Galamsey is neither a canker nor a menace; National dialogue in Accra not the solution!

I have always argued that galamsey, an artisanal and informal form of mining for the subaltern in Ghana, is neither a canker nor menace, as they erroneously describe them.

In a paper we did in 2019 and published in Elsevier Journal of Sustainable Mining, we found that the informal mining business alone contributes to about 40% of total gold production in the country and in 2016 alone it generated revenues of more than 2.2 billion dollars to the Ghanaian economy.

Informal mining is the mining of the Ghanaian people, dates to the 4th century and it is the only sector responsible for production of diamonds in the country.

In 2018, the ASM sector contributed 2.1 million ounces of gold, an equivalence of 43.1% of total gold production in the country. This is a jump from the 1.6 million ounces of gold, equivalence of 40% found in 2016. But how come there was a surge in gold production from the sector, despite the ban on their activities between 2017 - 2018?

This is a question that we may want to find the answers to later. Be that as it may, these statistics thus show the significant contribution this informal mining sector alone contributes to the gold mining revenues and economic development of the country.

See more in Owusu, Bansah and Mensah (2019): “Small in size, but big in impact”: socio-environmental reforms for sustainable artisanal and small-scale mining.

National dialogue and conglomeration of political actors in Accra who give speeches, speak English and eat thereafter won't ever solve the problems associated with artisanal and small-scale mining. Neither has any military intervention ever been the solution to the so-called menace and canker they so describe the operation.

Military intervention against artisanal and small-scale mining started in the 1980s when security and the police used to chase the subaltern miners into the bush. Previous governments did it again in 2006, 2013, and 2017 each bearing different names but same strategies.

Each of these operations against the activities of the informal miners equally also gave the miners different strategies - they adopted different strategies as they, for instance, shifted from working in the day time to the night time to evade the security task forces. See more in Bansah (2019): From diurnal to nocturnal: Surviving in a chaotic artisanal and small-scale mining sector.

The government went ahead in 2017 to repeat what previous governments failed at. The president put his presidency on the line and went ahead to constitute what he described as the Inter-Ministerial Committee on Illegal Mining (IMCIM) and constituted a task force.

This committee was filled with party faithful, the constitution of the task force wasn't backed by law and their operations and responsibilities were equally informal and not scientific.

All the 7 responsibilities of the IMCIM were already performed by the responsible oversight institutions such as the water resources commission, forestry commission, minerals commission, environmental protection agency, and others.

The members of the IMCIM were caught in corruption as their boss and secretary were caught on camera taking bribes to allow illegality of the informal mining to perpetuate. The committee members sought rents and they became private citizens at the expense of the state's interests.

The informal mining sector in Ghana is complex and to be able to tackle it, the approach must be holistic involving the very miners, the local communities and the approach must be bottom-up. Again, by involving technocrats from all sectors with research experience in the field and by removing politics out of the conversation!

In Africa's rural economics, there may be only two major competing occupations: agriculture and mining. Most farmers and miners in rural Africa are mostly small holders and artisanal miners, respectively. The later outcompetes and has competitive advantage over the former in terms of revenue generation and poverty amelioration in peri urban and rural economies.

Artisanal and small-scale mining (ASM) sector in Ghana alone employs over a million people. These are even the official records from the minerals commission. It is thus reported that twice this figure works in the informal or artisanal sector. Additionally, the sector provides indirect livelihoods to over 4 million people.

This is in sharp contrast to the number of people employed by the large-scale mines: around 20,000 - 30,000. It is commonly reported that large scale mines exist to boost national incomes and foreign exchange earnings for the national economy but positive economic impacts on the local communities where they operate are minimal (see more in: Akabzaa and Darimani, 2001; Aryee, 2001; Garvin et al., 2009).

Between 1990 and 1998, mining operations in Tarkwa displaced 14 agricultural communities totalling 30,000 and Newmont’s first phase of the Ahafo South Project displaced 9,500 rural (95% subsistence) farmers. Additionally, a cyanide spill caused by the company in 2009 killed a huge number of fishes, depleted water quality and threatened aquatic biodiversity of the riparian communities.

See more in: https://www.earthworks.org/stories/wassa_ghana/

It is reported that more than 70% of the land in Tarkwa has been taken by mining and only 30% is available for farming activities, but such percentage distribution does not specify whether the degradation is solely attributed to artisanal and small-scale mining activities.

It must be noted that mining, regardless of its scale of operation- large, medium or small, is environmentally degrading and not ecosystem friendly. But we could put in place measures to minimise the negative deleterious impacts and to maximise the positive gains and impacts.

These then underscore the need for environmental impacts assessment for every undertaking or projects that are envisaged to have deleterious impacts on the ecosystem, environmental health and the social fabric of communities where mineral mining projects take place.

The above arguments and statistics are further reiterated by Hilson and Hilson (2017) when they argued that the future of Ghana's mining industry may be ASM! In their published paper titled, “Mining in Ghana Critical Reflections on a Turbulent Past and Uncertain Future”, they questioned:

“Is Ghana destined to follow the path of a Nigeria, where, following the discovery of oil in the 1950s, one of the world’s leading tin mining industries began to experience steady decline due to diminished government interests and a lack of investment?” They added:

“Ironically, the future of Ghana’s mining sector may be the very area which the government continues to ignore and marginalize: Artisanal Small-Scale Mining. Despite employing hundreds of thousands of people directly country-wide, the sector has never been viewed as a core element of national poverty-alleviation strategy.

It has rather been treated very similarly to large-scale mining: prospective licensees must complete a series of bureaucratic steps, make several costly payments and in some cases, travel vast distances to consult officials.

With very little effort-specifically, simplifying the licensing scheme for operators and lowering the costs of permits- the government could facilitate the formalization of ASM and in the process, secure a new, badly-needed source of taxation for itself (Hilson, Hilson, and Adu-Adrko, 2014)”. See more in Hilson and Hilson (2017): Mining in Ghana, Mining in Ghana critical reflections on a turbulent past and uncertain future.

Furthermore, Emmanuel Ababio Ofosu-Mensah (2017) published a 25-page book titled “Historical and Modern Artisanal Small-Scale Mining in Akyem Abuakwa, Ghana”. The paper focuses on micro aspects to explain the resource-curse hypothesis, which states, “an abundance of natural resources in developing countries is associated with negative developmental outcomes”. He analyses the problem using Akyem Abuakwa, a dominant mining community in Ghana as a case. He argues:

“The three main approaches taken by the government to combat the problem of negative environmental effects associated with small-scale mining have been formalization, military intervention, and alternative livelihood projects (Banchiriga 2006).

Traditional approaches to deter illegal miners, including force and livelihood initiatives in the traditional states, have failed because proponents do not fully appreciate the complexity of the country’s illegal mining communities. Alleviation of the illegal mining problems requires revisiting the question of why miners are illegal in the first place.

It is unrealistic to assume that every individual will abandon artisanal small-scale mining if there is an alternative opportunity in other sectors. The prosperity and safety of small-scale mining depends on organizing and regulating the industry.

This author agrees with Banchiriga (2008) and Noetstaller (1994) that releasing land and regularizing the operators will facilitate better organized and environmentally more benign activities”.

The difference between legal (what is termed as small-scale mining) and illegal/galamsey - gather them and sell, is possession of licence. Whereas those in small-scale mining possess licences, those in galamsey possess no licence and thus their operation is oftentimes referred to as 'illegal', 'canker', 'problem' and 'menace'.

But frankly, the modes of operation of both the legal and illegal small-scale mining are mostly the same. Why then do we criminalise a sector with so much potential towards amelioration of poverty in mining communities? And we refer to it as a canker and a menace? All formal businesses today may have first started as informal, but became formal through proper regulations!

Additionally, through frequent monitoring and auditing to see to it that, standards are adhered to and protocols are followed! In many instances, corporations- big or small, may produce for their profits with no regards for environmental or social considerations, where there is a regulatory vacuum. Indeed, banning and criminalizing informal mining isn't the sustainable option.

We can effectively regularize the sector, recognise it, accept it as our own, harness the potential it offers and we could use it as a mainstream poverty amelioration tool in mining communities! The ASM sector is complex and it is unfortunate that many don't understand the sector.

We have reduced the arguments to emotions and expression of sentiments. Artisanal and small-scale mining is neither a canker nor a menace; and national dialogue in Accra won’t be the solution! The way to go in the future will rather come from harnessing the potential the sector provides towards poverty amelioration in rural economies.

These can come from making conscious efforts to formalising the sector, with effective regulations and strict enforcement of the existing regulatory frameworks!