Policy Making in the Mining Industry - Case Study Example

Policy Making In the Mining Industry The cases of Australia and U.S.A Insert Name Course, Class, Semester Institution Instructor Date Policy Making In the Mining Industry Introduction The mining sectors of both America and Australia play a key role in shaping the economy. These countries are among the leading contributors to the world market. This means that they contribute not only to their domestic economies but to the global well being as well. The United States of America for instance, is said to be having unexploited mineral reserves that can sustain the generations for a century to come (Satchell, 1995). The reason why the country has not exploited its full potential is the influence of the various interest groups. These are groups that have various interests that are in most cases for the greater good. Similarly, Australia has been quite conservative on the mining activity in the country. The government of the country has gone a long way in having a hand in the activities of the private firms of the mining industry. The two countries, Australia and the United States, have a couple of things in common, the most conspicuous one being, and the roles of the interest groups on the mining industry. The manner in which the government formulates policy in relation to the mining activity is different in the two countries. The interest groups in the two countries are quite similar but play different roles and influence policy to different extents (Happell, 2010). The United States has the most powerful interest groups. This can be attributed to the fact that it is these same interest groups that are the key stakeholders in the politics of the country. These groups keep watch on every issues touching on public policy. Description and background of the study The mining industries of both Australia and the United States of America, just like the mining sectors of any other countries have been associated with depletion of the environment (Nadoll & Mauk, 2011). This is the major cause for the involvement of the interest groups in the decisions regarding mining activities. The government of Australia has had a great influence in its attempts to reduce the negative impacts of the activities on the environment. The government in collaboration with the various interest groups has therefore instituted strict regulations to be adhered to by the mining agencies-both private and public. This has been the major reason why Australia’s mining environment has been referred to as the cleanest and most secure globally. The major interest groups that can be credited for this particular feature are the environmentalist campaigners as well as the trade unions. The trade unions are usually formed with the major aim of championing for the welfare of the employee. The history of the unions is rooted in the industrial revolution when the main and almost only mineral being dealt with in Europe and Asia was coal (Zullig & Hendryx, 2010). During this time the trade unions were fighting for the welfare of the employee through bargaining for better working conditions. By better working conditions they did not refer to the monetary reward but rather to the physical conditions of the mines and other places where they worked. The places of work were very dirty, hygienically pathetic and were general hazards to the workers. For instance, the lighting was so poor in the mines. This caused many accidents that ended up killing workers and maiming others for life. Similarly, in Australia today, the unions of workers are concerned about the working environment of the mine workers. They hence put pressure on the government to institute strict standards and rules that ought to be adhered to. Similarly other interest groups from the elite of America are big determinants and shaping factors in the industry. For a long time now, since the late eighteenth century, various experiments have been done on the working environment of the mining workers in the United States of America (Quinn, 2011). The experiments have given the unions even more reason why they should keep pushing for their involvement in the decision making procedure. In the American case though, there are many more interest groups. These groups are more powerful than the Australian case for various reasons to which detail will be attached in the analysis. It is however worth noting that the interest groups in both countries have similar objectives and work with the government to achieve the wider interest. The analysis of the study In developing the policy regarding to the mining industry, the government of the United States of America takes the elitist approach. This means that not all the stakeholders are held in consultations (Barnes, 2007). All stakeholders are not involved in the decision making process since it is assumed that the elite groups involved are representative of the public’s interest. The government recognizes the fact that it is impossible to involve all the stakeholders in making decisions since the number of stakeholders concerned with the mining industry is very big (Everingham & Jo, 2010). As such, the government of the United States of America works with the elite groups such as the presidential advisory committee on matters of external trade. One of the biggest and most influential elite groups involved in mining decisions is the Big Oil in America. This is a group of serious investors in the economy’s oil sector. The Australian government on the other hand takes the corporatist decision approach. This is the approach that entails the striking of a balance between the central government, the business community and the trade unions in making and implementing strategies and policies (Ivanova & Rolfe, 2011). This approach is more democratic than the elitist approach which is informally referred to as the mafia approach in the United States of America. This is because the corporatist approach is more representative than the elitist approach. The corporatist approach has parties from the groups of stakeholders. For instance, the mine workers are represented by the union members, the business community or traders are represented by the corporate agents, the citizens are represented and protected by the government and the environmental stability is represented by the environmentalist campaigners. An interest group can be said to be any faction that is interested in the social well being of the public at large (Sharma, 2010). The interest groups are commonly concerned about the public interest. By public interest we mean the well being of the members of the public. The interest groups involved in the mining sectors of the two nations are: the business community, the local and foreign investors, the political opinion makers, the environmentalists and the trade unions. In the United States, the business community is represented by the most prominent investors in the policy making process. The local and foreign investors are as well represented by the key investors. Such groups as the environmental watchdogs are not represented at all; not even by proxy (Munarriz, 2008). This makes the United States policy making process less objective. This can be linked to the extreme imperialist nature of the American people. Australia on the other hand involves such interest groups as the environmentalists, the human rights activists, the local and foreign investors, the traders, the trade unions and the government agents (Franks et al, 2010). This is considered a more representative group. The decisions made by this composition are objective and consider the various social spheres to the same extent. This is the major reason why, despite the intense mining activity, Australia’s mining environment remains the cleanest and friendliest to the health of the worker and the inhabitants of the area Greene, Marvin V. (2007).Much as the interest groups of the United States are more influential and powerful, they are not representative enough. Conclusion In conclusion, it is worth noting that from the foregoing, the United States has more powerful yet less representative interest groups. It can be noted as well that much as the interest groups of the Australian case are not as powerful, they get the interest of the common citizen represented and considered. It is therefore essential note that the interest groups play an important role in determining the decisions taken by the government in relation to the mining industry. The elitist approach to decision making is inefficient as it is subject to the inefficiencies if the various elite groups. The elite groups involved in the American mining industry are extreme imperialists that focus on their inner interests. They prioritize individual interests and subordinate the interests of the common mines. Carrying out mining at the expense of the environment amounts to immorality against the environment and by extension the human race as well as the ecological system. For this reason, the corporatist approach is preferred to the elitist approach. Reference list Barnes, Jeb. (2007).Bringing the Courts Back in Interbranch Perspectives on the Role of Courts in American Politics and Policy Making. Annual Review of Political Science. Vol. 10 Issue 1, P.25-43. Everingham & Jo-Anne. (2010).Towards Social Sustainability of Mining. Greener Management International. May, Issue 57, P.91-103. Franks, Daniel M.; Brereton, David & Moran, Chris J. (2010). Managing the Cumulative Impacts of Coal Mining On Regional Communities and Environments in Australia. Impact Assessment & Project Appraisal (Beech Tree Publishing). Dec, Vol. 28 Issue 4, P.299-312. Greene, Marvin V. (2007). Mining industry looks ahead after Troubling 2006. Safety & Health. Jan. Vol. 175 Issue 1, P.34-37. Happell, Kevin. (2010). The coal miner's wife. Ebony. Jul, vol. 65 issue 9, p.92-97. Ivanova, Galina & Rolfe, John. (2011).Using Input-Output Analysis To Estimate The Impact Of A Coal Industry Expansion On Regional And Local Economies. Impact Assessment & Project Appraisal (Beech Tree Publishing). Dec. Vol. 29 Issue 4, P277-288. Munarriz, Gerardo J. (2008). Rhetoric and Reality: The World Bank Development Policies, Mining Corporations, and Indigenous Communities in Latin America. International Community Law Review. Dec, Vol. 10 Issue 4, P.431-443.t Nadoll, Patrick & Mauk, Jeffrey L. (2011).Wüstite In A Hydrothermal Silver-Lead-Zinc Vein, Lucky Friday Mine, Coeur d'Alene Mining District, U.S.A. American Mineralogist. Feb/Mar, Vol. 96 Issue 2/3, P.261-267. Satchell, Michael. (1995). Sinkholes and Stacks. U.S. News & World Report. Vol. 118 Issue 23, P.53. Sharma, Sanjay. (2010).The Impact of Mining on Women: Lessons from the Coal Mining Bowen Basin of Queensland, Australia. Impact Assessment & Project Appraisal (Beech Tree Publishing). Sep, Vol. 28 Issue 3, P.201-215. Quinn, Hal. (2011). Unlocking the Full Potential of U.S. Mining. Vital Speeches of the Day. Jul, Vol. 77 Issue 7, P.257-260. Zullig, Keith J & Hendryx, Michael. (2010). A Comparative Analysis of Health-Related Quality Of Life for Residents of U.S. Counties with and Without Coal Mining. Public Health Reports. Jul/Aug, Vol. 125 Issue 4, P.548-555. Read More