15
more resilient. Communities that have been properly consulted about their capacitybuilding priorities have been able to strengthen key assets, becoming more capable
of coping with mining-induced changes. However, such approaches need to be
included as constituents of both corporate and government policies. It is not solely
the companies’ responsibility to make community capacity-building available for
communities; governments also need to share responsibilities with companies in
this regard, and governments also need to consult communities. All consultation
should be genuine and not be merely the token provision of information; it should
be such that communities are involved in decision-making about matters such as
priorities for the allocation of funds.
At the corporate level, a more people-centred approach to corporate social
responsibility for community capacity-building has helped companies in mining
locations play a strong role in enhancing human capital and allowed them to contribute strongly to the development of sustainable livelihoods. The implementation
of non-mining capacity-building initiatives involving the broader community was
found in the research to be more valuable for locals. There are a few cases of companies driving community capacity-building initiatives that place local people at the
centre of development. These actions involve the broader community regardless of
their engagement with the mining industry. For example, there is active participation from local entrepreneurs and vulnerable groups, but with the assistance of mining companies, so that they can access better business opportunities and so develop
livelihoods that do not involve mining. These activities can also have the potential
to reduce poverty.
These are examples where both corporations and governments have embarked on
socially responsible programmes based on the aspirations and expectations of communities. This has had positive impacts on locals, as the resultant efforts at community capacity-building are more attuned to the context in which they are
embedded. In this approach the needs and expectations of the community are highly
valued in the implementation of community capacity-building activities. These conditions have made the existing community capacity-building approaches meaningful for all stakeholders but especially for communities, all of which could serve as a
valuable model for actors in other regions to follow.
As discussed earlier, the current approach in Antioquia is mainly intended to
attract and retain human capital that is skilled or trained for the mining industry.
Although there are some wider entrepreneurship development initiatives in place,
they were seen by respondents to be insufficient to face the potential challenges created by the mining sector. In spite of corporate investments in community capacitybuilding programmes and activities, those initiatives have not yet tackled issues that
were seen to be critical by the community. Development aspirations have been partially achieved, but powerful mining stakeholders are not playing a sufficiently
strong role in protecting community assets or in helping to forge sustainable livelihoods. In addition, the government and private sector actors involved need to take
community capacity-building more seriously and devote more resources and attention to the enhancement of community human capital assets, especially by delivering relevant training.
2 SDG 1 No Poverty
more resilient. Communities that have been properly consulted about their capacitybuilding priorities have been able to strengthen key assets, becoming more capable
of coping with mining-induced changes. However, such approaches need to be
included as constituents of both corporate and government policies. It is not solely
the companies’ responsibility to make community capacity-building available for
communities; governments also need to share responsibilities with companies in
this regard, and governments also need to consult communities. All consultation
should be genuine and not be merely the token provision of information; it should
be such that communities are involved in decision-making about matters such as
priorities for the allocation of funds.
At the corporate level, a more people-centred approach to corporate social
responsibility for community capacity-building has helped companies in mining
locations play a strong role in enhancing human capital and allowed them to contribute strongly to the development of sustainable livelihoods. The implementation
of non-mining capacity-building initiatives involving the broader community was
found in the research to be more valuable for locals. There are a few cases of companies driving community capacity-building initiatives that place local people at the
centre of development. These actions involve the broader community regardless of
their engagement with the mining industry. For example, there is active participation from local entrepreneurs and vulnerable groups, but with the assistance of mining companies, so that they can access better business opportunities and so develop
livelihoods that do not involve mining. These activities can also have the potential
to reduce poverty.
These are examples where both corporations and governments have embarked on
socially responsible programmes based on the aspirations and expectations of communities. This has had positive impacts on locals, as the resultant efforts at community capacity-building are more attuned to the context in which they are
embedded. In this approach the needs and expectations of the community are highly
valued in the implementation of community capacity-building activities. These conditions have made the existing community capacity-building approaches meaningful for all stakeholders but especially for communities, all of which could serve as a
valuable model for actors in other regions to follow.
As discussed earlier, the current approach in Antioquia is mainly intended to
attract and retain human capital that is skilled or trained for the mining industry.
Although there are some wider entrepreneurship development initiatives in place,
they were seen by respondents to be insufficient to face the potential challenges created by the mining sector. In spite of corporate investments in community capacitybuilding programmes and activities, those initiatives have not yet tackled issues that
were seen to be critical by the community. Development aspirations have been partially achieved, but powerful mining stakeholders are not playing a sufficiently
strong role in protecting community assets or in helping to forge sustainable livelihoods. In addition, the government and private sector actors involved need to take
community capacity-building more seriously and devote more resources and attention to the enhancement of community human capital assets, especially by delivering relevant training.
2 SDG 1 No Poverty