitable land for farming. There was a general sense that affected families had no choice but to travel a further distance to new lands, and by extension to new farms. They also noted a rapid increase in the cost of land since resettlement. These narratives were supported by the company’s social impact monitoring study (Newmont, 2015). Many households found land at a distance, with new landowners. However, the majority indicated that the new distant lands were marginal and were not suitable for cropping. Under these circumstances, the households risked losing their investments (e.g. transport, labor and fertilizer) in poor crop yields. The subsequent paragraphs in this section elaborate two key challenges for resettlers: (i) availability of land within a reasonable distance, and (ii) the cost of land. In 2010 the company acquired approximately 1,907 hectares of land for mining and supporting infrastructure. This figure represents approximately 3.36 percent of the total land mass of the Birim North District. On face value, this acquisition appears marginal relative to Page | 114 the land mass of the district. However, in a localized context, an ostensibly small land-take reduces the quantum of available land for other land users. Affected households explained that the land-take by the company pushed them further away in their search for new farmlands, thus making it difficult to find land close by out past lands not acquired by the mine. In other words, it was not a simple matter of finding replacement land close by. The combined effect of being dispossessed and pushed out in the search for alternative lands required traveling further distances. For the majority of the relocated households, the increased distance to new farmlands, sometimes up to 15km away, was an unwelcome and costly change in agricultural practices. Families found it difficult to reconcile the whole idea of ‘distant farming’. For subsistence farmers, proximity to or living on farms was a convenient and less expensive way to maximize the minimum returns from farming. Having to farm at a farther distance, in some cases on reduced land sizes, added travel costs and wasted productive time. A female participant wondered about the whole idea of having to travel to distant places to farm: “You would not even get the land at close-by communities at Hweakwae and Aduasena. So you have to travel very far to find land. If you have to go to Akoase and Pankese to farm, what type of farming will you be able to do?” (XAPF04).45 For the majority of the households, traveling to farms now comes at a cost. Before resettlement, most people lived on, or walked to their farms, which were close-by. Following resettlement, the majority had to board trotros at a fare to reach their farms.46 The households described the cost and drudgery of doing ‘shuttle-transfer-shuttle-walk’ as unbearable. Without a regular income, most of the households could not sustain regular visits to their new farms, and had in fact, abandoned their farms. One male participant said: “Most of the lands are at far distant locations from where we live. Moreover, if you have no money to afford transport fare to and fro on a regular basis, you will abandon the farm. My farm is at Akoase, on the Nkawkaw road. I have to pay about four Ghana cedis from Abirem to Akoase. Add that to the transport fare from Adausena here to Abirem, plus Akoase to where the farm is, and back. You realize that if you do not have 45 Akoase and Pankesi are about 15 km and 20 km respectively away from the resettlement village. 46 Trotros are local commercial mini-buses. They are the predominant means of transport across Ghana, both in urban and rural settings. Page | 115 about 20 Ghana cedis a day, you cannot go to the farm. So if you do not have money, it is difficult to farm” (XAPM17). 47 The need to incur the additional transport fare to the farm increases the overall cost of farming. Farmers explained that this situation could easily lead to indebtedness. It was fear of indebtedness that drove people to choose to abandon their farms. Another factor associated with land was the increase in the cost of land acquisition. In the Akyem area, land tenure transactions are typically anchored in lease or sharecropping arrangements between traditional landowning chiefs, family heads and land-users. Whether lease or sharecropping, land-users have to pay landowners to use the land. The affected households reported that the applicable fees had skyrocketed since resettlement. From as little as 50 Ghana cedis (approximately $11 USD) for two-acres of farmland, one participant reported that the fees for the same parcel of land now cost approximately 500 Ghana cedis (approximately $111 USD). The increase in the cost of land resulted from several factors: the project land acquisition, an arbitrary increase in prices by some landowners, and dubious landowners who resorted to deceiving or “duping” unsuspecting farmers by charging multiple land-user fees from different farmers for the same lands. In an effort to alleviate local land pressure, one farmer requested that the company; local government and forestry authorities cede part of the remaining forest reserve. This request was denied. 6.3.2 Cash compensation In contemporary DIDR practice, compensation is a predominant resettlement strategy (Cernea and Mathur, 2008). Best practice in MIDR requires mining corporations to identify, evaluate and pay fair and adequate compensation to eligible project-affected persons for their loss, or for damage to physical assets, economic structures, and expected income. Compensation should be provided before land acquisition (ICMM, 2015).48 In the Ghanaian context, cash compensation is a legal requirement for providing restitution to project-affected households in 47 20 Ghana cedis is approximately 3.82 USD as at March 22, 2019. 48 Best practice refers to resettlement policy prescriptions as outlined in international resettlement standards including the IFC performance standards, The World Bank ESF; the OECD resettlement guidelines, the ICMM sustainable development principles, Equator principles, UNDP social and environmental standards, Asian Development Bank, et cetera. These policy platforms generally prescribe compensation to be evaluated and paid at replacement cost. Page | 116 lieu of loss of crops, deprivation of land use, immovable assets, and commercial structures. The Minerals and Mining Act, 2006 (Act 703) of Ghana and its accompanying regulation on Compensation and Resettlement, 2012 (LI 2175) generally aligns with the key principles of best practice, although it is not as elaborate as it should be on some key elements. This issue is addressed in detail in Chapter Eight. By these legal provisions, mining companies as was the case in the case context, are required to negotiate and agree with affected households on compensation rates. In this context, Newmont commissioned census and asset surveys which mapped out affected properties and persons to determine compensation values and amounts. Then, it constituted a ninety (90) member stakeholder inclusive Compensation Negotiation Committee (CNC), negotiated compensation rates, agreed on persons who were eligible to receive payment, and paid out compensation to eligible affected households. Based on prescription of L1 2175, the membership of the committee included representatives from project-affected farmers and households, local chiefs, company officials, local government authorities, mining sector authorities and the office of the administrator of stool lands. The affected farmers in every community selected their representatives on the committee through voting. As required by law, the company paid for the services of a competent valuer to provide technical guidance and support to communities throughout the negotiations. The company also worked with mining and local government authorities to provide training and technical orientation workshops on key aspects of negotiations (Doc/03).49 Company officials noted that they invested in these training programs to build capacity of farmers to negotiate and to help in creating a balance of power and knowledge in negotiations. Ahead of negotiations and to facilitate its work, the CNC constituted relevant standing sub-committees (and occasionally ad hoc committees) dedicated to the aforementioned elements of negotiations; that is, crops, deprivation of use of land, immovable assets and structures, resettlement construction process as well as rules and regulations sub-committees. Negotiations effectively commenced on 18th August 2009 when the CNC held its first plenary session and concluded a year and half later in 2011 with a set of agreements on the various 49 For example, training workshops were provided on asset inventory and valuation procedures, crop valuation procedures, Spatial and physical planning regulations of Ghana, rules and regulations of negotiations, as well as the art of negotiations. It must be noted that not all member of the committee had voting rights. Representatives from mining and local government authorities had no voting rights. They could only advice and provide guidance to the committee. Page | 117 elements of negotiations. Company officials reported that almost all farmers signed a compensation and entitlement agreement with the company to accept negotiated settlements on cash compensation for land, crops, immovable assets and resettlement housing. The eligible households received cash compensation for loss of crops, loss or damage to economic structures, and deprivation of use of land. Interview data, supported by company records, show that the majority of the eligible affected households did receive compensation.50 Two of the sampled households – who were caretakers of other people’s farms – reported that they had been excluded from compensation. The company paid compensation via a bank checking system with a local commercial bank, and provided basic financial management skills training to each person before the compensation payment. The affected households attested to their knowledge of, and participation in, these procedural steps. There was a positive sense among the households that they were represented throughout the negotiation process. This positive sense, however, conflicts with how the households felt about their compensation. There was a general sense that representation in the negotiation process did not translate into fair and adequate compensation. They attributed this failure to a number of factors. These factors included: the poor quality of their representation in the negotiation process and the inhibiting powers of Ghana’s mining regime on the negotiation process. In addition, they suspected that chiefs and local elites had applied social pressure and influence due to the receipt of material benefits from the company. The company’s post-resettlement review report supports the issues raised by participant households. For example: “The PAPs also believe that when the Government grants a mining lease to Companies, it creates unequal power relations when it comes to negotiations for compensation. When a Mining Lease is granted by Government, there is the presumption that mining would definitely take place, and so the Mining Companies tend to have their right backed by law to have access to the land. There is, therefore, an issue of power imbalance which the PAP's believe makes them vulnerable”. (Doc/01, p.26) This same report noted that community representatives on the CNC did not always provide feedback to community members during the negotiations. Almost all of the households 50 Evidence drawn from company record Doc/01. Page | 118 explained the cash compensation they received was insufficient when compared to the farmlands and economic activities which had been affected by the projects. There were two main inadequacies. Firstly, previous landowners lost a highly rated economic and natural livelihood asset. Before resettlement, there were two scenarios under which landowners generated economic returns from their land. In the first scenario, known as sharecropping, a landowner allows someone else to use the land for farming and in return receives a proportionate food harvest. If the farmer sells this produce, a share of the profits is also provided to the landowner. The second scenario occurs when the landowner farms his or her land and retains all produce and profits. After resettlement, the previous landowners joined the ranks of the landless and became mere sharecroppers with new landowners. The previous landowners stated that dispossession reduced their social status and asset holdings. To describe the changing in status, a female participant and physically-disabled, who previously owned farmland, said: “Truly, my farmland which someone held on ‘Abunu’ was two and a half acres. However, my late father’s farm, about 8 to 10 acres, which we inherited was also impacted. I used to live on the proceeds of that farm, but the project impacted that land too…My two and a half acre farm was an orange farm. Each crop season, the sharecropper will harvest, sell and bring me my share. He would cultivate maize and bring me my share. So my emphasis was not on the family land” (XAPF07). For the landowners, cash compensation was not commensurate with the economic loss. The reason for this (seldom discussed in the formal interview setting) is that local culture and customs among the Akans in Ghana prohibits the outright sale of land (Mireku, et al., 2016). Even with access to funds, it is not possible for former landowners to purchase land. Their options were reduced to leasing, renting, or sharecropping. Sharecroppers become jobless when they are not able to access land or provide farm labor to landowners. Secondly, the households evaluated the inadequacy of cash compensation by highlighting its shortfalls in providing restitution for the loss of farmlands. They noted that cash was desirable and an important financial asset, but that cash compensation for farmlands, paid in a lump sum, was unreliable and an “evaporative asset” when compared with the Page | 119 everlasting inter-generational ownership and entitlement of farmlands. A male participant recounted his fears about receiving cash compensation instead of retaining farmland: “We did not want to accept the cash compensation because we knew that farmland has an inter-generational benefit and will always guarantee food as long as you cultivate. When I pass on, my children will feed on it; their children, i.e. my grandchildren, will also feed on it. Compare this to cash compensation, which can easily be spent and exhausted” (XAPM11). In other words, land was highly regarded as a stable and safe livelihood asset, whereas cash was considered as a resource that “just burns.”51 The fault lines around cash compensation reflected how the households lived through displacement and resettlement. Land guarantees minimal survival for families, whereas cash does not. The majority of the households who received compensation elaborated on the unsafe nature of cash, noting that the money was long gone, and economic distress had set in. In the words of a male participant: “we indeed received it [cash compensation]; we have spent the money, but we are in hardship now” (XAPM09). The participants described the expenditure of their compensation cash. Most households spend the cash on food and consumables, utility bills in their new peri-urban setting (e.g. water and electricity), and capital expenses such as financing the construction of new buildings for shelter and renovating dilapidated ‘family homes’. A few participants, mostly women, invested their cash compensation in starting up new or existing small enterprises. One participant split the money among his nephews and nieces who, according to the Akan’s matrilineal system of inheritance, are entitled to inherit from him. Another regretfully recalled that her only son squandered the money on women and alcohol. The paragraphs below detail the factors that underpinned household decisions about compensation spending. The circumstances that gave rise to household choices relating to compensation spend were directly related to the Akyem mine life cycle. Along with its land acquisition schedule, the company intensified compensation payments to households from mid-2010 through to the 51 In Akan parlance, people tend to frame assets of inter-generational quality as ‘egyapadie’. Egyapadie refers to a property durable and worthy enough to bequeath to your children. Land (and land-related properties) are preferred as egyapadie than many other asset forms. Page | 120 end of 2012. At this time, the construction of the resettlement village was on-going, and the affected households had not moved from Yayaaso, their previous location. The company’s moratorium on farm development and restriction of access to project-marked areas was in force. The effects of the moratorium, combined with the delayed movement from Yayaaso, limited community access to typical sources of food. Compensation cash and income from construction-related jobs became the main resource for meeting their basic needs, including food. A single-parent female participant explained: “They paid us the compensation at a time we had not moved yet. Moreover, then we were not allowed to go into our farms. So we relied on the compensation to survive and now all the money is gone. So for me, I am suffering. We exhausted the money before moving here. We had to buy just about everything” (XAPF04, Resettlement village). This explanation is valid and was supported by interview data from company officials. One official remarked: “We paid their compensation several months before movement. Those were times we had placed an embargo on the development of structures and so on, and these people had money and were in a dilemma as to whether they are going right or left. So most of them did not invest their money very well. When we moved them; now they are established and looking to undertake investments, but the money is not there. If we had a second chance and tie compensation payment to movement, it will help” (XMMC06). Households that invested their compensation in building or renovating homes were mostly impacted through economic displacement, that is, loss of crops and economic structures. This category of households was resident in the project-affected communities other than Yayaso, which was physically relocated. Four of the sampled households invested in new buildings and three in renovating old buildings. These investments were complemented by financing from other sources of income, including remittances from children and relatives. These participants explained that shelter was a basic livelihood necessity, and living in one’s house brought self- fulfillment and social esteem. A female participant was in the process of completing a three bedroom house at her village. She explained: Page | 121 “It is good to own house. Each time I visited home, there was always a struggle relating to where I sleep[…] Some people might say the good thing to have done is to invest the money in business. However, I thought that the business would not help. The right thing for me was to build a house for myself. That is a property and will help me in future” (XAPF10). During fieldwork, the researcher observed that construction of some of the buildings referred to was not completed, and participants had no income to complete them. Some household heads, mostly women, invested their cash compensation in starting up new enterprises, or upscaling existing ones. These were ‘table-top’ or kiosk businesses in food vending, agro-processing, and household consumables, including confectioneries and personal care items. From my observations, other businesses also sprang up in other study communities, including drinking bars, football studios, chemist shops, textiles and apparel shops, and manufactured merchandise. Household heads explained that by the time the project had moved into operation, the majority of enterprises established by the resettled households had either collapsed or were collapsing. This discussion highlights the various ways affected households negotiated, received and used cash compensation. In the absence of viable alternatives or complementary sources of food and income, the households were heavily reliant on their cash compensation to address immediate consumption requirements, while also trying out new strategies to recover from their loss. Such circumstances were a major constraining factor in the livelihood reconstruction trajectory of the households. 6.3.3 Physical relocation As discussed in Chapter Three, the land acquisition activities of the Akyem project physically displaced 346 households. The physical displacement presented the risk of creating homelessness. Through negotiated agreements, the company presented two resettlement options for addressing homelessness. Each affected household could choose a lump sum cash compensation, or a replacement house at the newly constructed resettlement village (see figure 6.2 below). Two-hundred and forty-nine (249) of 346 physically-displaced households opted for a replacement house. The company constructed and supported the movement of these Page | 122 households. Each moving household was given 300 Ghana cedis (approx. $76 USD) as a financial allowance to cater for the cost of movement from old Yayaaso to the new resettlement village, three kilometers way.52 Thirteen of these physically relocated households directly participated in this study. Figure 6-2 Akyem resettlement village Source: Newmont Golden Ridge Ltd, January 2016. To understand the effects of physical relocation on the quality of life of households, the sampled households were asked to describe changes, positive or negative, in their lives since resettlement. The majority of participants indicated that the design of their houses and quality 52 Calculated on August, 16, 2016. Page | 123 of the building materials were better than their houses before resettlement. They considered the resettlement houses as an upgrade over the houses they lost. Some of them also expressed their satisfaction about the spatial layout of the resettlement village, tarred roads all through the village, an upgraded school block, access to household toilets, and the availability and proximity of a potable water system. Only three of the 13 sampled households expressed dissatisfaction, and this was in relation to the number and sizes of rooms and the lack of trees to protect the houses from the scorching sun. Despite the positive comments about the physical characteristics of the resettlement village, the households described serious difficulties with life in the village. Interview data, supported by company-commissioned studies, highlighted difficulties associated with the village’s location. The location of the resettlement community distanced residents from essential social and economic services and opportunities and limited their options for pursuing productive activities. Significantly, all the affected households expressed deep resentment towards buying (rather than being able to harvest) most of their food items. Moving wholly into the monetized ‘new mining’ economy coupled with localized inflation and reduced household income, made life extremely difficult. At various times participants described their new lot in life as ‘unbearable’. Some household members, especially women, expressed frustration that the prevailing socioeconomic conditions in the resettlement village did not offer an enabling environment for success in local businesses.53 Sourcing inputs for their businesses was also problematic, as the paucity of demand for goods and services within the village. Some of the life difficulties are elaborated below. Understanding the choice of location for the resettlement village was a delicate issue during interviews. Ethnicity was pivotal in the way people participated in negotiations about site selection. Ewes comprised the majority of resettled households. They inveighed the current location and strongly opposed the choice of the current site for the new village.54 However, as they were not native to the area, their opinions did not hold sway among the native Akan. Nor 53 Sometimes this was communicated non-verbally, by confirming statements of others. 54 The Ewes are natives of the Volta region of Ghana. Historically, they migrated to the Akyem area for economic reasons, mainly to undertake farming or provide farm labor. Other ethnic groups in the ranks of economic immigrants in the area include Dagaabas, Frafras, Fantes, and Krobos. The natives and non-natives have had relations configured around land use and tenure in which the latter usually felt abused and cheated. 51 Nkwakwa is a regional commercial town with transport services linking to major cities such as Accra and Kumasi. Page | 124 were their views of interest to the company as they were not part of the landowning group. Native Akan households did not raise issues about the location because this would have put them in a position of opposing their Chief. The Ewe households preferred another site, closer to Afosu township. They argued that Afosu is a big town and held better prospects for market and local business, better opportunities for rental income, better access to goods and services; and sits right on the main road to Nkwakwa, a major nodal market and service city.55 A male participant suggested that Afosu would have helped them to avoid direct competition for land with the mine. He said: “this place is closer to Newmont’s work. Over there [at Afosu], Newmont is not working, and we could go round picking kola. Kola is so helpful because you can sell it” (XAPM08, resettlement village). Issues associated with choosing the site and location of the resettlement village were known by company representatives. The majority of the company interviewees said that they were aware of the fact that most, up to 90 percent, of the affected households, preferred the Afosu site; not the current location. But even with this knowledge, the company feared that granting this preference would have derailed the company’s land acquisition schedule. Thus, they manipulated the site selection process and convinced the affected households to accept the current location. One of the company’s managers explained: “So majority preferred the other site which was on a different stool land, Afosu. And that would have created a major issue for us. In a traditional sense, it is like you have gone to war and taken booty from one stool land and given to another[...]By now, I strongly believe there would have been a huge compensation that Newmont would have had to pay[...]eventually, we had to whip people up to accept the fact that they need to be resettled on the same stool land for the sake of peace and also respect the cultural heritage of the stool land owner” (XMMC1). This situation brings to the fore the dilemmas of balancing the ethics of development (in this case, resettlement) with corporate interests. In the Akyem case, people in company decision- making roles leaned towards what worked for the company, not the majority of resettlers. 56 Nkwakwa is a regional commercial town with transport services linking to major cities such as Accra and Kumasi. Page | 125 Household heads discussed the locational factors that they considered were inhibiting their capabilities to embark on a meaningful livelihood recovery process. Foremost, the new location further distanced them from New Abirem, where they previously sourced and sold goods and services.56 New Abirem has a big market, an urbanized salaried working-population, mine workers and mining-induced migrants, and an array of social amenities. The town is home to the district’s only hospital and has well-resourced educational facilities. Before resettlement, New Abirem was within walking distance of Old Yayaso. The affected households relied on the town in many ways. Most women reported that they traded at the Abirem market, and farmers sold their produce there. Following resettlement, it cost four Ghana cedis to travel to and from New Abirem. The further distance from New Abirem meant people were no longer able to take advantage of the market and services, unless they could cover the cost. Additionally, the increased cost of transportation to New Abirem appeared to have threatened children’s access to education facilities. Because education was a livelihood priority, at Old Yayaso, some parents had enrolled their children in the well-resourced schools at New Abirem. However, due to their deteriorating income situation and the cost of travel, they worried that they were no longer able to keep their children in those schools. A female participant at the resettlement village said: “Some pupils go to school at Abirem…You have three children, all schooling at New Abirem. The transportation cost can come to 40 Ghana cedis per student per month. Calculate that for three months throughout the term; you end up with a bill of 360 Ghana cedis. Also, there is no work here, and people do not have money” (XAPF19, resettlement village). Another inhibiting factor that underlies the life difficulties at the resettlement village was the cost of access to public utilities. The cost to get housing units connected to electricity and paying up with monthly bills for utility consumption were presented by the households as constant drains on the few resources they had. Women added that they now bought charcoal to cook, in place of fuelwood which they had harvested freely from the forest. A household head explained that to spend money on these routine services when not earning a regular income is like “eating up your eggs before they get hatched” (XAPM06, male participant, resettlement village). The households explained that the community had lost their common property 56 New Abirem is the borough of the Birim North District, hosting about 10 decentralized government departments at the district level. It has better socioeconomic facilities and is a major market centre in the district. Page | 126 resources such as streams and access to fuelwood through displacement. While the upgraded water system is potable, household heads explained that regular water system breakdowns and the lack of streams and boreholes left them with no option than to pay for water. Incidentally, interview and observation data revealed that the water from the taps at the village, had a ‘brownish coloration’ and community members feared that it was beginning to cause skin rashes and irritation. Women singled out one critical limiting factor that was impeding their capability to start up or sustain small enterprises at the resettlement village. This was the limited demand for goods and services at the village. They observed that the drawdown of mining-related construction activities, joblessness, and little or no income among the inhabitants of the community, cumulatively suppressed the local market and economic opportunities. Those who have tried to engage in informal ‘table-top’ and kiosk businesses have failed, and those who wanted to start a business had very little confidence in the prospects for success. A female participant resident at the resettlement village explained: “at this place, things are very difficult. If you engage in business, you will run at a loss because people do not buy things here. So if you go for a loan to do any business, you will create problems for yourself” (XAPF01). Overall, physical relocation, in this context, provided better physical assets at the individual and community levels. The households conceived the upgrades in housing, spatial planning, and social amenities as positive outcomes from resettlement. However, they faced serious and deteriorating socioeconomic conditions that made life in the ‘new’ village unbearable. The inability of the households to meet basic requirements of daily survivability overshadowed the value they otherwise perceived in the improved physical infrastructure. This situation was summarized by a male resident. He said: “As a human being, you only sleep when you have eaten. If you are hungry, how can you sleep? When I am satisfied with the food and have no place to sleep; it is easy to manage because it is easy to sleep. So all these things make life difficult for us. If anyone tells you that things are better here, I would doubt if the person lives here” (XAPM06). Page | 127 6.3.4 Livelihood restoration programs The difficult life circumstances of the affected households, as described above, were not entirely overlooked by the company. Company representatives indicated that they assessed the risks of impoverishment among the affected households as a business risk, from the onset of mine planning and land acquisition. To address these risks and support the livelihood recovery process of the affected households, the company planned and implemented a livelihoods restoration program. From interview and documentary sources, the program was two-pronged. It centered on facilitating long-term household livelihood recovery through agriculture-based investment, while supporting identified vulnerable households to live through transitional hardships and vulnerability that may have been imposed by displacement. The lead component of the livelihood program, a crop production project, focused on assisting all households that lost farms through resettlement to re-establish farms. Each household received free seeds and seedlings, a cash allowance ranging from 190 to 250 Ghana cedis to help defray farm expenses, and extension services.57 Depending on the size of the farm that was lost, this program provided inputs and support to re-establish farms ranging in sizes from half an acre to a maximum of two acres (see Appendix 6-1). As of the time of the field work, program reports indicated that more than 2,000 affected-farmer households, including 24 sampled households, had signed up and received support to re-establish farms. Figure 6.3 below shows farm locations (marked green) relative to the mine footprint (marked red) and project-affected communities. The other component, a vulnerable people support project, focused on identifying and assisting poor, vulnerable project-affected households to respond to the immediate project- induced transitional hardships and risks to food security.58 Each identified vulnerable household received a monthly food ration, a monthly cash allowance ranging from 10 to 20 Ghana cedis, a one-off health insurance cover, and free regular health screening and psychosocial counseling.59 Company records show that 111 households, including eight of the 57 250 Ghana cedis is equivalent to 63 USD; calculated on August 16, 2016. 58 Based on company records, the criteria/checklist for identifying vulnerable households considered a combination of factors: household size (larger than national average); pre-existing vulnerability factors such as elderly, orphans, disability, and widows; lack of alternative farm or economic activity following displacement; households with facing ‘visible’ food insecurity; and households with high dependency without matching resources. Vulnerable households were selected and validated by a multi-stakeholder committee including company representatives, community leaders, farmers, women, youth and local government authorities. 59 10 to 20 Ghana cedis is equivalent to 2.54USD and 5.07USD respectively; calculated on August 16, 2016 Page | 128 sampled households, were identified and placed on the vulnerable program (Doc/02). The livelihood restoration program had been in place since the last quarter of 2011. Page | 129 Figure 6-3: location of farms established by farmers under the livelihood restoration program Source: map provided by Newmont, 2016. Page | 130 In addition to the livelihoods program, the researcher noted that in terms of livelihood both the company and household participants tended to recognize the broader social and economic resources and opportunities that the mine had created. The company participants highlighted specific community-funded development programs as well as the jobs and supply chain opportunities from the mine. These were deemed to have broadly enhanced the livelihood restoration program. In particular, they mentioned a microcredit program that the company put in place, and the development foundation. The households recognized some of these broader programs as being valuable to their livelihood recovery efforts, yet dismissed others, such as employment and supply chain opportunities, as ‘broken promises’ by the company. The household participants were positive about the development foundation especially its rolling education scholarship for school children. However, there were fears that the foundation was allocating resources to projects that served no immediate benefit to the community, such as sports programs. To assess the effectiveness of the livelihood restoration programs on the livelihood reconstruction process, all the household participants were asked to describe how the company’s livelihood planning and programs had assisted or were assisting them towards their livelihood recovery. The responses were inconclusive. Many household participants commended the company for instituting the program. At the same time, all of them lamented the numerous inherent shortfalls that either limited the effectiveness of the program or inhibited their ability to convert the resources of the program to livelihood outcomes. Household interview data, supported by company record (Doc/02), indicated that the households that participated or were participating in the vulnerable support project had been able to meet critical food consumption needs that they would fail or struggle to meet without the program. In other words, the food ration that the company provided for identified vulnerable households was addressing food insecurity among the affected households. Four of the eight households reported that the quantity of food and the accompanying cash allowance was inadequate to meet the full span of their daily survivability. Households that were not deemed eligible for the vulnerable support described it as unfair and discriminatory. They wondered why some households received food and others did not, when all of them were poor and in need of food. Page | 131 Some household participants offered insight into the instances that led to the exclusion of some poor households from the vulnerable program. To qualify for vulnerability support, company program staff determined the vulnerability status of each project-displaced household using socioeconomic data that had been collected through a series of company-commissioned studies. Some household heads misconstrued the purpose of these studies and provided inaccurate information about the state of their household in order to bolster their chances of gaining access to employment opportunities or compensation for loss of assets or income. This inaccurate information, to some extent, misinformed the program’s targeting process, leading to the exclusion of some poor, vulnerable households from the program. In recounting the information that household heads provided in company- commissioned socioeconomic assessments, a male participant said: “At the old village, the company people came around and asked questions about our daily food requirements, expenditure, and other things. Some people answered that they were suffering; others reported that they spent up to 50 Ghana cedis, 20 Ghana cedis daily on food needs and so on […] As it turns out, those who truthfully reported that they were suffering ended up receiving the food basket. Some people thought that by reporting huge sums of money in daily food expenditure, Newmont would give them that much money in cash; but it did not turn out that way […] The company officials looked through the responses and decided to assist those who were suffering and could hardly feed themselves. But if you false-reported your daily food expenditure, it did not help you” (XAPM02, resettlement village). Cases like these bring into question the impact assessment process and value of data generated by such studies in MIDR. The household participants, supported by some company staff, also blamed the failings of the livelihood program on poor resourcing and the attitude of the company towards addressing early symptomatic issues before they materialised into challenges. There was a general sense that the company dithered in responding to critical community issues. Three household participants reported that they had notified the company much earlier about transport challenges to new farms, and requested a shuttle bus to facilitate visits to their farms. The Page | 132 company took almost three years to respond to this request. When it finally provided the bus, it was too little, too late. A male participant said: “We requested that the company assist us with a bus to go to our farms. They refused to honor our request until recently, about four months ago, that they provided the bus. So one establishes a farm in 2010, and it is only now that you bring him a bus. So you realize that majority of our people had already abandoned their farms because they could not afford transport fare to those farms” (XAPM06, resettlement village). Overall, the company’s livelihood restoration program offered both material and technical resources to support household livelihood reconstruction, a declared company aspiration. However, as described above, the program had inherent challenges. These challenges combined with other difficulties faced by the affected households constrained the reach and effectiveness of the program as a livelihood reconstruction strategy. 6.4 Chapter summary This chapter demonstrates the multiple effects of displacement on the lives and livelihood structures of project-affected people. In this case study context, the immediate effects of MIDR, caused by dispossession, displacement, and pressures of localized transformations were visible in the vulnerability of the sampled households. These immediate effects were coupled with structural constraints that inhibited the livelihood reconstruction process. These constraints include difficulties in access to land, a critical livelihood asset to support farming activities. Cash compensation showed only a short-lived restitutive quality. For the most part, households considered it as only palliative and transient in easing post-displacement livelihood pressures. Physical relocation holds the prospect of providing improved housing and infrastructure. But these prospects can be undermined when corporate interests take precedence over livelihood considerations. In the Akyem case, this occurred during the site selection process. The constraints discussed above were not mutually exclusive. They occurred either concurrently or had interdependent consequences, with implications for impoverishment risks and vulnerability. The idea that impoverishment risks when left unmitigated can materialize into real poverty is the basis upon which formal resettlement policies and programs are established. In the Akyem context, Newmont, guided by best practice and national regulations, Page | 133 assessed, planned and implemented various response measures. Despite all the measures that had been implemented or were being contemplated, there were indications that the households were sliding into impoverishment. It may be that a pathway forward requires firsthand understanding of the operational context of these applicable resettlement policies and programs, and the institutions with formal responsibility for addressing impoverishment in MIDR. In the next chapter, the structural constraints of household livelihood reconstruction are examined against MIDR policy and practice with the aim of determining the underlying institutional infrastructure which may help account for the prevailing impoverishment among affected-persons. Page | 134 CHAPTER SEVEN 7.0 MINING, RESETTLEMENT AND LIVELIHOOD RECONSTRUCTION: POLICY AND INSTITUTIONAL DIMENSIONS 7.1 Introduction “Socially responsible implementers and administrators of policies are of crucial significance in any reconstruction of livelihoods.” (Nayak, 2000; p.99). In a study among displaced tribes in India, Nayak (2000) highlights the role of policies and institutions in displacement and impoverishment, and concludes that reversing impoverishment requires responsible resettlement policy and practice. This chapter is about the policy and institutional dimensions of MIDR in Ghana, and addresses the second and third research questions: how do state institutions, mining corporations and relevant organizations determine and respond to household livelihood reconstruction needs in MIDR settings? The chapter is based on primary data generated through interviews with 57 official representatives, and secondary data drawn from relevant mining sector laws and regulations of Ghana, corporate resettlement standards, company-commissioned studies and resettlement plans.60 The officials held formal responsibilities within mining sector governance institutions in Ghana, mining companies, IFIs, civil society organizations (CSOs) and consulting firms. Each interviewed official acted in an administrative, regulatory or specialist role in their respective organizations, and shared responsibilities for authorising, planning, resourcing, implementing and regulating MIDR in Ghana. In this thesis, these policymakers are collectively referred to as institutional actors. The chapter revisits the four structural factors that constrained livelihood reconstruction efforts of the study households, namely: the ‘inadequacy’ of cash compensation; poor access to agricultural land; the shortcomings of physical relocation; and the limitations of the company’s livelihood restoration programs (Chapter Six). These factors, together with the localised inflationary pressure of mining, broadly represented the lived experiences of the participants, and inducing impoverishment and vulnerability in the process. Mathur (2013) 60 The sample from organizations included 17 government representatives, 26 company officials and 14 other key informants. The government officials were drawn from the Ghana Mineral Commission, the Ministry responsible for mining and natural resources, the Parliament of Ghana, as well as regional and district government authorities. The company officials were community relations managers, project managers and field staff while other key informants were drawn from civil society organizations, IFIs, and global resettlement specialists. Page | 135 posits that knowledge and understanding about the impoverishment process is an important first step towards addressing livelihood reconstruction challenges. In each interview session, the interview first focused on assessing the informants’ knowledge about impoverishment process at the household level, and then proceeded to examine the formal institutional mechanisms with which policymakers sought to address impoverishment in the case context. The data used in this chapter describes the policy and institutional perspectives on impoverishment risks and livelihood reconstruction, and includes the driving incentives of various mining sector organizations when they respond to impoverishment. Based on the findings, actors from different organizations shared a consistent knowledge about impoverishment and the constraining factors. There was an overall recognition across policymakers that MIDR is problematic, inducing ‘new’ poverty. Different officials had differing levels of knowledge about the problem. Some had detailed information, while others had only a bird’s-eye view. The chapter is presented as follows: Section 7.2 highlights the knowledge institutional actors held about the impoverishment process. Section 7.3 is presented along three dominant themes drawn from the data: cash compensation; physical relocation; and livelihood restoration programs. These themes represent institutional mechanisms with which policymakers addressed impoverishment in the case context, and help to decipher formal responsibilities for addressing livelihood reconstruction challenges at the household level. The driving assumptions underlying these formal mechanisms have been considered in the analysis. Implicit in Mathur’s (2013) position is that by understanding the impoverishment process, actors are better positioned to act in sufficient measures to address the problem. The nature and scope of the formal mechanisms in this context did not always reflect the depth of knowledge officials held about the identified livelihood reconstruction constraints. Instead, a range of competing factors influenced the mechanisms; including public policy trade-offs, social due diligence, contextual factors and social interactions within and among these institutions. These factors are highlighted throughout the analysis. Page | 136 7.2 Overview of perspectives on MIDR in Ghana All institutional actors were asked about their understanding of the livelihood circumstances of mining-displaced households. The views of company, government, and CSO representatives were surprisingly consistent. The majority especially CSO and local government representatives noted that mining-displaced households in Ghana were mostly living in poverty or highly susceptible to impoverishment. Corporate actors rarely admit failures in resettlement outcomes.61 This was not the case in Akyem. Some company representatives described what they considered as serious shortcomings of the company’s resettlement program, noting that this development induced food insecurity among the displaced households, especially the physically relocated households. A company supervisor in a community relations function noted: “It is terrible, to tell you the truth. People can hardly feed themselves at the resettlement village, and they feel so disappointed … and this tells you that they [resettlers] are suffering” (XMMC10). Another company supervisor added: “The problem is that this time, most of their livelihood is gone, they do not have farms, they do not have any skill, they do not do any socioeconomic activity” (XMMC14). These narratives support the negative claims that households attributed to their experiences. Other actors described their perspectives about the aforementioned livelihood reconstruction constraints. The majority claimed that the inability of the households to utilise cash compensation in meaningful ways, difficulties in accessing productive land, and the sub- optimal effects of existing livelihood programs impeded livelihood reconstruction. Mining sector regulators and CSO representatives emphasised the need to fix broken livelihood systems in mining-impacted communities. They noted that livelihood challenges not only put pressure on households but also manifested in company-community conflicts. These key informants also highlighted public finance limitations that exacerbate the poor livelihood conditions of mining-displaced households. They explained that local government authorities lacked the requisite resources to support displaced households, and this partly contributed to poor resettlement outcomes. Household members did not raise this issue, suggesting that they did not have an understanding of the financial flows between levels of 61 Drawn from personal communication with Professor Deanna Kemp, my lead Academic Advisor (April, 2017) and researcher’s familiarity with the subject matters. Page | 137 government. Some company managers and civil society representatives laid blame for this on the central government. The Stool Lands Act, 1994 (Act 481) and more recently the Mineral Development Fund Act, 2016 (Act 912) both mandate the central government to allocate prescribed percentages of mineral revenue to local government authorities.62 The local authorities, in this case the Birim North District Assembly, are required by law to invest this allocation into programs that help offset the adverse impacts of mining. The interview data from local government and corporate representatives suggested that the central government frequently reneges on its obligation to pay the allocated sums. One senior manager at the Akyem site suggested that: “If the government can advance just 10 percent of what [royalties and taxes] it gets from mining companies to reinvest in infrastructure, it would ease the pressure on mining companies and help communities to see the benefits of mining” (XMMC04). While investment in infrastructure alone will not address the livelihood challenge, this suggestion raises questions about the broader political economy of mining and mineral wealth; in this case access to financial resources for supporting livelihood reconstruction of displaced households. At the time of this fieldwork, the local press reported that the central government owed approximately two and a half million US dollars in mining royalties to local authorities.63 But even when the prescribed allocation is paid to local authorities, some respondents noted that the authorities tend “to spend the money on recurrent administrative expenditure” (XMGP04), rather than invest in mitigation programs. There was one exception to the general recognition that MIDR was problematic in Ghana. A senior legislator (XMGP02) at the Parliament of Ghana suggested that MIDR was not as problematic as it appears. He cited laws and provisions, which supposedly protect the rights of displaced households, referenced resettlement houses “nicely built” by companies as markers of success, and criticised householders for willingly trading-off their farms for compensation, only to then turn around and complain. On face value, this sceptical view allows no significant inference. However, in a relatively weak regulatory and institutional 62 20 percent of royalties in the case of the Stool Lands Act and 20 percent of funds from the Mineral Development Fund Act are allocated to Community Development Schemes. 63 See http://www.myjoyonline.com/news/2015/December-29th/government-owes-over-gh100-million-in- mining-royalties-to-communities.php (accessed December 29, 2015) Page | 138 environment, the perspectives of one politically powerful individual can sometimes determine policy directions for addressing impoverishment. This is partly the case in this context especially as households noted the inhibiting influence of Ghana’s mining law and the influence of local elites on their ability to negotiate better outcomes. MIDR policymakers also expressed concerns about the four factors, which constrained livelihood reconstruction. On cash compensation, the majority of the institutional actors noted that it was highly unreliable in addressing impoverishment, noting that compensation was ‘evaporative’, especially when paid in lump sums to displaced households. They explained that most mining-displaced households in Ghana are rural, illiterate, lacking in financial literacy, and engage in ‘wasteful’ spending of compensation cash. When comparing these institutional perspectives about cash compensation with household experiences, the data showed some overlaps and differences. While government representatives emphasised the so-called ‘wasteful’ spending, the majority of household participants pointed to the urgent need to offset the unfamiliar costs of living in their new environments. Their view on offsetting unfamiliar expenditure aligned with the views of some corporate and CSO representatives. Some corporate representatives recalled that compensation was paid at a time when the company’s moratorium and restricted access to land and forest were in place, and that the households may have needed to rely on the compensation cash to live through the moratorium phase. Like household participants, civil society and some government representatives held the view that the current compensation approach did not account for intergenerational entitlements to land or normalising both present and future dispossession. They also noted that it was difficult to quantify and compensate for the cultural value of the land. A senior government minister asked rhetorically: “how much compensation could you possibly pay for the social status that people lose through the land lost as a result of the mine?” (XFGP06). These cultural questions resonate with the narratives of mining-displaced households. A senior social development specialist at the World Bank indicated that compensating for cultural values is a puzzle that needs to be resolved in contemporary resettlement practice. The majority of the institutional actors highlighted access to productive land as a major livelihood reconstruction determinant. In their view, agriculture remained the single most promising activity that could facilitate better livelihood recovery among displaced communities such as Akyem. One local agriculture extension officer stated: “All these people Page | 139 [displaced-households] have known in their lives is farming, so it is important they be supported to do farming if they are to survive” (XMLC03). Senior social development specialists at the World Bank backed this view and noted that the bank’s safeguard policies lend credence to land-based agriculture in resettlement. Most of the institutional actors recommended enhanced access to productive land, complemented with training on better crop farming techniques, as essential enablers of better livelihood reconstruction. Company field staff who worked closely with farmers elaborated on the land question in ways that coincided with the narrative of the households. They reported that farmers have to travel greater distances from their homes to secure ‘new’ farmlands and this triggers additional transport costs. When they find land, a portion may be in poor quality and unable to support viable crop production. With no or dwindling financial resources, some households reportedly abandoned their farms, becoming landless and farmless. One senior local government official (XMLC03) attributed the widespread vulnerability among the study households to landlessness and farmlessness. In assessing the shortcomings of physical relocation on livelihood reconstruction, the research prioritised the views of company and local government representatives in the Birim North District. The Akyem resettlement site is location-specific and only the company and local government representatives were considered familiar with the prospects and shortcomings of the location as it relates to household experiences. When asked to comment on the livelihood conditions of the households, their comments align with the perspectives of the households. Both company and local government actors considered the built environment of the resettlement village as an upgraded physical asset for the households. At the same time, the majority of those interviewed outlined the difficult livelihood circumstances that the households faced. These difficulties appear to be embodied in a remark from one senior community development official: ”Now they have better places to sleep, better schools for kids, [...] But what they are living on is an issue now. The regular source of income is the issue now. Otherwise the place would have been a better place. But if they are sleeping in nice buildings and have nothing to eat; then it is a problem. That is the issue. It’s livelihood” (XMNC01). Page | 140 Resettlement outcomes such as the one expressed above bring into question the value of improved modern housing to people when they lack complementary economic opportunities and income to support the basic necessities of life. One local government official (XMLC02) noted that the situation at the newly constructed village was one of serious economic distress. The analysis above reflects the official opinions about MIDR in Ghana. In most cases, these viewpoints confirmed the narratives of the mining-displaced households in the case context. A seasoned civil society official concluded: “The experiences [of mining in Ghana] have shown that [...] the companies have done very well but the communities have not, and the country has not” (XMCS03). 7.3 MIDR: provisions in law, corporate policy and practice One of the primary concerns of this research is to understand how institutional actors respond to the challenges of MIDR. This section addresses this concern. It outlines mining sector- specific provisions in Ghanaian law, corporate policies and programmatic interventions for addressing impoverishment, and analyses how each of these provisions and interventions addressed the material livelihood concerns expressed by the households in the case context. As noted above, the analysis is presented along three themes: compensation (dealing with issues of adequacy and fairness); physical relocation (focusing on the shortcomings of resettlement housing); and livelihood restoration planning, including the complexities therein. 7.3.1 Compensation: adequacy and fairness In Ghana, compensation for the displacement impacts of mining is mandatory as prescribed by the following legal and regulatory instruments: • The Constitution of the Fourth Republic of Ghana, 1992 • The Minerals and Mining Act, 2006 (703) as amended by the Minerals and Mining (Amendment) Act, 2015 (Act, 900) • The Compensation and Resettlement Regulations, 2012 (LI 2175) • Guidelines for Corporate Social Responsibility in Mining Communities (Mineral Commission, 2012)64 64 These guidelines are non-binding but provide general guidance on corporate-community relations issues including compensation. Page | 141 Based on analysis of these instruments, companies can provide compensation by paying cash, providing in-kind replacement, or offering a mix of both to offset the adverse impacts of mining. Cash compensation is designed to replace lost assets and provide relief from displacement impacts. Most interviewees in this study held the view that cash compensation did not provide sufficient relief, let alone replace lost livelihood assets. Section 20(2) of the Constitution enshrines the right of individuals to compensation and requires developers to assess and pay “fair and adequate” compensation to persons whose properties are expropriated. What is “fair and adequate” is not defined in the Constitution. The Constitution merely requires developers to pay market value for crops and business structures, and replacement cost for affected buildings. This is broadly consistent with the requirements of global resettlement standards. This right to compensation is further emphasised in section 73(1) of the Minerals and Mining Act, 2006 (Act 703) as amended, 2015 (Act 900). The Act and its accompanying LI 2175 outline the scope of compensation to include: compensation for loss of or damage to immovable property or land under cultivation, deprivation of use of land, and loss of expected income. Policy makers and regulators held the view that these legal instruments provide guidance on how to determine and compensate adequately and fairly. Yet they also recognised some systemic and practical limitations to upholding the law. For example, Section (7) of the LI 2175 directs mining companies to negotiate compensation with displaced populations. Negotiations can be done individually or collectively through a prescribed multi-stakeholder Compensation Negotiation Committee (CNC) as it occurred in this context. Where a committee is used, the law permits displaced households to recruit the services of qualified valuation experts to assist them during negotiations. The LI 2175 requires companies to pre-finance the cost of services of the expert(s). As noted in section 6.3.2, the company in this case pre-financed this service for the affected farmers. Mining sector regulators believed that negotiations will help produce fair and adequate compensation. Government and some civil society representatives considered these measures significant because they enhanced local participation. The right to recruit qualified experts, they suggested, directly responds to the quality of community representation in compensation negotiation. However, some noted that the communities were uninformed about the rights and Page | 142 opportunities extended to them by the law and could not afford the interpretive assistance needed to help them understand the legal constructs. The Minerals and Mining Act also responds to adequacy of compensation by expanding the scope of impacts that qualify for compensation. Before it was enacted, mining companies only compensated for crops on actively farmed land and/or for immovable physical structures. They were not required and did not compensate for fallow land, for example. With the expanded scope, compensation is required for deprivation of use of land (DLU), including fallow land. Additionally, the LI 2175 prescribes that compensation for assets (buildings and structures) be assessed and paid at replacement cost. Under this instrument, compensation rates are benchmarked against minimum government-established rates. In other words, companies are prohibited from paying compensation below the rates that are established by the government. But as one senior government official at the ministry responsible for mines noted: “[the minimum] rates are not incentive enough, they are not high. But we allow that law to exist” in order that they can be used to resolve conflicts where there are disagreements about the rates (XMGP01). While a minimum benchmark may be useful in situations of disagreement, the law effectively creates conditions for undervaluing loss and impacts for compensation, and in so doing exacerbates households’ concerns around adequacy and fairness of compensation. The CSR guidelines cover wide ranging themes on MIDR and categorise resettlement as a human rights issue. It encourages companies to “minimize involuntary resettlement and compensate fairly for adverse effects on the community where they cannot be avoided” (p.4). The guidelines attempt to address incidents of wasteful spending of compensation cash by encouraging companies to “stagger payment of crop compensation” (ibid, p.4) rather than providing a lump sum payment. While the guidelines contain useful lessons for addressing troubling aspects of compensation, some institutional representatives were quick to point out that guidelines were merely voluntary, “not biting” and without consequences for non- compliance (XMCS02). Overall, the legal and regulatory response to MIDR problems, including compensation, were viewed by some civil society and human rights agencies as being “narrow” and limited in their scope, “legally-confined”, “promotional”, “discriminatory”, and “hands-off” (XFCSO01; XMCSO03; XMGR07). These respondents held the view that it was difficult to Page | 143 achieve fair and adequate compensation outcomes due to the following factors: the existing legal framework; the overbearing economic power and political influence of mining companies; the companies’ “conniving” relationship with local elites and chiefs; the illiteracy of displaced households; and the lack of suitable compensation recourse to displaced households. To exemplify the “hands-off” reference, one CSO representative noted: “When the government takes my land to build a road, they deem it state expropriation, and they deal with me directly in terms of my compensation. But when they take my land and give it to a foreign company they leave me to go and negotiate with the company. Something is wrong here. So built into the starting point itself is a discriminatory process against the people who are resettled and paid compensation” (XMCS03). Interview data from a number of senior government officials and views expressed in parliamentary debates point to a policy consensus at the national level which focuses on attracting foreign capital in the mining sector, despite the knowledge that safeguards may be weakened, exposing local communities to impoverishment. This is evidenced in a statement by a senior government official: “We know that communities have problems when it comes to resettlement ... We should have got punitive actions [….] and we could easily do that ... But sometimes you have to look at the environment around you. Every country is looking for investors. They have put their […] incentive package in place to attract these people [companies]. So some of the rules may not be too hard because of the environment around you” (XMGP01). Statements like above helps to account for lack of political will to protect people’s interest against corporate interest even when regulations appear to be relatively strong. Against the pressures for attracting investments, the protection and interest of people can be traded off. During a parliamentary debate preceding the passing of the Mining and Mineral law, the then minister responsible for mining situated the law in the context of Ghana’s competitive edge for attracting foreign direct investment in the West Africa sub-region. He stated: Page | 144 “Ghana has a long history of gold mining […]. However, with time, this tradition faded away and the industry suffered serious depression until the enactment of PNDC Law 153 in 1986, which gave a favourable mining climate to investors. But the law has been in existence for almost twenty years and most of its contents and the favourable conditions that it gave investors are almost becoming outdated […] what we are about to present to you is therefore an attempt to sustain and revive the industry so that a favourable climate would once more be created” (Ghana. Parliamentary debates. Official Report, Parliament of Ghana. 27 July 2005; Vol.50, col.2654).65 For a sector that contributes averagely 5 percent of GDP and over 15 percent of government revenue, this statement suggests that attempts to bolster the country’s competitive edge through regulatory inducements may have occurred, to the detriment of relevant safeguards against mining impacts, thereby weakening protection for displaced households. In a lax regulatory environment, mining companies tend to defer to global resettlement standards for guidance on how to address social risks including impoverishment risks (see Chapter Three). In the case context, senior corporate executives and site-level managers indicated that the mining industry had come to accept the global resettlement standards as ‘best practice’ in projects involving involuntary resettlement. They considered these standards as fundamental safeguards against complex social risks, especially as operational footprints expand into high risks environments in the Global South, such as Ghana. All company managers interviewed indicated that these standards, along with host-country regulations, informed the company’s corporate Sustainability Statements and site-level Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs). One such SOP relevant to MIDR is the company’s Land Acquisition and Involuntary Resettlement Standard. Corporate managers reported that this standard was first occasioned by the company’s investment relationship with the IFC in 2004. The company received a loan from the IFC for the development and operation of its first project in Ghana, the Ahafo gold project. In this relationship, the company was required to adapt and comply with the IFC Performance Standards. Since then, the company has modified the standard on three occasions to reflect its land acquisition experiences thus far, first in 2006, then in 2009 and most recently in 2014. According to corporate managers, the prevailing version of the standard provides 65 See https://www.parliament.gh/docs?type=HS&yr=2005&mon=7 Page | 145 guidance for the company’s site-level approach on compensation, resettlement planning and livelihood restoration. On compensation, the standard requires site managers to assess and address “the rights and needs of land owners and local communities related to land acquisition […] prior to impact through interactions […]” (p.1). It also requires that compensation for crops and non-occupied structures be valued at market value, whereas loss of assets or access to assets should be valued at full replacement cost. These requirements are broadly consistent with both global resettlement standards and the Minerals and Mining Act. Despite its consistency, interview data with corporate representatives revealed key contentions in the way the company addressed issues of fairness and adequacy of compensation. At the outset, corporate representatives observed that the country’s regulatory mechanisms lacked clarity on fair and adequate compensation. A corporate manager who held leadership responsibility for negotiating compensation with the displaced households indicated that questions about fairness and adequacy were the major “battlegrounds” throughout the negotiations. He noted: “To the community, what was fair was what Newmont would also call outrageous [...] they made claims that in the eyes of Newmont were outrageous; but in the eyes of the community, it was fair. That to them, would be a fair replacement of what they are losing; that they are not only losing their crops but their lands bequeathed to them by their forefathers and they are also supposed to hold it in trust for future generations […] That is why the negotiation was heated throughout almost one and a half years until final conclusion” (XMMC04). Faced with this dilemma, the company sought to address compensation issues through procedural fairness, rather than respond to the material concerns of the households. Firstly, the company committed itself to achieving key procedural requirements of compensation negotiation as stipulated by Ghanaian law and the company’s standards on land acquisition. These procedural steps included setting up a compensation negotiation committee (CNC) and ensuring the ‘free’ participation of affected persons in the negotiation process. In fact, some site-level managers highlighted that the company not only facilitated the participation of displaced persons in compensation negotiations, but they also provided capacity building Page | 146 training for members of the negotiation committee on the laws and procedures governing compensation negotiation in Ghana. The rationale behind the capacity building initiatives, according to one site-level manager, was: “… to establish credibility, transparency, and openness around the process [of negotiation] so that when people begin negotiations around resettlement and entitlements […] they would do so within the confines of reasonability” (XMMC07). Secondly, the company went into the negotiations with the knowledge of the prevailing compensation rates in the industry and the minimum government-established rates as required by law. The company considered its commitment to achieve these procedural requirements as proxy variables for fairness and adequacy. As stated by one manager: “We tried to the best of our ability to ensure that what we were going to negotiate was fair and adequate […] we benchmarked what we were going to pay against what the industry benchmark is […] we did extensive data collection from all our competitors on compensation […] The government also has compensation rates […] What we paid was far above the government compensation rate, the industry’s average rate [...] so we termed that as fair. The community may think otherwise […] the bottom line is at the end of the day we did not force them to sign the agreed rates […] it was something that we all mutually agreed” (XMMC04). Corporate managers also raised an important practical dimension of moderating what the company considered as fair and adequate compensation. While the provision for DLU in the Minerals and Mining Law sought to mitigate previously overlooked displacement impacts, one manager observed that the law offered no direction on how DLU could be evaluated and compensated for: “ It [DLU] was in the law, but no mining company had ever paid DLU before; but Newmont went ahead, negotiated and paid compensation for depriving the people the use of the land during this period of the fifteen years” (XMMC04). Negotiations and social interaction between mining companies and displaced populations, as implied in the observation above, can be instrumental in resolving undefined elements of Page | 147 legislation. Yet, weak MIDR regulatory provisions combined with unequal corporate economic and political power can also result in negotiated outcomes that defy households’ sense of adequate and fair compensation. Detailed analysis about the differential perspectives of fairness is considered in chapter 8. As at the time of conducting this field work, mining-sector regulators still had no procedures for evaluating DLU, other than a reference to the experiences of the company in this case study. Drawing on the analysis above, the approaches put forward by the government and the mining company were found to be mostly unaligned with, disconnected from, and missing the material expectations and concerns of the households, who expect compensation that accounts for today’s loss and tomorrow’s generational entitlements. As elaborated above, some of the government’s regulatory measures lacked focus on these household concerns and were considered by civil society representatives as “narrow”, “discriminatory” and distant from the real concerns of mining-displaced households. In turn, the company’s attempts to achieve what it considered as fair and adequate compensation were mostly fixated on procedural fairness while falling short of households’ notions of fair and adequate compensation. The decision to prioritise procedures, rather than a comprehensive take on providing significant material resources for facilitating long-term livelihood reconstruction, helps to explain the prevailing impoverishment among the sampled households. 7.3.2 Physical relocation and resettlement housing Physical displacement is a predominant cause of impoverishment in displacement events. It induces homelessness, destabilises social and production systems and exposes people to poor living conditions, increasing the risks of morbidity, mortality and food insecurity (Cernea, 2000). As presented in Chapter Six, homelessness, as in the absence of a house or shelter, was not an issue in the case context; rather, households cited the surrounding livelihood conditions for destabilising economic activity, degrading social support networks and making life extremely unbearable in the resettlement village. The research examined the effects of policy and institutional mechanisms on physical relocation and resettlement housing as it occurred in Akyem. Through thematic analysis and interviews, it was found that there was better regulatory guidance and formal emphasis on providing shelter against homelessness than there was on addressing the surrounding livelihood conditions. Page | 148 Section 73(4) of the Minerals and Mining Act requires the minister responsible for mining to “ensure that inhabitants who prefer to be compensated by way of resettlement as a result of being displaced by a proposed mineral operations are settled on suitable alternative land, with due regard to their economic well-being and social and cultural value, and that the resettlement is carried out in accordance with the relevant town planning laws”. Section 6(1) of the LI 2175 goes beyond “regard for economic and social well-being” and declares improving livelihoods as an objective of resettlement. Yet it falls short of any requirement or further guidance on how companies should engineer livelihood improvement. It merely states that: “where the operations of a holder of a mining lease involves the displacement of inhabitants, the inhabitants shall be resettled by the holder on suitable alternative land and the resettlement shall have regard to the economic well-being and socio-cultural values of the person to be resettled, with the objective to improve the livelihoods and standards of living of those persons”. The effect of formal mechanisms on livelihood restoration is discussed in the next section. To address homelessness, the company provided ‘new’ houses and relocated all eligible households to a new resettlement village. Most interviewees, institutional actors and households alike acknowledged that the ‘newly-constructed’ housing was better in quality than that which households lost. Yet the majority also pointed to extreme livelihood conditions which made life unbearable in the village. The following paragraphs present the research findings on how the resettlement housing in Akyem was formulated and negotiated, and the procedures the company used to select the site for the ‘new’ village. The findings also considered how the key informants evaluated the company’s response to homelessness, including taking into account households’ access to economic opportunities and resources for livelihood reconstruction. Corporate representatives claimed that the company’s approach to resettlement housing was guided by the IFC performance standards (IFC PS5) and the relevant Ghanaian laws. As one site-level manager said: “resettlement [housing] and compensation [was] governed by Ghanaian laws, while livelihood restoration is governed by international best practice” (XMMC08). The representatives explained that the IFC standards and the national regulations espoused replacement criteria, meaning that companies must replace dwellings affected by involuntary resettlement. The IFC standards, for example, require companies to offer “options for adequate housing with security of tenure”, implying that “resettled individuals or Page | 149 communities are resettled to a site where they can legally occupy and where they are protected from the risk of eviction (p.2)”. In the case context, the resettlement and compensation initiatives were negotiated through a stakeholder-inclusive CNC. All household heads and local government officials recognised that the committee was sufficiently representative. Regarding physical relocation, the committee determined eligibility for various initiatives offered through the company’s resettlement program. Significantly, the committee also discussed criteria and helped in selecting a suitable location for the resettlement village. Some corporate managers noted that the criteria for site selection was elaborate, with consideration given to the availability of land, cultural cohesion and the potential for regenerating livelihood activities. By the criteria, eighteen locations were first identified, then narrowed down to four, and then a final shortlist of two. These two locations were then tabled at the resettlement negotiations, where one was selected for resettlement. The company then designed and constructed the resettlement village where the physically-relocated households currently live (see figure 6.2). The rationale for multiple locations is to allow affected people to exercise volition over their future homes (Satiroglu and Choi, 2015). In the case context, the tabling of the two locations at the negotiations was ostensibly to realise volition. However, the interview with corporate representatives revealed a surprise finding. When the company tabled the two site options, officials were not prepared to accept the “free choice” of displaced households if it did not coincide with the company’s preferred site. Corporate and local government representatives indicated that the households did not want to be at the location where they have been resettled, with the vast majority preferring another site. One corporate representative stated that “ninety percent of the physically-displaced” showed preference for a different location. (XMMC10). Despite knowing the locational preferences of households, the company’s managers feared that accepting this preference posed costly risks to its business. For this reason, the company insisted the households accept the location that they believed posed less risk to its land access schedule. One manager said: “The majority [of the physically-displaced households] preferred the other site which was on a different stool land […] And that would have created a major issue for us. In a traditional sense, it is like you have gone to war and taken booty from one stool land Page | 150 and given to another [...] By now, I strongly believe there would have been a huge compensation that Newmont would have had to pay [...] eventually, we had to whip people up to accept the fact that they need to be resettled on the same stool land for the sake of peace and also respect for the cultural heritage of the stool land owner” (XMMC04). As indicated in Chapter Six, the decision to relocate households somewhere other than their preferred location was but one of the causes of impoverishment in this case context. Some corporate, local government and CSO representatives suggested that the choice of location of the resettlement village was devoid of livelihood considerations and lacked a thorough analysis of the households’ previous social and economic interaction with their environment. They explained that the location of the village distanced the resettlers from farms, the district’s nodal market, better-equipped schools and a hospital in the district capital of New Abirem. Some corporate, government and civil society representatives provided insights into the company’s decision to override the location preference of displaced households. They explained that the local elites and chiefs in the case study area had more influence and voice on the negotiation process than the physically-displaced households. One corporate manager said; “The chiefs [had] more influence on the [negotiation] process than the people to be resettled [...] By that it put them at a place where you cut them off from the market, increase the distance from school and market which makes life difficult […] the chiefs had more voice than the people who were going to live there”. (XMNC01) Another corporate representative noted that the influence of the chiefs was further complicated by the financial interest of land owners at the host communities. He said the landowners expected cash compensation for the designated relocation sites regardless of where the sites were located. On the heels of potential financial gain, land owners at the host communities pitched into competition for the right and cultural legitimacy to host the displaced community. Through this competition, each of them strengthened their positions by threatening to derail the company’s land acquisition process if they missed the opportunity to host the resettlement village. He stated: Page | 151 “Newmont wanted peace to have the land to work. So when people started threatening to stall the company’s work […] that kind of thing. Those days people thought where [the location] we are going to resettle them [displaced households] will also attract compensation for land for land-owners and farmers. So if you want to send them to another place […] some of us would lose the compensation that we are expecting […] So it is the politics of the chiefs and the people who wanted the compensation thing that threatened the company” (XMMC14). At the national level, some government representatives were aware of what they considered widespread occurrences of unsuitable resettlement locations. Some attributed this outcome to disconnect between company resettlement plans and national development plans. Others suggested that the companies were simply driven by a cost-saving mentality and did not involve government in the site selection process. A senior government official at the ministry responsible for mines said: “The plan of government is not coinciding with the plan of the companies. If the company comes, they are doing their exploration silently. They [companies] come to us [government] and say grant us a mining lease, we give you […] and the company says we are going to resettle the people […] then we [companies] have got land to resettle the people […]. Government does not want to get that blame of getting a bad place for the people or identify a place that the company will say they cannot pay” (XMGP1). The analysis above shows a complicated resettlement site selection process driven by multiple interests. In trying to address homelessness, the company was confronted by its immediate land acquisition imperatives as well as ethical responsibilities to ensure the free participation of displaced populations in resettlement planning. Balancing typical investment decisions and social responsibilities can be a daunting challenge. In this case study context, the company’s response was found to be utilitarian, with land acquisition and social risks imperatives taking precedence over ethical considerations, so long as the latter presented as an acceptable risk. Resettlement housing as a locational livelihood resource The analysis also considered resettlement housing against the opportunities it may have presented for livelihood recovery in the case context. Most interviewees considered the Page | 152 resettlement housing as an improvement over the impacted dwellings. However, the data shows interesting overlaps and differences when examined from broader perspectives around livelihood conditions that could help resettled people fully maximise the offerings of a ‘new’ house. The majority of company and local government representatives noted that the location of the village and the resources dedicated to planning it missed opportunities for enhancing livelihood recovery. Some said that less economic activity at the resettlement village resulted in households living in economic misery. Those who held this view attributed the poor economic situation at the resettlement village to inadequate planning and development visioning. In the words of one community relations consultant, the company was now beginning to realise the consequences of poor planning of the Akyem resettlement project: “We are now beginning to see the fruits. Right now with casual observation you can see that the people [physically-displaced households] are doing nothing. Because no provisions were made in terms of how they [physically-resettled households] should be actively doing something for themselves” (XMRE02). This sentiment suggests that the planning process did not only stifle the volition of displaced households, but also dedicated insufficient resources towards generating economic opportunities for livelihood reconstruction. There was a sense among some corporate representatives that the company’s resettlement planning processes did not fully recognise the apparent interactions between the people’s geographic locations and the resources they previously relied on as safety nets. Some company representatives said the physical relocation planning was fixated on physical infrastructure, rather than the lives of the displaced households. One senior community relations official observed: “If you look at what we are going through now, we didn’t anticipate this. At the time, we were looking at the physical aspects of it. You are living in this muddy house, and we [company] are going to give you very nice sandcrete blocks with pavements, street lights, and so on. We didn’t think about their lives […] if you go to the place [resettlement village] you can see that they are living in better structures but their lifestyles have changed and I see them going down instead of progressing (XMMC10). Page | 153 By not prioritising the “lives” of the physically-displaced households, the company appears to have marginalised other critical aspects of household livelihood reconstruction. One site manager who participated in the resettlement negotiation process believed that the company did not provide adequate financial resources to the physically-relocated households during their movement. He explained that poor resourcing was due to the lack of internal understanding of the scale and magnitude of impacts related to relocation. In his opinion, the company’s internal discussions on direct financial resources for those households was narrow and shallow. He opined: “I think that discussion should have gone deeper than what we did [...] some people were not happy, even though they agreed to take the amount [movement allowance] that was offered at the time to move. After going there [resettlement village], they [physically-relocated households] realised that moving from an old settlement to a new settlement is not just about getting transport and packing my things and moving. And that it also goes with social separation and other emotional separations” (XMMC07). The analysis above points to multiple complex factors that may underpin resettlement planning and implementation. In this case context, the company’s response to homelessness was not a simple matter of design and construction of new houses. Competing land access imperatives, socio-cultural considerations and lack of adequate resourcing contributed to relocation measures that mostly overlooked the material demands of household reconstruction. The company decided on the location of the resettlement village even when the majority of the displaced households preferred another option. It is far-fetched to assume that the households’ preferred location would have presented better livelihood restoration opportunities. What cannot be doubted is that the households’ preference for another location, as highlighted in section 6.3 of Chapter Six, was largely driven by their sense of livelihood security. The interviewed resettlement experts indicated that moving displaced households from one geographic location to another is in itself a complex activity with enormous difficulties. The majority of the experts identified difficulties associated with livelihood reconstruction as the most daunting challenge that the mining industry is yet to resolve. The next section describes data regarding the company’s formal response to supporting the livelihood reconstruction of the displaced households. Page | 154 7.3.3 Livelihood restoration planning Content analysis of the Mining and Minerals Act and the LI shows that concern for livelihoods of mining-displaced households is scanty, with only one mention of the term “livelihoods” in both the Act and the LI. Where mentioned, it is only used to express the intent that resettlement should “improve livelihoods”, but stops short of placing requirements on companies or providing guidance on ways to achieve the objective. Section 6(1) of LI2175 states that resettlement be conducted with due “regard for economic well-being and sociocultural values of the person to be resettled, with the objective to improve livelihoods and standards of living of those persons”. Apart from these mentions, nowhere else in the law is the subject addressed. In contrast, the company’s standard on land acquisition responds to the need for livelihood reconstruction by requiring site managers to take steps to address project-caused economic displacements. In this regard, site managers are required to plan and implement a “livelihood action plan” aimed at providing affected-persons with “opportunities to improve, or at least restore, their means of income earning capacity, production levels, and standards of living” (p.3). The standard also directs managers to undertake regular monitoring, supervision, and auditing of resettlement action plans and livelihood restoration plans in order to track progress (or lack of progress) of affected-persons towards attaining the minimum standards of living. According to corporate representatives, the company anticipated impoverishment risks from the onset of the project. The company designed a livelihoods program to mitigate the risks. This program was two-fold: a short-term transitional relief program for selected vulnerable households, and a crop-based agriculture improvement project aimed at assisting eligible displaced persons to re-establish farms. Vulnerable households received a monthly food ration, a stipend, annual health insurance cover and access to primary health care and psychosocial counselling services. The agriculture component provided financial assistance for land access, planting materials and fertiliser free of charge, and guaranteed access to agriculture extension services and advice through the local government department responsible for agriculture. Depending on the size of farm a farmer lost, he/she is supported to acquire and cultivate a farm size ranging from 0.5 acres to 2 acres (see Appendix 6-1). The livelihood Page | 155 program operated concurrently with other wider social development initiatives that the company had planned for the affected communities. Corporate respondents indicated that these programs were guided by the company’s internal resettlement standard, the IFC performance standard five, and the company’s previous experiences in addressing adverse project impacts in similar project settings in Ghana and other developing countries. They said the livelihood program was designed exclusively to respond to anticipated food insecurity and vulnerability among the displaced households, and to resource them to reconstruct their lost crop-based livelihood systems. To examine the success of the program, all corporate respondents and some local government representatives were asked to comment on whether or not the program had achieved its objectives. The responses to this question are mixed and further differentiated along the two components of the program. The transitional support for vulnerable households was thought to have been a significant enabler of critical food consumption requirements for beneficiary households. However, the support for agricultural production was assessed with mixed judgements. There were varying perceptions of success and failure within the company. Corporate representatives in managerial roles were more generous in their assessment of the program’s success than those in supervisory and direct program/field implementation roles. Officials in implementation roles felt that the program could do better than it had: “We the implementers wish what we see in the field would be better than what we are seeing now […]. There is some kind of success. But then as an implementer, I wish it will be more than what we have. You visit the farms now the cash crops are there, but the food crops are non-existent. Even the cash crops, the management is not as we want them to be (Group interview, XMMC15, XMNC02, XMNC03). The evaluations of the program’s success by respondents was consistent with the findings of corporate-commissioned studies on those programs. An internal company report concluded that the program had “increased preparedness and capabilities of assisted vulnerable households to mitigate food insecurity” (Doc/02). The interviews also delved into the underlying factors that account for these evaluative judgements. For the purposes of this thesis, the analysis of these underlying factors is presented Page | 156 along three important dimensions of social risks assessment and mitigation planning in MIDR: (i) social impact assessment; (ii) planning and resourcing; and (iii) program implementation and effectiveness. These dimensions also represent key milestones in MIDR process. The focus on these elements is important as it helps to illuminate and account differently for the effects of programmatic factors that are internal to the company and those that are external. (i) Social impact assessment In MIDR, social and environmental impact assessments or similar studies provide the information upon which mine operators and regulators determine project impacts on local populations. Such studies do not only capture pre-displacement baselines of social and economic attributes of project-affected populations, but also inform impact mitigation planning against impoverishment risks. Given that the livelihood program was considered as a response to impoverishment, all corporate representatives were asked to share their knowledge on the processes that may have informed the design of the program. The majority of the representatives indicated that the company determined the livelihood profile of the local population at the onset of mining, using a series of impact assessment studies.66 Together, these studies indicated that the local population was made up of subsistence farmers who relied heavily on land for agriculture. The respondents reported that they knew upfront that the mine’s proposed land acquisition would displace local populations from the land and potentially induce food insecurity. While the studies provided the baseline for assessing the project impacts, the interview data from corporate representatives suggest little connection between these studies and the design of the livelihood program. Apart from limited use of baseline data to conduct an initial vulnerability assessment, the interview data suggests that the broader livelihood program was not informed by the impact assessment data. Some corporate representatives revealed that the program, in its formulation and design in Akyem, was a direct replica of the company’s experiences in Ahafo, its first mine project in Ghana. One manager said: 66 Some of these studies include: a livelihood survey in 2005; Environmental Impact Assessment in 2008; Gender Impact Assessment Survey, 2008; and Social Impact Assessment in 2010; Page | 157 “The livelihood program […] was just an imposition from Ahafo. What they were doing in Ahafo was just imposed on Akyem. This is what we are doing in Ahafo, so let’s do the same thing here” (XMMC08). Resettlement experts and civil society representatives noted that companies were more inclined to replicate social mitigation plans across different project settings, particularly where regulations didn’t exist or did not provide guidance. One community relations consultant described this replicating practice as “templatism” (XMRE02). Replicating programs is not necessarily misplaced, but the fixation on “templatism”, according to some civil society representatives, almost always risks neglect of unique contextual factors in program design. Other corporate representatives, civil society representatives and resettlement experts questioned current approaches and scope of social impact studies. They noted that approaches were narrow, tended to underestimate the full scale of project impacts on local livelihood systems, and focused on mapping ‘present’ livelihood circumstances while ignoring important questions about what works for adequate impact mitigation in the future. Civil society representatives added that the impact assessment studies in Ghana demonstrated only weak linkages between rural livelihoods and the forest resources. This practice, in the words of one resettlement expert, “fails to anticipate the transformational nature of these [mining] projects and thus livelihood programs tend to be primitive” (XMRE01]. In forward looking, he added: “The baseline approach is still struggling to cover issues like common property resources […] Often, the safety net provided by the forest is not fully accounted for. We need to move beyond ‘survey approach’ by sitting down with communities to better understand their livelihoods. Communities have a different understanding of their losses, which is quite different from the understanding of the multinational corporations” (XMRE01). Primitive livelihood programs, according to government and civil society representatives, were highly ineffective in resourcing resettlers to live through the harsh economic realities of the localised transformations triggered by large mining projects. Civil society representatives also offered a macro level perspective about impact assessment studies in general. They held the view that the social and environmental impact Page | 158 assessment studies in the Ghanaian context were flawed and embedded an instinct to get a “project pass” (XMCS03), rather than focusing on technical evaluation of project-cost benefits. This practice, according to respondents, resulted in a lack of thorough examination of project impacts. This observation around the narrowness of impact assessment approaches and the need to deepen community participation in the process also appears to resonate with the perspectives of some corporate representatives. At the Akyem mine site, some corporate representatives pointed out that local communities did not share similar impact assessment objectives with the company. Rather than seeing social impact assessment as a process for identifying project impacts, some project- affected households misconstrued the purpose and significance of those studies, viewing them as potential entry points for future benefits. To position themselves for more favourable future benefits from the company, they provided inaccurate information about their households to impact assessment teams. In the end, the company relied on this data to assess for vulnerability among the displaced households. The consequences of using inaccurate data to inform important corporate decisions on reversing vulnerability to food insecurity resulted in problematic program targeting. This problematic targeting was highlighted by the households and was further evidenced in previous corporate-commissioned social performance assessments (Kemp, Owen, Babatu, & Kim, 2013). (ii) Program design and resourcing The interviews sought the views of institutional representatives about corporate processes for design and resourcing of livelihood response systems. Corporate representatives were asked about: how the company determined the specific contents of the program; the opportunities for community participation in program design; the assumptions underlying the program; and the mechanisms for resourcing the program. Regarding program content, the corporate representatives suggested, as noted above, that the content of the livelihoods program was a replica of the company’s experiences in Ahafo. In effect, the content of the program was pre- determined with little regard for the Akyem context. The idea that the program was pre-determined appears to reflect what some CSO representatives, corporate representatives and resettlement experts believed was a regular Page | 159 MIDR practice. They noted that the tendency to predetermine programs limited the opportunities for genuine participation of affected persons in program design. In the Akyem context, the majority of the corporate representatives stated that the company had multiple avenues for community participation. However, some observed that these avenues were not consistently deployed across the different dimensions of the company’s risks mitigation planning, including the livelihoods program. A community relations official observed the limited participation of the displaced households in the process for designing the livelihood program, noting that: “Most of the time, we think for them […] We do lots of the discussions in-house, take it there and try to let them accept it, take it, and live with it. Sometimes it is not always right. Right from the very beginning we have to involve them […] this is about their lives, and they need to participate” (XMMC10). On assumptions, some MIDR policymakers commented on the frequent gaps between ‘declared intent’ to address MIDR issues as against having the knowledge and the opportunity to do so. Resettlement experts and corporate representatives noted that livelihood restoration was one such problematic issue where intent did not always translate into favourable outcomes. Planning and implementing livelihood programs was considered a very difficult and complicated process. The experts highlighting contextual and practical challenges that they claim at often less understood and appreciated by companies. Scott (1998; p.309) describes the tendency to ignore or underestimate contextual issues as “thin simplification” of complex peasant ethic. Resettlement specialists noted that companies do not appreciate the time it takes to plan and deliver; that there were often flawed assumptions that affected-persons will opt-in and participate in the programs; and that local traditional knowledge about some livelihood reconstruction activities (for example, farming) were sometimes ignored in program design. Relative to the gestation of livelihood programs, one resettlement expert said: “It takes a long time to restore these livelihoods, not only economic but the very base on how society works. Another issue is most companies have five year close-out period for resettlement. And in many cases livelihoods aren’t recreated within five years. That is really the big challenge. And without livelihood people cannot feed themselves” (XMRE06). Page | 160 In the Akyem context, corporate and local government representatives involved in program implementation highlighted a number of flawed assumptions. These included beliefs that the displaced households would easily access new lands to support farm re-establishment; that the households were subsistence farmers willing and able to get back to farming; and that farmers would dedicate themselves to establishing up to two acres of farm in one go. They reported that most of these outcomes did not materialise, and therefore negatively affected the effectiveness of the program. Resettlement experts observed that the existing practice whereby developers pay less attention to the cumulative and transformational effects of large mining projects was affecting the success of livelihood programs. They noted, for example, that land- based livelihood strategies can only succeed when resettlers have adequate access to land. When resettlers are crowded out of land by the project that displaces them, the success of such programs is automatically challenged. On financing, government and CSO representatives opined that corporations do not always budget adequately for livelihood programs. In contrast, managers in community relation functions noted that resettlement project financing (including livelihoods) was not a simple question of budgeting and allocation. Rather, the financing process involved difficult cycles of explaining the intricate complexities of these programs to project engineers who are often in control of budgets, but do not necessarily understand the social issues. Even when budgets are fully allocated for livelihood programs, questions remain as to when companies’ obligations end. The difficulties of not knowing when an obligation ends exposed corporations to risk of cost overruns on resettlement projects. Page | 161 Figure 7-1 Gold price - share price behaviour of Newmont (from Qtr1 2009 to Qtr4 2016) Researcher's construct (with credit to Dr Kwasi Ampofo), October 2016 In the Akyem context, corporate executives indicated that they had allocated fully budgeted resources for the resettlement program, including the livelihood program. Yet, at the time of the field work, project implementers reported that they were consistently called upon by executive leadership to cut costs due to the eroding effects of commodity downturns on program resources. A review of the company’s share price behaviour at the time shows a downward trend of both gold price and share price (see figure 7.1). This downward price behaviour may well explain the pressure for budget cuts. The pressure to cut costs, they reported, constrained their ability to respond to emerging challenges within the livelihood program, thereby affecting the implementation and effectiveness of the program to address livelihood reconstruction needs. (iii) Implementation and effectiveness Corporate representatives enumerated factors which they thought hampered the effectiveness of the company’s livelihood program. Some of these factors were internal and within the company’s domain, while others were outside the immediate control of the company. Program implementers mentioned the following internal factors that impeded program effectiveness: that the program timeline of three years was rigid, with no flexibility to review; that the Page | 162 implementation was overly focused on outputs, with little concern for outcomes; that internal commitment to systematically audit the process and track impacts was lacking; and that the implementation was contracted out to an NGO and government agencies without effective internal oversight and supervision. They complained that the program appeared ‘cast in concrete’ and was not amenable to field challenges, especially when the need for additional budget arose. From a group interview, one field officer thought: ”Newmont as an entity has decided not to pay attention to whatever feedback they get from the farmers. We as implementers do as much as possible to recommend, but this boils down to corporate decisions. Most times, this involves resources and they [corporate] will always come back saying there is no budget. It is fixed and we cannot do anything” (XMN02). This statement suggests that information on program challenges passed on by field officers to corporate managers do not always receive the attention. The consequences of not adapting the program to changing field circumstances, combined with weak internal oversight and supervision, may have affected the optimal reach of the program in addressing impoverishment. Failure to consistently assess risks of further impoverishment across project life had been identified by earlier social performance studies commissioned by the company (Doc/05, 2012) One external factor hampering the effectiveness of livelihood programs is the extreme difficulties that households face in assessing new farmlands. The factors that make this difficult have been discussed in Chapter Six, and were broadly consistent with institutional perspectives. Corporate officials interviewed recognised that productive land had become scarce, and that the cost of land and the distance to new farmlands has increased. While some officials leaned towards addressing these difficulties, they expressed concerns about creating other social risks. For example, some company officials hinted that the company could facilitate access to productive land by acquiring land banks upfront, to be allocated to farmers. They considered this idea laudable. Yet they also flagged that this approach would immediately trigger a cycle of displacement. As one corporate manager said; Page | 163 “Because there is a constant amount of land, whether you like it or not, that is what God has endowed upon us. So if you have constant land in the country; part has been taken and you want to replace that land, it will lead to a cycle of displacement” (XMMC03). The fear of creating multiple displacements was found to be a major constraint on the readiness of the company to respond to some livelihood problems, even if they had the financial resources to do so. Against the risks of secondary displacements, some resettlement experts and civil society representatives suggested the need for mining sector regulators and policy makers to deploy integrated economic planning to address livelihood challenges in localised mining impact areas. Such an approach, they suggested, should recognise regional land use planning and leverage the economic opportunities created by mines, including local employment and supply chain. 7.4 Chapter summary Impoverishment as a social risk for the mining industry is a constant feature of MIDR. In the Akyem context, the views on impoverishment and reconstruction challenges from different actors in MIDR – government, regulators, mining companies, civil society organizations and resettlement specialists – were generally consistent with those of the displaced households. Despite this common awareness, actor-specific attempts to respond to impoverishment showed marked deficiencies. The policies and approaches around compensation, productive land, relocation and resettlement housing overlooked the material concerns of household livelihood reconstruction. While the mining laws and regulations appeared to extend some rights and opportunities, local communities were generally unaware about these rights or required interpretive and instrumental support to realise the benefits of the law. In the circumstances, the prospects of the laws and regulations to safeguard the interest of the displaced people against the negative impacts of mining remain untapped. For mining companies, attempts to respond to a particular set of impoverishment risks showed the tendency to generate another set of social risks. For example, the company’s procedure for selecting an appropriate relocation site for the physically displaced households was heavily challenged when it became obvious that the mine risked putting its own land access schedule in jeopardy if officials did not yield to the demands of local land-owning chiefs who Page | 164 insisted on maintaining their cultural hold over the displaced population. Similarly, the idea that companies should invest more to access new agricultural lands for displaced households poses the risks of displacing some other communities. The potential for such spiralling social risks are legitimate concerns that need to be addressed when advancing strategies for resolving impoverishment. The causes of impoverishment, institutional response systems, and the factors that shape these response systems are considered in the following chapter. Page | 165 CHAPTER EIGHT 8.0 DISCUSSION 8.1 Introduction “Any intervention that does not recognize the centrality of the social actors in development programs is bound to clash, rather than to fit, with the natural dynamic of socioeconomic processes” (Cernea, 1991; p.xii) The primary aim of this thesis is to contribute knowledge in support of better livelihood outcomes for households in MIDR. In addressing this aim, the research focused on three related points of inquiry to understand how: i. displaced households in Akyem experienced MIDR; ii. livelihood reconstruction needs were conceptualized across resettlement policy platforms; iii. institutional actors in MIDR determined and acted on household livelihood reconstruction needs. The results of this study highlight a process of unfolding impoverishment among the displaced households. This finding is consistent with similar patterns in the literature about the experience of impoverishment among displaced households elsewhere (see, for example, Wilson, 2019; Bennet and McDowell, 2012; Honget al 2009; Cernea and McDowell, 2000). The underlying conditions of impoverishment among displaced households in Akyem were structural in nature. Household poverty was directly linked to the difficulties they faced when accessing productive land for agriculture; a reduction in viable economic opportunities and social safety net systems; and the negative effects of living in an increasingly monetized mining economy. The study found that notable elements (for example, land, housing, and skills training) relevant to household livelihood needs were present across the various resettlement policy frameworks, at the global, country and site levels (see Chapters Three, Four and Seven). What was evident across these frameworks was an absence of a consistent approach to the description of households, and no guidance on identifying and reflecting their needs and interests throughout the displacement and reconstruction stages of the resettlement process. This chapter Page | 166 discusses the human-centred dimensions of MIDR, using households as the primary unit of analysis. The discussion explores potential ways in which developers can address Maldonado’s (2012; p.213) call for a “system-thinking approach” to resettlement whereby “people are central to both the cognitive and practical implementation of programs”. By focusing on human-centred issues, the thesis also responds partly to enduring scholarly calls for deepening knowledge about post-displacement household livelihood experiences (Cernea and Maldonado, 2018; Cochrane, 2017; Maldonado, 2012). The discussion in this chapter is anchored by the conceptual framework outlined in Chapter Four and draws on key concepts from DFID’s (1999) Sustainable Livelihood Framework (see figure 8.1); Sen’s Capability Approach (Sen, 2009); and Hallet and Ventresca’s (2006) Inhabited Institutions Approach. Page | 167 Figure 8-1 Sustainable Livelihoods Framework Source: DFID (1999). Page | 168 The SLF and the capability approaches emphasize the value of human-centred planning. Given the critical role of public institutions and mining companies in MIDR, the Inhabited Institutions Approach is drawn upon to augment the discussion on how social actors in such institutions reach meaning and give effect to key decisions and actions that ultimately influence or constrain capabilities of displaced households. The SLF explains the structure of household livelihoods in a given context. It also characterizes sudden events that threaten household assets and resources. Displacement and involuntary resettlement are events with significant consequences for the assets of households and communities. In resettlement, the livelihood reconstruction strategies of the displaced households are influenced by the displacement event itself and the policy and institutional response mechanisms designed to support livelihood reconstruction. Sen’s Capability Approach is applicable to the policy and institutional context of displacement and involuntary resettlement. Robeyns (2005), while not writing on displacement and resettlement, highlights the role of policies and institutions as enabling factors for developing individual capabilities. For the purposes of this thesis, the policy and institutional settings are framed as “inhabited” for two reasons: to introduce human scale considerations in the analysis of the policy environment presented in the SLA, and as the basis for examining human capabilities within those environments. In the following sections, the conceptual framework is applied to three important components of impoverishment risks and reconstruction in MIDR. First, the impoverishment risk assessment process is discussed in section 8.2. Second, the key elements of resettlement planning and implementation are discussed in section 8.3. It is worth noting that the nature and scale of risk assessment has a cascading effect on resettlement planning and outcomes. Third, the issues of social interaction in MIDR is discussed in section 8.4 and relates to how these interactions influence impoverishment risk assessment, resettlement planning, resourcing and implementation. 8.2 Impoverishment risks in MIDR: reconciling perspectives There is scholarly consensus about the impoverishment effects of displacement on project-affected households. Cernea’s (2000) IRR has been seminal in defining the conceptual parameters of contemporary resettlement policies and frameworks. In this section, the researcher aims to align key components of the SLA that are directly relevant in defining resettlement risks. The discussion Page | 169 places particular focus on the components relating to “assets”, “livelihood strategies” and “transforming structures, processes and policies”. Assets map directly to resources lost as a result of dispossession and displacement, for which the developer has the primary responsibility to assess, replace, remedy and manage. In displacement settings, losing assets or access to assets can trigger impoverishment. Livelihood restoration strategies by households in MIDR involve the adaptive processes used by the households to interpret and respond to resettlement events. A missing element in the existing IRR and World Bank Group frameworks is the point of interaction or interface between displaced households and the developer – and the way in which this interface affects restoration outcomes. The social interaction that occurs in these environments is discussed in further detail in Section 8.4 below. While international, safeguard frameworks and national legislation account for risks to assets, and part of the context within which households secure their livelihoods, much of this detail is focused on compensation, replacement, and, to some extent, improvement. How the mine defines its own interests in relation to land and the changing conditions in local communities is also not easily rendered in existing legislative and policy frameworks. Although structural conditions for power that influence bargaining dynamics and fairness of exchange are noted in the existing safeguard frameworks, these conditions are not prominent in the international standards. The conceptual benefit of applying the SLA to this study context is that the source or origin of shocks or threats to livelihoods is made explicit. This is a critical point from the perspective of building awareness across the various institutional actors, and marks an improvement in the existing safeguards thinking. To complement the insights generated through the SLA on this topic, the researcher also utilises the Capability Approach to emphasize interactions and outcomes that flow from MIDR events. This brings into frame the obligations that social actors have in negotiating their positions and the effects these positions have on others, and themselves. In the following paragraphs, three elements of impoverishment risk and reconstruction are discussed: (i) homelessness, (ii) landlessness, and (iii) the function of cash compensation as a remedy for loss of assets. These themes were prominent in the study context. Homelessness and landlessness are well established themes in the displacement literature (Bui and Schreinemachers, Page | 170 2018; Alexandrescu, 2011; Nayak, 2000; Lassailly-Jacob, 2000). In Akyem, homelessness was not about “the absence of shelter or home”. A key part of the compensation package was that the developer provided replacement housing for all eligible households. Evidence from the Akyem case suggests that the absence or inadequacy of livelihood resources can render replacement housing ineffective in responding to the risk of homelessness. The problem of cash compensation being treated as commensurate the value of land and family farms was also apparent. As elaborated below, a seemingly straightforward response to impoverishment risks such as replacement housing, or issuing cash compensation, is more complex than is often understood by companies and regulators. 8.2.1 Homelessness – more than housing In the sustainable livelihoods literature, scholars consider a house and its associated infrastructure as physical assets (Bebbington, 1999) that influence the social and economic functioning of households (Robeyns, 2005; Bury, 2004). Like any other asset, households’ ownership or access to shelter is both a means and an end in terms of decreasing poverty and reducing vulnerability. Adequate shelter may facilitate access to other livelihood resources or provide an environment from which people can embark on some particular livelihood strategies. As a resource, a house can be combined with, or converted to, other resources to generate income (for example, rental income). Housing is one asset that a household may own or have access to. Other assets may include land and ecological resources, social networks, skills, and income. The structure and quality of an asset, such as a house, is only one measure of its value. In line with the SLF, a thorough account of how households utilise their assets requires examination of where the assets are located, and how they relate to and/or interact with other assets in a given context. These interactions and relationships between different assets are the foundations upon which stable livelihood strategies are created, diversified and sustained. It can be argued, in the context of displacement, that an appreciable evaluation of a house, and by extension homelessness risks, must go beyond a pure “house as a shelter” assessment. Wider human functionings, and agency that that shelter allows one to exercise also need to be taken into account. Page | 171 In responding to the risks of homelessness, the existing set of international standards, require developers, including mining companies, to provide displaced households with adequate housing, backed by security of tenure at resettlement sites. This requirement is generally reinforced by most country laws and regulations including Ghana’s. Typically, and as was the case in Akyem, companies’ approach to addressing homelessness risk is to construct resettlement housing in advance, move communities en masse, and sometimes implement programs to support livelihood reconstruction. The trajectory from planning, construction, and movement of people is mediated by several factors, including consultations, budgeting, and technical considerations. Scholars suggest that the wisdom behind advanced planning and group relocation is that it offers the opportunity to recreate “the elements of original locality in its new location”, minimize adverse social risks and improve standard of living (Lucian and Remus, 2012; p.68; Reddy, 2000). A missing element in MIDR practice relates to the analysis of how “adequate housing” interacts with broader transformational processes induced by mining itself. These processes such as population influx to project areas, localized inflation, increased cost of services, and lack of viable economic opportunities are instrumental to understanding the extent of risks associated with homelessness. For example, de Wet (2006) draws attention to these factors as creating accelerated socioeconomic change and affecting people’s ability to cope. In resettlement practice, there is a tendency to consider a ‘new’ resettlement house as a single all-encompassing benefit. Yet, this benefit may disguise “new poverty” that comes with living in a house without access to supporting livelihood conditions. In the case context, the company provided upgraded resettlement housing with complementary infrastructure in response to homelessness risks. Some corporate and government representatives regarded the upgraded housing as a mark of resettlement success, paying little attention to how the houses functioned within the entire transformational context of mining. In contrast, the households had a different view of what it meant to own a house. Although they appreciated the quality of housing, they also lamented the economic burdens that living in those houses imposed on them. In essence, their appreciation of upgraded housing was literally diminished by their deteriorating standards of living, food insecurity, and vulnerability. A male displaced participant (XAPM06) connected shelter with food security by simply asking: “If you are hungry, how can Page | 172 you sleep?” Put in context, a house does not directly induce food insecurity. But when the location of a house, relative to other livelihood assets and activities stifles human functioning it can present exactly these types of vulnerabilities. The contrasting views about the new houses suggest key differences in the way households and institutional actors perceived homelessness as an impoverishment risk. The concept of homelessness as an impoverishment risk is a not a simple issue of lack of a house or shelter. Most of the study households traced their livelihood predicaments to the location of resettlement housing. When a house distances you far away from farmlands, markets, and other essential services, it can become a burden. Living in the resettlement village triggered new expenditure patterns including transport cost to new farms, markets, and social services. The application of this conceptual framework (see Chapter Five) to impoverishment risks, in this case homelessness, has advantages. It allows resettlement researchers and practitioners to go beyond a house as an ‘end’ to understanding how the house provides means or support for the use of other sets of assets to produce desirable livelihood outcomes in a given context. Outside of this understanding, a seemingly straightforward upgraded house may end up creating new demands on the capability sets of households. International resettlement standards and theories (for example, IFC Performance Standards 5, and Cernea’s IRR), feature assets elements (e.g. land, house, and income), but then again, the interrelatedness of these assets and risks could be more carefully identified and examined. Scholars argue that disregard for this interrelatedness in resettlement planning often gives rise to outcomes that constrain the ability of displaced households to adapt or develop long term attachments to their ‘new place’ (see, for example, Hemer, 2016; de Wet, 2006; Asif, 2000). de Wet (2008; p.114) describes these situational outcomes as ‘disemplacement’, referring to “situations where, for a range of socioeconomic reasons, the area where people live or with which they associate is no longer able to support and sustain them”. Under these circumstances, resettlement leaves displaced people “unsettled, uprooted”, and at risk of perpetual displacement and homelessness. Faced with difficulties in accessing farmlands and the resulting economic distress, some relocated households in Akyem were unsettled. Some sold or were thinking of selling their new homes, while others were planning to migrate out of the village altogether. In the Page | 173 rural development literature, migration is a regular livelihood strategy, often timed, sequenced and linked to seasonal demands and opportunities (Scoones, 2009). Rarely do people abandon their homes with no strategy for sequence and benefit. For the households that previously objected to the location of the resettlement village, worsening economic conditions confirmed that their initial fears were warranted. In a recent global study of MIDR, Kemp et al., (2017) noted that the mining industry was better at understanding and responding to risks to physical assets than to risks that are were sociologically oriented. Impacts on physical assets such as a house are more visible and frequently feature in legal requirements for land acquisition activities with which companies must comply. Indeed, the existing legal and regulatory mechanisms governing MIDR in Ghana were found to be overly biased towards physical assets. The focus on compliance is imperative because non- compliance can present business risks for mine operations. When fixation on compliance overrides basic livelihood concerns of the displaced households, resettlement runs the risk of inducing further impoverishment. A better approach for the industry is to position physical risks in the broader context of industrial mining and its implications for impoverishment risks. In which case, the idea of adequate housing with secured tenure does not end as an isolated product, but rather the beginning of a long-term commitment towards assisting displaced households to re-establish stable living patterns in their ‘new’ environments. This approach has implications for companies’ land acquisition activities. Companies are much more likely to address the complicated issues around homelessness if they can access land in the right quantity, quality, and location. As discussed below, this is not without complexities. 8.2.2 Landlessness Landlessness is a significant impoverishment risk with far-reaching consequences. This is evident in both empirical and grey literature (see, for example, Lillywhite et al., 2015; Mares, 2012; Scudder, 2011; Fernandes, 2007; Downing, 2002a). When development projects intervene in localized settings, questions about land or landlessness emerge as contested issues or as the basis for bargain and exchange; and usually involve local communities and project developers. These questions invoke themes such as human rights and indigenous people (Mwonzora, 2011; Robinson, 2003), conflicts (Conde, 2017; Franks et al., 2014; Bebbington et al., 2008), just and Page | 174 fair exchange (Nosal, 2008; Maitra, 2009), and normative concepts such as Free Prior Informed Consent (FPIC) and consultation (Lisa et al., 2014; Aronsson, 2009). Access to land and land- based resources for livelihood purposes is the overriding concern across these issues and connects directly with landlessness as an impoverishment risk. Cernea (2000; p.23) posits that landlessness is “the principal form of decapitalization and pauperization of displaced populations”. By conservative estimates, Downing’s seminal report on MIDR (2002a) put this form of decapitalization as accounting for 10-20 percent of impoverishment risks.67 Consistent with literature, landlessness in Akyem appeared to be the bane of the unfolding impoverishment. For households who suffered both physical and economic displacement, the tendency to drift towards impoverishment and worsening vulnerability was considered irreversible. International resettlement standards duly recognize landlessness as a risk that project developers must address. The standards require developers to avoid displacement, where possible, in which case landlessness would not occur. When avoidance is not an available option, as is often the case, developers must compensate for and/or provide replacement land to restore lost assets. The World Bank sustainability framework (World Bank, 2017; p.59) denotes replacement land as land “that has the combination of productive potential, locational advantages, and other commensurate factors” for displaced populations to support their livelihood reconstruction process. Commensurability in relation to compensation for displacement impacts on livelihood assets is discussed in the next section. Whether opting to avoid displacement, pay compensation, or provide replacement land, landlessness as a risk in MIDR appears characterised by several differential risk considerations that are worth examining. Literature seldom addresses these differences. Of the eight impoverishment risks outlined by Cernea’s IRR, landlessness is the only impoverishment risk that is directly and explicitly connected to business risks. This claim is not to dispute the connections between other risks and business risks, but rather to emphasize the attribute of land as an asset of common interest to both mining operations and households facing the risks 67 After 17 years, this statistic is outdated with no update in literature. Page | 175 of ‘new’ poverty. Land is also a “zero-sum” asset. When one party has it, the other cannot. These attributes of land frequently underpin land-use conflicts in mining (Brueckneret al., 2014; Hilson, 2002b; 2002c). The lack of access to land, as noted above, induces impoverishment for displaced households as much as it impedes mine projects, producing negative bottom-line consequences. For mining, a project’s failure to gain access to land, as noted by Owen and Kemp (2015), can result in cost overruns, construction delays, or the abandonment of the project altogether. In a sense, impoverishment risk is entangled with business risk, leading to a situation where people and companies are exposed to different kinds of vulnerability through the risk associated with land. Based on this view, it seems from this case study that the company’s approach to assessing and addressing landlessness, largely endorsed by government regulation, was partly configured by its own evaluation of capital risks – in this case – access to land for mining. The company’s bottom- line interest, coupled with the government’s focus on FDI meant the option of ‘avoidance’ was not on the table. Unlike people, the mineral resource was unmovable. Neither the company nor the government was interested in avoiding displacement. Thus, dispossession, leading to landlessness, became a planned process designed to enable the mine. This process gives rise to what some scholars describe as “dispossession by accumulation”, whereby household livelihood assets are subjected to ‘forced’ expropriation by corporations and state authorities (Harvey, 2003 as cited in Bebbington et al., 2008; p.2890). Even when avoidance is an available option, research establishes that there is always the tendency for mine operations to incrementally adjust land requirements which end up encroaching on local livelihood systems (Downing, 2014). In Akyem, some households wondered why they were not permitted to farm parcels of land that the company acquired but had not put to use. As inhabited institutions, the convergence of corporate utilitarianism combined with government revenue targets resulted in a situation where the risk assessment process downgraded the risk of households becoming landless. When a senior government official explained the glaring weakness of the country’s laws for protecting displaced people, he did so knowing that the livelihoods concerns of local people were ultimately being compromised. He said: “We know that communities have problems when it comes to resettlement. But we try to also intervene to get the companies to do certain things. But we should have got punitive Page | 176 actions […] and we could easily do that…but sometimes you have to look at the environment around you – Every country is looking for investors. They have put their […] incentive packages in place to attract these people [companies]…so some of the rules may not be too hard because of the environment around you.” The focus on the distant extra-local “environment around you”, rather than the interest of households in such policy decisions brings to light the competing interests and objectives at play when policy makers determine regulatory provisions to protect the interest of displaced people. Based on the research findings, it appears that the policy making drivers, regulation and enforcements in this case context appear to be heavily influenced by Ghana’s economic policy to position the country as a preferred destination for FDI against its competing mineral endowed countries in the West Africa sub-region. Like avoidance, the attempts by developers to reverse landlessness by providing ‘replacement land’ can come under the direct influence of factors that are beyond their immediate control. In the inhabited institutions space, such out-of-control factors are described as ‘extra- local’ factors and help to explain how different interests and perspectives drive the question of landlessness following displacement. Drawing from the results chapters, replacing land after displacement involves two distinct and interrelated factors: availability and access to land. Availability may be the mere presence of unoccupied land that households can access. But access can be affected by several factors including the structural transformations of industrialized mining, and cultural limitations embedded in customary provisions of the context. Structural transformations including ‘new’ commercialization of land in disproportionate volumes, distorted land markets in the case context. Similarly, access to land is affected by many social actors of which mining companies are only one. In a customary land tenure environment like Akyem, companies cannot do much to influence land access. The complexities involved in avoiding displacement or providing replacement land bring to the fore the competing risks and interests in project settings that give rise to landlessness. Empirical work by Xi et al. (2015) on risk information sharing in the Three Gorges project highlights these differential risks and reveals situations whereby the risks perspectives of displaced Page | 177 persons are ignored in resettlement planning. The analysis in this thesis reinforces Xi’s findings. It argues for alternative risks-based analysis whereby addressing impoverishment risks requires companies to adjust to absorbing or accepting some level of risks as they relate to business capital. This is a frequently unresolved issue in contemporary resettlement literature with no easy answer in sight. A pathway forward is to evaluate cause and effect relationships, rather than just the cause which is often the case in literature. 8.2.3 Cash Compensation Cernea (2007; p.17), argues that the adverse impacts of displacement and resettlement often overwhelmingly “surpass the redeeming powers of compensation”. This is particularly so in the light of the fact that displacement imposes multiple impoverishment risks, mostly occurring simultaneously. Cernea’s argument helps to explain why scholars persistently call out perceived unfairness and inadequacy of compensation as contested elements of conflict between developers, in this case, mining companies and local communities (see, for example, Brueckner et al., 2014; Hilson, 2002c). In the resettlement literature, questions about ‘what constitutes fair and adequate compensation’ remain unresolved. Generally, scholars question the economic and financial basis of compensation (see, for example, Shaojun, 2018; Cernea and Mathur, 2008). Others raise ethical and normative flaws in the compensation process, including the neglect of informed consultation and the influence of power and status in negotiation outcomes (Kidido et al., 2015; Drydyk, 2007). The thesis highlight the features of this debate that relate to the commensurability and compatibility of compensation as a form of ‘fair exchange’. In their philosophical work The Morality of Money, Walsh and Lynch (2008; p.8) inform us of the universal role of money as a “commensurating device” for creating equivalence between different goods and services. Compatibility (addressing the type of goods and services) is complementary to commensurability (the cost of the goods and services). Both features relate to mutual advantage. In other words, the persons engaged in exchange recognize and agree to bargain one commodity for another based on mutual advantage. While displacement and resettlement fall outside the scope of Walsh and Lynch’s work, their ideas on the role of money mirror contemporary debates about the role of Page | 178 compensation in displacement and resettlement. Interviews with displaced households featured issues about commensurability and compatibility of cash compensation as an exchange for farmlands, and confirm several aspects of the debate. Regarding landlessness, it was clear that the displaced households and corporate representatives held different views about what constituted adequate and fair compensation for fallow and farmlands. A capability analysis of these different views allows us to discern important elements of focus that have implications for resettlement policy and practice. For example, when households contested the adequacy of cash compensation, they did so by raising compatibility issues. Cash, when compared to farmlands, did not offer livelihood guarantees and missed a highly-valued attribute of land as a cultural and intergenerational asset. Simply put, ‘cash’ was incompatible with ‘farmlands’ as a set of goods. This view stood in contrast to those of some corporate and government officials who measured the adequacy of compensation only on the basis of commensurability; that is, compensation as determined was over and above government established rates and peer-company benchmarks. A Capability Approach also leads to important considerations about the influence of the MIDR context and its transforming process on the agency households, including functionings that may be extended by cash compensation. For example, by deciding to peg compensation rates at those of peers rather than consider the household livelihood situation, the company stifled the opportunity for realistic assessment of investments that are reasonably required to service household livelihood reconstruction. In the context of capabilities, Sen (2009; p.231) in his Idea of Justice argues that the individual’s overall advantage can be judged by his or her “capability to do things he or she has reason to value doing or being”. This is a recurrent concern among resettlement scholars, although much of this concern is focused on the financial and economic attributes of the exchange (Cernea and Mathur, 2008). A pathway forward is to understand that resolving the commensurability issues require addressing compatibility at the same time. Rather than approaching compensation in an isolated way, it is argued that the first focus should be determining the compatibility of the goods being traded. In this instance, the cumulative advantage of cash compensation (or even replacement land) can only be determined by considering the entire suite of geographical, social and economic environments within which it is located, and allowing the owner to derive appreciable utility and Page | 179 value from the commodity. Compensation determined without such considerations is much more likely to be unacceptable to project-affected persons. And while the reverse will not always address the problem either, it holds the potential for contextualizing compensation negotiation beyond assets to inform better planning and adequate resourcing of livelihood restoration programs and benefit sharing agreements. Such an approach will also allow mining companies to place compensation in its rightful spot, that is, restitution, rather than an absolute value for replacing lost livelihood assets. But even with this potential, this was not the case in Akyem. The company’s approach to planning and implementing its resettlement program showed significant side-steps and seeming neglect of households’ material concerns about land and livelihood activities. 8.3 Resettlement planning and implementation Debate about the usefulness of resettlement planning as an institutional device for counteracting resettlement effects is emerging. The international resettlement standards are predicated on the assumption that impoverishment risks can be predicted beforehand, and that these risks can be avoided or minimized through planning, resourcing and implementation of resettlement measures. Cernea’s IRR is a dominant planning model. Some scholars question this approach as reductionist, linear and ‘inputs-driven’ suggesting that it does not account for the complexities of social change created by displacement and resettlement (de Wet, 2004; Koenig, 2002; Hall, 1994). de Wet (2004) argues that such planning instruments are relevant but remain insufficient in responding to the complexities created by displacement. In their article on planning in MIDR, Owen and Kemp (2016) highlight the utility of planning for addressing mining-induced trauma especially when it is pursued under a set of preconditions. One such precondition, they suggest, is for mining proponents to approach MIDR with a greater acknowledgement of the severity of trauma that mining imposes on people. This suggestion aligns with de Wet’s (2004) call for project developers to acknowledge the reality that the news about displacement on the whole is not good to start with. It is assumed that such acknowledgement is an important step towards generating useful knowledge for planning and constructive engagement. However, recent literature, supported by the findings of this research, indicate that this acknowledgement is far from reachable, even in the face of an improved set of resettlement policies and standards. In commenting on the new World Bank ESF and ESS, Cernea Page | 180 and Maldonado (2018; p.28) observed that the new frameworks “lack an explicit description of the most frequent risks of impoverishment worldwide, such as loss of home, loss of land, marginalization, food insecurity, and loss of CPRs”. This lack of explicit description only compounds the critical oversights in the conceptualization of impoverishment risks which have been discussed in Section 8.2 above. Like Owen and Kemp, this thesis finds value in planning although it also highlights shortcomings in the resettlement planning. The conceptual framework as presented in Chapter Five is useful for analysing the process of planning and implementing livelihood restoration activities. Resettlement plans typically entail programmatic measures aimed at assisting displaced households to re-mobilize assets and recreate livelihood activities after moving to the new resettlement site. The SLF concepts that are applicable in this programming are: “assets”, “livelihood strategies” and the “vulnerability context”. In MIDR, the impact of mining on the livelihood assets of displaced households mostly constitutes the basis for compensation and livelihood restoration plans. The Capability Approach provides an additional theoretical lens to ask deeper questions about the effects of resettlement policies or planned programs. Part of the wisdom underlying the Capability Approach is that policies or programs must facilitate the creation of “comprehensive opportunities” for individuals, rather than a detached set of deliverables. Sen (2009) describes comprehensive opportunities as the actual impacts of interventions on the lives of people considered as an integral part of the influencing agencies, and the exact processes involved in the person’s actions, choices, and the outcome thereof. Sen’s (1999) notes on the pervasive influence of the broader “social and economic arrangements” in creating substantive outcomes ties in with the SLF and helps to explain the vulnerability context of livelihoods in MIDR. In essence, a better explanation of individual actions and choices must include the influencing agencies and the exact processes the person used in arriving at such actions or choices. Livelihood restoration programs mainstream features of most global resettlement policies and corporate sustainability standards. Under particular project impact thresholds, the IFC Performance Standards for example, developers are required to assess, plan, resource, and Page | 181 implement livelihood programs to restore or improve the welfare of project-affected persons. The diagnostic and problem-solving functions of Cernea’s IRR model lend support to this requirement. The IRR encourages early assessment, engagement and adequate resourcing of livelihood programs as drivers for potential success. In mining and resettlement, the processes of assessing impacts can come under peculiar influences from factors that are both apparent and less visible. The conceptual framework of this thesis helps to draw attention to the effects of these factors on the cause and effect relationship between livelihood programs and the ‘replacement and improvement value’ they seek to create. In the Akyem context, the impact of these influencing factors, as elaborated below, were apparent in the company’s impact assessment and livelihood restoration planning process. 8.3.1 Knowledge for planning Social impact assessment (SIA) is commonly described as a knowledge generating activity for assessing, analysing and managing project impacts (Vanclay and Esteeves, 2011; Goldman and Baum, 2000). Most global resettlement standards position this activity (or similar) as a critical step towards predicting the scale and magnitude of project impacts on livelihood assets and activities, evaluating project cost against benefits, and for informing compensation and livelihood restoration plans. de Wet (2009b) argues, along with Dwivedi (2002), that there is an underlying predicative logic that presupposes that the adverse impacts of projects can be avoided or minimized through carefully constructed plans and interventions. This approach, according to de Wet, suggests that ‘inadequate inputs’ are the primary cause of resettlement projects going wrong.68 In DIDR, project developers use standard environment and social impact assessment reports to determine – in relative terms – where needs are in line with national standards, and/or where needs are more acute. While scholars agree that there is a relationship between knowledge, planning and the effectiveness of interventions, there exists some debate as to the principal cause of planning failures. According to de Wet (2009b), the central problem is that resettlement events contain ‘inherent complexities’. In his words “the nature of involuntary resettlement, […] is 68 The inadequate inputs referred to herein include inadequacies of pre-resettlement surveys and assessments, funding gaps, consultation, poor implementation, weak policy and regulatory frameworks, lack of political will and other initiatives (see de Wet, 2004; p.36) Page | 182 characterised by a complexity which gives rise to a range of problems that are more difficult to deal with and involve more than providing the kind of inputs noted above” (p.37). The research for this thesis confirms both the significance of “inputs” in meeting identified livelihood needs, and that company interventions (as inputs) are a key but often overlooked element that contributes to the inherent complexity of these projects. The process and results stemming from household surveys at Akyem is a case example. Households, when responding to company-commissioned SIA surveys, were thinking in terms of positioning themselves as best as possible for reaping compensation and employment benefits from the project. It was noted in Chapter Six that some displaced households did not understand the function of the surveys and therefore mispresented their vulnerability status. For example, when asked about skills, assets, and household level capabilities, respondents indicated that they were effectively “work ready” with a suite of skills and qualifications, when in fact, many such households did not have members with these skill sets. The situation exemplified above raises questions about the depth of engagement required at the outset of impact assessment studies, keeping in mind the need for companies to deepen their understanding of the social and economic status of households, but not at the same time to create situations that encourage households to “game the system”. In this case, the affected households came to an understanding that part of the failure of the company’s vulnerability program, especially in relation to who received assistance, was a result of households providing misleading data about their vulnerability status. This realization amongst affected households arose at a late stage, after programs had been designed and were in the process of implementation. Household respondents, while accepting that they were responsible for the data they had given to the company, also explained that if they had properly understood the principles and intended function of the survey instrument, they would not have found themselves in this predicament. This evidence lends support to some scholarly views about the influence of organizational factors on the SIA process. It also brings to light the role of such influences in creating knowledge gaps in resettlement planning (see, for example, Suopajärvi, 2013; Kemp, 2011). It can be inferred from this case example that the SIA process proceeded at a time when some households lacked critical information about the objectives of the study. In addition, the process failed to imagine the Page | 183 livelihood needs and aspirations of households, positioning themselves as ‘work ready’ when they were not. The situation described above also raises questions about the sequential value of data and knowledge generated through impact assessment surveys. Different data points have a rolling significance in the risk assessment and mitigation process. A mistake created at one point can have long-standing bearing on subsequent efforts, which can prove difficult to unravel. In this instance, misrepresentation by households at the survey stage meant that company officials used misinformation to plan and implement the company’s mainstream livelihood restoration program. This misstep led to negative implications across the programing, resourcing and implementation of the program. Another important knowledge issue relates to moments in the impact assessment process, and the scope of risks that can be predicted to support resettlement planning and livelihood restoration. Banks, Kuir-Ayius, and Sagir (2013) highlight the tendency for companies to under- theorize the transformational impacts of mining on local livelihoods. Under-theorizing, they argue, can lead to “conservative programs” with outcomes that are frequently outpaced by the circumstances brought about by the transformational processes of the mine itself. Circumstances can develop quickly and programs cannot adapt in response. For instance, the livelihood program in the case context, at the optimal best provides a chance to sell crops at 3-4 month intervals, but cash demands on households were immediate and recurrent. Households could not wait for a full agriculture cycle to complete itself. In this study, one CSO interviewee described such programs as “primitive”. Descriptors such as this reinforce Cochrane’s (2017; p. 170) critique of contemporary impact assessment approaches as overly centred on “preservation and conservation” of community life rather than “appreciating change requirements” that represent the interests and aspirations of local people. A pathway forward, according to Cochrane, requires adopting a “socially grounded” assessment which empowers people to generate for themselves knowledge about the change process (ibid, p.172). The ability of companies to predict displacement impacts on assets can be relatively straightforward when such assets are mapped out, enumerated and evaluated. In contrast, Page | 184 knowledge about the consequences of the transforming effects of mining on livelihoods restoration is not always apparent until displacement occurs. Failure to recognize and act on the distributional impacts of these transformational processes was a persistent theme in interviews. When discussing the process of SIA, some institutional actors criticized it as a narrowly focussed “project-pass” activity which often fails to account for the full scale of project impacts on livelihood assets. Information was absent about the key household level assets. The most surprising omission was around common property resources (CPRs) in the overall livelihood composition of households. Most physically-relocated households constantly mentioned the loss of access to common property resources as a critical livelihood constraint. Forest resources including firewood and kontomere, were frequently mentioned as items that were no longer available on a foraging basis, and therefore had to be purchased. For women, firewood was no longer available to collect or sell to supplement incomes. Displaced people described these CPRs as contributing to an overall safety net system. These resources are rarely attached to clear-cut ownership rights where one or a small number of persons have exclusive ownership or usage rights. Households typically exercise broadly accepted sets of user rights that allow them to forage for foodstuffs and other resources to support household level needs. While recognising the inherent limitations of typical livelihood programs to replace CPRs, acknowledging the deficits of these resources as critical impoverishment risks holds prospects for better design and resourcing of compensation and livelihood programs. In the Akyem context, the households lost access to forest goods and opportunities for hunting, without compensation or restoration. Concerns about displacing CPRs, disregarding them in compensation, and the unfolding consequences on household safety net systems are familiar themes in resettlement research (see, for example, Bennett and McDowell, 2012; Fernandes, 2009; Kibreab, 2000). Given the role of impact assessments in servicing resettlement and social management plans, scholars argue (see, for example, Franks and Vanclay, 2013; O’Faircheallaigh, 2011; Lane, 1997) argue that the inadequate uptake of this knowledge can impede good planning and resource allocation. Yet the uptake of ‘misrepresented’ knowledge, as discussed above, can also challenge the effectiveness of resettlement plans. Page | 185 8.3.2 Planning and resourcing norms Companies approach resettlement and livelihood restoration from the vantage point of the mining project’s lifecycle.69 This is considered against the fact that social information and functions are not always effectively integrated across project schedules. Typically, the SIA and mitigation planning of the mine projects are stage-gated along the distinct phases of the mine life cycle. While such a structured approach introduces a discipline to the planning and implementation of resettlement projects, the level of alignment between project life cycles and community life cycles is generally poor. Resettlement events in particular do not always align with the distinct stages of the mine life cycle and tend to underpin impoverishment when left unaddressed. It may be taken for granted that these poor alignments are driven by different factors in different lifeworlds, each posing unique sets of challenges for planning, resourcing, and implementing resettlement programs. In a critical appraisal of MIDR, Owen and Kemp (2015) identified five life cycle factors that drive companies’ risk mitigation planning and decision making concerning key resettlement activities including livelihood reconstruction. These factors are: cohabitation, inter-dependency, incremental expansion and uncertainties characterizing mines, leveraging cost, and governance by default. The interplay of these factors was generally evident in the Akyem context. For the purposes of this thesis, only cohabitation and inter-dependency are discussed, and are used to expand the scope of the analysis on the question of landlessness and the shortcomings of resettlement housing, which have been discussed in Section 8.2. Cohabitation is a key reference point when companies are planning the locations of new resettlement villages, yet this preference can make it difficult for households to find new productive lands for agriculture. Issues about governance and accountability are highlighted in the concluding chapter. Owen and Kemp’s (ibid) research about the impact of these factors on resettlement practice typically reflects the constraints of companies. The discussion in this section does not repeat these viewpoints. Rather, it offers an alternative reading of these life cycle factors through the combined perspectives of the Capabilities and Inhabited Institutions approaches. This reading is important 69 Typically, the distinct phases of a mine include: exploration, feasibility, development, operation, and mine closure. Page | 186 for enhancing resettlement practice. It turns the analytic focus on households, the primary social units of livelihood reconstruction; helps to decipher the different perspectives and pressure points that underpin these life cycle factors; and, in so doing, moves towards integrating social data and functions with mining project life more effectively. Cohabitation refers to the tendency for mine projects to relocate communities on the same mine concession or closer to the mine operations. Literally, project operations cohabit the same space with communities. This is usually the case because alternative land for relocation is harder or more costly to find. Cohabitation allows mine projects to service their obligations to displaced people more efficiently, making it possible for local communities to co-share improved services with the mine and/or tap into employment and other income generating spin-offs from the mine. Inter-dependency on the other hand refers to entanglement and often self-perpetuating dependency between the mine and affected people (ibid). Entanglement may result from the lack of economic diversity for relocated communities, unrealized benefits and expectations, and budget and resource constraints. For Owen and Kemp, these factors provide unique insights into understanding how mining companies plan and resource MIDR, using a distinct and different approach than other development projects. When cohabitation and inter-dependency are interpreted from the Capabilities and Inhabited Institutions approach, new insights emerge and relate to moments in planning that sway the focus of decision-making away from the critical livelihood reconstruction concerns of households. Drawing from the findings in Chapter Six, some physically-relocated households attributed the difficulties they faced in accessing productive land and CPRs to their proximity to the mine operations. Households explained that they preferred another site, away from the mine pit and infrastructure, and asserted this preference to the company and government officials during the negotiations on location of the new resettlement village. The preferred location, they argued, held better prospects in terms of proximity to available productive land, markets and improved services. Some corporate and local government representatives confirmed this preferred view of the households, and explained that the decision to locate the resettlement village at its present site was determined mostly by the voices and interests of influential chiefs and landowners. Even when the households appealed to both the government and the company to allow them access to adjoining Page | 187 forest for farming, this request was denied. In a capability sense, the ease of household access to land as a livelihood asset had been compromised. Cohabiting with the mine in this case context also meant accepting the burden of new transport costs to distant farm locations. As inhabited institutions, it may be argued that the company’s approach when it rejected the site preferences of households and refused to facilitate household access to forested land was driven by utilitarian corporate interest. Access to land for both current and future mine operations and the desire to maintain good relations with ‘powerful’ chiefs to sustain the project were prioritized, regardless of the implications on household livelihoods. With regards to inter-dependency, two pertinent issues are discussed and include entanglement and complexities generated through the budgeting process. As in many displacement settings, the attempts by the displaced households in Akyem to recover livelihoods became entangled with the mine. This was evident in the way company and household participants expressed their expectations of what ought to happen at distinct stages of the resettlement process. For example, at the commencement of construction, the company was actively engaging with displaced households about the prospect of jobs for local unskilled workers. At that moment the company could afford to extend jobs to local people through construction activities. As the project moved from construction to the production phase, the household participants continued to express expectations for jobs. For company personnel, there was little scope for employment at this stage as construction jobs had waned. The company expected the community to understand this reality. Households, by comparison, explained that this was the time when the pressures associated with displacement and the absence of effective livelihood programming became more acute. Without access to regular cash income, the households regarded life in the resettlement as untenable. This was due to households being located further from farmlands and therefore needing to pay for transport, and an increased dependency on local markets for supplies of basic food goods. Each of these requires access to a regular supply of cash. At the same time, with the movement from the construction phase of the project into operations, the company began to recruit a cohort of skilled workers from outside the local area. A relatively well-paid workforce, combined with increasing externally-sourced merchandise, inflated the price of basic consumables and increased competition for land and natural resources. Page | 188 It can be argued that the company, in this instance, viewed the community requests as unreasonable in the context of the mine’s life-stage. The company failed to accept that how they scheduled projects, including livelihood restoration programs, had a direct causal effect on household demands. Budgetary constraints were cited by several company representatives as limiting the effectiveness of the company’s livelihood program. Program implementers suggested that budget for resettlement and livelihood programs was insufficient to start with. Down the line, management requested all functional units including the social function to make further budget cuts. Some of the key underlying challenges associated with the budgeting process can be explained through the lens of Inhabited Institutions. Community relations managers described the project’s budgeting process as sets of difficult interactions between them and project engineers. Although project engineers are often budget gate-keepers, they rarely appreciate the scale and complexities of the social issues and long-term implications attached to livelihood programs. Drawing from figure 7.1, it may be argued that these difficult interactions are also underpinned by external factors, including commodity markets and share price behaviour that are far from the immediate environs of the project. At the time corporate executives called for budget cuts across all functions, the gold price had dipped with a knock-on effect on the company’s share price and availability of resources. The discussion above surrounds a typical case example that highlights the different implications the transforming structures and processes of industrial mining have on both the system world of corporations and the lifeworld of households. The discussion brings to the fore moments in resettlement planning and resourcing where key decisions are disproportionately driven by corporate imperatives and fail to balance household livelihood considerations. Displacement literature commonly discusses the utilitarian approach to planning and poor resourcing of improvement programs. The findings of this study support the views expressed by several other scholars, indicating a consistent pattern in project development where the interest of the project can sometimes be at odds with the interests of local people (Germanet al, 2013; Alexandrescu, 2011; Szablowski, 2002; Asif, 2000; Koenig, 1997). What is not so obvious in literature, which the thesis highlights, are the underlying pressures that give rise to incompatible risk cultures and misalignments in impoverishment risk assessment and mitigation planning. As with planning and Page | 189 resourcing, some complexities can emerge during the process of implementation that have considerable implications for the livelihood reconstruction needs of households. 8.4 Social interaction in mining settings “The Power of some and the vulnerability of others make bargains that violate common standards of Justice” (Scott, 1976; p.231) The introductory paragraphs of this chapter stated that one of the benefits of the SLF is its diagnostic function. Development practitioners find enormous value in using the framework to identify actors, institutions, resources and events that shape program outcomes in rural settings (Coakes and Sadler, 2011; McDowell, 2002). How the SLA frames the “interactions” between these different elements is too often overlooked in literature. The focus of this chapter, and indeed this thesis, is how these elements come together in the face of resettlement events. In these events, and considering the safeguards frameworks and policies, it is common to focus on the interactions that occur around “assets” that need to be compensated for or replaced, or similarly on livelihoods that must be restored. This section focuses on the human scale dimensions of social interactions that proceed and surround these more transactional types of interactions. The human dimensions of the Capabilities Approach naturally lends itself to supporting this discussion – bringing to the forefront questions such as: to what extent do these interactions respect, enhance or compromise fundamental human development ethics such as freewill and choice? And, perhaps equally as important, what do MIDR focused interactions tell us about the state and quality of capabilities between actors, knowing the complexities associated with resettlement, and the eventual consequences that can follow? All resettlement interventions, including replacement of structured and unstructured assets, are products of social interactions. Using the conceptual framework, these interactions are framed as “situated interactions”. To understand how decisions are formed, agreements are reached, and interventions transpire at the human scale, we need to understand the context of relationships in which these interventions are conceived and enacted. The benefit of this approach is evident when considering resettlement interventions. Each of the project elements that contribute to a resettlement program, successfully or otherwise, must at some point be conceived, approved and Page | 190 enacted by human actors in one setting or another. Using the situated interactions approach makes contextual conditions, exchanges, power dynamics and interests available to researchers when explaining how specific events transpired, and what is significant in a given location or process. It was noted in both Chapters Six and Seven that when project affected persons discussed the fairness or adequacy of compensation they referred to the context of negotiations that determined how compensation transactions were effected between them and the company. When speaking about shortfalls in compensation, most said they “were represented but the outcome was nonetheless unfair”. This expression was taken to mean that the affected households saw compensation outcomes as a negotiation primarily between the company and local elites and chiefs. The Ghanaian laws on land acquisition and compensation, as well as international standards, provide and indeed recommend negotiated settlements for compensation between developers and affected households. The laws (e.g. Compensation and Resettlement Regulation LI 2175, Article 5) specify that should households require support in the negotiation process, developers are obliged to pre-finance reasonable financial costs to in ensure that third-party valuers and negotiators are available to households. When affected households use the phrase “we were represented” this is not to say that their interests were put forward in negotiations by a qualified party, but that the interests of others were asserted during negotiation. Strictly speaking, the company and affected households did participate in negotiations over compensation. It was also the case, however, that local authorities heavily influenced what was said in those meetings. The overreaching influence of local chiefs in determining land matters was particularly noted as a significant factor. Legislative weaknesses, low capacity of community representatives, and the asymmetrical power balances played respective roles in producing compensation outcomes that violated households’ sense of justice. This observation confirms similar findings by scholars in the context of mining in Ghana and Mexico (see, for example, Kidido et al., 2015; Garibay et al., 2012). Moreover, the company was involved in parallel negotiations with local chiefs and authorities over right of access and land acquisitions for the mine more generally. The company also negotiated closely with chiefs to find land for resettlement sites. Page | 191 Each of the project’s interventions must therefore be considered and explained with respect to how different actor groups assert and negotiate their interests. The explanation for how particular events or project components occur is rarely available on first read. In most instances, observers or researchers are told that one party entered into an agreement process with another party and that a resolution was reached. In other words, the official documentation often fails to reflect the full interactional history of events. Although the situational factors that direct these processes are frequently hidden from view, they are nonetheless critical to understanding both the process and outcomes of resettlement interventions. The situations described above bring to the surface the need for greater attention to how different interests are negotiated and prioritised in resettlement events. At one level, interactions are situated in a context where government and corporate interests are explicit. At another, the interests of local chiefs, district authorities, business men and women, and affected households are available to assist in explaining the character of events. Across and between these levels, different interests and values are asserted and prioritised. Affected households, when describing the design, process and final outcome of negotiations, maintain that their interests were not prioritised, but simply traded-off. These kinds of trade-offs are described in literature. In the human rights literature, for example, the right of affected people to have a measure of determining influence over their futures is considered important (see, for example, Penz et al., 2011; Clark, 2009; Johnston, 2009). Perhaps more importantly, affected households are to have basic sets of human rights guaranteed (shelter, food, water), regardless of what interest other parties might happen to exert. The international standards, drawn broadly from the DIDR literature, emphasize the significance of participation and consultation as a means for bringing affected households’ interests into the process. These same sets of standards also assume that, as a minimum, households have a right (if not an interest) in having basic goods and services restored at full cost to the developer. What is not obvious or explicit in this literature is the situatedness of the environment in which trade-offs occur. In both of the literature sets mentioned above, there are conditions placed on trade-offs. In the Respect Protect Remedy Framework (2008, 2011), Ruggie directly states that Page | 192 companies cannot undertake human rights trade-offs by claiming to have performed well in one domain, while generating or allow harm in another. At the same time, the Respect Protect Remedy Framework asserts the need for companies to demonstrate their awareness of human rights factors in their operating context through, what Ruggie calls, “know and show”. The situated interaction approach would argue that to guarantee that efforts are being made to uphold rights, we need to carefully examine the context in which interests are exchanged and, at times, traded-off. This goes beyond reading a context for simple power asymmetries between a set of actors. To understand how interests are balanced, exchanged or traded-off requires a deep, situated reading of interactions across actors and over extended periods. The general, or rather the tacit recommendation in the sustainable livelihoods literature is that outsiders (in this case developers) must rely on the existing social and cultural institutions of communities as mechanisms for initiating or enhancing local participation and ownership of the development process. This is based on conventional wisdom, and in a typical project setting may prevent actors from discerning the overbearing influence of situated interactions in the processes and outcomes of interventions such as resettlement. This is particularly so in the MIDR context, where the interests of local chiefs, elites and representatives can differ in appreciable ways when compared with the interests of common people. For developers who intervene in rural settings, this is one element to pay close attention to. 8.5 Chapter summary In concluding this discussion, Habermas’ (1984) concept of ‘communicative action’ is useful. In this case it can be redefined to mean a cooperative process of interpretation in which mining stakeholders relate simultaneously to the question of livelihood reconstruction as a common sustainability issue, even as they stress their respective interests in the discourse around mining and its impoverishing effects. The discussion above has highlighted aspects of MIDR processes whereby critical livelihood reconstruction needs of displaced households are sidestepped, and in some cases consciously sidelined. This situation can quickly translate into business risk for mining operations, with knock-on effects to corporate-community relations, corporate social responsibility, and the sustainability of mine operations. Navigating the risk process can be highly challenging as corporate representatives, government officials, and local communities engage in Page | 193 complex situated social interactions with multiple interests that can shift in multiple ways. These complexities, as highlighted above, were evident in the Akyem context. In the process of explaining these complexities, the material and human scale dimensions can be overlooked, and appear to reflect the lack of or the inability of individual stakeholders to engage in communicative actions. This affects the types of questions that researchers and corporate stakeholders must ask, and in turn limits the opportunity for learning and discovering pathways for change. As noted above, many important questions, issues and perspectives in MIDR frequently get lost. The perspectives and interests of households in resettlement planning and implementation is one such example. For instance, it was difficult for mining officials and affected households to rationalize the constitutive and strategic elements about ‘fairness and adequacy’ of compensation, although mining proponents generally agreed on the materiality of compensation; that is, the need to support livelihood reconstruction efforts of farmers in an adequate manner. The combined analytical merits of the SLF framework, the Capabilities Approach, and the Inhabited Institutions approach help to direct institutional perspectives about social risks in MIDR. They also focus attention on the human and material considerations of industrial mining, resettlement and the challenges of livelihood restoration. As noted throughout this chapter, differential perspectives about impoverishment risks need to be reconciled and examined against the complex forces of resource development. In this case, the convergence of geology, land, multiple stakeholders, and power relations need to be carefully considered when discussing the challenges of livelihood reconstruction of households in remote locations. A pathway for change is for institutional actors in MIDR to develop better social imagination and awareness (Cochrane, 2017), and invite extended responsibility (involving government and companies) that focuses on understanding human scale dimensions in mining and resettlement. Page | 194 CHAPTER NINE 9.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION: RESETTLEMENT POLICY AND PRACTICE This thesis has focused on the representation of households in contemporary MIDR policy and practice. A key area of concern has been the attention paid to human scale factors and the extent to which these are covered in policy frameworks that govern displacement events in the mining sector. These issues have been examined through an in-depth case study of a resettlement planning and implementation exercise undertaken at Newmont’s Akyem Gold Mine in Ghana. This chapter, the final of the thesis, provides a summary of the major research findings and offers a set of recommendations for policy makers and scholars interested in advancing the issues captured through this research. These recommendations are set in the context of ‘governance’ and ‘responsibility’, longstanding themes in the literature on development-induced displacement and resettlement. 9.1 Key findings In addressing the human scale factors, the thesis focused on three key aspects of MIDR: (i) the livelihood concerns of households following displacement and resettlement; (ii) the policies and standards which serve as guidance for mining companies and host governments when they develop mines that cause displacement and resettlement; and (iii) the institutional actors who hold primary responsibilities for authorizing and regulating mining activities that result in displacement, and for designing and servicing livelihood reconstruction efforts of displaced households. At the household level, the research confirmed the established pattern of impoverishment and vulnerability resulting from mining-induced displacement. The dual pressure of dispossession and rapid transformations associated with industrial scale mining were especially prominent. This finding is consistent with the academic literature. Page | 195 Efforts by the households to undertake livelihood reconstruction activities were undermined by structural constraints. These constraints include, foremost, access to productive land, a critical livelihood asset for farming, became extremely difficult following displacement. Cash compensation was short-lived, and had little positive effect on household recovery. The provision of improved housing and civil infrastructure by institutional actors facilitated the physical relocation process. Few households were able to harness the benefits of these provisions due to the absence of viable economic opportunity. Recent scholarship such as by Cernea and Maldonado (2018) along with the findings of this research, confirm that critical human scale dimensions of household livelihood reconstruction are not well represented across key policy platforms at organisational and institutional levels. In this case context, Newmont, guided by international best practice, national regulations, and its own corporate standards, assessed, planned and implemented various response measures. Newmont’s assessments plans and implementation activities did not account for many of the critical human scale dimensions of the resettlement process. This research highlights that company representatives and other institutional actors have some insight into the limitations of existing policy and practice. By bringing a disparate set of insights together across a range of institutional actors, the thesis concludes that there is some potential for achieving policy and practice change in the future. Before presenting an agenda for change and future research, the flaws and limitations of the current institutional landscape are explained. 9.2 Responsibility for resettlement risk Impoverishment risks relating to landlessness and homelessness amongst displaced households were discussed at the outset of Chapter Eight. The mechanisms for addressing impoverishment risks most often take the form of either compensation or a programmatic intervention. To be effective, mechanisms to address impoverishment risks must take into account factors inherent to the local context. They must also involve actors outside the local context. Addressing impoverishment risk requires a response beyond that of a single mining company. In this case, the preparedness of the company and various government authorities, to accept joint or shared responsibility was determinably low. In the absence of joint responsibility, it was difficult for actors to define the scope of their individual responsibilities. These opaque governance Page | 196 arrangements masked risk responsibility, and allowed impoverishment risks to persist at the level of households. This situation reflects similar observations noted by Filer, Burton and Banks (2008; pp.175-176) in their study of mining and development in Melanesia whereby: “Everyone expects development, but everyone expects someone else to make it happen. There is a very poor understanding of the degree of commitment required to make the desired state attainable. The Government just sits back and expects the developer to make things happen. The landowners expect everything to be done for them because the developer is on their land. The developer is reluctant to take over what they see as the role of the government” Filer et al. (ibid) frame this situation as a “responsibility vacuum”. If we consider mining companies as inhabited institutions, it allows us to interrogate this vacuum along three analytical lines: governance, trade-offs, and practical difficulties. On governance, the most relevant question for this thesis becomes: who is responsible for what when a mining project displaces people? When government institutions do not have the capacity or the wherewithal to intervene to address impoverishment risk, the level of complexity in answering this question is amplified for all stakeholders. In the case of Akyem, the local government authority, by constitutional mandate, is responsible for planning and overseeing development within its jurisdictional boundaries. This mandate is to be exercised in close collaboration with traditional authorities. Responsibility rests not solely with these authorities, but also with the central government. However, the degree to which any of these actors can legitimately intervene or influence household level matters, is ill-defined. This underscores the lack of communicative action with various duty bearers focusing on their individual challenges, mandates and resources with little attention for collective and coordinated action and cross- support. Traditional leaders are most able to influence village level decisions. Resourcing displacement and rehabilitation efforts sits with mining companies. And parliamentary processes Page | 197 determine the policy parameters of government. It seems none of the parties have a clear mandate and responsibility to advocate for and focus on households. A subsequent question then relates to accountability between actors. On the one hand, it was common for company officials to raise questions about government spending, and ask whether mining revenues should be allocated to local government authorities to support those communities most impacted by the project. Local government authorities, on the other hand, while mandated to act, had few resources to work with, having not received funds from the central government to address the pressing problem of household-level impoverishment. In the meantime, the company and local traditional authorities had access to funds that allowed them to act and influence the course of resettlement events. Without clear parameters and active oversight by institutional actors with clear responsibilities, decisions tended to be based on individual discretion and convenience. When governments were unwilling, or unable, to exercise responsibility, companies ended up covering the cost and carrying the burden of responsibility. This responsibility often stretched beyond what company representatives believed should reasonably be expected of a single industrial actor. Additionally, displaced households shouldered the burden of this “externalised” responsibility, and turned to companies for support as the actor most willing and able to step into the responsibility vacuum. The idea that displaced people cannot seek support from their government, and in lieu of that support, are forced to engage a foreign, private, displacing entity to manage risk, is problematic. With respect to trade-offs, the issues surrounding homelessness in this case are worthy of consideration. Addressing housing risk was not a straightforward matter of locating a place in which a house could be built. The company had to consider the vested interests of different traditional leaders. For example, households that were identified as requiring resettlement resided on land belonging to one traditional leader. One of the principles articulated in international resettlement standards is that people should be relocated as close to their existing residences as is practical. The assumption is that this is the least disruptive for land tenure and social networks. During the researcher’s engagements with households, it was clear that they wanted to move away Page | 198 from their existing traditional leader on the grounds that their current land tenure arrangement was disadvantageous. A decision to disrupt existing authority systems had to be weighed against the prospect of that same leader withdrawing support for the mine. The risk of conflict between leaders over where people should be moved to was high. In the case of Akyem, the issue is around how companies are to navigate competing sets of obligations and responsibilities to the company, community leaders and project affected people. As an inhabited institution, company personnel understood that resolving this situation would ultimately require sidelining at least one party’s interests. The decision to prioritise the interests of the company and the local elite raises questions about such trade-offs, and whether meeting household demands in this instance would have been the more responsible course of action. While prioritizing household interests may have been a prudent course of action, this same action may have resulted in conflict between two traditional leaders, and challenged their relationship with the company. Under conditions of trade-off, determining the right course of action is a complex matter and challenges the core principles of global resettlement standards. Finally, a matter of practical importance relates to the availability of productive land to support households in their livelihood reconstruction activities. In this case, the company generally understood that access to land was important. But the reality was that the company was presented with limited options in terms of what they could offer to displaced people as replacement land. This is a common issue in resettlement projects globally. Land that lies in close proximity to large development projects rapidly increases in value once those industrial activities commence. Mining companies face the challenge of keeping displaced people close to their social networks and opportunities that stem from the mine, while not imposing on other communities by moving displaced people on to their lands. This creates a difficult choice: to move people into the immediate area while not disrupting other settlements or to find locations further afield that do not impose travel or other costs onto relocated households. In practical terms, these are far from perfect alternatives. Page | 199 9.3 Recommendations This section provides recommendations considering the two groups of readers mostly likely to engage with the substance of the thesis. The first set of recommendations is presented with the policy-practitioner audience in mind, while the second set is directed at emerging scholars with a view to identifying areas of research that could usefully build on the findings established in this thesis research. The policy-practitioner audience covers readers from three distinct but related professional domains. These are: global development finance institutions (such as the World Bank and other International Finance Institutions), global mining corporations and their representatives, and country level policy officials. This latter professional cohort could be taken to include employees of both government and non-government organisations. Resettlement Policy Two major policy recommendations are suggested. These reflect the emphasis on responsibility made in the earlier section of this chapter. In the following recommendations, the main concern is to ensure that policy gaps identified in the course of the research are either addressed or highlighted to avoid duplicating some of the more troubling experiences noted in the Akyem case. First, clearer policy guidelines at the national and international standard level are needed to assist companies in determining who qualifies as a representative of affected people. The present set of guidelines adequately encourage consultation, and highlight the importance of defining which groups of people will be affected by the project. The difficulty in the Akyem case is that the company rightfully consulted with local authorities as customary representatives. Negotiations with project affected people were similarly undertaken with customary representatives, who according to one cohort of project affected people, were able to represent their own interests in relation to land, but who were not necessarily best placed to speak for the affected people themselves. This is not a unique situation and it raises the critical question of how to ensure that people have an appropriate level of negotiating authority such that their basic interests are represented. At Akyem, a customary authority was able to exercise control over the resettlement options of a migrant population living on customary land, but who wanted to move elsewhere in order to explore less bonded arrangements. Page | 200 Second, current guidelines relating to the definition and support of vulnerable persons requires further development. Two issues from the Akyem case highlight the need for more explicit guidance in this area. The first issue is that definitions for what constitutes vulnerability are too broad. Characterising vulnerability based on local criteria would provide project-affected people with a stronger basis from which to avoid further vulnerability and for developers to formulate social programs against. The second issue is that consultation processes need to be sufficiently transparent, so that affected-people understand why they are giving over personal information to project teams. At Akyem, people intentionally gave misleading information to the project on the false understanding that they were participating in a pre-employment survey. This drastically skewed the early study data and radically understated the extent to which the displaced households were already vulnerable, and would be made more vulnerable post-settlement. Future research Three recommendations are made for scholars interested in pursuing the themes outlined in this thesis. First, in the course of the fieldwork for this thesis, a range of spatial dimensions of displacement risk were described by affected people. This includes issues such as the spatial arrangement of households in the new village setting and the way that the new configuration affects daily interactions and a sense of belonging. It also included the distance and barriers posed by moving people away from both forested areas and farmlands; and the multi-site strategies households constructed across their various networks as means for coping with their new economic conditions. The findings of this research map closely with the landlessness, food security, marginalization, social disarticulation and loss of common property from Cernea’s (1997, 2000) IRR model. Further research using remote sensing methods and GIS systems could add an important and much neglected spatial layer to understanding of displacement risks. Second, Wilmsen and Hulten’s (2017) research on livelihood programming under the Chinese state-sponsored approach highlights the value of longitudinal research to demonstrate the effects over the family life course and between generations. A longer than usual term of monitoring and evaluation was exercised at Newmont’s Ahafo mine in Ghana, however this was done for the purposes of closing out commitments under the IFC Performance Standards and demonstrating good corporate practice. This somewhat extended monitoring window does not reflect standard Page | 201 industry practice. Extending this longer-term approach to monitoring resettlement outcomes at Akyem and to the study of MIDR would be a positive development. Insisting on multi-generational monitoring as an additional principle of international standards and norms is a more difficult proposition in practical terms, but one that should be considered to better reflect the interests of displaced households. Third, in order to advance the operationalisation and to test the applicability of Free Prior Informed Consent (FPIC) in the African context, research into specific conditions, such as those presented at Akyem, could be pursued. As a general principle, FPIC is a common sense sequence for ensuring that local, land-connected, and indigenous and tribal peoples have exercised their rights, and voices, in relation to project developments that affect their land and territories, and thus their cultural survival. The situation at Akyem, while particular to this case, is not unique. Underneath each customary land tenure arrangement will be special circumstances that test the extent to which people are rightfully able to speak for others, or to speak on specific themes or issues. The ‘right of representation’ is directly linked to the issue of volition and, in some cases, if managed poorly, could result in one collective voice undermining the voice and condition of others. 9.4 Conclusion This thesis has drawn from the analysis established by displacement scholars over the course of the past six decades. This research has focused on displacement caused by large-scale mining projects, and the consequences that follow for affected households. The case study highlights the central importance of understanding local dynamics against established general patterns and themes. The research is confident that the research findings and conclusions represent a contribution to the displacement literature, with insights for proponents of other mega development projects in conceptualizing, planning, implementing, and managing household livelihood restoration in post-displacement contexts. Although the conclusions are drawn from the results of a single case study, these locally particular challenges are observable in other large-scale mining jurisdictions. By writing this thesis, the researcher’s ultimate goal is to contribute to deepening the knowledge base that supports improved outcomes in resettlement policy and practice into the future. Page | 202 BIBLIOGRAPHY Adam, A. B., Owen, J. R., & Kemp, D. (2015). Households, livelihoods and mining-induced displacement and resettlement. The Extractive Industries and Society, 2(3), 581-589. ADB. (2009). Safeguard Policy Statement (June 2009 ed., Vol. 2014): Asian Development Bank. ADB. (2012). Involuntary resettlement safeguards: a planning and implementation good practice sourcebook - Draft working document. Addy, S. N. (1998). Ghana: revival of the mineral sector. Resources Policy, 24(4), 229-239. Adjaye, J. K. (1987). Time, the calendar, and history among the Akan of Ghana The Journal of Ethnic Studies, 15(3). AfDB, OECD, UNDP, & ECA. (2013) Africa Economic Outlook 2013: Structural transformation and Natural Resources. Retrieved from https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/docserver/aeo- 2013- en.pdf?expires=1553479643&id=id&accname=ocid177546&checksum=DCD527306477 87F797635FA21A743F3F Agbesinyale, P. K. (2003). Ghana's Gold Rush and Regional Development: The Case of Wassa West District. SPRING Centre, University of Dortmund. SPRING Centre, University of Dortmund. Aguinis, H., & Henle, C. (2008). Ethics in Research. In S. G. Rogelberg (Ed.), Handbook of Research Methods in Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Wiley-Blackwell. Agyekum, K. (2002). Menstruation as a verbal taboo among the Akan of Ghana. Journal of Anthropological Research, 58(3), 367-387. Ahmad, N., & Lahiri-dutt, K. (2006). Engendering Mining Communities: Examining the Missing Gender Concerns in Coal Mining Displacement and Rehabilitation in India. Gender, Technology and Development, 10(3), 313-339. Ahmad, N., & Lahiri-Dutt, K. (2014). Gender in coal mining induced displacement and rehabilitation in Jkharthand. In K. Lahiri-Dutt (Ed.), The Coal Nation: histories, ecologies and politics of coal in India. England and Burlington: Ashgate. Akabzaa, T., & Darimani, A. (2001). Impact of Mining Sector Investment in Ghana: A Study of the Tarkwa Mining Region. SAPRI. Akabzaa, T. (2009). Mining in Ghana: Implications for national economic development and poverty reduction In C. Bonnie (Ed.), Mining in Africa: Regulation and development (pp. 25-66). London Pluto press. Page | 203 Amponsah-Tawiah, K., & Dartey-Baah, K. (2011). The mining industry in Ghana: a blessing or a curse. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 2(12), 62. Akiwumi, F. A. (2011). Transnational mining corporations and sustainable resource-based livelihoods in Sierra Leone. Singapore Journal of Tropical Geography, 32(1), 53-70. Alexandrescu, F. (2011). Gold and displacement in eastern Europe: risks and uncertainty at Rosia Montana. Revista Romana de Sociologie, 22(1/2), 78-107. Amoatey, C. T., Famiyeh, S., & Andoh, P. (2017). Risk assessment of mining projects in Ghana. Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, 23(1), 22-38. Ampofo, K., & Adam, A. B. (2019). Mineral investment decision-making in Africa: a real options approach in integrating price and environmental risks. In S. Ali, K. Sturman, & N. Collins (Eds.), Africa's Mineral Fortune. London: Routledge. Amponsah-Tawiah, K., & Dartey-Baah, K. (2011). The Mining Industry in Ghana: A Blessing or a Curse. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 2(12), 62. Andrews, N. (2018). Land versus livelihoods: Community perspectives on dispossession and marginalization in Ghana's mining sector. Resources Policy, 58, 240-249. Areeparampil, M. (1996). Displacement Due to Mining in Jharkhand. Economic and Political Weekly, 31(24), 1524-1528. Aronsson, I. L. (2009). The paradox of local participation in forced displacement and resettlement caused by the development process Revista Romana de Sociologie, 20(1/2), 37-59. Aryee, B., & Aboagye, Y. (2008). Mining and sustainable development in Ghana. Paper presented at the Developing Messages for the UN Conference on Sustainable Development Review– Developing Country Perspective. Aryee, B. N. A. (2001). Ghana's mining sector: its contribution to the national economy. Resources Policy, 27(2), 61-75. Aryeetey, E., Harrigan, J., & Nissanke, M. (2000). Economic Reforms in Ghana: The Miracle and the Mirage. Trenton, NJ: Africa World Press, Inc. Asif, M. (2000). Why Displaced Persons Reject Project Resettlement Colonies ? . Economic and Political Weekly., 35(24), 2005-2008. Aubynn, E. A. (2003). Community perceptions of mining: An experience from Western Ghana. (MQ87714 M.Sc.), University of Alberta (Canada), Ann Arbor. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/305251952?accountid=14723; http://cf5pm8sz2l.search.serialssolutions.com/?&genre=article&sid=ProQ:&atitle=Comm Page | 204 unity+perceptions+of+mining. ABI/INFORM Complete; ABI/INFORM Global; ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global database. Ayee, J., Soreide, T., Shukla, G. P., & Minh Le, T. (2011). Political Economy of the Mining Sector in Ghana. Washington, D.C: The World Bank. Ayisi, M. K. (2015). "The Review of Mining Laws and the Renegotiation of Mining Agreements in Africa: Recent Developments from Ghana." The Journal of World Investment & Trade: 467-505. Ayisi, M. (2009). Ghana's New Mining Law: Enhancing the Security of Mineral Tenure. Energy and Natural Resources, 27(1), 66-96. Bainton, N. A. (2010). The Lihir Destiny: Cultural Responses to Mining in Melanesia. Canberra, Australia ANU Press. Banks, G. (2013). Little by little, inch by inch: Project expansion assessments in the Papua New Guinea mining industry. Resources Policy, 38(4), 688-695. Banks, G., Kuir-Ayius, D., Kombako, D., & Sagir, B. (2013). Conceptualizing mining impacts, livelihoods and corporate community development in Melanesia. Community Development Journal, 48(3), 484-500. Barclay, R. and T. Salam (2015). Ahafo South Resettlement and Livelihood Restoration Completion Audit Final Report, Newmont Ghana Gold Ltd. Bawole, J. N. (2013). Public hearing or 'hearing public'? an evaluation of the participation of local stakeholders in environmental impact assessment of Ghana's Jubilee oil fields. Environ Manage, 52(2), 385-397. Bebbington, A. (1999). Capitals and Capabilities: A Framework for Analyzing Peasant Viability, Rural Livelihoods and Poverty. World Development, 27(12), 2021-2044. Bebbington, A., Abdulai, A., Bebbington, D., Hinfelaar, M., & Sanborn, C. A. (2018). Governing Extractive Industries: politics, histories and ideas Great Clarendon Street, Oxford, OX2 6DP,: Oxford University Press. Bebbington, A., Humphreys Bebbington, D., Bury, J., Lingan, J., Muñoz, J. P., & Scurrah, M. (2008). Mining and Social Movements: Struggles Over Livelihood and Rural Territorial Development in the Andes. World Development, 36(12), 2888-2905. Bennett, O., & McDowell, C. (2012). Displaced : The Human Cost of Development and Resettlement. Gordonsville, VA, USA: Palgrave Macmillan. Bernstein, H., Ben Crow, & Johnson, H. (Eds.). (1992). Rural Livelihoods: crisis and responses: Oxford University Press and The Open University. Page | 205 Bice, S. (2016). Responsible mining : Key principles for industry integrity. London and New York: Routledge. Bloch, R., & Owusu, G. (2012). Linkages in Ghana’s gold mining industry: Challenging the enclave thesis. Resources Policy, 37, 434–442. Blochert, J. (2006). Building on Custom: Land tenure Policy and Economic Development in Ghana." Yale Human Rights and Development Journal 9. Bosson, R., & Varon, B. (1977). Mining industry and the developing countries. United States U.S Department of Energy, Office of Scientific and Technical Information. Bottorff, J. L. (2004). Types of Observation. In M. S. Lewis-Beck, A. Bryman, & T. F. Liao (Eds.), The SAGE Encyclopedia of Social Science Research Methods. Thousand Oak: SAGE Publications, Inc. Bowen, G. A. (2009). Document Analysis as a Qualitative Research Method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2), 27-40. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101. Britton, A., & Lakhdari, R. (2015). The social and economic Impacts of gold mining. Retrieved from London, United Kingdom: file:///C:/Users/uqababat/Desktop/New%20folder/the- social-and-economic-impacts-of-gold-mining.pdf Brueckner, M., Durey, A., Mayes, R., & Pforr, C. (2014). Resource Curse or Cure ?: On the Sustainability of Development in Western Australia. Springer Berlin Heidelberg. Bryceson, D. F. (2002). Multiplex livelihoods in rural Africa: recasting the terms and conditions of gainful employment. The Journal of Modern African Studies, 40(1), 1-28. Bury, J. (2004). Livelihoods in Transition: Transnational Gold Mining Operations and Local Change in Cajamarca, Peru. The Geographical Journal, 170(1), 78-91. Button, G. V. (2009). Family resemblances between disasters and development-forced displacement: hurricane Katrina as a comparative case study In A. Oliver-Smith (Ed.), Development and Dispossession: The crisis of forced displacement and resettlement (pp. 255-274). Santa Fe: School of Advanced Research Press. Campbell, B. (Ed.) (2009). Mining in Africa: Regulation and Development: International Development Research Centre, Nordiska Afrikainstitutet, Pluto Press. Page | 206 Carney, D. (1999). Approaches to Sustainable Livelihoods for the Rural Poor. London: Retrieved from https://www.odi.org/sites/odi.org.uk/files/odi-assets/publications-opinion- files/3093.pdf Carney, D. (2002). Sustainable Livelihoods Approaches: Progress and Possibilities for Change. London: Retrieved from: http://www.eldis.org/vfile/upload/1/document/0812/SLA_Progress.pdf Carney, D. (Ed.) (1998). Implementing the sustainable rural livelihoods approach (Vol. 3). London: Department for International Development. Carruthers, B. G., Schensul, S. L., Schensul, J. J., & LeCompte, M. D. (1999). Essential Ethnographic Methods: Observations, Interviews, and Questionnaires: Rowman Altamira Press. Cernea, M. (Ed.) (1999). The Economics of Involuntary Resettlement: Questions and Challenges Washington, D.C: The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/The World Bank. Cernea, M., & Maldonado, J. K. (2018). Challenging the Prevailing Paradiagm of Displacement and Resettlement: Its evolution, and constructive ways of improving it. In M. Cernea & J. K. Maldonado (Eds.), Challenging the Prevailing Paradiagm of Displacement and Resettlement: Risks, Impoverishment, Legacies, Solutions London and New York Routledge. Cernea, M. M. (1986). Involuntary Resettlement in Bank-assisted Projects: A review of the application of Bank policies and procedures in FY 79-85 Projects. Washington, D.C: The World Bank. Cernea, M. M. (1990). Internal Refugee Flows and Development-Induced Population Displacement. Journal of refugee studies, 3(4), 320-339. Cernea, M. M. (1995). Understanding and Preventing Impoverishment from Displacement; Reflections on the State of Knowledge*. Journal of Refugee Studies, 8(3), 245-264. Cernea, M. M. (1996). Public Policy Responses to Development-induced population displacement. Economic and Political Weekly 31(24): 1515-1523. Cernea, M. (1997). The risks and reconstruction model for resettling displaced populations. World Development, 25(10), 1569-1587. Cernea, M. M. (2000). Risks, Safeguards and Reconstruction: A Model for Population Displacement and Resettlement. Economic and Political Weekly, 35(41), 3659-3678. Page | 207 Cernea, M. M. (Ed.) (1991). Putting people first: Sociological variables in rural development (Second edition,revised and expanded ed.). Washington D.C.: The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/The World Bank. Cernea, M. M., & Guggenheim, S. E. (Eds.). (1993). Anthropological Approaches to Resettlement: Policy, Practice and Theory. Boulder: Westview Press. Cernea, M. M., & Mathur, H. H. (Eds.). (2008). Can compensation prevent impoverishment?: Reforming resettlement through investments and benefit-sharing Oxford Oxford University Press. Cernea, M. M., & Mathur, H. M. (2007). Can Compensation Prevent Impoverishment?: Reforming Resettlement Through Investments: Oxford University Press. Cernea, M. M., & McDowell, C. (Eds.). (2000). Risk and Reconstruction: Experiences of resettlers and refugees. Washington D.C.: The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/The World Bank. Chambers, R. (1981). Rapid rural appraisal: rationale and repertoire. Public Administration and Development, 1, 95-106. Chimhowu, A., & Hulme, D. (2006). Livelihood dynamics in planned and spontaneous resettlement in Zimbabwe: Converging and Vulnerable. World Development, 34(4), 728- 750. Choi, N. (2015). Reinvigorating a critical discussion on 'development' in development-induced displacement and resettlement: a study of non-displacement impacts. In I. Satiroglu & N. Choi (Eds.), Development-Induced Displacement and Resettlement: New perspectives on persisting problems (pp. 41-55). London and New York Routledge. CHRAJ. (2008). The State of Human Rights in Mining Communities in Ghana. Accra,Ghana. Chuhan-Pole, P., Dabalen, A. L., & Land, B. C. (2017). Mining in Africa: Are Local Communities Better Off? Washington, DC: International Bank for Reconstruction and Development. Clark, D. (1997). The World Bank and Development-Induced Displacement in South Asia. The Brown Journal of World Affairs, 4(2), 215-231. Clark, D. (2009a). An Overview of Revisions to the World Bank Resettlement Policy. In L. Mehta (Ed.), Displaced by development: Confronting marginalization and gender injustice (pp. 195-224). Delhi, India: Sage. Clark, D. (2009b). Power to the people: Moving towards a Right-Respecting Resettlement Framework In A. Oliver-Smith (Ed.), Development and Dispossession: The Crisis of Forced Displacement and Resettlement (pp. 181-199). Santa Fe: SAR Press. Page | 208 Cleaver, F. (1999). Paradoxes of participation: questioning participatory approaches to development. Journal of International Development(11), 597-612. Coakes, S., & Sadler, A. (2011). Utilizing a sustainable livelihoods approach to inform social impact assessment practice. In F. Vanclay & A. M. Esteves (Eds.), New Directions in Social Impact Assessment: Conceptual and Methodological Advances (pp. 323-340). Cheltenham, UK and Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Printing. Cochrane, G. (2017). Anthropology in the mining industry: community relations after Bougainville's civil war. Switzerland Palgrave: Macmillan. Colson, E. (1971). The Social Consequences of Resettlement: The Impact of the Kariba Resettlement Upon the Gwembe Tonga: Institute for African Studies, University of Zambia by Manchester University Press. Conde, M. (2017). Resistance to Mining. A Review. Ecological Economics, 132, 80-90. Crotty, M. (1998). The Foundations of Social Research : Meaning and Perspective in the Research Process. Sydney Allen and Uwin. Taylor, N., Dale, A., & Lane, M. (2001). Conclusions: social assessment, natural resource institutions and the future Social Assessment in Natural Resource Management Institutions. A. Dale, N. Taylor and M. Lane. Collingwood, Csiro Publishing Darimani, A. (2007). Review of state equity participation and mineral royalty tax upward adjustment: Policy brief for the Government of Zambia. Mining and Environment Bulletin, Vol. 2, Third World Network, Accra, Ghana. Davidson, A. P. (1991). Rethinking Household Livelihood Strategies. Research in Rural Sociology and Development, 5, 11-28. Desai, V., & Potter, R. B. (2006). Doing development research. London: SAGE Publications, Ltd. de Wet, C. (2004). Why do things often go wrong in resettlement projects. Moving People in Ethiopia: Development, Displacement & the State, 35-49. de Wet, C. (2006). Risk, complexity and local initiative in forced resettlement outcomes. In C. De Wet (Ed.), Development-induced displacement: Problems, policies and people (pp. 180- 202). United States: Berghahn Books. de Wet, C. (2008). Reconsidering displacement in Southern Africa. Anthropology Southern Africa, 31(3&4), 114-122. de Wet, C. (2009a). Does Development Displace Ethics? The Challenge of Forced Displacement In A. Oliver-Smith (Ed.), Development and Dispossession (pp. 77-96). Sante Fe: School of Advanced Research. Page | 209 de Wet, C. (2009b). Why do things often go wrong in resettlement projects. In A. Pankhurst & F. Piguet (Eds.), Moving People in Ethiopia: Development, Displacement and the State. : Boydell & Brewer. Debrah, A. A., Mtegha, H., & Cawood, F. (2018). Social licence to operate and the granting of mineral rights in sub-Saharan Africa: Exploring tensions between communities, governments and multi-national mining companies. Resources Policy, 56, 95-103. Deera, C. D., & Janvry, A. (1979). A conceptual framework for the empirical analysis of peasants American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 61(4), 601-611. Dendena, B., & Corsi, S. (2015). The Environmental and Social Impact Assessment: a further step towards an integrated assessment process. Journal of Cleaner Production, 108, 965-977. DFID. (1999). Sustainable Livelihoods Guidance Sheets. 1999. Downing, T. (2002b). Creating poverty: The flawed economic logic of the World Bank’s revised involuntary resettlement policy. Forced Migration Review, 12. Downing, T., & Garcia-Downing, C. (2009). Routine and Dissonant Cultures In A. Oliver-Smith (Ed.), Development and Dispossession: The crisis of forced displacement and resettlement Santa Fe. Downing, T. E. (2002a). Avoiding new poverty: mining-induced displacement and resettlement (Vol. 52): International Institute for Environment and Development. Downing, T. E. (2014). Does the Kosovo Power Project’s Proposed Forced Displacement of Kosovars Comply with International Involuntary Resettlement Standards? Retrieved from https://www.miningresettlement.org/elibrary/does-the-kosovo-power-project-s-proposed- forced-displacement-of-kosovars-comply-with-international-involuntary-resettlement- standards Druckman, D. (2005). Content Analysis. In Doing Research. Druckman, D. (ed). SAGE Publications, Inc. Thousand Oaks. Drydyk, J. (2007). Unequal Benefits: The Ethics of Development-Induced Displacement. Georgetown Journal of International Affairs, 8(1), 105-113. Dwivedi, R. (2002). Models and methods in development-induced displacement. Development and Change. 33 (4), 709-732. Einbinder, N. (2017). Development: A Critical Backgrounder Dams, Displacement and Development Perspectives from Río Negro, Guatemala (pp. 19-27). Cham Springer International Publishing. Page | 210 Ellis, F. (1998). Household strategies and rural livelihood diversification. The Journal of Development Studies, 35(1), 1-38. Ellis, F. (2000). The Determinants of Rural Livelihood Diversification in Developing Countries. Journal of Agricultural Economics, 51(2), 289-302. Ellis, F., & Bahiigwa, G. (2003). Livelihoods and Rural Poverty Reduction in Uganda. World Development, 31(6), 997-1013. Etemad, H., & Salmasi, K. S. (2003). The Evolution of Mining Policy in Developing Countries The Socio-Economic Impacts of Artisanal and Small-Scale Mining in Developing Countries (pp. 569-582): Taylor & Francis. Fernandes, W. (2007). Managing the Social and Environmental Consequences of Coal Mining in India, Dhanbad. Paper presented at the International Mining Conference, Delhi, India. Fernandes, W. (2009). Beyond Relocation: The Imperative of Sustainable Resettlement. Beyond Relocation: The Imperative of Sustainable Resettlement. SAGE Publications India Pvt Ltd. New Delhi: SAGE Publications India Pvt Ltd. Fetterman, D. M. (2011). Methods In M. S. Lewis-Beck, A. Bryman, & T. Futing Liao (Eds.), The SAGE Encyclopedia of Social Science Research. Thousand Oaks: SAGE publications, Inc. Filer, C., Burton, J., & Banks, G. (2008). The fragmentation of responsibilities in the Melanesian mining sector. In C. O' Faircheallaigh & S. Ali (Eds.), Earth Matters: Indigenous peoples, the extractive industries and corporate social responsibility (pp. 163-179). Sheffield Greenleaf Publishing in association with GSE Research. Franks, D., Davis, R., Bebbington, A., Ali, S. H., Kemp, D., & Scurrah, M. (2014). Conflict translates environmental and social risk into business costs. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111(21):, 111(21), 7576-7581. Franks, D. M. and Vanclay, F. (2013). "Social Impact Management Plans: Innovation in corporate and public policy." Environmental Impact Assessment Review 43: 40-48. Frey, J. H. and Fontana, A. (1991). The group interview in social research. The Social Science Journal, 28(2), 175-187 Futa, A. B. (2009). Water Resources Development—Organisation of a Resettlement Programme (A Case Study of the Kpong Resettlement Programme in Ghana). Water International, 8(3), 98-108. Gans, H. J. (1968). People and Plans: Essays on Urban Problems and Solutions. New York Basic Books. Page | 211 Garibay, C., Boni, A., Panico, F., Urquijo, P. & Klooster, D. (2011). "Unequal Partners, Unequal Exchange: Goldcorp, the Mexican State, and Campesino Dispossession at the Peñasquito Goldmine." Journal of Latin American Geography 10(2). Gedicks, A. (1973). The Nationalization of Copper in Chile: Antecedents and Consequences. Review of Radical Political Economics, 5(3), 1-25. German, L., Schoneveld, G., & Mwangi, E. (2013). Contemporary Processes of Large-Scale Land Acquisition in Sub-Saharan Africa: Legal Deficiency or Elite Capture of the Rule of Law? World Development, 48, 1-18. Ghana Chamber of Mines. (2018). The performance of the mining industry in 2017. Retrieved July 2, 2018, from The Ghana Chamber of Mines http://ghanachamberofmines.org/wp- content/uploads/2016/11/Performance-of-the-Industry-2017.pdf Ghana Chamber of Mines. (2014). The performance of the mining industry in 2014. Retrieved June 1, 2016, from The Ghana Chamber of Mines http://ghanachamberofmines.org/wp- content/uploads/2016/11/Performance_of_the_Mining_Industry_in_Ghana_2014.pdf GHEITI. (2015). GHANA EITI report on the mining sector 2014. Accra: Ministry of Finance Retrieved from https://eiti.org/sites/default/files/documents/gheiti_2014_mining_sector_report_0.pdf. Ghana Statistical Service. (2014). District Analytical Report: Birim North District. Accra, Ghana. Ghana Statistical Service. (2016). 2015 Labor force report. Accra, Ghana Statistical Service Retrieved from http://www.statsghana.gov.gh/gssmain/fileUpload/pressrelease/LFS%20REPORT_fianl_ 21-3-17.pdf. Gilberthorpe, E., & Banks, G. (2012). Development on whose terms?: CSR discourse and social realities in Papua New Guinea's extractive industries sector. Resources Policy, 37(2), 185- 193. Girvan, N. (1976). Corporate imperialism: conflict and expropriation : transnational corporations and economic nationalism in the Third World. White Plains, N.Y: M. E. Sharpe. Given, L. M. (Ed.) (2008). The SAGE Encyclopedia of Qualitative Research Methods. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications, Inc. Gizachew, A. (2017). Refining the impoverishment risks and reconstruction (IRR) model: A study of the models overlooked risks, evidences from the impacts of Tekeze Dam, North East Ethiopia. Journal of Development and Agricultural Economics, 9(4), 66-79. Habermas, J. (1984). The theory of communicative action. Boston: Beacon Press. Page | 212 Habermas, J. (1987). The theory of communicative action (Vol. 2). Boston: Beacon Press. Hall, A. (1994). Grassroots Action for Resettlement Planning:Brazil and Beyond. World Development, 22(12), 1793-1809. Hallett, T., & Ventresca, M. J. (2006). Inhabited Institutions: Social Interactions and Organizational forms in Gouldner’s Patterns of Industrial Bureaucracy. Theor Soc(35), 213-236. Hang Bui, T. M. and Schreinemachers, P. (2018). "Livelihood changes of affected households under resource scarcity: The Son La hydropower project in Vietnam." Kasetsart Journal of Social Sciences. Hammersley, M. (2016). Reading ethnographic research: A critical guide London, New York Routledge. Hanson, K. T. (2004). Rethinking the Akan Household: Acknowledging the Importance of Culturally and Linguistically Meaningful Images. Africa Today, 51(1), 27-45. Haslam, P. A., & Ary Tanimoune, N. (2016). The Determinants of Social Conflict in the Latin American Mining Sector: New Evidence with Quantitative Data. World Development, 78, 401-419. Hathcoat, J. D., & Nicholas, M. C. (2014). Epistemology. In M. B.-M. D. Coghlan (Ed.), The SAGE encyclopedia of action research (pp. 303-307). London: SAGE Publications Ltd. Hemer, S. R. (2016). Emplacement and resistance: Social and political complexities in development-induced displacement in Papua New Guinea. The Australian Journal of Anthropology, 27(3), 279-297. Hilson, G. (2002a). Harvesting mineral riches: 1000 years of gold mining in Ghana. Resources Policy, 28(1–2), 13-26. Hilson, G. (2002b). Land use competition between small- and large-scale miners: a case study of Ghana. Land Use Policy, 19(2), 149-156. Hilson, G. (2002c). An overview of land use conflicts in mining communities. Land Use Policy, 19(1), 65-73. Hilson, G. (2004). Structural Adjustment in Ghana: Assessing the Impacts of Mining-Sector Reform. Indiana University Press, 51(2), 53-77. Hilson, G. (2011). Inherited commitments’: Do changes in ownership affect corporate social responsibility (CSR) at African gold mines? African Journal of Business Management, 5(27). Page | 213 Hilson, G. (2014). The extractive industries and development in sub-Saharan Africa: An introduction. Resources Policy, 40, 1-3. Hilson, G., & Banchirigah, S. M. (2009). Are Alternative Livelihood Projects Alleviating Poverty in Mining Communities? Experiences from Ghana. Journal of Development Studies, 45(2), 172-196. Hira, A., & Busumtwi-Sam, J. (2018). Mining Community Benefits in Ghana: A Case of Unrealized Potential. Retreieved February 30, 2019 from https://www.academia.edu/38010555/Mining_Community_Benefits_in_Ghana_A_Case_ of_Unrealized_Potential_TABLE_OF_CONTENTS_Acknowledgements_List_of_Abbre viations_Map_of_Ghana_showing_location_of_Mining_Communities_Map_of_Ghana_s howing_major_Gold_Belts Holden, W. N. (2005). Civil Society Opposition to Nonferrous Metals Mining in the Philippines. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 16(3), 223- 249. Holliday, A. (2007). Doing and Writing Qualitative Research. London: SAGE Publications Ltd. Hong, P. Y. P., Singh, S., & Ramic, J. (2009). Development-induced impoverishment among involuntarily displaced populations. Journal of Comparative Social Welfare, 25(3), 221- 238. ICMM. (2018). Role of mining in national economies: mining contribution index 2018, 4th ed. Retrieved fromhttps://www.icmm.com/website/publications/pdfs/social-and-economic- development/181002_mci_4th-edition.pdf ICMM. (2015). Land acquisition and resettlement: lessons learned. Retrieved from London: https://www.icmm.com/website/publications/pdfs/social-and-economic- development/9714.pdf ICMM, & The Ghana Chamber of Mines. (2015). Mining in Ghana-What Future Can We Expect? Retrieved from https://www.icmm.com/website/publications/pdfs/mining-parterships-for- development/mining-in-ghana_what-future-can-we-expect IFC. (2012). Performance Standards on Environment and Social Sustainability Performance Standard 5: Land Acquisition and Involuntary Resettlement. Retrieved from http://www.ifc.org/wps/wcm/connect/115482804a0255db96fbffd1a5d13d27/PS_English _2012_Full-Document.pdf?MOD=AJPERES Jackson, R. (1992). New mines for old gold: Ghana's changing mining industry Geography Association, 77(2), 175-178. Page | 214 Jenkins, H., & Yakovleva, N. (2006). Corporate social responsibility in the mining industry: Exploring trends in social and environmental disclosure. Journal of Cleaner Production, 14(3-4), 271-284. Jenkins, K. (2014). Women, mining and development: An emerging research agenda. The Extractive Industries and Society, 1(2), 329-339. Johnson, B., & Christensen, L. (2008). Educational Research: Quantitative, Qualitative, and Mixed Approaches: SAGE Publications. Johnston, B. R. (2009). Development disaster, Reparations, and the RIght to Remedy: The case of the Chixoy Dam, Guatemala. In A. Oliver-Smith (Ed.), Development and Dispossession: The crisis of forced displacement and resettlement (pp. 201-224). Santa Fe: School for Advanced Research. Kamaleddin, S. S., & Hamid, E. (2003). The Policy Environment and Foreign Direct Investments in Mining Ventures in Developing Countries The Socio-Economic Impacts of Artisanal and Small-Scale Mining in Developing Countries (pp. 59-80): Taylor & Francis. Kangave, J. (2012). Investigating the failure of resettlement and rehabilitation in development projects: a critical analysis of the World Bank's policy on involuntary resettlement using lessons from Uganda's Bujagali hydroelectric project. University of British Columbia law review, 45(2), 356. Kapstein, E., & Kim, R. (2011). The Socio-Economic Impact of Newmont Ghana Gold Limited. Accra, Stratcomm Africa. Kemp, D. (2010). Community relations in the global mining industry: exploring the internal dimensions of externally orientated work. Corporate social responsibility and environmental management, 17(1), 1-14. Kemp, D. (2011). Understanding the organizational context In F. Vanclay & A. M. Esteves (Eds.), New Directions in Social Impact Assessment: Conceptual and Methodological Advances (pp. 20-38). Cheltenham, UK and Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd. Kemp, D., & Owen, J. R. (2013). Community relations and mining: Core to business but not “core business”. Resources Policy, 38(4), 523-531. Kemp, D., Owen, J. R., & Collins, N. (2017). Global perspectives on the state of resettlement practice in mining. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 35(1), 22-33. Kemp, D., Owen, J. R., Babatu, A., & Kim, J. (2013). Field Review of Newmont’s Akyem project Final Report, Newmont Golden Ridge Ltd. Kemp, D., Worden, S., & Owen, J. R. (2016). Differentiated social risk: Rebound dynamics and sustainability performance in mining. Resources Policy, 50, 19-26. Page | 215 Kenneth J, G., & Mary, M. G. (2008). Social Constructionism. The SAGE Encyclopedia of Qualitative Research Methods. SAGE Publications, Inc. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc. Kibreab, G. (2000). Common property resources and resettlement In M. Cernea & C. McDowell (Eds.), Risks and Reconstruction: Experiences of Resettlers and Refugees (pp. 293-331). Washington, D.C.: The World Bank. Kidido, J. K., Ayitey, J. Z., Kuusaana, E. D., & Gavu, E. K. (2015). Who is the rightful recipient of mining compensation for land use deprivation in Ghana? Resources Policy, 43, 19-27. Koenig, D. (1997). Competition Among Malian Elites In The Manantali Resettlement Project: The Impacts On Local Development. Urban Anthropology and Studies of Cultural Systems and World Economic Development, 26(3/4), 369-411. Koenig, D. (2002) Toward local development and mitigating impoverishment in development- induced displacement and resettlement. Working Paper Series, Refugee Studies Centre. Oxford, U.K: Refugees Studies Centre. Koenig, D. (2006). Enhancing local development in development-induced displacement and resettlement projects. In C. de Wet (Ed.), Development-Induced Displacement: Problems, Policies and People. New York:: Berghahn Books. Krisppendorff, K. Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology. ed, ed. JM Ford. 2004. Lane, M. (1997). "Social Impact Assessment." Australian Planner 34(2): 100-102. Lassailly-Jacob, V. (2000). Reconstructing livelihoods through land settlement schemes: Comparative reflections on refugees and oustees in Africa. In M. M. Cernea & C. McDowell (Eds.), Risks and Reconstruction: Experiences of resettlers and refugees (pp. 108-123). Washington, DC: The World Bank. Lawson, E., & Bentil, G. (2014). Shifting sands: changes in community perceptions of mining in Ghana. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 16(1), 217-238. Lewis-Beck, M. S., Bryman, A., & Liao, T. F. (Eds.). (2004). The SAGE Encyclopedia of Social Science Research Methods. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications, Inc. Liebenthal, A., Michelitsch, R., & Tarazona, E. (2005). Extractive Industries and Sustainable Development: An evaluation of World Bank Group experience. Retrieved from Washington, DC: http://www- wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2005/06/21/00009034 1_20050621121829/Rendered/PDF/32671.pdf Page | 216 Lillywhite, S., Kemp, D., & Sturman, K. (2015). Mining, resettlement, and lost livelihoods: Listening to the Voices of Resettled Communities in Mualadzi, Mozambique. Retrieved from http://im4dc.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Mining-resettlement-and-lost- livelihoods-Completed-Report.pdf Lisa J. Laplante, & Spears, S. A. (2014). Out of conflict zone: the case for community consent processes in the extractive sector Yale Human Rights and Development Journal, 11. Lo, K., & Wang, M. (2018). How voluntary is poverty alleviation resettlement in China? Habitat International, 73, 34-42. Madebwe, C., Madebwe, V., & Mavusa, S. (2011). Involuntary displacement and resettlement to make way for diamond mining: the case of Chiadzwa villagers in Marange, Zimbabwe. Journal of Research in Peace, Gender and Development, 1(10), 292-301. Mahapatra, L. K. (1999). Testing the risk and reconstruction model on India's resettlement experiences. In M. M. Cernea (Ed.), The Economics of Involuntary Resettlement: questions and challenges (pp. 180-230). Washington, DC: The World Bank Mahanty, S., & McDermott, C. L. (2013). How does ‘Free, Prior and Informed Consent’ (FPIC) impact social equity? Lessons from mining and forestry and their implications for REDD+. Land Use Policy, 35, 406-416. Maitra, S. (2009). Development Induced Displacement: Issues of Compensation and Resettlement – Experiences from the Narmada Valley and Sardar Sarovar Project. Japanese Journal of Political Science, 10(02), 191-211. Maldonado, J. K. (2012). A New Path Forward: Researching and Reflecting on Forced Displacement and Resettlement: Report on the International Resettlement Conference: Economics, Social Justice, and Ethics in Development-Caused Involuntary Migration, the Hague, 4-8 October 2010. Journal of refugee studies, 25(2), 193-220. Mancini, L., & Sala, S. (2018). Social impact assessment in the mining sector: Review and comparison of indicators frameworks. Resources Policy, 57, 98-111. Mares, R. (2012). Corporate Responsibility and Compliance with the Law: A Case Study of Land, Dispossession, and Aftermath at Newmont’s Ahafo Project in Ghana. Business and Society Review, 117(2), 233-280. Marston, H. (2012). Bauxite Mining in Vietnam’s Central Highlands: An Arena for Expanding Civil Society? Contemporary Southeast Asia, 34(2), 173. Mathur, H. H. (2011). Making resettlement work: policy,planning and management In H. H. Mathur (Ed.), Resettling Displaced People: Policy and Practice in India (pp. 25-74). New Delhi: Routledge. Page | 217 Mathur, H. M. (1998). The impoverishment risk model and its use as a planning tool. In H. H. Mathur & D. Marsden (Eds.), Development projects and impoverishment risks: Resettling project-affected people in India (pp. 67-78). Delhi: Oxford University Press. Mathur, H. M. (2013). Displacement and resettlement in India: the human cost of development (Vol. 69.). Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge. Mauthner, M., et al., Eds. (2002). Ethics in qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, SAGE Publications Ltd. Maxwell, J. (2009). Designing a Qualitative Study. In L. Bickman & D. J. Rog (Eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Applied Social Research Methods (pp. 214-253). Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications, Inc. May, T. (2010). Social Research. Berkshire, United Kingdom: McGraw-Hill Education. May, T. (2011). Social research: issues, methods and process. Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill Education. May, T. (2001). Social research: Issues, methods and process (Third Edition ed.). Buckingham & Philadelphia: Open University Press. McDowell, C. (2002). Involuntary resettlement, Impoverishment Risks, and Sustainable Livelihoods. The Australasian Journal of Disaster and Trauma Studies, 2002-2. Messerli, P., Giger, M., Dwyer, M. B., Breu, T., & Eckert, S. (2014). The geography of large-scale land acquisitions: Analysing socio-ecological patterns of target contexts in the global South. Applied Geography, 53, 449-459. Milgroom, J., & Spierenburg, M. (2008). Induced volition: Resettlement from the Limpopo National Park, Mozambique. Journal of Contemporary African Studies, 26(4), 435-448. Mineral Commission. (2012). Corporate social responsibility guidelines,Accra, Ghana. Ministry of Lands and Forestry. (1999). National Land Policy. Retrieved November 5, 2019, from https://www.documents.clientearth.org/wp-content/uploads/library/1999-06-01-national- land-policy-1999-ext-en.pdf Ministry of Lands and Natural Resources. (2014). Minerals and mining policy of Ghana: Ensuring mining contributes to sustainable development. Retrieved April 1, 2015, from https://www.extractiveshub.org/servefile/getFile/id/798 Ministry of Youth and Sports. (2010). National youth policy of Ghana. Retrieved September 30, 2016, from http://www.youthpolicy.org/national/Ghana_2010_National_Youth_Policy.pdf Page | 218 Mireku, K. O., Kuusaana, E.D., & Kidido, J.K. (2016). Legal implications of allocation papers in land transactions in Ghana—A case study of the Kumasi traditional area. Land Use Policy 50: 148-155. MMSD. (2002). Breaking New Ground: Mining, Minerals and Sustainable Development. Retrieved from https://www.iied.org/mmsd-final-report Modi, R. (2013). Displaced from Private Property: Resettlement and Rehabilitation Experiences from Mumbai. Economic and Political Weekly, 48(23), 71-74. Mohammed Banchirigah, S. (2006). How have reforms fuelled the expansion of artisanal mining? Evidence from sub-Saharan Africa. Resources Policy, 31(3), 165-171. Morris-Jung, J., & Roth, R. (2010). The Blurred Boundaries of Voluntary Resettlement: A Case of Cat Tien National Park in Vietnam. Journal of Sustainable Forestry, 29(2-4), 202-220. Muggah, R. (2000). Through the Developmentalist's Looking Glass: Conflict-Induced Displacement and Involuntary Resettlement in Colombia. Journal of Refugee Studies, 13(2), 133-162. Munarriz, G. (2008). Rhetoric and Reality: The World Bank Development Policies, Mining Corporations, and Indigenous Communities in Latin America. International Community Law Review, 10(4), 431-443. Mwonzora, G. (2011). ‘Diamond Rush’ and the Relocation of the Chiadzwa Community in Zimbabwe: A Human Rights Perspective. (Masters of Arts in Development Studies, A research report ), Institute of Social Studies The Hague, The Netherlands. Narasimham, S., & Subbarao, D. V. (2018). Impact of Mining on Tribal Socio-economic and Environmental Risks in India. Economic Affairs, 63(1), 191-202. Nathan, D. (2009). Social Security, Compensation and Reconstruction of Livelihoods. Economic and Political Weekly, 44(30), 22-26. United Nations. (2014). Report of the Working Group on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises on its visit to Ghana (8 to 17 July 2013). Retrieved from https://www.ohchr.org/en/issues/business/pages/reports.aspx Nayak, R. (2000). Risks associated with landlessness: an exploration toward socially friendly displacement and resettlement. In Michael M Cernea & C. McDowell (Eds.), Risks and Reconstruction: experiences of resettlers and refugees (pp. 79-107). Washington D.C: The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/The World Bank. Neuman, W. L. (2000). Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative approaches. Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Page | 219 Newmont. (2008). Environmental Impact Statement, Akyem project.Accra, Ghana. Newmont. (2010). Resettlement Action Plan, Akyem project. New Abirem, Ghana. Newmont. (2011). Social baseline and impact assessment study, Akyem project.New Abirem, Ghana. Newmont. (2014). Sustainability and social engagement policy. Denver: Newmont. Newmont. (2015). Updated Social Impact Assessment (draft report). New Abirem, Ghana. Nosal, E. (2001). The taking of land: market value compensation should be paid. Journal of Public Economics(82), 431–443. Nussbaum, M. C. (2000). Women and Human Development: The Capabilities Approach. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press. Obour, P. B., Owusu, K., Agyeman, E. A., Ahenkan, A., & Madrid, À. N. (2015). The impacts of dams on local livelihoods: a study of the Bui Hydroelectric Project in Ghana. International Journal of Water Resources Development, 32(2), 286-300. O' Faircheallaigh, C. (2011). Social impact assessment and indigenous social development. New directions in social impact assessment: Conceptual and methodological advances F. Vanclay and A. M. Esteves. Cheltenham, Northampton, Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd 138- 153. Oliver-Smith, A. (2010). Defying displacement Austin: University of Texas Press. Oliver-Smith, A. (Ed.) (2009). Development and dispossession: the crisis of forced displacement and resettlement Santa Fe: School of Advanced Research Press. Oliver-Smith, A., & de Sherbinin, A. (2014). Resettlement in the twenty-first century. Forced Migration Review(45), 23-25. Osei-Assibey, E. (2016). Ghana natural resource revenue forecasting model. Accra, Ghana: Ministry of Finance. Owen, J. R. (2016). Social license and the fear of Mineras Interruptus. Geoforum, 77, 102-105. Owen, J. R., & Kemp, D. (2014). ‘Free prior and informed consent’, social complexity and the mining industry: Establishing a knowledge base. Resources Policy, 41, 91-100. Owen, J. R., & Kemp, D. (2015). Mining-induced displacement and resettlement: a critical appraisal. Journal of Cleaner Production, 87, 478-488. Page | 220 Owen, J. R., & Kemp, D. (2016). Can planning safeguard against mining and resettlement risks? Journal of Cleaner Production, 133, 1227-1234. Owen, J. R., & Kemp, D. (2016). The weakness of resettlement safeguards in mining. Forced Migration Review, 52, 78-81. Owusu-Ansah, F. (2011). Surface mining, land transactions and risk perceptions among small scale household farmers in Ghana: A socio-demographic perspective. (3461461 Ph.D.), State University of New York College of Environmental Science and Forestry, Ann Arbor. Owusu-Koranteng, D. (2008). Mining Investment & Community Struggles. Review of African Political Economy, 35(117), 467-473. Pegg, S. (2006). Mining and poverty reduction: Transforming rhetoric into reality. Journal of Cleaner Production, 14(3), 376-387. Penz, P., Drydyk, J., & Bose, P. S. (2011). Displacement by Development: Ethics, Rights and Responsibilities: Cambridge University Press. Price, S. (2009). Prologue: Victims or Partners? The Social Perspective in Development-Induced Displacement and Resettlement. The Asia Pacific Journal of Anthropology, 10(4), 266- 282. Price, S. (2015). A no-displacement option? Rights, risks and negotiated settlement in development displacement. Development in Practice, 25(5), 673-685. Price, S., & Singer, J. (Eds.). (2016). Global Implications of Development, Disasters and Climate Change: Responses to Displacement from Asia Pacific. London Routledge. Prno, J. (2013). An analysis of factors leading to the establishment of a social licence to operate in the mining industry. Resources Policy, 38(4), 577-590. Pettigrew, A. M. (1997). What is a processual analysis? Scandinavian Journal of Management, 13(4), 337-348. Quisumbing, A. R., Meinzen-Dick, R., Raney, T. L., Croppenstedt, A., Behrman, J. A., & Peterman, A. U. (2014). Gender in Agriculture: Closing the Knowledge Gap. Netherlands: Springer Sciences and Business. Quisumbing, A. R., Payongayong, E., Aidoo, J.B., & Otsuka, K. (2001). Women’s Land Rights in the Transition to Individualized Ownership: Implications for Tree-resource Management in Western Ghana. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 50(1), 157-181. Rakodi, C. (2002). A livelihoods approach–conceptual issues and definitions. Urban livelihoods: A people-centred approach to reducing poverty, 3-22. Page | 221 Rammohan, A., & Pritchard, B. (2014). The Role of Landholding as a Determinant of Food and Nutrition Insecurity in Rural Myanmar. World Development, 64(0), 597-608. Reddy, I. U. B. (2000). Restoring housing under urban infrastructure projects in India. In M. Cernea & C. McDowell (Eds.), Risks and Reconstruction: Experiences of resettlers and refugees (pp. 167-183). Washington, D.C: The World Bank. Rew, A. (1996). Policy Implications of the Involuntary Ownership of resettlement negotiation In C. McDowell (Ed.), Understanding Impoverishment: The Consequences of Development- induced Displacement: Berghahn Books. Robeyns, I. (2005). The Capability Approach: a theoretical survey. Journal of Human Development, 6(1), 93-117. Robinson, W. C. (2003). Risks and Rights: The Causes, Consequences and Challenges of Development-Induced displacement. Retrieved from https://www.brookings.edu/research/risks-and-rights-the-causes-consequences-and- challenges-of-development-induced-displacement/ Robson, C. (2011). Real world research: a resource for users of social research methods in applied settings. Hoboken, N.J; Chichester, West Sussex: Wiley-Blackwell. Rogers, S., & Wilmsen, B. (2019). Towards a critical geography of resettlement. Progress in Human Geography, 030913251882465. Ruggie, J. (2008). Protect, Respect and Remedy: A Framework for Business and Human Rights. Retrieved from https://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/itgg.2008.3.2.189 Ruggie, J. (2011). Report of the special representative of the secretary-general on the issue of human rights and transnational corporations and other business enterprises: Guiding principles on business and human rights: implementing the united nations ‘protect, respect and remedy’framework. . Retrieved from https://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Issues/Business/A-HRC-17-31_AEV.pdf Ross, M. (2001). Extractive sectors and the poor. Retrieved March 10, 2015, from http://www.oxfamamerica.org/static/oa3/files/extractive-sectors-and-the-poor.pdf Sarat, A., & Scheingold, S. A. (2005). The Worlds Cause Lawyers Make: Structure and Agency in Legal Practice: Stanford University Press. Satiroglu, I., & Choi, N. (Eds.). (2015). Development-induced displacement and resettlement: New perspectives on persisting problems. London and New York: Routledge. Saumure, K., & Given, L. M. (2008). Rigor in qualitative research. The SAGE encyclopedia of qualitative research methods, 2, 795-796. Page | 222 Schmidt-Soltau, K., & Brockington, D. (2007). Protected Areas and Resettlement: What Scope for Voluntary Relocation? World Development, 35(12), 2182-2202. Schueler, V., Kuemmerle, T., & Schröder, H. (2011). Impacts of Surface Gold Mining on Land Use Systems in Western Ghana. AMBIO, 40(5), 528-539. Scoones, I. (1998). Sustainable rural livelihoods: a framework for analysis. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Ian_Scoones/publication/251873585_Sustainable_R ural_Livelihoods_A_Framework_for_Analysis/links/5561c41808ae6f4dcc94f72b/Sustain able-Rural-Livelihoods-A-Framework-for-Analysis.pdf: Scoones, I. (2009). Livelihoods perspectives and rural development. The Journal of Peasant Studies, 36(1), 171-196. Scott, J. C. (1999). Seeing like a state : How certain schemes to improve the human condition have failed. New Haven and London: Yale University Press. Scott, J. C. (1976). The moral economy of the peasant: Rebellion and subsistence in Southeast Asia. New Haven and London: Yale University Press. Scudder, T. (1982). No place to go: Effects of compulsory relocation on Navajos. Philadelphia: Institute for the Study of Human Issues. Scudder, T. (2005). The future of large dams: Dealing with social, environmental, institutional and political costs: Earthscan. Scudder, T., & Colson, E. (1982). From Welfare to Development: A Conceptual Framework for the Analysis of Dislocated People. . In A. Hansen & A. Oliver-Smith (Eds.), Involuntary Migration and Resettlement: The Problems and Responses of Dislocated People. . Boulder: Westview Press. Sen, A. (1999). Commodities and capabilities. Delhi & New York: Oxford University Press. Sen, A. (2005). Human Rights and Capabilities. Journal of Human Development, 6(2), 151-166. Sen, A. (2009). The idea of justice: Penguin Books New York. Sen, A. (1999). Development as Freedom. New York: Anchor Books, A Division of Random House, Inc. Sen, A., & Muellbauer, J. (1987). The Standard of Living. Cambridge, Cambridgeshire, New York.: Cambridge University Press. Shaojun, C. (2018). Cost externalization impoverishes resettlers: findings from hydropower projects In M. Cernea & J. K. Maldonado (Eds.), Challenging the Prevailing Paradiagm Page | 223 of Displacement and Resettlement: risks, impoverishment, legacies, solutions (pp. 45-56). New York Routledge. Siegel, P. B. (2005). Using an Asset-Based Approach to Identify Drivers of Sustainable Rural Growth and Poverty Reduction in Central America: A Conceptual Framework. Washington D.C: Simons, H. (2009). Case Study Research in Practice. London: SAGE Publications. Smyth, E., & Vanclay, F. (2017). The Social framework for projects: a conceptual but practical model to assist in assessing, planning and managing the social impacts of projects. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 35(1), 65-80. Somayaji, S., & Talwar, S. (Eds.). (2011). Development-induced Displacement, Rehabilitation and Resettlement in India: Current Issues and Challenges. London: Routledge. Standards and Poor. (2019). Market Intelligence Dataset. New York. Suopajärvi, L. (2013). Social impact assessment in mining projects in Northern Finland: Comparing practice to theory. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 42, 25-30. Szablowski, D. (2002). Mining, Displacement and the World Bank: A Case Analysis of Compania Minera Antamina’s Operations in Peru. Journal of Business Ethics, 39, 247-273. Szablowski, D. (2006). Who Defines Displacement? The Operation of the World Bank Involuntary Resettlement Policy in a Large Mining Project. In P. Vandergeest, P. Idahosa, & P. S. Bose (Eds.), Development's Displacements : Economies, Ecologies, and Cultures at Risk: UBC Press. Szablowski, D. (2007). Transnational Law and Local Struggles. Portland: Hart Publishing. Taabazuing, J., Luginaah, I., Djietror, G., & Otiso, K. M. (2012). Mining, conflicts and livelihood struggles in a dysfunctional policy environment: the case of Wassa West District, Ghana. African Geographical Review, 31(1), 33-49. Tagliarino, N. K. (2018). The need for national-level legal protection for populations displaced by expropriation: laws on land acquisition and resettlement in 50 countries In M. M. Cernea & J. k. Maldonado (Eds.), Challenging the prevailing paradiagm of displacement and resettlement: risks, impoverishment, legacies, solutions (pp. 273-292). London & New York Routledge. Terminiski, B. (2015). Development-Induced Displacement and Resettlement: Causes, Consequences, and Socio-Legal Context (1 ed.): ibidem-Verlag. Terminski, B. (2012). Mining-Induced Displacement and Resettlement: Social Problem and Human Rights Issue (A Global Perspective). Available at SSRN 2028490.Retrieved Page | 224 October 10, 2014 from http://refugeeresearch.net/ms/km/wp content/uploads/sites/2/2014/02/Mining.pdf Thangaraj, S. (1996). Impoverishment risk analysis: a methodological tool for participatory planning In C. McDowell (Ed.), Understanding Impoverishment: The Consequences of Development-induced Displacement. Providence & Oxford: Berghahn Books. Thomas, K. J. A. (2002). Development Projects and Involuntary Population Displacement: The World Bank's Attempt to Correct Past Failures. Population Research and Policy Review, 21( 4). Tsikata, F. S. (1997). The vicissitudes of mineral policy in Ghana. Resources Policy, 23(1–2), 9- 14. Tsuma, W. (2010). Mining Sector Reforms in Ghana: Institutionalizing and Legitimizing Large- Scale Land Deals and Acquisitions in Rural Communities of Western Ghana Gold Mining in Ghana: Actors, Alliances, and Power LIT Verlag. Turner, B. A. (1971). Exploring the industrial subculture. New York Seabury Press. UNDP (1999). Sustainable livelihoods. New York: UNDP. Retrieved December 10, 2014 from http://www.undp.org/sl/. UNECA. (2011). Minerals and Africa's Development Retrieved from Addis Ababa: https://www.uneca.org/sites/default/files/PublicationFiles/mineral_africa_development_r eport_eng.pdf Vaismoradi, M., Turunen, H., & Bondas, T. (2013). Content analysis and thematic analysis: Implications for conducting a qualitative descriptive study. Nurs Health Sci, 15(3), 398- 405. Vanclay, F., & Esteves, A. M. (2011). New Directions in Social Impact Assessment: Conceptual and Methodological Advances. Cheltenham, UK. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing. Vesalon, L., & Cretan, R. (2012). Development-induced displacement in romania: the case of rosia montana mining project. Journal of Urban and Regional Analysis, 4(1), 63-75. Vivoda, V., Owen, J. R., & Kemp, D. (2017a). Applying the Impoverishment Risks and Reconstruction (IRR) Model to Involuntary Resettlement in the Global Mining Sector. In C. f. S. R. i. Mining (Ed.). Brisbane Centre for Social Responsibility in Mining. Vivoda, V., Owen, J. R., & Kemp, D. (2017b). Comparative analysis of legal and regulatory frameworks for resettlement in the global mining industry. Brisbane: The University of Queensland. Page | 225 Walsh, A., & Lynch, T. (2008). The Morality of Money: An Exploration in Analytic Philosophy. New York Pelgrave Macmillan. WCD. (2000). Dams and Development: A new framework for decision making Retrieved from London and Sterling, VA: http://hqweb.unep.org/dams/WCD/report/WCD_DAMS%20report.pdf Wheelock, J. (1996). The household as a focus for research. Journal of economic issues, 30(1), 143-159. Williams, M. L. (1975). The extent and significance of the nationalization of foreign owned assets in developing countries, 1956-1972. Oxford Journals, 27(2), 260-273. Wilmsen, B. and A. van Hulten (2017). "Following resettled people over time: the value of longitudinal data collection for understanding the livelihood impacts of the Three Gorges Dam, China." Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal 35(1): 94-105. Wilmsen, B., Adjartey, D., & Van Hulten, A. (2018). Challenging the risks-based model of involuntary resettlement using evidence from the Bui Dam, Ghana. International Journal ofWater Resources Development. Wilmsen, B., & Wang, M. (2015). Voluntary and involuntary resettlement in China: a false dichotomy? Development in Practice, 25(5), 612-627. Wilson, S. A. (2019). Mining-induced displacement and resettlement: The case of rutile mining communities in Sierra Leone. Journal of Sustainable Mining. Witter, R. (2013). Elephant-induced displacement and the power of choice: moral narratives about resettlement in Mozambique′s limpopo national park. Conservation and Society, 11(4), 406. World Bank. (1996). Resettlement and development ; the Bankwide review of projects involving involuntary resettlement 1986-1993 (32). Retrieved from http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/1996/03/696707/resettlement-development- bankwide-review-projects-involving-involuntary-resettlement-1986-1993 World Bank. (2004). Involuntary Resettlement Sourcebook. Planning and Implementation in Development Projects Washington D.C, The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/ The World Bank 30118. World Bank. (2010). Safeguards and Sustainability Policies in a Changing World: An independent evaluation of World Bank experience. Washington D.C, The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development/ The World Bank 63896. World Bank. (2017). The World Bank Environmental and Social Framework Washington, DC: The World Bank. Page | 226 World Bank. (2017). Ghana: Policy Agenda for Growth and Shared Prosperity. Accra, Ghana: The World Bank Group. Xi, J., Hwang, S., & Cao, Y. (2015). Risk information sharing: an impirical study on risk perception and depressive symptoms among those displaced by the Three Gorges project In I. Satiroglu & N. Choi (Eds.), Development-induced displacement and resettlement: New perspectives on persisting problems. London, New York Routledge. Yankah, K. (2012). The Proverb in the Context of Akan Rhetoric, 2nd rev. ed. . New York: Diasporic Africa Press. Yankson, P. W. K. (2010). Gold mining and corporate social responsibility in the Wassa West district, Ghana. Development in Practice, 20(3), 354-366. Yeboah, E. and Shaw, D. (2013). Customary land tenure practices in Ghana: examining the relationship with land-use planning delivery. International Development Planning Review 35(1): 21-39. Yelsang, F.D. (2013). Agricultural Land Use Conflict between Landlords and Migrant Farmers in Ghana: An Examination of Issues Affecting Dagara Migrants in the Brong-Ahafo Region. European Scientific Journal, 9(29). Yin, R. (2009). Case Study Research, Design and Methods (Vol. 5). London, UK: Sage. Yin, R. K. (2012). Case study methods. In H. Cooper, P. Camic, D. L. Long, A. T. Panter, D. Rindskopf, & K. J. Sher (Eds.), APA handbook of research methods in psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 141-155). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Page | 227 APPENDICES Page | 228 Appendix 2-1: Research concept Research concept Research topic Conceptualizing Household Livelihood Needs in Mining induced Displacement and Resettlement: A case study from Ghana Research aim To understand how contemporary MIDR policy and practice in Ghana can better respond to the livelihood reconstruction needs of mining displaced households. Research objectives 1. To understand the livelihood reconstruction experiences and expectations of displaced households in relation to MIDR policy standards and aspirations in Ghana. 2. To contribute to the ongoing development of resettlement policy and regulatory frameworks in support of livelihood reconstruction of mining-displaced households. 3. To improve resettlement planning and practices in MIDR with respect to household livelihood reconstruction. 4. To contribute to the emerging global research agenda in mining, displacement and resettlement. Primary Design focus Secondary Data source Method Analysis question questions Household What have been the Individual Semi-structured Thematic analysis livelihoods experiences, narrative/testimonies interviews context aspirations, and Group narrative/stories Group interviews expectations of households throughout the Researcher’s observation Field diary displacement and How can reconstruction contemporary process? MIDR policy and practice Policy and How are Documents (standards, Document analysis Thematic analysis better respond to Regulatory households’ safeguards, legislations, Semi-structured the livelihood context livelihood needs agreements, MOUs) interviews needs of conceptualized Individual narratives households? across the various Group interviews policy platforms? Content analysis Group narratives Field diary Institutions How do state Individual Semi-structured Thematic analysis and institutions, mining narrative/stories interviews organizational companies, and Group narrative/stories Individual and group processes relevant Content analysis interviews/discussions organizations Researcher observation determine Field diary household Documents (Social Impact Assessment Document analysis Page | 230 livelihood needs in (SIAs) reports, asset MIDR processes? surveys, Standard Operating procedures (SOPs), audit reports, program plans et cetera) Page | 231 Appendix 2-2: Households, land and post-resettlement livelihood reconstruction Page | 232 Appendix 2-3: Sample management criteria Research participants Inclusion criteria Exclusion criteria Sample households • Must have been impacted • Demand for financial and and resettled by Newmont material reward as a Akyem project as a result condition for participating of land acquisition. in the research. • Have accepted and/or • Seek to share authorship participated in one or or intellectual property more of the company’s rights. livelihood restoration • Self-opt to be excluded. programs. • Must be residing in the 8 listed project communities. • Must be willing to participate in the research without any monetary or material reward. Government policy and • Must have worked or be • Demand for financial and regulatory agencies working in a relevant material reward as a official function. condition for participating • Must be willing to in the research. participate in the research • Seek to share authorship without any material or intellectual property reward. rights. • Must consent to the use of • Self-opt to be excluded. data for thesis. Newmont personnel • Must have worked or be • Demand for financial and working in a relevant material reward as a Page | 233 official function of condition for participating Newmont in the research. • Must be willing to • Seek to share authorship participate in the research or intellectual property without any monetary rights. reward • Self-opt to be excluded. • Must consent to the use of data for thesis. Other key informants • Must have expertise (or • Demand for financial and official interest) in the material reward as a areas of mining, condition for participating resettlement, and in the research. community relations. • Seek to share authorship • Must have worked or be or intellectual property working in a relevant rights. official function. • Self-opt to be excluded. • Must be willing to participate in the research without any financial and material reward. • Must consent to the use of data for thesis. Page | 234 Research about livelihood improvement in resettlement communities Appendix 2-4: Research information sheet for participants What is this research about? This research is about how to improve Who is funding the research? livelihood outcomes for communities who This research is funded by the Sustainable have experienced resettlement. The study Minerals Institute at the University of will involve a review of the current policy Queensland, Australia. frameworks relating to resettlement, as well as the different strategies and practices used How will this research be carried out? to plan and manage resettlement. The case The researcher will collect information from study location for the research is the Birim a variety of sources. For this stage of the North District of Ghana. research, the researcher is looking to meet with key stakeholders to conduct interviews What is the objective of this research? based on their knowledge and experience The overall objective of the research is to about resettlement. The key stakeholders for understand the major challenges and this research are household heads, mining opportunities to improving livelihood and company personnel, consultants, government resettlement outcomes. The research will officials, and civil society organizations. aim to make recommendations for better resettlement policies and practices. It is important for the researcher to engage with a diverse number of stakeholders to ensure a balanced representation of views Who is undertaking this study? relating to resettlement. The lead researcher for this project is Mr Alidu Babatu Adam, a PhD scholar at the When is the research being undertaken? University of Queensland, Australia. This The information gathering process in Ghana research is being conducted as part of the will start in September 2015 and will requirements for his studies. continue until January 2016. Page | 235 Interviews of some participants may occur What will happen with the information via telephone or other electronic means. you provide? The information you provide will be recorded by the researcher and used to develop a final Will participants be able to access the report for this study. The final report will not results? identify individuals. Quotes from interviews Before leaving Ghana, Mr. Adam will contact will be anonymized, unless the participant participants to provide a preliminary report provides explicit consent to be named in the on the fieldwork findings. Findings will be study. Interview data will be stored securely made available in paper copy, or through on a password protected hard drive. All personal conversations, emails, or phone interview notes are confidential to the calls. researcher (and his advisory team) conducting the study. No one else will have access to the research notes. Research ethics Is participation voluntary? This study has been approved according to Participation in this research is voluntary. the University of Queensland’s guidelines on Participants are at liberty to participate, opt Research ethics (Approval No. 15.005). out, or discontinue their participation during the research without prejudice or retribution. If you have concerns about this research that Interview participants do not have to answer you want to speak to someone about, other all the questions and can withdraw from the than the researcher and persons connected to research at any time. this research, kindly contact the Human Ethics Office at the University of Where will the interviews be conducted? Queensland: Interviews will be conducted at various

, Ph. 3365 locations in Ghana. Interviews will be 4584. conducted at venues that are convenient and safe to both the researcher and the participant. Page | 236 For further information Contact: Lead Researcher Mr. Alidu Babatu Adam PhD Candidate, Sustainable Minerals Institute, the University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia. Phone : +233 24 4853705 (Ghana) Email :

PhD Advisor Assoc. Prof. Deanna Kemp Centre for Social Responsibility in Mining, Sustainable Minerals Institute, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia. Email:

You can find out more about the Sustainable Minerals Institute online: http://www.smi.uq.edu.au/ Page | 237 Appendix 2-5: Participant consent form Research topic: Conceptualizing household livelihood needs in mining-induced displacement and resettlement: A case study from Ghana. WRITTEN AGREEMENT OF THE RESEARCH PARTICIPANT: Name of interviewee:____________________________________________________ I hereby agree to be involved in the above research project as a respondent. I have read the research information sheet for this project and discussed it with the researcher. I understand: • the nature of the research • that the information provided will be treated confidentially, and • that I am free to withdraw at any time • that there is no direct material benefit to me from being a participant in this research. Signed: __________________________ Date: __________________________ VERBAL AGREEMENT OF THE RESEARCH PARTICIPANT: (To be completed by the researcher if the interviewee is unable, or unwilling to sign for cultural reasons, or is being interviewed over the telephone.) Name of interviewee:____________________________________________________ The interviewee has read the information about the research with the researchers and discussed the nature of the research, its aims and outcomes. He/she understands: The nature of the research ❑ Yes ❑ No That the information he/she provides will be treated confidentially ❑ Yes ❑ No That he/she is free to withdraw at any time. ❑ Yes ❑ No That there is no direct material benefit to him/her from being a participant in this research ❑ Yes ❑ No The interviewee has given verbal agreement to be involved in the above research project as a respondent. Signed (Researcher): __________________________ Date: _________________________ CONTACT TO OBTAIN ANY INFORMATION ON THE RESEARCH: Alidu Babatu Adam, Tel#: +61 4 49933120 or Email at;

Page | 238 Appendix 2-6: Interview guides Interview questions for household heads [Introductory Courtesy, clarify research information, seek consent] 1. Tell me something about your household? a. How many are you? How long have you been here? 2. What was life like before resettlement? 3. Before resettlement, how did you learn that you were going to be resettled? 4. What did you think was going to happen? 5. When you agreed to move, what were you concerned most about? Do you remember expressing this concern to anyone? Who? Where? a. What was their response? [Signpost: post-resettlement] 6. After you moved, what has changed? a. How have things changed? 7. How has resettlement affected your quality of life? a. Can you tell me things that have improved? b. Can you tell me about things that have gotten worse? 8. Since resettlement, how are you making a living? [signpost: issues about the company] 9. Specifically about livelihoods planning, what do you think the company did (or doing) well? 10. Specifically about livelihoods, how could things have been made easier for you? 11. What were your life priorities before resettlement? 12. What are your life priorities now? 13. Do you think the company understands your priorities? Y/N. How? 14. Given the opportunity, what would you like to do differently to enhance your living circumstances? Close-up Check key highlights in notes, thank participant, and depart Page | 239 Interview questions for key informants (NGOs and CSOs) [Intro: discuss work of NGO and how it relates to resettlement and livelihoods] 1. Can you describe your position and role in this organization? 2. Post-resettlement livelihood restoration is a major challenge for resettled populations across the country. Why is that? What do you think government and mining companies are missing? What expectations are developers not meeting? 3. At what point did livelihood became an issue – events, court cases, demonstrations, conflicts? Civil society triggers. 4. In 2006, Ghana passed the current Mineral and Mining Act. How did this law come about? What were the triggers, motivations, incentives? Who were the organizations (and people) involved in the process? 5. How effective is this law in responding to the livelihood challenge in resettlement? 6. What are civil society expectations on livelihoods of resettlement communities? What should be the ‘ideal’ livelihood restoration, proposition on success? 7. How are CSOs addressing the issue? What platforms or space exists for engaging government and companies on livelihood issues? 8. What challenges do you encounter when engaging the actors? Which actor (government or mining companies) is listening and who is not? 9. In your opinion what is the role of government in resettlement planning and practice? 10. In your opinion what is the role of communities in resettlement planning? 11. From your engagement with mining and resettlement, what have you learned that might be relevant for improving livelihood restoration outcomes (e.g. studies, assessments, planning, implementation, and closure?) 12. What will it take for these lessons (8 above) to influence resettlement policy or practice? Interview questions for key informants - corporate managers [Introductory] 1. Kindly provide me a brief overview of your position and role? • How long in this role? • Any specific responsibility/experiences related to resettlement? [ Resettlement frameworks/Standards] Page | 240 2. Newmont subscribes to [x global safeguards/standards]. How did it come about? • Time, drivers, process of formulation and adoption 3. Can you briefly describe the primary requirements of your resettlement standards? 4. What do people in the company think about these standards? [Resettlement and livelihoods] 5. When you start thinking about livelihoods, where is your starting point? 6. How do the livelihood needs of APs feature in your resettlement thinking and planning? 7. When you conduct resettlement, what objectives are you looking to achieve at the household level? • Do APs understand these objectives? How important is it for APs to understand these objectives? 8. In your experience on resettlement, how will you rate the company’s performance on livelihood restoration? How do you determine this score? 9. Where are the challenges/gaps for you as a company? 10. In your opinion what is the role of government in livelihood planning and practice? 11. In your opinion what is the role of communities in livelihood planning? 12. What lessons have you learned that could enhance livelihood restoration among resettled households? Interview questions for site managers/Supervisors (operational level) [Introductory courtesies] 1. Kindly provide me a brief overview of your position and role? a. How long in this role? b. Any specific responsibility/experiences related to resettlement? 2. Can you briefly describe the primary requirements of your resettlement standards? 3. When you start thinking about livelihoods, where is your starting point? a. How did the company come to this understanding and options on livelihood programs 4. How do the livelihood needs of APs feature in your resettlement thinking and planning? Page | 241 5. What was the company’s understanding about the livelihood priorities of APs before the physical relocation? 6. What do you think are their livelihood priorities now? What is this thinking based on? 7. Can you describe the primary components of your livelihood program? a. How did it all start? Ideas, design, test-run of ideas, time? 8. How are communities responding/reacting to the program? a. How did you respond (what course of action did you take?) to community reactions? 9. When you conceived this program, what were you hoping to achieve? 10. Would you say the program is successful or at least succeeding? [Y/N] a. From company perspective, is this a successful program? b. From a household perspective, is this a successful program? 11. In your experience on resettlement, how will you rate the company’s performance on livelihood restoration? Where are the challenges/gaps for you as a company? 12. In your opinion what is the role of government in resettlement planning and practice? 13. In your opinion what is the role of communities in resettlement planning? 14. What lessons have you learned that could enhance livelihood restoration among resettled households? Interview questions for company field staff (community relations and development) 1. Kindly provide me a brief overview of your role? 2. Can you describe how the company views and addresses livelihood needs of APs in resettlement? 3. What do you think are the livelihood priorities of APs? 4. Can you describe the primary components of the livelihood program? a. How did it all start? Ideas, design, test-run of ideas, time? 5. How are people responding/reacting to the program? a. How did you respond (what course of action did company take?) to community reactions? 6. What objectives were this program designed to achieve? 7. Would you say the program is successful or at least succeeding? [Y/N] Page | 242 a. From company perspective, is this a successful program? b. From a household perspective, is this a successful program? 8. From what you know, how will you rate Newmont’s performance on livelihood restoration? What is this score base on? 9. Where are the challenges/gaps for you as a company? 10. In your opinion what is the role of government in resettlement planning and practice? 11. In your opinion what is the role of communities in resettlement planning? 12. What lessons have you learned that could enhance livelihood restoration among resettled households? Government policy (Ministry responsible for mining, Eastern Regional Minister, and Legislators) 1. Kindly provide an overview of your position and role in this department? a. Any connection with community issues in mining? 2. Could you please describe the relationship between your office and mining companies? 3. Please describe the frameworks or avenues of your engagement with mining communities? 4. When and how do you get to talk with stakeholders in the mining industry? 5. Specific to restoring livelihoods of APs in resettlement, what expectations do you have of mining companies? a. Basis of this expectation? 6. Do you think the companies know about (or even acting on) your expectations? [Y/N] how? 7. How is your office responding to the livelihood challenges in resettlement communities? 8. Ghana had new mining law and legislative instrument in 2006. How did these come about? a. What specific objectives are the existing mining law and legislative instrument designed to achieve? Page | 243 9. What factors do you consider in granting, refusing, or revoking licenses? [replace with responsible for ratifying licenses/investment agreements in the case of legislators] 10. In your experience, how will you rate the mining industry’s performance on livelihood restoration? Where are the challenges/gaps for you as a company? 11. What lessons have you learned that could enhance livelihood restoration among resettled households? Interview questions for government officials (Regulators) 1. Kindly provide an overview of your position and role in this department? a. Any connection with community issues in mining? 2. Could you please describe the relationship between your office and mining companies? a. When a mining company knocks your door what do they usually look for? 3. Please describe the frameworks or avenues of your engagement with mining communities? 4. When and how do you get to talk with stakeholders [mining companies, ministries, CSOs] in the mining industry? 5. Specific to restoring livelihoods of APs in resettlement, what expectations do you have of mining companies? a. Basis of this expectation? 6. Do you think the companies know about (or even acting on) your expectations? [Y/N] how? 7. How is your office responding to the livelihood challenges in resettlement communities? 8. Ghana had new mining law and legislative instrument in 2006. How did these come about? a. What specific objectives are the existing mining law and legislative instrument designed to achieve? 9. What factors do you consider in granting, refusing, or revoking licenses? [replace with responsible for ratifying licenses/investment agreements in the case of legislators] Page | 244 10. In your experience, how will you rate the mining industry’s performance on livelihood restoration? Where are the challenges/gaps for you as a company? 11. What lessons have you learned that could enhance livelihood restoration among resettled households? Interview questions for government officials ( Human rights commission and Administrator of Stool lands) [Intro: discuss research, mining, and community issues] 1. Briefly outline the commission’s mandate? As a commission where do you connect with issues in mining-impacted communities? 2. Has any issue relating to mining come up on the commission’s radar before? What was it about? When? 3. Resettlers face enormous challenges in trying to re-establish their lost livelihoods. What do you think government and mining companies are missing? What expectations are developers not meeting? 4. Per current institutional arrangements, the Administrator of stood lands disburses royalties to local authorities. Have you had issues about these funds from communities or any stakeholder? What was it about? [Question for only stool lands] Interview questions for key informants (IFIs) 1. Can you provide a brief overview of your position and role with the organization, and your engagement with mining and resettlement? 2. Can you explain how the safeguards came about – time period, drivers and process for formulation? 3. As we understand it, the framework contains both procedural and performance elements. In your view, how effective is the framework in defining what is important from a procedural perspective? And from a performance perspective? 4. The framework is a guide to developers across all sectors. As you know we have a specific interest in mining. How well do you think the framework applies to livelihood restoration in the mining sector? 5. As a lender, what are your main points of leverage in terms of ensuring compliance with the framework for current clients? Page | 245 6. In terms of assurance - what do you look for when reviewing a project proposal that involves resettlement? 7. A lot of mining companies subscribe to the IFC standards. Why is that? How did it get to be so popular among mining companies? 8. How will you rate performance of developers against the requirements of the standard? 9. From your engagement with mining and resettlement, what have you learned that might be relevant for enhancing livelihood restoration of resettled communities (e.g. studies, assessments, planning, livelihood restoration, close our processes) 10. Recent internal review on resettlement by the World Bank suggest confusion and inconsistency in “units of engagement and analysis”. How is this affecting developers’ ability to respond to the livelihood challenge in project settings? Interview questions for key Informants (Industry Association) 1. Briefly provide some background to this association (membership, objectives, etc.) 2. How do you relate with government in terms of sector regulation and policies? Issues and motivations driving the relationship. 3. For your members, tell me the frequent topmost community issues that they face? 4. Post-resettlement livelihood restoration is a major issue among resettled populations across mining sites in Ghana. What do you think is missing? What expectations are stakeholders not meeting? 5. What do you expect of your members when they conduct resettlement? Why? 6. Specific to livelihoods, briefly describe how your association is responding? 7. Specific to livelihoods, are there minimum standards that you expect your members to comply with? 8. How did these standards come about? Who were involved? How are you socializing these standards among your membership? 9. Beyond the chamber, are there other platforms through which your members engage on response systems to livelihood restoration? Page | 246 10. In your opinion what is the role of government in resettlement planning and practice? 11. In your opinion what is the role of communities in resettlement planning? 12. Given your experience with resettlement, what could be done to enhance the livelihood restoration process of resettlers? Interview questions for key informants (Resettlement Specialist/consultants) 1. Briefly provide an overview of your background and engagement on mining and resettlement? 2. Under what circumstances are you engaged (e.g. from the outset, crisis, monitoring etc.)? 3. What is the structure of your engagement (embedded consultant, advisory only, capacity building or combination.)? 4. Have you been involved in planning or delivering a livelihood restoration program? Briefly describe. 5. How much influence did you have over strategy and planning? 6. How much influence did you have on the outcomes of the program? 7. When are you most (or least) effective in practice? 8. What makes a successful livelihood restoration program? 9. How would you describe the industry’s overall performance in restoring livelihoods? 10. What are the constraints that affect a typical livelihood reconstruction program? [Planning, implementing, resources, community] 11. What have you learned that might be relevant for improving livelihood restoration outcomes (e.g. studies, assessments, planning, implementation, and closure?) Page | 247 Appendix 2-7: SMI student research ethics approval letter Page | 248 Appendix 6-1: Farm re-establishment support menu Farmer lost Will get support to Plus financial incentives: establish a farm up to; Up to 0.25 acre 0.25 acre • 100 GHC for each farmer to help 0.26 to 0.5 acre 0.5 acre defray cost of land access 0.51 to 1.0 acre 1.0 acre • 40 GHC for each farmer to hire 1.01 to 1.5 acres 1.5 acres labor to support initial land 1.5acres and above 2.0 acres clearing • 50 GHC for each acre under the program to support farm maintenance Other Support measures Planting materials Farmer can choose a combination of food crops, or food and cash crops. Extension service Agriculture extension service tailored to selected crops Food crops Food crops (cassava and plantain) and cash crops (cocoa and oil palm) Source: Newmont, December 2015. Page | 249