Problems and Purpose

In 1999, the Ministry of Energy and Mining launched a development program in connection with the mining industry in Tambogrande (Piura Departement, Peru), without any previous debate or consultation with the people living there. The mayor of the municipality approved the project and the Canadian mining company, Manhattan Minerals Corporation, came to Tambogrande to start the first perforations. The event generated a significant social conflict between public institutions and civil society in the years that followed. Under the pressure of residents, the municipality organized a public consultation and referendum on the continuation of mining activities.

Background History and Context

The district of Tambogrande is situated in the Piura Department.  Agricultural production is at the center of the valley’s economic activities especially mango, lemon and rice grown for local and national consumption as well as for international exportation. In 2001, the majority of the working population made their living from agricultural activity[1].

Problems Raised by the Mining Project

In 1999, the Ministry of Energy and Mines launched a development program in connection with the mining industry in Tambogrande without consulting or debating with the local inhabitants. The Mayor of the municipality, Alfred Rengifo Navarrette, approved the project and the Canadian mining company, Manhattan Minerals came to Tambogrande to start the first perforations[2]. Tambogrande inhabitants did not learn about the mining project or the concessions given to the Canadian mining company, Manhattan Minerals Corporation (MCC) until May 1999 through a press release. 

Immediately, several concerns were raised by Tambogrande's residents. First, a democratic one, as people were never informed or consulted. Second, there was a high risk of serious environmental problems due to the use of highly toxic chemical products necessary to the extraction, which would adversely affect the hydrologic system of the region. Third, these ecological changes might have generated social and demographic problems: the soil impoverishment would have affected the local agriculture, forcing people to change their economic activity or migrate to other regions.

On May 30, peasants of Tambogrande and the Valley of San Lorenzo came together to ask for more transparency and information about the project. The Frente de Defensa del Valle de San Lorenzo y Tambogrande (FDVSLT) was created in July and the first protest march took place on September 25. Social conflict increased over the next few months, with regular attacks from protestors to MMC equipment and infrastructures. In March 2001, Godofredo García Baca, one of the leaders of the FDVSLT was assassinated[3].

This event marked a turning point in the conflict and the entry of new regional, national and transnational actors onto the scene which would put enough pressure on the municipality to pass a decree cancelling the mining project's approval and granting residents their demanded referendum[5]. 

Organizing, Supporting, and Funding Entities

 While inhabitants and peasants of the valley asked for consultation as a mechanism of public, the national government preferred public audiences which could bring together the government, civil society and MMC. These public audiences were largely rejected by the inhabitants as well as the Defensoría del Pueblo (Office of the People’s Advocate) and the Catholic Church, both at the head of the negotiations and intermediation[4]. In response, the municipality formed a new decree cancelling the previous approval of the project and then organized a referendum[5]. Meanwhile, a technical council, composed by various NGOs and experts[6], provided some information about the risks of the mining projects in the form of publications. The referendum was scheduled for June 2, 2002.  

Participant Recruitment and Selection

Know how participants were recruited? Help us complete this section!

Methods and Tools Used

While it prefered to engage with citizens in a deliberative fashion, the municipality acquiesced to the use of referendum according to the following norms[9]:

• Rights of citizens to participate in public affairs.
• Right of neighborhoods to participate in municipal government activities recognized by the Political Constitution.
• Law n°26300, entitled right of participation and citizen control, outlines the mechanisms for citizenship participation at the municipal level.
• The duty of municipalities to seek neighborhood opinion and approval for those projects that might affect the physical and social environment[10].
• Competency of the municipality to plan urban and rural development of the district (Constitution, Organic law of municipalities).

What Went On: Process, Interaction, and Participation

While it continued to advocate for deliberative consultations, on October 2001, the District Municipality of Tambogrande announced, by municipal order Nº 012-2001-MDT-C, the referendum as a mechanism of public participation to collect the opinions of inhabitants relating to local development. The referendum asked for a simply 'yes' or 'no' answer to the following: “Do you agree with the development of mining activity in urban areas, urban expansion, and agricultural expansion in the district?” (“¿Está Ud. de acuerdo con el desarrollo de la actividad minera en áreas urbanas, de expansión urbana, agrícola y de expansión agrícola del distrito?”)[8].

The referendum took place June 2, 2002. National and international observers were present during the vote. No fraud was observed.

By the 36.937 electors, 27.015 participated in the vote (73.14% of participation). 93,85% voted against the mining project and only 1,98% in favor. Remaining votes were blank or spoiled.

Influence, Outcomes, and Effects

The result of the vote didn’t modify the Company’s position. MMC claimed that the vote did not have a legal bearing on the concession[11]. After the referendum, the government tried to reopen the dialogue with social organizations of Tambogrande. The government claimed that referendum was not a mechanism allowed by law and that it was not a valid measure of public opinion. The government and the Ministry of Energy and Mining then insisted on an independent environmental evaluation of the project, or an EIA (Evaluación de Impacto Ambiental, Environment Impact Evaluation), with public audiences. In protest against the irregularity of the process, Tambogrande inhabitants refused to participate[12].

In December 2003, the national company, Centromin, announced that Manhattan Minerals Corporation did not meet the prerequisites to execute the contract[13].

However, the end of this social conflict has not meant a complete victory for district of Tambogrande over the mining industry. Since 2003, mining companies have continued to show interest in carrying out exploration work in the valley[14].

Analysis and Lessons Learned

The public referendum in Tambogrande is one of the first of its kind anywhere triggered by civil society's rejection of a state-approved, privately-led resource extraction.

One of the mistakes made by the Municipality and the Mining Corporation was the failure to properly inform people living in the region before beginning extraction. The government was never impartial during the social conflict and always supported the company. It delegitimized public consultation and consistently tried to promote parallel mechanisms of participation (such as public audiences, intermediary dialogue with the Office of the People’s Advocate or the Catholic Church) in its own interest.

The Tambogrande case is instructive because it demonstrates the viability of popular consultation to resolve environmental-social conflicts through the use of non-violent instruments.

NGOs also played an important role during the social conflict by providing information to inhabitants and by extending the social conflict to national and international spheres[15].

See Also 

Referendum

References

[1] Jahncke Benavente and Meza, DERECHO A LA PARTICIPACIÓN Y A LA CONSULTA PREVIA EN LATINOAMÉRICA Análisis de Experiencias de Participación, Consulta Y Consentimiento de Las Poblaciones Afectadas Por Proyectos de Industrias Extractivas.

[2] Ibid.

[3] De Echave et al., Minería Y Conflicto Social.

[4] Alvarado Merino, “Políticas Neoliberales En El Manejo de Los Recursos Naturales En Perú: El Caso Del Conflicto Agrominero de Tambogrande.”

[5] Jahncke Benavente and Meza, DERECHO A LA PARTICIPACIÓN Y A LA CONSULTA PREVIA EN LATINOAMÉRICA Análisis de Experiencias de Participación, Consulta Y Consentimiento de Las Poblaciones Afectadas Por Proyectos de Industrias Extractivas.

[6] These experts came from different national universities, the Chamber of Commerce and various NGOs, such as Oxfam, Piura Vida y agro, CREA Pueblo (for more information, see Alvarado Merino 2008)

[7] De Echave et al., Minería Y Conflicto Social.

[8] Alvarado Merino, “Políticas Neoliberales En El Manejo de Los Recursos Naturales En Perú: El Caso Del Conflicto Agrominero de Tambogrande.”

[9] Leyva, “La ONPE Y La Legalidad de La Consulta Vecinal Aprobada Por La Municipalidad de Tambogrande.”

[10] Rules of Territorial Development, urban development and environment (Reglamento de Acondicionamiento Territorial, Desarrollo Urbano y Medio Ambiente).

[11] Jahncke Benavente and Meza, DERECHO A LA PARTICIPACIÓN Y A LA CONSULTA PREVIA EN LATINOAMÉRICA Análisis de Experiencias de Participación, Consulta Y Consentimiento de Las Poblaciones Afectadas Por Proyectos de Industrias Extractivas.

[12] “Tambogrande Y Pampamali : Derecho a La Consulta.”

[13] De Echave et al., Minería Y Conflicto Social.

[14] Ibid.

[15] Alvarado Merino, “Políticas Neoliberales En El Manejo de Los Recursos Naturales En Perú: El Caso Del Conflicto Agrominero de Tambogrande.”

External Links

Tellier, Emilie. “Une Multinationale Canadienne S’y Promène.” Le Journal Des Alternatives, July 1, 2002. http://journal.alternatives.ca/spip.php?article229.

Tenorio Juan. DOCUMENTAL DEL MARTES_Tambogrande   Mangos, Muerte, Minería 2007 C Legendas PT B, 2015. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lmwV4ctCXFc.

Notes

Lead image: Liliana Alzamora F./Factorierra https://goo.gl/ihCzWH