6/29/2016

1

The Role of Indigenous Cultures in Securing

Sustainable Economic Development Of Mineral

& Energy Resources: Australia & Sweden

Principal Research Leader

Dr Boyd BlackwellUNE Business School, Australia

Presentation to ISEE 2016, Washington DC, Mon 27 Jun 2016

Acknowledgement Project Partners & Participants

6/29/2016

2

Outline

• Introduction• Methods:

• Case studies• Regressions (to come)

• Preliminary findings• Discussion• Conclusion

3

Introduction – Practical, Geographic Background

• Sabbatical Proposal• Ninti One Ltd funded project• Prof. Dean Carsen• Prof. Brian Dolllery• Myself • Thus, Australasia e.g. Australia and Europe e.g. Sweden comparison

4

6/29/2016

3

Introduction – Conceptual Background

• Mining Toolkit for Remote Communities (O’Faircheallaigh, K. Pers. Coms, Feb 2016)

• Typical view, resource company delivers enduring community value from mining (ECVM)

• Instead: communities, ngos, and government (with companies) deliver ECVM?

• Counter-intuitive• Remote communities under-resourced

• BUT: CSR SLO, Community Acceptance/Informed Consent • Factor share theory (Blackwell & Dollery 2013; 2014)

• Land labour capital• Royalties salary/wages dividends/interest/local supply• Mine Lifecycle and Community Economic Cycle Planning (Robertson &

Blackwell 2016; Blackwell & Robertson 2016)

• Importance of International Interests

5

Methods: Case Study Locations

6

Characteristic Australia Sweden

Resources Vastest and rich ‘inheritance’ (Marshall 1788, p. 349)

Mineral wealth

RemotenessGeography

Vast ‘uninhabited’ ultra-sparsely populated interior

Sparsely populated north -Lapland

Traditional people

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders - preponderance

Sami

Climate Arid deserts and tropical wetlands

Arctic

Regional Doorstep of AsiaMajor Landmass in AustralasiaAntipodes

Part of EuropeMajor landmass in ScandinaviaStrategic

Political Conservative Westminster democratic market economy with sovereign head of state

Socialist democratic market economy with sovereign

6/29/2016

4

Findings: Mineral Development Australia and Sweden

7

Characteristic Australia Sweden

Resource owner Crown Crown

Access manager Delegated to the states (not Commonwealth)

Minerals Inspector (exploitation concession)

Regulated? Yes, each state has a Mineral Resource Act

Yes Minerals Act

Institutionalarrangements

EIS proponent; social and environmental impact assessment and mitigation

Permit also required under Swedish Environmental Code

Can trigger state/Cth Acts e.g. EPBC Act (Cth)

?

Social arrangements self governede.g. SLO private royalties regional partnerships

?

Actors: Decision makers?www.sgu.seMineral Deposits of National Interest

Findings: Aboriginal &Torres Strait Islanders and S ami

8

Characteristic Aboriginal & Torres Strait Islanders

Sami

Uniqueness 120+ Language groups,hence ‘peoples’ (refer map)

Single northernmost indigenous people of European continent

TraditionalLivelihoods

Hunters and gatherers, nomadic but language areas

Reindeer herders

Current Livelihoods

Two worlds – strongconnection to place and people

As above

Mining relationship

Contested but growing wealth/affluence from royalties - disparity

Conflict

Cultural evolution

Exciting moment ?

Actors: Decision influencers?Kiruna and the surrounding area where national interests for nature (green dots), outdoor life(green lines), reindeer husbandry (red lines), culture (purple hatched) and minerals (black lines) overlap each other.

6/29/2016

5

Findings: Indigenous Peoples Driving ECVM

9

Factor Jabiru, Ranger Uranium; Leigh Creek Coal

Kristineberg Copper & Adak, Malå

Resource –Town nexus

R:One of World’s largest, 2021 legal life, community operatesL: Mine just closed, community in transition

K: Mine open, 8-10 mines over 150yrs, community doesn’tA: Mine closed, community thriving

Royalties State, equiv. (R) & private

Employment R: Strong 20%, ~5-10% localL: Weak ~0%, 0% local

Dividend/interest/partnership

Nil – 100% company owned

Local supply Yes

Investment -infrastructure

R: Built & manage airport, power built townL: Closed town (100%)

Cultural Investment

R: Regional partnerships & fund sports, art, music & cultural festivalsL: Limited

Rareness R: With Kakadu WHA wetlands, Cth, NT & Miner package deal, Jabiluka agreementL: No LGA, No land tenure, hist. apartheid

Actors: Decision influencers BUT HOW?

Discussion

• If not acceptable to local people , how can it be acceptable to a nation, global community?

• Local people critical to ensuring mine operates sustainably i.e. delivers ECVM

• Not well resourced so rely on funding redirection from miningcompany – the best way for miners to achieve ECVM

• Requires good understanding of mine lifecycle and community economic cycles

• BUT has potential to compromise their ethics• E.g. leaders/guides sell-off trust of community for short term

profit• NB that leaders have enduring contract with their people &

held to account – but how? – Canada IBAs ?• Governments ethics to serve the people also potentially

compromised by desire for royalties, exports, GRP, taxes etc.• Similarly need to be brought to account – election sufficient ?

10

6/29/2016

6

Conclusion

• New view ; indigenous people drive sustainable mineral resource development

• BUT need to know their current role in decision making process• How to achieve ECVM ? Through returns to factors of production and…• Need contracts with negotiating leaders in community and government

and an instrument to bring them to account where break communities’ trust

• More research and help for remote communities to come through Mining Toolkit

11

12

Acknowledgement

6/29/2016

7

13

References• Blackwell B and B Dollery (2014) The impact of mining expenditure on remote communities in

Australia: The Ranger uranium mine and the Tanami gold mine in the Northern Territory, Australasian Journal of Regional Studies 20(1): 68-97. 'Accessed 19 Aug 2014 from: http://www.anzrsai.org/assets/Uploads/PublicationChapter/Blackwell-and-Dollery-final.pdf

• Blackwell B and B Dollery (2013) Income factor shares from mining in remote Australia: An analysis of the Ranger uranium mine and the Tanami gold mine in the Northern Territory, Australasian Journal of Regional Studies 19(3), pp. 369-395. Accessed 19 Aug 2014 from: http://www.anzrsai.org/assets/Uploads/PublicationChapter/546-BlackwellandDollery.pdf

• Blackwell , B.D. and S. Robertson (2016), ‘Enduring value for remote communities from mining: Synthesising production, employment, populations, and reform opportunities’, Learning Communities: International Journal of Learning in Social Contexts, Special Issue: Synthesis & Integration Writing from the Cooperative Research Centre for Remote Economic Participation, April, No. 19, pp. 116-147. http://dx.doi.org/10.18793/LCJ2016.19.08

• Robertson, S. and Blackwell, B ., (2016) ‘Remote mining towns on the rangelands: determining dependency within the hinterland ’, The Rangeland Journal, 37(6): 583-596. Accessible 23 December 2015 from: http://www.publish.csiro.au/?act=view_file&file_id=RJ15046.pdf

• Marshall, A. (1878) ‘The Coal Question’, Chapter X and XI in Thorpe, T.A. (Ed.) Coal: Its History and Uses, MacMillian, London. Accessed 14 July 2015 from: https://ia601403.us.archive.org/19/items/coalitshistoryus00thorrich/coalitshistoryus00thorrich.pdf