Political Ecologies ofEnvironment and Development

Energy and MiningWater Resources and DamsForestry/FisheriesAgriculture/Food SecurityBiodiversity

Millennium Development Goal #7: Ensure environmental sustainability

Integrate the principles of sustainable development into country policies and programmes;

reverse loss of environmental resources Reduce by half the proportion of people without

sustainable access to safe drinking water Achieve significant improvement in lives of at

least 100 million slum dwellers

Political Ecology

Studying the human factors and especially the power relations embedded in environmental outcomes.

Intersection of environment/society relations Environmental degradation can be seen as an outcome

of human behavior– Soil erosion/desertification– Mining– Deforestation

Environmental Hazards– flooding– Earthquakes

Famine

Development and Political Ecology: The environment and natural resources are central to economic and other development strategies and policies

Export strategies:– Primary resource economies (oil and gas, minerals; crops such

as bananas, sugar, coffee)– Agriculture (other export crops)– Forest products (timber)

Increasing internal use of energy resources – Utilities: Urban electrification and water – Energy usage:

pollution in cities: (Ie. Megacities like Mexico, Delhi, Sao Paolo; aslo post Soviet/USSR countries)

Wood in rural areas: deforestation

Feeding a growing population: – Export v. subsistence agriculture

Political Ecology and the Politics of Environment and Development

The politics of resource use The politics of resource degradation The politics of resource and environment

protection The politics of environmental sustainability_________________________________ All of these processes operate across

scales from the local to the state or to the global.

Decisions made at one scale affect the local

Questions to ask about E and D

How do environment/resource struggles and decisions affect development goals and outcomes?

How does decision making reflect social and political power of different groups?

How does the political ecology of development reflect and/or support different development theories?– View from the core– View from the periphery

Fossil fuels: Oil and Gas

Primary resource economies: Middle East and some OPEC

Oil/Gas + Poverty: Highly contentions resources Often at the center of conflicts between marginal and

elite groups– Chechnya– The Caspian Sea region in general– Nigeria: the Ogoni and Shell Oil Co. – Colombia: the U’Wa and Occidental Oil Co.

Also central to conflicts between elite and marginal countries that influence development:

– Persian Gulf war, Iraq Invasion?– Venezuela/US involvement in coup?

Mining

At the center of intense “resource conflicts”– West African diamond wars– Congo conflicts– South African apartheid

More complex political ecologies of mining development

Gold mining in Cajamarca, PeruMinera Yanacocha or MYSA

Study by Dr. Jeff Bury Peru: dramatic increase in mining

– now one of the leading exporters of mineral resources in Latin America

– Mining=45% of export income

Result of transition to liberalized economy and structural adjustment in early 1990’s: Fujimori Government

– Privatization of mining/attraction of international investors– Reformed land tenure: control over land

MYSA Investor: Newmont Mining

Largest gold producer in NA Largest gold company in the world

– US, Peru, Australia, Canada, Mexico, Uzbekistan, Indonesia, Bolivia

Newmont: operator – 51.35% interest in Minera Yanacocha

Peruvian mining firm, Compania de Minas Buenaventura S.A.A. 43.65% interest

International Finance Corporation (IFC), an arm of the World Bank, holds the remaining 5%.

Cajamarca, Peru

Open pit mining at Yanacocha(MYSA) Cajamarca: -Open pit mining/cyanide heap-leaching operation

Newmont MYSA mining stats

Investment of over $750 million Employs 1000’s of workers Purchased 1000’s of acres estimated 37 million ounces

gold in Cajamarca 2.3 million oz sold in 2002

– 600,000 tons/day

Cost of production $88/oz -$125/oz (one of lowest in the world)

Price of gold: $385

Yanacocha (MYSA) land package: 607sq. miles

Mining and development: Cajamarca physical context

Mining and development: Cajamarca economic context

96% Rural Highly impoverished

– Per capita household income is <1/2 national average, < 1/3 Lima average

– 86% do not have water or electricity– 2/3 children in first grade: chronic malnutrition– Roads almost non-existent in much of area– 79% cannot meet basic needs

Mining and development: historical landscape transformations

Spanish conquest: one of “central focal points” Pizarro captured and killed Incan ruler, Atahualpa, in Cajamarca

Later colonization: haciendas, textile factories, silver mining

– Land alienation concentrated human population 1900’s: economy reoriented to cattle/dairy

– Further expelled peasants to marginal lands 1980’s land reform only partially successful here NOW: People are very poor and subsist on a complex

and changing array of livelihoods including agricultural production, agro forestry and animal husbandry

Impacts of mining on livelihoods

“Livelihoods analysis”– Intersecting patterns of livelihood production

Four capitals– Natural capital: key resource for crops, animals, wood, and

products such as dairy and artesanry– Produced capital: income from dairy enterprises, artesanry,

migration to other regions– Human capital: education or training, maintenance of family

health– Social capital: access to intra-family, inter-family or larger

scale networks of support

3 MYSAstudy sites

Impacts of MYSA mining on livelihoods

Mixed outcomes: – Positive impacts for produced and human

capital– Negative impacts on access to natural

capital – Mixed impacts on social capital

Impacts on produced capital

Infrastructure: positive, but uneven– roads– potable water systems– improved irrigation systems – latrines

Financial capital– Household income

Sold land to mine, sold more livestock and ag products, accessed credit provided by Newmont

Increased household income

Impacts on human capital

Education: – Constructed or improved schools– Donated school furnishings and supplies– Transportation costs for teachers– Improved kitchens and electrification

Health resources– Preventative and other health services– Evidence inconclusive: must be seen in light of

water quality issues

Educational changes

Impacts on natural capital

Water quality: serious water pollution from mining– Solids, copper, iron, manganese, zinc– People perceive this as a serious health problem for

themselves, crops, animals

Impacts on natural capital

Land resources– Land price increase: some benefit, but mostly

people can’t afford to buy additional landfood production

– Agricultural Intensification (reduced fallow) – land degradation

Most people can’t afford purchased fertilizer Hi altitude makes agro forestry and other intensive

techniques as successful

Impacts on social capital: mixed

Social capital: networks of support, reciprocity and trust among people and households

At the local scale:– MYSA social programs, hiring practices, land

purchasing strategies unequal and not transparent

– Increased “distrust, social differentiation, conflict among households”

Perceptions of inequality

Impacts on social capital: mixed

Positive?--Vertical or transnational networks New social and political relationships with

international communities of protest

Recent initiatives

Community Dialogue re: – Water quality– Repair of roads

New school for 450 students Gold jewelry manufacturing industry for

local women http://www.yanacocha.com.pe/ing/index.htm