Publications

By James Wilkes. This study was done as a Masters thesis at Trent University and is posted here at the request of the author. Canadian environmental management involving Indigenous communities is at a crossroads. First Nation communities in regions holding mineral and other natural resources are coping with legal, economic and political pressures to comply with government and industry demands for resource extraction and exploitation.

The creation of large volumes of waste, including solids, liquid effluents, and air emissions, is a fact of life for mining and mineral processing operations. Depending on the minerals’ natural geology and how they are processed these wastes can often be hazardous to the environment and human health. Solid wastes including waste rock and tailings are, by volume, the most significant waste generated by mining and mineral processing. Solid wastes are typically in the tens to hundreds of millions of tons of waste for a single mine. A rough estimate of Canadian production is 2 million tonnes a day. Based on information available from the U.S., it is safe to assume that mining in Canada generates a greater volume of toxic waste than any other industry in the country.

This report, researched by MiningWatch Canada, CENSAT-Agua Viva, and Inter Pares, looks at four case studies of Canadian extractive industry investment projects in Colombia, analyzing their associated potential human rights risks. Referring to principles developed by the UN Special Representative on Human Rights and Transnational Corporations, the report identifies issues and circumstances that clearly indicate that transparent and independent human rights impact assessments are necessary to avoid significant potential risk to human rights in existing and proposed extractive projects. Available from Inter Pares on request or download the PDF. Also available in French and coming soon in Spanish.

Communities dealing with the impact from mining activities (whether at the claim-staking, exploration, development, operating, closure, or restoration/rehabilitation stage) find themselves confronted by a legal entity they may not understand, making demands that are contrary to the desires of the community, and giving reason for its behaviour that they do not know how to counteract.