12
The ‘Context’ SLF component also includes the concept of shocks. These shocks
constitute factors that might destroy community assets such as floods and droughts
but also resulting in or from conflicts or wars (Rakodi and Lloyd-Jones 2002, p. 14).
The revisited version of the SLF proposes the Colombian internal conflict (or civil
war) as a shock. It is also argued that internal conflict and local impacts have had
serious implications for community livelihoods. The application of the SLF to the
Colombian mining context highlights that shocks, in the form of civil war and the
involvement of illegal groups, are perhaps the most sensitive issues that settlements
and communities in resource regions have to deal with and therefore deserve major
attention. The involvement of illegal groups in resource regions through informal
small-scale mining has exacerbated historical conflicts and adversely affected stakeholder interactions. The interviews conducted for this research showed it has also
diminished the potential of enhancing community assets as a driver for social sustainability (Franco 2014):
Why do you think there is violence in the world? What do you do when you have a family
to support and you do not have a job? ... you do whatever to get some income to feed your
children, right? Well, there are many people experiencing this situation in this region, even
though this is a mining region ... The situation is very complex in these towns. At least 3 to
4 people are killed every day ... This has got worse during the last three months. (NGO
Director from Antioquia, Interview, November, 2012)
Civil society actors and government representatives both agree that relationships
between companies and other stakeholders have deteriorated in the two regions. In
addition, the escalation of global mining interests in the regions is causing resentment amongst legitimate small-scale miners. These groups are highly dependent on
mining which they perceive as the only employment opportunity and therefore their
only livelihood option. Consequently, legitimate small-scale miners regard the
arrival of multinational exploration and mining companies as a threat to their livelihoods. This situation has increased resistance from these groups against multinational companies. The whole situation has also been intensified by armed conflict.
Internal conflict dynamics have been exacerbated by illegal groups including
guerrillas, paramilitary and bacrim (criminal bands). These illegitimate actors own
small-scale mines to launder money or support their illegal businesses. In addition,
they have found the current mining boom to be the best opportunity to extort money
from companies operating in the two regions. Community livelihoods have been
heavily impacted by the indirect benefits of mineral extraction to these groups. Very
often communities and human settlements cannot actively engage in human capital/
asset enhancement initiatives as they feel threatened by these groups. On the other
hand, governments and companies are reluctant to further engage with some smallscale miners and community members due to their suspicions of links between
locals and illegal groups. This has not only aggravated the level of discontent and
violence in remote resource areas but has also resulted in destruction of livelihoods,
since communities reap very little benefit from collaborative endeavours in these
circumstances. These limiting contextual factors have also been detrimental for the
role of the private sector in the governance environment in resource regions.
I. B. Franco and J. Minnery
The ‘Context’ SLF component also includes the concept of shocks. These shocks
constitute factors that might destroy community assets such as floods and droughts
but also resulting in or from conflicts or wars (Rakodi and Lloyd-Jones 2002, p. 14).
The revisited version of the SLF proposes the Colombian internal conflict (or civil
war) as a shock. It is also argued that internal conflict and local impacts have had
serious implications for community livelihoods. The application of the SLF to the
Colombian mining context highlights that shocks, in the form of civil war and the
involvement of illegal groups, are perhaps the most sensitive issues that settlements
and communities in resource regions have to deal with and therefore deserve major
attention. The involvement of illegal groups in resource regions through informal
small-scale mining has exacerbated historical conflicts and adversely affected stakeholder interactions. The interviews conducted for this research showed it has also
diminished the potential of enhancing community assets as a driver for social sustainability (Franco 2014):
Why do you think there is violence in the world? What do you do when you have a family
to support and you do not have a job? ... you do whatever to get some income to feed your
children, right? Well, there are many people experiencing this situation in this region, even
though this is a mining region ... The situation is very complex in these towns. At least 3 to
4 people are killed every day ... This has got worse during the last three months. (NGO
Director from Antioquia, Interview, November, 2012)
Civil society actors and government representatives both agree that relationships
between companies and other stakeholders have deteriorated in the two regions. In
addition, the escalation of global mining interests in the regions is causing resentment amongst legitimate small-scale miners. These groups are highly dependent on
mining which they perceive as the only employment opportunity and therefore their
only livelihood option. Consequently, legitimate small-scale miners regard the
arrival of multinational exploration and mining companies as a threat to their livelihoods. This situation has increased resistance from these groups against multinational companies. The whole situation has also been intensified by armed conflict.
Internal conflict dynamics have been exacerbated by illegal groups including
guerrillas, paramilitary and bacrim (criminal bands). These illegitimate actors own
small-scale mines to launder money or support their illegal businesses. In addition,
they have found the current mining boom to be the best opportunity to extort money
from companies operating in the two regions. Community livelihoods have been
heavily impacted by the indirect benefits of mineral extraction to these groups. Very
often communities and human settlements cannot actively engage in human capital/
asset enhancement initiatives as they feel threatened by these groups. On the other
hand, governments and companies are reluctant to further engage with some smallscale miners and community members due to their suspicions of links between
locals and illegal groups. This has not only aggravated the level of discontent and
violence in remote resource areas but has also resulted in destruction of livelihoods,
since communities reap very little benefit from collaborative endeavours in these
circumstances. These limiting contextual factors have also been detrimental for the
role of the private sector in the governance environment in resource regions.
I. B. Franco and J. Minnery