Abstract
Conflicts around access to, control over, and quality of water accompany mining projects all over the globe. Often, they are associated with high intensity as means of contestation range from verbal complaints to protest marches, civil disobedience and violent confrontations. While numerous case studies on water-related mining conflicts exist, scholarship that synthesizes insights remains rare. In order to better understand the dynamics that lead to the escalation of conflicts and to further theory development on the role of, e.g., political economic contexts, hydro-social conditions and social relationships, a systematic overview of the existing empirical evidence is needed. Our meta-study of 53 water and mining conflicts identifies several combinations of conditions that are tied to large-scale mobilization and the use of civil disobedience measures, sabotage or hunger strikes by environmental defenders. As our results show, raised stakes and ontological differences, e.g. in situations where water is essential for livelihoods and cultural and spiritual practices, play a role, in particular when coupled with a lack of meaningful participation. Discursive or physical coercion by the state or by private security forces also intensify mobilization rather than containing it while the role of international NGOs is more ambiguous. To identify explanatory scenarios, we conducted a two-step, fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA) based on data collected in a systematic literature review of peer-reviewed articles and book chapters. Taking its data from published research, our study identifies a geographic bias towards Latin America in academic literature on water and mining conflicts and points out topical blind spots. By looking for conditions that are consistently associated with high-intensity conflicts, it also provides insights on priority areas of engagement for community leaders, policy-makers, and private sector and civil society representatives seeking to avoid the escalation of conflicts. © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Generated Summary
This meta-study investigates the high intensity of water and mining conflicts by analyzing 53 case studies. The research employs a two-step fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (fsQCA) to identify conditions consistently associated with conflict escalation. The study aims to understand the dynamics that lead to conflict escalation, focusing on political-economic contexts, hydro-social conditions, and social relationships. The methodology involves a systematic literature review of peer-reviewed articles and book chapters to collect data. The study conceptualizes ‘high intensity’ conflicts as situations of mass mobilization or when environmental defenders employ strategies that expose them to potential physical or legal harm, encompassing tactics like civil disobedience and violent protests. The goal is to provide insights into factors influencing conflict development, highlighting the multi-dimensionality of these conflicts and potential geographic biases in case study-based research.
Key Findings & Statistics
- The study analyzed a dataset of 53 mining and water conflicts.
- The geographic distribution of cases is heavily skewed towards Latin America, with 34 cases, compared to 5 from North America, 4 from Oceania and Asia, and 3 from Africa and Europe.
- In conflicts that take place in the planning or the licensing stage of mining projects, intensity remains moderate in about half the cases.
- In conflicts that occur after the mine has already started operating, the number rises to two thirds of all cases.
- In the planning and licensing stage of mining projects, high-intensity conflicts occur when:
- Communities are internally conflicted, assign cultural value to water, and have not experienced meaningful participation.
- They experience coercion by the state or private security forces, lack alliances with international NGOs, and meaningful participation.
- Communities assign cultural value to water, have alliances among INGOs, but did not experience meaningful participation.
- In the operating stage, high-intensity conflicts or high-risk measures are chosen by environmental defenders:
- When livelihoods depend highly on water resources, they experience marginalization and coercion by state or private forces and dependency on the mine.
- The research found that in the dataset, the bulk of cases on this platform is still located in Latin America
- Cases in Asia make up nearly 30%
- Roughly one seventh of reported cases take place in Africa.
Other Important Findings
- The study identifies several combinations of conditions that are tied to large-scale mobilization and the use of civil disobedience measures, sabotage or hunger strikes by environmental defenders.
- The cultural significance of water, clear and visible impacts from mining, the importance of water for livelihoods, meaningful participation, dependency on the mine, alliances with INGOs, the existence of counter-narratives, coercion by the state or private actors and internal conflicts among defenders are considered proximate conditions.
- Physical water scarcity, pre-existing tensions with mining companies, national-economic reliance on mining, and the marginalization of affected communities were used as remote conditions.
- The absence of meaningful participation is linked to all solution terms where conflicts escalate.
- Internal conflicts among mining-affected communities are part of the solution term for conflicts at the planning and licensing stage.
- Coercion by the state or by private forces plays a role in explaining the mass mobilization and the use of higher-risk means by environmental defenders in conflicts that occur prior and post opening the mine.
Limitations Noted in the Document
- The research relies on published papers and book chapters, which limits the information available to the topics and considerations deemed noteworthy by the authors, potentially introducing bias.
- The language of publication and the dynamics of inclusion and exclusion inherent in the academic publishing process establish boundary conditions for the dataset.
- QCA establishes relationships of necessity and sufficiency but not causality, which requires case-study based research.
- The study’s findings might be limited by the geographic focus on Latin America, as the geographies of academic attention do not necessarily reflect the geographies of water and mining conflicts.
- The dataset is based on a literature search on Scopus, and the selection of papers and book chapters is subject to the authors’ discretion, and may not be fully representative of all relevant studies.
Conclusion
The study underscores the complex interplay of factors driving water and mining conflicts, emphasizing the significance of social relationships and the material conditions related to water and miningscapes. The research highlights the crucial role of participation in mitigating conflict, while also noting its limitations when divergent interests and imaginaries exist. The absence of meaningful participation is consistently linked to conflict escalation, underscoring its importance in preventing higher-intensity conflicts. Internal conflicts within communities are also identified as a factor in conflict dynamics, highlighting the need to consider group dynamics. Coercion by state or private forces is found to exacerbate conflict, reinforcing opposition. The study’s findings suggest that a comprehensive understanding of both the material and social dimensions of water and miningscapes is essential for comprehending conflict dynamics. The need for states to maintain impartiality and protect the rights of citizens, along with the potential double-edged role of international NGOs, are also emphasized. Finally, the geographical bias towards Latin America and the limitations in the data suggest the need for further research, especially in areas where overt resistance is less visible. The study implies that future research should investigate the causal mechanisms that cause conflicts to escalate under specific conditions and the role of power dynamics in shaping the development and resolution of these conflicts, and it stresses the need for interdisciplinary approaches that integrate the material and the social aspects of water and mining.