|
mining in peru
New IFI video '
The World Bank and Mining in
Peru: Alleviating Poverty
'
In Peru, the World Bank supports mining
projects that contradict its mission of
poverty alleviation. These projects generate
a series of conflicts with local communities
that depend on the very resources that mining
development uses, especially water.
Labor (FoE Peru) is leading the charge
against World Bank-support of mining
projects. In the case of the Yanacocha gold
mine, there are reports of displaced
communities, polluted waters, diversion of
waterways, loss of agriculture areas and
increasing migration to the city of
Cajamarca.
In the case of the planned Quellaveco
copper mine, the design of the project is
such that it will divert the river Asana away
from communities and change the mining pit
into a lake. These plans carry a great risk
of polluting water resources that are being
used by surrounding villages and downstream
valleys. Moreover, the extraction of
underground water for the development of the
mine endangers future agricultural projects
in the region.
The most negative consequences of mining
are shown in the case of the proposed
Tambogrande mine, containing both gold and
copper, in northern Peru. In the fifties, the
World Bank financed the expansion of a dam in
this area, in order to develop local
agriculture. By local communities, this
project is regarded a very succesful project.
However, it is in danger because of a planned
mine with characteristics as destructive as
those of the Yanacocha and Quellaveco mines
together.
The benefits of these mining projects for
the poorest communities are almost zero. In
general, the revenues of the mining sector do
not come back to economic development of the
country or the people. The mining companies
do not take up their socio-environmental
responsabilities. If the World Bank can not
guarantee that the resources it spends on
mining comply with its mission, it should
invest these resources in other sectors.
Agriculture is an example.
Needed: alternative investments
The IFC/World Bank should invest in projects
that benefit the poorest communities in the
mining areas of Tambogrande, Yanacocha and
Quellaveco. A possible example for the
Tambogrande area is an investment in an
expansion of the World Bank financed
irrigation project. Secondly, the Yanacocha
mine should not be expanded, because the mine
endangers the productive cattle base of the
region. Lastly, the Bank should minimize the
environmental and social costs of its
intervention in Quellaveco. If it cannot
guarantee this, it should withdraw its
financing of these mining projects
altogether.
More information?
Mining:
Mineral Policy Center:
www.mineralpolicy.org
World Bank at
www.worldbank.org
On Yanacocha:
FEROCAFENOP
ferocafe@terra.com.pe
Center for International Environmental Law
at
www.ciel.org
Project Underground at
www.moles.org
Oxfam US at
www.oxfamamerica.org
Global Response at
www.globalresponse.org
World Bank Group at
www.ifc.org
Newmont at
www.mining-technology.com
On Tambogrande
:
Frente de Defensa de Tambogrande at
www.geocities.com/frentetambogrande
Factor Tierra at
www.geocities.com/factortierra
Vida y Agro at
www.geocities.com/vidayagro
This foto was taken in the city of
Tambogrande in February 2001, after the
population decided it wanted to put an end to
the mines and the trouble they cause.
(Courtesy José Mendoza)
Contact: Doris Balvin at
dorisbd@terra.com.pe
, Janneke Bruil at .
|
