Critical Political Ecology
The article in question is entitled: Mining, Water Appropriation, and Latent Conflicts. There was no clear indicator of authorship. It is not prudent to assume that the creator was named after the initials that read: mjbeltran. Aside from the aforementioned initials there is a lack of information with regards to the source. It seems like the article was taken from a blog. However, the author clarified his intended message. He wanted his readers to realize that mining firms have the power and the resources to overcome and defeat any form of social responsibility not in favor of the company’s mining activities. In this article, the author claimed that a mining firm named Cobre Las Cruces “CLC” was able to exploit water resources using a top-down approach, and the application of a technocratic presentation of mining-related facts.
Key Ideas and Major Claims
The article’s creator was able to make at least five major claims. First, it was pointed out that the open-pit mining of copper within the easternmost area of the Iberian Pyrite belt in Andalusia, exemplified the environmentally destructive process of digging up mineral resources buried below the earth’s surface. Second, the author highlighted the fact that due to mining’s environmental impact, it is normal to encounter social conflict in the form of protests initiated by community members and those who are concerned about sustainability and environmental protection. Third, the author clarified the fact that CLC committed gross violations of governing rules as manifested by the company’s extreme use of water resources, as well as violation s that lead to water pollution. Fourth, the author asserted that CLC leveraged the work of technocrats to bend environment-related laws, especially those linked to effective and efficient use of water resources. Finally, the author claimed that the absence of social conflict was explained through the community’s dependence on CLC’s economic activity and the assumption made by the members of the community regarding the role of government officials in enforcing the law of the land. In other words, affected residents and other stakeholders were confident that they had the support of dedicated and competent government officials.
Evidentiary Support
The author provided evidentiary support with regard to the first claim made earlier. He provided an aerial photograph of CLC’s open-pit mining operations. Using adjacent buildings and vehicles as reference points, readers are able to make sense of the size of the mining activity and its environmental impact. Additional information was provided when the author disclosed that copper ores were located beneath an aquifer. Regarding the claim concerning extreme water use and water pollution, he discussed the impact of acid mine drainage. Specific information was also revealed, such as the firm’s illegal extraction of 75 metric tons of water. Furthermore, the author cited how CLC was guilty of the illegal discharge of arsenic acid and other pollutants into the community’s water source.
With regard to the fourth claim made earlier, the author discussed how CLC presented an alternative water management plan to Andalusia’s Regional Government in 2009. It was made clear that the CLC did not agree to the prescribed water consumption allowance that limited the company’s extraction of water to a mere 18.3 metric tons per hour of use. However, the author also made a startling revelation that CLC managed to increase the water usage limit. In fact, CLC was able to increase the allowance adding more than 100 metric tons of water per hour. The article blamed the work of technocrats for creating a legal loophole that enabled CLC to almost unlimited access to finite water resources.
About the final claim, the author did not provide enough information to support the said assertion. He was content to say that an NGO was tracking CLC’s mining activities, while at the same time condemning the firm’s deliberate misuse of the aforementioned legal loophole. In the end, the author made generalizations citing another case labeled as the Aznalcollar disaster without providing evidence to support the original claim.
Least Persuasive Argument
One of the least persuasive arguments in the article was the assumption made regarding the failure of the Regional Government about the responsibility of confronting CLC’s destructive mining practices. There is a need to develop a better explanation other than the conclusion that CLC was able to deceive government officials using scientific explanations prepared by technocrats. It is more prudent to pursue issues like bribery and corruption as the root cause of the failure to limit CLC’s mining capabilities.
Insights from a Critical Political Ecology Standpoint
This article made me realize the difficulty of enforcing mining-related laws, especially those associated with regulations created to protect the environment. It is easy to understand the clamor for eco-friendly operations and sustainable mining practices, however, these ideas are easier said than done. To improve the success rate of government agencies tasked to monitor and enforce the said laws, it is also imperative to acknowledge the degree of difficulty that they are facing when tempted to accept bribe money or compelled to enter into anomalous deals. A deeper understanding of the inner-workings of the mining industry helps in improving the implementation of laws in the context of accountability and law enforcement. After all, mining is one of the most lucrative business operations on the planet.
Conclusion
The article is a positive contribution to the study on the environmental impact of open-pit mining. The author offered valuable insights especially in revealing the number of water resources needed to dig up copper ores buried deep underground. The same thing can be said about the illegal release of arsenic acid while extracting precious mineral resources. However, in trying to explain the failure of the Andalusian’ government’s drive to take into account CLC’s destructive mining practices, the author was content to make generalizations and in blaming the incompetence of government officials in their inability to see the real meaning of the alternative water management that was used to deceive them into increasing the firm’s water usage. It is of critical importance to discover a more realistic explanation. Denial of the challenges faced by government regulators in the context of a lucrative mining sector prevents the introduction of better measures that are more practical and implementable. The best starting point is to acknowledge the difficulty in rejecting bribe offers and the temptation of entering into anomalous transactions to earn large sums of money. It is only through the acknowledgment of the existence of these problems that government regulators are able to receive ample support and greater vigilance from the public. This new mindset also enhances greater transparency within government agencies empowered to uphold the laws of the land.