What do indigenous communities think of the CSR practices of mining companies?

Abstract

This paper examines how one indigenous community in the Western Province of Papua New Guinea (PNG) views the social responsibility initiatives of OK Tedi Mining Ltd (OTML). This mining operation has been controversial since its inception, and various operators of the mine have sought to engage the community and to undertake a number of CSR-related projects. Insights gained from four focus groups amongst the Ok Tedi River indigenous communities show that while some members of the community are satisfied with the company’s efforts at the macro level, many have reservations about the effectiveness of the programs at the micro level on the village and family unit. The implementation of CSR activities are slow and in many instances do not effectively address stakeholder concerns.

Improving environmental management through indigenous peoples’ involvement

“…This lack of transparency provides support for the perspective that corporate social responsibility (CSR) initiatives are above all used as a marketing tool to control stakeholder perceptions (Basu et al, 2015;Coronado and Fallon, 2010;Devenin and Bianchi, 2018;Parsons, 2008). Third, CSR initiatives have been criticized for their superficiality and lack of substantial benefits for local populations (Kepore et al, 2013;Whitmore, 2006). Overall, the adverse impacts of extractive activities have been found to exceed their benefits for indigenous communities in many cases and to have long-term social and environmental consequences (O'Faircheallaigh, 2013b;Whitmore, 2006).…”

CSR and reconciliation with Indigenous peoples in Canada

“…Benefits to these communities may exist, they concede, but only as “mere collateral windfalls” (Coronado and Fallon, 2010, p. 678). Kepore et al (2013, p. 48) note a macro- versus micro-level distinction amongst CSR benefits in Papua New Guinea; in the case examined, a mining company’s CSR activities were broadly appreciated, but “initiatives targeting individual villages and households [were] seen as ineffective and fail to touch the day to day realities experienced by affected communities”. Finally, Luning (2012) observed how the consultation framework of a Canadian mining company operating in an African nation perpetuated colonial relations and categorizations by defining the few communities with whom they would engage using a narrow definition of who would qualify.…”

Business Ethics and Sovereignty in Settler Colonial States

“…Building on Antonetti and Maklan (2016), firms can attempt to pretend that the interest of Indigenous Cemānáhuacan nations are the same as those of settler colonial states to minimize opposition to their operations and projects. The use of Occidental (business) ethics by firms does not translate into satisfactory results from the perspective of Indigenous nations (Kepore, Higgins & Goddard, 2013)this should not come as a surprise. Since Indigenous Cemānáhuacan nations are sovereign throughout all of Cemānáhuac, calibrating the expectations of Indigenous Cemānáhuacan nations vis-à-vis settler colonial states and firms (as suggested in Ali, 2016) is not ideal-indeed, the calibration should be the other way around.…”