A view of the White Cliffs of Dover, taken on September 7 2004 Source: http://www.flickr.com/photos/fanny/555925/
Development is a complicated process, with a range of considerations to be taken into account. In an article published recently by David Shukman (BBC Science Editor), Shukman poses the question ‘would you mine the white cliffs of Dover for £1 billion worth of gold?’ For those readers not familiar with British culture, the chalk cliffs of Dover are a national emblem of Britain, a landscape strongly associated with national pride, heritage, wartime resilience or defiance. The bright white chalk cliffs are easily visible when sailing across the Channel and coming towards Great Britain, they are a visible reminder that the UK is close. Shukman poses the interesting dilemma that if there was £1 billion worth of gold (which there isn’t, this is purely hypothetical) would we mine this national treasure for a very different type of treasure? What if there was £1 trillion worth of gold in the cliffs? Would we then choose to mine and extract it?
Development is complex. The tax revenues and royalties from a trillion pounds worth of gold would make a huge contribution to education, healthcare or infrastructure in the UK. It would also provide a range of skilled jobs. The impact on the natural environment, however, would be significant. Large-scale removal of rock material, heavy-laden trucks, and emissions – a landscape changed forever.
Whilst this situation is purely hypothetical, Shukman describes the real case situation in Brazil, where $1 trillion worth of iron ore is being extracted in the heart of the Amazon rainforest. Brazil had to make the choice between conserving a part of the Amazon rainforest, an important ecosystem, and generating vital income to help Brazil overcome severe poverty. Decisions such as those above are far from straightforward. Rainforest has a significant economic value in its own right. Ecosystem services, such as clean drinking water, biodiversity and protection against natural hazards (e.g., natural protection against landsliding) are valuable contributions to human and societal development. On the other hand, however, cash – alongside intelligent policies – is required for healthcare facilities, sanitation, education, sustainable and safe shelter and housing.
In developing countries (and others), these are decisions that have to be made on a regular basis, and decisions that often directly impact the lives of individuals and communities. It may be a mine (small or large scale) close to local communities, a dam providing much needed power, a road system allowing goods and services to better reach remote communities. All of these developments can bring prosperity and wellbeing to communities, but they all come with a cost. Good practice can help to minimise these costs and maximise the benefit to local communities, but there still retains a number of complexities surrounding any large scale development such as that seen in Brazil, or the hypothetical example described in the UK.
The differential valuation of the landscape, not just in economic terms, but in cultural and historical importance should be taken into account. A local community may have strong spiritual or cultural associations with a particular region that would make development highly distressing. The vast array of stakeholders involved means that effective decision making must consider all points of view.
The distribution of financial reward for any development project must also be carefully considered. The benefits of a nickel mine in Tanzania, for example, are likely to be shared amongst a number of stakeholders. An international company may be undertaking the extraction and therefore making money from the sale of the material. Tax revenues, license fees or royalties are likely to be paid to national governments. Employment opportunities and investment in services are likely to be made in the local communities themselves. The distribution, particularly of the tax revenues, is something that can result in contention.
Ultimately, the decision to develop land to access valuable minerals – be that in an important national heritage site or a locally important site will almost always generate disagreements. Geologists may sit on both of sides of the argument – recognising the importance of conserving geologically important sites but also understanding the importance and benefits that natural resources can bring to communities. GfGD is working to help young geoscientists to understand these complexities and ensure the contribution that geoscientists make is sustainable and effective. We are training geoscientists with the skills to communicate across stakeholder groups, and understand how to better involve local communities in decision making. To find out more about our work and the role of geologists in international development, as well as the complexities involved in undertaking such work, why not register for our upcoming National Conference. We’ll be having a range of interesting talks and discussions about some of these issues.
‘Fighting Global Poverty – Can Geologists Help?’ is the first GfGD National Conference, kindly supported and hosted by the Geological Society of London. For information on the day and registration please visit our website – www.gfgd.org/conferences.
