May 31 2009
Carrot or Stick?
These days, the word sustainability appears prominently on any major mining company’s website or promotional materials… often closely associated with social responsibility.
But what do these concepts mean, who defines their bounds, and what constitutes sustainable mining? This post briefly explores two approaches. First, the International Institute for Sustainable development takes the carrot approach:
They provide a guidance document for companies that wish to be as sustainable as possible. Their argument is that the improvements would generate greater revenues by avoiding later complications of environmental impacts and community resistance. We would love to hear from our readers about whether or not this approach is likely to result in significant change in mining practices.
Sounds nice, click this image for full details
Alternately, there is the punitive approach reported on by Mining Watch Canada:
“The Federal Court sided with the groups and issued an Order demanding that the federal government immediately begin publicly reporting mining pollution data from 2006 onward to the National Pollutant Release Inventory (NPRI). The strongly worded decision describes the government’s pace as “glacial” and chastises the government for turning a “blind eye” to the issue and dragging its feet for “more than 16 years”.”
http://www.miningwatch.ca/index.php?/npri/npri_victory_federal_court
Will punitive measures like this deter new pollution or simply distract the issue by chasing down old contamination that has little to do with current practices? And when the polluters have been absorbed by larger companies, gone bankrupt, or when the property has changed hands repeatedly… whom then becomes responsible and is it possible to extract a settlement?
We are eager to hear your comments… can we realize a new sustainable mining industry using carrots? What, in terms of promoting sustainability, is the role of punitive measures?
I picture an ideal world as a place where people have high moral standards and strong sense of ethics that will be the guidance for our actions toward ourselves, the others and the environment.
However considering the current context in which we are living in where there is an enormous lack of care and respect for human beings and the environment in general I believe there is space for punitive actions since this can restrain people’s attitudes that they would not contain if there were no penalties.
Simultaneously, I am aware by punishing does not necessarily assure the augment of moral and ethics principles. Real education is needed.
The point then is how to blend both approaches… the one where people are stimulated and positively encouraged to do right things and the punitive one. The combination of both can lead to sustainable practices not guided only by the fear of punishment but also because is the right thing to do.
I short, I would encourage and support the “and” approach instead of the idea of “either / or”.
In the current world both are needed and have its value.