Evaluation of Criticism of Rio Tinto - Case Study Example

Running Header: Evaluation of criticism of Rio Tinto Student’s Name: Instructor’s Name: Course Code & Name: Date of Submission: Evaluation of criticism of Rio Tinto Political criticism of the corporation The construction of the mining infrastructure began in 2006 between the government of Madagascar and Rio Tinto which is a Canadian company. The mining process is said to damaging process to the environment which has made Madagascar to lose the coastal forest. The process of the mining is through dredging and Rio Tinto defends itself by saying that it will cater for the rehabilitation activities after mining is over. For the mining to begin people living in that area were displaced and they had to be compensated for them to relocate to other parts of the country (Curtis 2007, p. 42). There were criticisms that there was unfair compensation and also the information about compensation scheme entitlements was unclear. The most criticisms were; there was no respect of the rights of the customary land and the families which did not have formal titles for the land were disadvantaged in the whole process of compensation irrespective of the commitment by the Rio Tinto to respect traditional tenure; the families were not treated them same like some families received higher compensation while other families were stopped by the officials from the continuation of cultivating the land so they received no compensation; other families received the compensation but the money they were given was not enough to buy another land some where else of the same quality and the land they were getting was not of any agricultural value (Perlez & Raymond 2005, p. 69 ). The compensation of the company to the villagers was less to what the company got so the whole process of compensation only the company that benefited from the process. The aim of the company was to maximize the land that had mineral and give to the community less compensation. Also the housing that was provided to the one that were displaced was of lower quality. Respect of local customs When Rio Tinto constructed the mine, the communities were denied the access to forest which was the natural resource that provided medicines, firewood and food. This restriction to use the forest affected their livelihood and this also made them to change their customs and local cultures which destroyed the way they live and what has been passed from other generations (Friends of the Earth 2007, p. 4). The cutting down of the tree also affect the environment by reducing the water catchment areas and also green house gases. Although the Rio Tinto has done a compensation of the resources by planting trees for the firewood and also it has done some investment for the eco-tourism but this will not make up for the changed customs and lifestyles (Panos 2007, p. 45). There were evidence that were gathered and it included; when the company was planning to start its mining activity it did not provide necessary information to the people in the local area about the planned mine development and the local people had no idea of the change that was coming and the reasons; the local people were not very clear concerning the rules that were controlling the accessibility of the conservation of the forest zones and some of the villagers complained that the rules kept on changing without them being consulted (Banerjee 2001, p. 50 ). Criticism Validity There was enough evidence of how Rio Tinto destroyed the environment and how villagers were mistreated and the businessmen. The local people who had businesses said that they were not happy about the information that was provided by Rio Tinto to them which made it difficult for them to make any investment and to make use of the new opportunities (Hamann & Paul 2004, p. 90). They said that the company give out misleading information e.g. the company said that there was no need for rental cars to be added where in real sense the car were supposed to be added. Despite the fact that the rules of Malagasy about mining restricted mining in the graves, there were some graves that were destroyed through mining and the people in that society were not happy about it. They said the company was not respecting the social rules buy mining in the graves. The communities said that even after Rio Tinto starting the mining projects the job opportunities that were provided were less than they had anticipated (Hopkins 2003, p. 52). The people that were given the employment opportunities were from foreign countries. The young men in the locality felt betrayed because they had no work and they had no land so they did almost nothing and this strained their families. For them not having money means they were not able to feed their families which destroyed their self-esteem and respect (Viviers & Jean 2008, p. 56). The mining company brought extra workers to come and work for the company which has led to the increase in the fresh food and housing thus making the prices of the essential items to increase (Maphosa 2007, p. 188). The families that live in that area cannot afford to buy medicine pay the healthcare bill or afford to buy meals for their families. The mining project was also not environmental friendly because of cutting down of the trees in the surrounding areas which were indigenous. Although the company planted exotic trees in the area they did not serve the purpose of the indigenous trees. Criticism in the light of the evidence According to the evidence that was provided we can say that before the company started its operations and during its operation there were some guidelines that it did not follow (Warhurst & Noron 2008, p. 40). We can say that the mining project of Rio Tinto in Madagascar was not much concerned about the poverty reduction. It also did not help to protect and conserve the ecological resources that were valuable. The company failed to deliver to the ground and also provided very little help to the communities and also to the wider economy and it also undermined the livelihoods and rights of the local people and also to the natural resources they relied upon. References Curtis, M 2007, Fanning the Flames: The Role of British Mining Companies in Conflict and the Violation of Human Rights, Oxford University press, Oxford Perlez,J & Raymond, B 2005, Freeport-Rio Tinto: Gold’s Other Price, University of Alberta Press, Canada. Friends of the Earth, 2007, Mining Madagascar – Forests, Communities and Rio Tinto’s White Wash, viewed on 15th February 2012 Panos, L 2007, Development recast? A review of the impact of the Rio Tinto ilmenite mine in Southern Madagascar, viewed on 15th February 2012 Banerjee, S 2001, Corporate Citizenship and Indigenous Stakeholders: Exploring a new dynamic organizational-stakeholder relationships. The Journal of Corporate Citizenship, Vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 39-55. Hamann, R & Paul, K 2004, Corporate Social Responsibility in Mining in Southern Africa: Fair Accountability or just greenwash? Development, vol. 47, no.3, pp. 85- 92. Hopkins, M 2003, The Planetary Bargain: Corporate social responsibility comes of age. Macmillan, Press London. Maphosa, F 2007, Corporate Social Responsibility in Madagascar: A Content Analysis of Mission Statements and Annual Reports. Madagascar mining, Vol. 15, no. 2, pp.181-193. Warhurst, A & Noronh, L 2008. Environmental Policy in Mining: Corporate strategy and planning for closure, Lewis, London. Viviers, S & Jean, B 2008, Corporate Social Responsibility in the Mining Sector: Critical Issues. International Society of Business, Antananarivo press, Antananarivo. Read More