Resources Policy 80 (2023) 103171

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Resources Policy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/resourpol

Mining and sustainable development in the Asutifi North District, Ghana

David Anaafo a, *, Ricky Yao Nutsugbodo b, Daniel Adusu c
a
Department of Planning and Sustainability, University of Energy and Natural Resources, Sunyani, Ghana
b
Department of Ecoutorism, Recreation and Hospitality, University of Energy and Natural Resources, Sunyani, Ghana
c
Department of Environmental Management, University of Energy and Natural Resources, Sunyani, Ghana

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Mining’s developmental ethos is criticised and praised in equal measure. The presence of precious mineral de­
Mining posits has been associated with widespread poverty and underdevelopment, at least at the macro level of ana­
Sustainable development lyses. This study, through the Asutifi North District case study sought to undertake a micro level analysis of the
Mine-take communities
nexus between mining and the sustainable development of the mine-take communities. Using questionnaire,
Asutifi north district
Ghana
focus group discussion, stakeholder validation workshop and analysis of satellite imagery the study finds,
particularly in relation to social development that mining has made significant contributions to the development
of the mine-take communities in the Ahafo area. The study, however, concludes that issues such as the one-off
payment of compensation to people who lose their lands, use of mineral royalties, and the amount of money
going to the NADeF require some review in tandem with global market trends and local development aspirations.

1. Introduction
Mining, a major global activity is extolled and chided in equal
measure. Beck (2000) observed that mining is generally detrimental to
development because it often takes place under conditions of awful la­
bour conditions and results in inequity in the distribution of wealth, and
poor development outcomes. More recently, Al-Hassan and Amoako
(2014) have argued that the benefits of mining to national economies
are obscured by the socio-economic and environmental costs which are
wrecked on mine-take communities. It is observed that mining, is
destructive, and a capture for corporate and individual benefits, that
which should ordinarily belong to all. Given these contentions, Beck
(2000) have described mining as a hydra-headed issue. They observe
that mining is often associated with significant and mostly irreversible
socio-economic and environmental impacts for the majority and outra­
geous benefits to a few. There is also the general believe that mining’s
overall potential is not properly harnessed and when done at all the
dividends are not equitably shared. Bebbington et al. (2008, p. 965)
conclude that: “in the coexistence of such divergent feelings about
mining and its human and environmental impacts lie the seeds of much
conflict.”
The arguments show that as to whether mining can be made sus­
tainable through its contributions to development remain contentious.
Notwithstanding, sustainable mining has been used to mean that the
rate of extraction of mineral resources should not exceed the rate of
renewability, recyclability or the rate at which new substitutes may be
found (Allan, 1995). To others (Hendrix, 2017; Dubiński, 2013) sus­
tainable mining requires that mining addresses economic, social and
governmental issues. Yet still there are those that view the relationship
between mining and sustainable development from the lens of corporate
social responsibility with its paternalistic tendencies and benefits for
communities beyond the mine (Kemp, 2010; Emel et al., 2011). Esteves
(2008) sees sustainable mining as being the extent to which the interests
of mining firms are harmonised with the values of society generally and
affected communities in particular; while Yildiz (2020) sees sustainable
mining as that which is undertaken in an environmentally friendly
manner.
As to whether mining can be made sustainable or not, the sector
remains very important to many African countries. Ghana for instance,
has recently overtaken South Africa to become Africa’s largest producer
of gold (Ghana Chamber of Mines, 2020). Mining in Ghana is an age-old
and ancient industrial activity from which the country first acquired its
name, the Gold Coast (Awudi, 2002; Amponsah-Tawiah and
Dartey-Baah, 2011). Ghana is blessed with a variety of commercially
valuable minerals such as gold, diamond, manganese, and bauxite. Ac­
cording to Appiah and Buaben (2012) the mineral and natural resources
sectors of Ghana have witnessed significant foreign direct investment
since 2000 and as a result contributed to the country’s economy through

* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: david.anaafo@uenr.edu.gh (D. Anaafo), ricky.nutsugbodo@uenr.edu.gh (R.Y. Nutsugbodo), Daniel.adusu@uenr.edu.gh (D. Adusu).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2022.103171
Received 15 December 2021; Received in revised form 2 August 2022; Accepted 23 November 2022
Available online 26 December 2022
0301-4207/© 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
D. Anaafo et al.
job creation and the growth of the country’s Gross Domestic Product
(GDP). The Government of Ghana (2019) estimates that mining and
quarrying contributed 12.6% to GDP in 2019, 18.38% of direct domestic
revenue, and 19.05% in corporate tax over the same period. The Ghana
Chamber of Mines, in its annual report (2020) indicated that there are
some thirteen (13) large-scale mining companies, operating 16 conces­
sions and about 1000 licenced small-scale mining companies involved in
gold mining in Ghana. Cumulatively, these mining companies paid a
total of GHC1,006,668.50 in royalties to the Government of Ghana and
affected mining communities in 2019. It is also estimated that the
small-scale mining sector employs about 1.1 million, mostly illiterate
and unskilled people, whose practices and methods of mining are
rudimentary and primitive (Wilson et al., 2015). Given the contributions
of the mining sector to the development of Ghana, it is not surprising
that the sector is thought to be central to efforts aimed at achieving the
sustainable development goals, especially in developing countries
(Hentschel et al., 2002; Amponsah-Tawiah and Dartey-Baah, 2011, Nti,
2020).
Although the mining sector of Ghana makes significant contributions
to the economy, infrastructure development, and rural livelihoods, it is
also viewed as a major cause of environmental degradation (Appiah,
1998; Armah et al., 2013). Adverse impacts of mining in Ghana are
catalogued to include loss of productive land to mining operations,
excessive cost of living, sporadic contamination of the environment from
cyanide and other chemicals, depletion of forest cover, and high rates of
unemployment in mine-take communities (Ayee et al., 2011; Ampon­
sah-Tawiah and Dartey-Baah, 2011). There are also reported increases
in diseases such as malaria, respiratory diseases, HIV/AIDS, and social
challenges such as drug abuse, social segregation, and forced displace­
ment in many mining communities across the country (Amponsah-Ta­
wiah and Dartey-Baah, 2011; Erdiaw-Kwasie et al., 2014).
These observations are, however, too general and do not allow for a
case-by-case analyses of the benefits and burdens of mining. They adopt
a macro-level view of the phenomenon and in the process the micro-
level issues are obscured. Such a process does not allow for learning,
understanding and promotion of best industry practices. This study
therefore undertakes, through the Asutifi North District case study of
Ghana, a micro-level analysis, to unpack the possibilities of mining co-
existing with development. This micro-level analysis is informed by
the thinking of Beck (2000, p. 48–49) that to study the macro is also to
study what is local, because macro level issues are better understood “in
the small and concrete, in the spatially particular, in one’s own life, in
cultural symbols that all bear the signature of ‘glocal’“. Micro level
analysis also helps us to have a firm grasp of the differences in practices,
the particularities and patterns in specific places (Suopajärvi et al.,
2017), thereby allowing for upscaling, where necessary. The study
sought to address the question of whether there is any discernible
relationship between resource extraction (gold mining in particular) and
the socio-economic and environmental development of communities
within the catchment of mining operations? To have an in-depth un­
derstanding of the issue the study was broken into economic, environ­
mental and social development components. The economic aspect
measured variables such as stability of income over time, availability of
food all year round, equity and fairness of access to mine related jobs,
and stability of expenditure over time, among others. The environmental
aspect measured variables such as forest cover, land use and land cover
(LULC) changes, riverbed and watercourse dynamics, and land degra­
dation to assess the effects of mining on the environment. The social
aspect collected and analysed data on land access and use rights, access
by members of the communities to relevant information and services,
stakeholder participation in decisions affecting their lives, and
accountability of local chiefs in the use of their share of royalties to
assess the links mining and social development. This component also
examined vulnerability levels and adaptive capacity of members of
mine-take communities to the adverse effects of mining operations. This
manuscript focuses only on the social component of the study. The social
2
Resources Policy 80 (2023) 103171
component is important in this research because it is the dimension of
the sustainability agenda that has received less attention in both policy
and academic cycles (Koning, 2001) even though the preamble of
Agenda 21 actually projects it beyond ecological and economic issues by
indicating that “a perpetuation of disparities between and within na­
tions, a worsening of poverty, hunger, ill health and illiteracy, and the
continuing deterioration of the ecosystems on which we depend for our
well-being” (UNCED, 1992, p.15). This paper will become part of the
larger recent trends aimed at incorporating the social dimension into
development generally and to set social sustainability indicators (Kon­
ing, 2001).
Studies like this have become necessary because of recent trends in
global demand for mineral resources coupled with growth in foreign
investment in the mining sector. Again, efforts are underway by the
global community to promote sustainability principles in the operations
of mining firms, evidenced by initiatives such as the adoption of ethical
values, integrating sustainable development in corporate governance,
and respecting the rights and culture of employees and host commu­
nities among others (Akpalu and Normanyo, 2017; Carvalho, 2017;
Erdiaw-Kwasie et al., 2014; Ghorbani and Kuan, 2017; Kokko et al.,
2015). It is contended that “mining with sustainable development” will
result in the attainment of beneficial economic, social, and environ­
mental outcomes for communities within the catchment of mining op­
erations. However, Dubiński (2013), indicates that the fluidity and
complexity of challenges in the mining sector do not readily lend
themselves to notions of sustainable development. Rather, what is
required is the need to harness diverse expertise, engage with multiple
stakeholders, adoption of modern technology, research and innovation
to address the multiple concerns emanating from mining environments
(Dubiński, 2013). This paper is divided into five main sections.
Following the introduction is a review of the theories related to mining
and development. Section three discusses the study area and methods.
Section four is used to undertake an analysis of the data with section five
dedicated to discussion of the results, leading to a conclusion.
2. Mining and sustainable development nexus
It was generally argued that there is no positive correlation between
the possession of valuable deposits and economic success (Ziyadov and
Shaffer, 2011). Contrasting the resource endowments and standards of
living of countries such as Angola, Nigeria, Sudan, and the Congo with
those of rocky, less endowed East Asian countries such as Japan, Korea,
Taiwan, Singapore, and Hong Kong Ziyadov and Shaffer, (2011)
concluded that the presence of valuable mineral resource deposits had
no discernible positive correlation with development. Similarly, Stevens
et al. (2015) undertook an assessment of the economic performance of
resource rich countries and concluded that resource abundance was
often associated with poor economic performance and socio-economic
ills. Earlier studies (Prebisch, 1950) established that the benefits from
the export of primary commodities suffer secular deterioration resulting
from the barter terms of trade.
While these assertions were generally borne out of the facts the
narrative has changed significantly since the publication of the report of
the World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED) on
sustainable development in 1987. The definition of sustainable devel­
opment by the WCED (1987) was that it is “development that meets the
needs of the present without compromising the ability of future gener­
ations to meet their own needs”. The definition of sustainable devel­
opment is seen to have undergone modifications thereby allowing the
mining sector to define their operations as sustainable or otherwise
contributing to sustainable development. Reed (2002, p. 206) observes
that sustainable development was initially “equity centered” but was
redefined to be more “growth-centered” following the Earth Summit in
Rio de Janeiro. This redefinition, it is argued favours the preservation of
biodiversity by managing small and relatively undisturbed conservation
sites (Kirsch, 2010). It is further argued that the redefinition allows
D. Anaafo et al.
mining companies to define growth using economic indices as sustain­
able development and to use the economic gains to fund conservation
projects as their contribution to alleviating the environmental impacts of
mining (Kirsch, 2010).
Over the years, however, the contributions of the mining sector to
sustainable development have grown significantly beyond economics
and conservation, to encompass various equally important issues
(Erzurumlu and Erzurumlu, 2015). The mining sector now embraces the
need to extract with responsibility, ensure corporate-community action
on social initiatives, increased focus on community engagement, use of
safer processes, adoption of new sustainable technologies, promotion of
improved wellbeing of local communities, adoption of corporate social
responsibility, and respecting and honouring stringent environmental
policies (Esteves, 2008; Hilson, 2000; Kamlongera, 2013). In the social
context, it is observed that the mining sector significantly affects social
variables such as poverty, unemployment, and corporate social re­
sponsibility (Zmami et al., 2021). Empirical studies undertaken in
different world regions support these conclusions. A study on social and
environmental impacts of mining in Tanzania revealed that 42 percent
of the study participants got employed in the mining sector, with
another 20.3 percent benefiting from social interventions such as roads,
water and educational facilities provided by the mining sector (Kitula,
2006). In Peru, Loayza and Rigolini (2016) investigated the
socio-economic impacts of mining and found that mining districts have
comparatively lower levels of poverty and higher per capita consump­
tion. And in Canada Gueye et al. (2021) observe that proximity to a
community mine correlates positively with educational outcomes, borne
out of the prospects for well-remunerated jobs after completion of pro­
grammes of study. Efforts by the mining sector in this respect have,
however, received some criticisms. It has been observed that many of the
social development initiatives are often targeted at shoring up the image
of companies in respect of global sustainability standards as opposed to
genuine efforts to address the social development challenges (Gilber­
thorpe and Banks, 2012). Esteves (2008) also indicates that although
mining companies generally accept that they have a responsibility to
play in the social development of host communities, they are often un­
certain as to the extent to which they should be involved.
It is not only within the arena of social development that the mining
sector is contributing to sustainable development. They are equally
doing so with respect to the environment. Mining and the construction
of associated infrastructure is generally thought to have adverse effects
on water, biodiversity, air, soil quality, spatial degradation, and trans­
formation of mining areas (Mabey et al., 2020; Monteiro et al., 2019).
Irrespective of the efforts that mining companies are making to
ameliorate the environmental impacts of their operations, the outcomes
of empirical reviews of environmental sustainability by the mining
sector across the globe are not encouraging. Mhlongo et al. (2018) un­
dertook a study on water quality in a mining and water-stressed region
in South Africa and concluded that there was increasing levels of water
contamination, requiring urgent action to avert any potential health
risks. In a similar study, Kitula (2006) also laments the adverse effects of
mining on water quality and the collapse of buildings in Tanzania.
Mabey et al. (2020) identified deforestation, air pollution, and lack of
clean water as some of the main environmental problems resulting from
mining in Sierra Leone. These emerging concerns in respect of envi­
ronmental sustainability are not surprising as Maconachie and Hilson
(2013), observed that in most instances mining companies acting with
the tacit support of governments disregard environmental regulations
with impunity. Yildiz (2020) has, however, observed that the emerging
role of EIA in the identification of potential environmental problems
associated with mining and taking steps to prevent or mitigate them can
be a game changer for the role of mining companies in promoting
environmental sustainability. Examining the permitting processes of
mining operations in Turkey, he indicated that EIA has become the main
basis for deciding to grant or decline a request for a mining permit.
The area most often touted as mining’s main contribution to
3
Resources Policy 80 (2023) 103171
development is the economic arena. Zmami et al. (2021) observe that
this role of mining stems from the relevance of minerals as raw materials
to the operations of many industries, the revenues of national govern­
ments, and the stimulation of allied activities. Again, Sala-i-Martin et al.
(2004) in a Bayesian averaging of classical estimates for 88 countries
concluded that mining is a major contributor to long-term economic
growth. These positives, notwithstanding, there are several criticisms of
the contributions of mining to sustainable economic development. Stern
(1995) in a study of 19 mineral rich developing countries held that the
long-term benefits of mining are not supported for all countries. The
relationship between resource abundance and poor economic perfor­
mance, otherwise known as the “Dutch disease” has long been espoused
by Prebisch (1950); with Cowell et al. (1999) recently arguing that the
non-renewability of most mineral resources negates their
inter-generational equity potentials. The Ghanaian case in terms of both
environmental, social, and economic sustainability have already been
espoused in the introductory section of this study. How these play out at
the micro level, particularly in relation to social development within the
context of societal values is the focus of this present study.
3. The Ghanaian situation
Ghana is a resource-rich country and the debate as to whether these
resources are contributing positively to development or otherwise,
remain inconclusive. For instance, Siakwah (2016, 2017) while not
disputing conclusions from other studies projecting Ghana as a country
inflicted with resource-curse, argues that such conclusions obscure other
equally important socio-economic and political factors contributing to
the situation. He argues that the land tenure system, political culture and
even educational levels of Ghanaians also play crucial roles. On the
contrary, Dupuy (2017) and Beck (2000) observe that the Ghanaian
mining and natural resources sectors are already afflicted with the
various negative outcomes as all essential features of resource curse are
readily observable. This section attempts to unpack the natural re­
sources sector of Ghana, particularly as it relates to mineral resources to
understand how the sector has evolved over the years and the positive
contributions or otherwise to national development.
Ghana is one of the countries in Africa that can boast of significant
endowments of mineral deposits, including manganese, diamonds,
bauxite, oil, and gold. Of all these endowments, gold is the single most
important mineral resource of Ghana. While there are gold deposits
across the entire country, the largest gold deposits of commercial value
are found in the Ashanti, Western, Central, and the Brong-Ahafo Re­
gions. The Ghana Chamber of Mines (2019) reported that, the mining
and quarrying sector contributed GH’ 4.02 billion in 2019, to national
revenue, accounting for 7.6 percent of revenue as against 4.8 percentage
contribution in 2018. Again, the mining sector generated US$4.5 billion
in export revenues in 2019, out of which US$ 3.3 billion was returned to
the country. This amount represents 73 percent of export proceeds for
the year (Ghana Chamber of Mines, 2020).
Aside revenue and export earnings the mining sector also serves as a
source of direct employment to some 11,899 Ghanaians, with several
others indirectly involved with the sector. The multinational companies
involved with mining are also initiating and implementing various
Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) programmes and projects.
Through the Ghana Chamber of Mines these companies have established
the Tertiary Education Fund into which an amount of US$442,500 is
paid annually and intended to be invested in educating skilled human
resources in support of the socio-economic transformation of the coun­
try. It is estimated that mining companies invested about US$24.45
million on CSR programmes in 2019 alone (Ghana Chamber of Mines,
2020). Fig. 1.1 shows the share of mineral receipts as a share of total
exports from 2005 to 2019.
Irrespective of the benefits generated by the sector, issues of health
and safety, environmental pollution and widespread discontent with the
contributions of the mining sector to the development of the country
D. Anaafo et al.
Fig. 1.1. Share of mineral receipts in total exports (2005–2019).
Source: Ghana Chamber of Mines (2019)
remain. As such some reforms have been initiated over the years. Most of
these reforms, however, seek to position Ghana as an attractive desti­
nation for the investor community. Often the policies have no long-term
beneficial impacts as they are watered down to incentivise and attract
Foreign Direct Investments (FDI). These challenges militate against the
sector’s ability to contribute in a manner commensurate with its size to
government revenues and the development of the country (Ayee et al.,
2011).
Recently, however, reforms have sought to ensure that the country
derives optimum benefits from its natural resources. Some of these re­
forms include the local content policy which requires of mining com­
panies to employ a certain percentage of their staff from the country;
social responsibility agreements requiring the setting up of consultative
committees in mine-take communities; and environmental sustainabil­
ity agreements requiring companies to sign on to reclamation bonds,
among others. Aubynn (2013) argues that these policies and reforms
have resulted in increased contributions of the mining sector to the
development of the country. Mining companies operating in Ghana are
also required to meet standard practices in the industry as contained in
agreements such as the Publish What you Pay (PWYP), Extractive In­
dustries Transparency Initiative (EITI), the Kimberley Process Certifi­
cation Scheme (KPCS), the US Congress’ Frank-Dodd Act, and the
African Mining Vision (AMV) which have been adopted to deal with
practices contributing to poor gains from resource endowments in
different country contexts (Khadiagala, 2015).
The legal and regulatory regime for mining in Ghana have also seen
some reforms. The most salient is the promulgation of the Minerals and
Monteiro et al., 2019 (Act 995), amending the Minerals and Mining Act
of 2006 (Act 703). Act 995 has as its objective to “increase the penalties
for a person who buys or sells minerals without a licence or without a
valid authority; to increase the penalties for a person who engages in
mining contrary to a provision of the Act and to provide for related
matters”. It also aims to make local content a central requirement for
granting licences to mining companies. Some activities prohibited by
Act 995 include the provision of mining support services to small scale
mining companies, and the imposition of stiffer punishment for trading
in minerals without a license. There are also plans to further amend Act
703 to reduce the duration for acquisition of a development agreement
from 15 to 5 years; and mainstream gender into employment decisions
of mining companies (The Daily Statesman, 2017). Overall, while there
are disagreements about the positive role of mining in Ghana’s devel­
opment, efforts are underway to reform the industry to make it more
responsive to the development needs of Ghana.
4
Resources Policy 80 (2023) 103171
4. Study area and methods
4.1. Study area
The study area is the Asutifi North District of Ghana, which serves as
the African headquarters of Newmont Goldcorp, an American mining
giant headquartered in Denver Colorado. The Asutifi North District is
located between latitudes 6◦ 40′ and 7◦ 15′ North and Longitudes 2◦ 15′
and 2◦ 45′ West, with Kenyasi as its capital. The district has a total land
area of 1500 sq. Km (Asutifi North District Assembly, 2020). Newmont’s
operations in the Asutifi North District affects five communities which
have been categorised as mine-take communities. These are Kenyasi No.
1, Kenyasi No. 2, Ntotroso, Gyedu and Wamahinso. The choice of study
area was borne out of the positive reviews from industry watchers and
the fact that Newmont Goldcorp participates voluntarily in initiatives
that seek to provide an agenda for action, offer the means for indepen­
dent assessment of their performance, willingly generate and share best
industry practices.
Newmont Goldcorp prides itself as operating a system that allows for
effective health, safety, community relations and environmental pro­
tection processes. Since 2007, the Ahafo site like other Newmont sites
across the globe are often assessed using ISO 14001 (environment) and
OHSAS 18001 (health and safety) standards (Newmont, 2019). In the
2019 sustainability report of Newmont Goldcorp, and in relation to
sustainability, the company proudly stated that “we serve as a catalyst
for local economic development through transparent and respectful
stakeholder engagement and as responsible stewards of the environ­
ment” (Newmont, 2019, p.10). Newmont Goldcorp also argues that it is
contributing to the realisation of the globally endorsed Sustainable
Development Goals (SDGs) especially, Goal 3 — good health and well­
being; Goal 5 — gender equality; Goal 6 — clean water and sanitation;
and Goal 8 — decent work and economic growth; Goal 17 — partner­
ships for the goals (Newmont, 2019).
Meanwhile other independent assessments of Newmont’s operations
put the company in a rather bad light in respect of its commitment to
sustainable development. Two separate studies carried out by the
Institute of Development Studies of the University of Cape Coast and the
Wassa Association of Communities Affected by Mining (WACAM) with
funding from Ford Foundation concluded that the operations of New­
mont negatively impacted various segments of the mine-take commu­
nities. Women’s access to potable water, farmlands and other means of
economic livelihood have been adversely affected, farm sizes have
reduced, and general living conditions have worsened, the study argued
(The Daily Statesman, 2017). Considering these contestations, the
mine-take communities bordering Newmont’s operations were purpo­
sively selected as the best place to unpack the nuances between mining
D. Anaafo et al.
and sustainable development of mine-take communities at the
micro-level in Ghana. Fig. 1.2 shows the study area in the context of
Ghana.
4.2. Methods
The study made use of mixed methods, deploying questionnaire
administration, key informant interviews, stakeholder validation
workshop and analysis of satellite imagery for a detailed and nuanced
understanding of the different components investigated. According to
Anthony et al. (2009), this approach is ideal for studies involving the
collection, analyses, and interpretation of quantitative and qualitative
data in a single study. Furthermore, in emphasizing the strength of this
approach, Creswell and Clark (2017) stressed that the mixed methods
approach provides a better understanding of the research problem than
either the quantitative or qualitative approach. Therefore, the study
draws on the complementary strengths of both quantitative and quali­
tative methods to provide a comprehensive understanding of the
research problem and meet the stated objective of the study.
Fig. 1.2. Asutifi north district in the context of Ghana.
Source: Asutifi North District Assembly, (2017)
5
Resources Policy 80 (2023) 103171
Determining a sample size to guide the study started with a perusal of
the Medium-Term Development Plan of the Asutifi North District As­
sembly (2017). The report indicates that there are 6305 households in
the identified mine-take communities. At a 95% confidence level the
sample size for the study was calculated using fluid surveys (Survey­
Monkey, 2022). This approach was used for the sampling because it is
easier to use and provides statistically accurate results. It can also be
used for both simple and complex studies (Meysamie et al., 2014).
Thereafter, the sample size for each study community was proportion­
ally determined based on its share of the total number of households.
Table 1.1 shows the sample size for each of the study communities.
The study employed a multistage sampling technique to ensure the
selection of a representative sample of the communities for the analyses.
With the help of National Service Personnel recruited and trained for the
study, all houses within the study communities were numbered. A
simple random sampling technique was used to select the first house
from which data was collected, and the remaining houses were sys­
tematically sampled, as contained in Table 1.1. The basis for the sys­
tematic sampling of houses in the study was the relatively homogenous
D. Anaafo et al. Resources Policy 80 (2023) 103171

Table 1.1
Sample size determination.
Community No. Of No. Of Sample Randomly Systema-
Houses Households size Selected tization
House
Kenyasi 1183 2838 163 21st 7th
No.1
Kenyasi No. 620 1427 82 87th 7th
2
Ntotroso 641 1209 70 215th 9th
Gyedu 270 500 29 37th 9th
Wamahinso 241 331 19 116th 13th
Total 2955 6305 363
Source: Author’s construct (2021)
households in the study communities and the direct and indirect in­
teractions of community members with the mining activities. A house­
hold for our purposes is a grouping of relatives or non-relatives living
together and sharing food from the same pot. Therefore, a house may be
inhabited by one or more households. Study participants from the sys­
tematically sampled houses, who were either heads of households or
their representatives were selected based on availability and willingness
to partake in the study. Field officers were trained using questionnaires
developed, pre-tested, and modified after reconnaissance surveys in the
study communities. Data were collected over one month, with each
questionnaire administration lasting approximately thirty (30) minutes.
The questionnaire was used to elicit relevant data on the various
aspects of sustainable development. Social sustainability for purposes of
this study is understood within societal values to include the processes of
enabling access to land for use by community members, access to rele­
vant information and services, participation in decisions affecting their
lives, and accountability for mineral royalties. These have been adapted
from the principles of social sustainability which include equity of access
to key services; political participation; a sense of community ownership
and a system for transmitting awareness among others (Morelli, 2011).
Key informant interviews with members of the Sustainable Development
Committees (SDCs) of the mine-take communities, the District Planning
Officer, the District Director of Agriculture, and the Director of Social
Welfare and Community Development were also undertaken. These
experts were selected based on their specialized knowledge on the
subject matter and over-sight responsibilities over social sustainability
issues in the study communities. Each interview lasted 40–60 min and
was recorded using a tape recorder. Interviews with key informants
focused on the role of mining operations in the development of the area,
food availability all year round, social responsibility arrangements,
relationship between the mining company and mining communities,
avenues for community participation, and measures by relevant actors
to improve benefits for affected communities among others.
Also, essential and significant but divergent issues that emerged from
the key informant interviews contributed to inform the design of the
guide for focus group discussions. Five focus group discussions were
conducted, one in each study community. The discussion comprised 8 to
10 household heads in each of the study communities and was facilitated
by the lead researcher with assistance from the head of the field team.
Like the household interviews, participants in the focus group discus­
sions were selected based on their willingness to participate. Focus
group discussions were intended to contribute to method and data
source triangulation for the study. Carter et al. (2014) indicates that
there are four types of triangulations in qualitative research. These are
method, investigator, theory and data source types of triangulations.
This study used both method and data source triangulation to obtain
varied perspectives and data validation. The discussion was conducted
in Twi, the dominant language in the study communities. Each discus­
sion lasted approximately 2 h, and the output was recorded using a tape
recorder. Following initial analyses and synthesis of the data, a stake­
holder validation workshop was held. It was necessitated by the
contested nature of issues from various participants and the need to
ensure that the outcome of the study is reflective of the views shared
with the researchers. Claims which were contested at the workshop and
could not be verified on the ground were taken out of the analyses.
Quantitative data was analysed with descriptive statistical methods
in SPSS version 21, whilst qualitative data was transcribed and manually
analysed based on themes that emerged from the interviews with study
participants. A major limitation of this study was the inaccessibility of
crucial informants, particularly Newmont Goldcorp and NADeF due to
their inability or unwillingness to approve their staff to be interviewed
for the study. As a result, publicly available information including
annual reports from Newmont which were corroborated by reports from
the Ghana Chamber of Mines relating to the operations of Newmont
were relied on, where necessary.
5. Results
The socio-demographics of study participants were deemed impor­
tant to unpacking the social development issues in the area. Issues
examined included ethnicity, household sizes, gender, age, religion,
marital status, education and occupation of study participants. Put
together, these were considered relevant to the employability, ability to
participate meaningfully in the community development space, ability
to access and manage information and the vulnerability and adaptive
capacity of individuals within the study area. The average household
size for the mine-take communities was five which is almost equal to the
4.2 reported in the 2010 Population and Housing Census report for the
district. In terms of language, Akan the language spoken by the natives
of the study area, and its varying dialects was widely spoken by 82.5
percent of the study participants with 81.4 percent of them being natives
of the study communities. Again, 54.7 Percent of the participants were
male while 45.7 percent were female. The study participants were pre­
dominantly within the age group of 31–40 (36.4%). Most of the par­
ticipants were married (73.5%) with many having between 3 and 5
children (40.2%) and mainly Christians (90.9%). Only 7.3 percent of the
participants had tertiary level education, with 15 percent never having
any form of education and the majority (29.9%) having just basic edu­
cation. The participants were mainly farmers (39.1%) with 5 percent of
them being unemployed. The socio-demographic data show that the
study participants comprised of people who were active participants in
the socio-economic life of the mine-take communities. They had the
potential to be considered for employment or trained to be employable,
could partake in public discussions and decision-making and thereby
contribute to the social sustainability objective of the study which
focused on voice and accountability.
In respect of the social sustainability variables underpinning the
study, it was realised that modes of land access remain unchanged
despite the operations of mining within the area. Most people (65.7%)
still access land through the family as autochthonous members of the
land-owning communities. Even in the face of mining, share cropping
arrangements based on abunu and abusa and grants to land are also
prevalent modes of land acquisition. Abunu is an arrangement whereby a
tenant and a landowner go into a tenancy agreement usually involving
food crops for an equal share of the yield realised at the end of a farming
season. Abusa on the other hand, involves tree or cash crops and the
sharing arrangement is 1/3 to the tenant and 2/3 of yield to the land­
owner. The results show that 26.2 percent of the respondents access land
through sharecropping arrangements while 7.7 percent accessed land
through grants. Although respondents acknowledge that some families
lost their lands to the concession acquired by Newmont Goldcorp, its
impact on general land access by locals is negligible. For instance, one
participant argued thus:
“Every family member had ready access to family lands. However, we lost
substantial portion of the family land to the concession acquired for the
mine and what is left is inadequate to support the farming needs of all

6
D. Anaafo et al.
family members. Increasingly, it is generally becoming difficult to get land
from other families” (A native of Ntrotroso, February 2021).
Respondents attributed any difficulties to land access to a multi­
plicity of issues including loss of farmlands to the mines, scarcity of land
due to population growth, general anxiety of losing land, rising land
values, and growing pressure on farmlands as opposed solely to the
operations of the mine. Although Newmont declined to take part in this
study, the favourable land access situation may be attributable to the
Agricultural Improvement and Land Access Programme (AILAP)
implemented by Newmont over the years. It is estimated that New­
mont’s Ahafo project took some 8030 acres from landowners, of which
4854 acres, consisting of 7641 individual fields, were cropped. AILAP
therefore sought to enable farmers who had lost their land re-establish or
exceed pre-mine levels of crop productivity by ensuring that compen­
sated farmers have access to land. Newmont offered agricultural assis­
tance to all crop compensated farmers and facilitated access to land for
compensated farmers who had lost their lands.
The provision of information by Newmont Goldcorp as a way of
fostering community engagement was acknowledged by the study par­
ticipants. The information provided include employment opportunities,
compensation schedules and arrangements, blasting schedules, pit
closure, and health and safety related information. These were provided
as and when necessary, as attested to by 67 percent of the participants
and throughout the mine-take communities as evinced by about 80
percent of the study participants. The main challenge with information
provision is that the information pertained to the operational activities
of the mine as opposed to general community development related is­
sues. It was therefore not surprising that projects being undertaken by
the Newmont Ahafo Development Foundation were attributed by study
participants to royalties received by local chiefs. This contradicts one of
the main agreements signed by Newmont with the mine-take commu­
nities prior to the start of operations. Known as the relationships
agreement its main objective was to further deepen the cordial rela­
tionship between Newmont Goldcorp and the Community. Democratic
representation in all spheres of community development is essential to
the kind of relationship envisaged by Agreement.
It emerged from the study that Newmont promptly paid-up royalties
due the mine-take communities. While about 76 percent of the re­
spondents indicated that royalties were being paid, some 18 percent of
the respondents indicated that the communities received no royalties
from the mining company. For most respondents (82.7%), the royalties
are used for infrastructure development while for 11.6 percent of the
respondents, royalties are used to provide scholarship opportunities for
students from the mine-take communities. Further checks, however,
revealed that royalties were kept completely by chiefs for the sole pur­
pose of “maintenance of the stool”. Therefore, the communities did not
benefit in any way from the payment of royalties to local chiefs. General
community share of royalties went to the local government authority to
be spent on priority development interventions. While some respondents
indicated that royalties were being used transparently, others thought
otherwise. The following statements represent the opposing views:
“There is transparency in the use of royalties. The beneficiaries of
royalties in the community, particularly those on scholarships are
well known to all of us” (A male respondent from Gueye et al., 2021).
“Because of the level of transparency and openness associated with
the disbursement of royalties, all projects initiated are completed
timeously. Frequently, meetings are held with community members
and we are informed on how royalties have been disbursed” (A male
respondent from Kenyasi, February 2021).
Further checks revealed that the projects that respondent two was
referring to were projects being undertaken by NADeF and not attrib­
utable to royalties. It is important to ensure that royalties paid to chiefs
are used in a manner beneficial to all members of the mine-take
communities.
7
Resources Policy 80 (2023) 103171
The main vulnerability challenges were in relation to pollution
(water, air, and noise). Participants complained of acid rain and their
inability to collect and use rainwater as they did in the past, noise
emanating from blasting and dust emanating from heavy duty earth
moving equipment plying their untarred roads. Some of the complaints
are quoted below:
“there are various health consequences resulting from acid-mine
drainage, contamination of soil, ground and surface water. These
result in all kinds of illnesses, affect our health budgets, traditional
livelihood activities and general agricultural practices” (A female
respondent from Wamahinso, February 2021).
“the negatives of mining is having a toll on us. We have very poor and
dusty roads which can result in respiratory diseases and the frequent
blasting of rocks have led to our buildings developing cracks. There
are also suggestions that our rivers are now heavily polluted and not
good for drinking from” (A native of Ntotroso, February 2021).
The mining company, the Newmont Ahafo Development Foundation
(NADeF) a creature of the mining company and the Asutifi North District
Assembly implement adaptation related interventions to deal with the
vulnerabilities mentioned by the participants. Some of these include the
direct provision of social services, provision of information, dust sup­
pression activities and payment of compensation to deserving in­
dividuals and families. Some participants had these to say:
“They are trying their best to deal with some of the emerging con­
cerns. Some individuals whose buildings have been affected by
blasting were recently compensated. The company has been
entreated to provide blasting related information to the public well
ahead of time to avoid any surprises and panicky behaviours” (A
male respondent from Gydeu, February 2021).
“the issue of acid rain has come to stay. So all they do is to make
announcements to the effect that we should not collect rainwater for
household use. Some communities are also being provided with
alternative water sources to prevent use of rainwater” (A female
respondent Kenyasi No. 2, February 2021).
“increasingly NADeF, is responding to our concerns. They have
embarked on several social interventions aimed at improving com­
fort and conditions under which we live” (A Male respondent from
Wamahinso, February 2021).
Over the years the NADeF working in collaboration with Sustainable
Development Committees has invested over $9,236,070.39 on various
projects in the communities. These range from schools through to
teachers’ quarters, libraries, water systems, electricity/power projects,
health facilities, community festivals and other socio-cultural activities.
NADeF also generates annual income of over $4 million and invests
about 20 percent of it into high yielding financial instruments that will
be ploughed back into the development of the communities when
Newmont’s operations come to an end. An issue which emerged during
the stakeholder validation workshop is that efforts by members of the
mine-take community to have the initial Social Responsibility Agree­
ment (SRA) reached with Newmont reviewed have not yielded any re­
sults. For instance, they want the $1 per ounce of gold sold given to
NADeF reviewed upwards through negotiations. It is important for
Newmont to give this some attention in order not to derail the cordial
relationship it has with the mine-take communities.
6. Discussion
The data show that there are various social development concerns in
the Ahafo area, where Newmont Goldcorp undertakes its mining oper­
ations in Ghana. The evidence also show that Newmont is responding to
many of those challenges while exploring opportunities to mitigate the
residual effects. Regarding land access, it emerged that the operations of
D. Anaafo et al.
the mine has not significantly impacted traditional modes of land access
for productive purposes. Modes of land access still included a mix of
grant, sharecropping arrangements, use of family land or purchase. The
problems associated with land access include farmlands lost to mining
concession in which case compensation was paid through to increasing
population, increased value of land and increased pressure on land.
Irrespective of the competing demands over land, Worlanyo et al. (2022)
observe that mining is the single important competitor to agriculture in
terms of land use conversion in the Asutifi North District. Interestingly
Newmont, through the AILAP project managed to mitigate the chal­
lenges that emerged from the loss of land. The efforts of Newmont in this
regard are commendable as it has been argued that it is against sound
economic reasoning for private investors to initiate and implement
measures that maximise benefits for local communities and minimise
profits as in the AILAP case (Li, 2011; Maconachie and Hilson, 2013).
However, the current land access dynamics as evident from the study
recognises broader set of factors influencing land access and agrarian
change in general (Hinojosa, 2013), hence the departure from heaping
the blame entirely on the mining operations. The approach adopted by
Newmont is also different from attempts in the past to reclaim lands for
agricultural uses after mining. Essah and Andrews (2016) have dis­
credited reclamation practices and what they term disjointed CRS ar­
rangements for nuanced interventions such as the AILAP.
Information is critical to socio-political decision making. Within the
study area Newmont provided information on employment opportu­
nities, compensation schedules and arrangements, blasting schedules,
pit closures, and health and safety. However, the sufficiency of the in­
formation is called into question as people seem not to know of who is
doing what in terms of community development initiatives. Newmont’s
is violating its relationships agreement that requires of the company to
engage with mine-take communities beyond the provision of opera­
tional information with community relevance. This approach is not
different from that complained about by Kamlongera (2013) in his ex­
amination of mining boom in Malawi in which he laments that agree­
ments are signed without greater participation of stakeholders in
decisions about mine development. In consideration of these Ayee et al.
(2011) argue that creating a platform for effective democratic repre­
sentation of members of communities affected by mining activities is an
important step to avoid conflict between mining companies and host
communities. Recently, Awoa et al. (2021) show through a large panel
study involving 130 developing countries that resource abundance often
has adverse effects on women’s political participation. In light of these,
(Cornwall (2002) warns against equating the extension of invitations to
participate in decision-making regarding natural resources extraction to
democratic representation. Essah and Andrews (2016) also indicate that
the involvement of community members in sustainable mining decision
making should not be limited to operational reclamation and Corporate
Social Responsibility (CSR) activities but broadened to include formu­
lation and review of laws and policies. The takeaway from these dis­
cussions therefore is that community actors and other relevant
stakeholders including CSOs must play active roles in decision-making
processes around mineral resources as a way of strengthening trans­
parency, accountability, and democratic representation (Maconachie,
2010; Maconachie and Hilson, 2013). In this respect deepened collab­
oration is important for ensuring that all stakeholders understand their
commitments within agreements reached and contribute to monitoring
(Hamann and Acutt, 2003; Jenkins and Obara, 2008). Given that New­
mont is flouting its own relationships agreement in terms of information
provision, it may be concluded that the mechanisms for participatory
decision making are merely self-serving and tokenist.
The payment of royalties appears shrouded in secrecy. Although
study participants appeared to know that local chiefs receive royalties,
they have no idea as to what the royalties are used for. On the other
hand, chiefs are frank in indicating that the royalties are used purposely
for the maintenance “stools” to the exclusion of the members of the
community. This behaviour has been labelled by Lujala and Narh (2020,
8
Resources Policy 80 (2023) 103171
p. 184) as capture of royalties remitted to mine-take communities.
Meanwhile the claim that royalties are meant to be used for the main­
tenance of the stool is traced to Article 267 (6) (a) of the 1992 Consti­
tution of Ghana which states that in respect of the sharing of royalties,
“twenty-five percent to the stool through the traditional authority for
the maintenance of the stool in keeping with its status”. This article has
been wrongfully interpreted by chiefs to appropriate mineral royalties
meant for the development of their communities for themselves. This is
because chiefs occupy fiduciary role in the management of land (Anaafo
and Guba, 2017), as the “stool” represents the customary group being
ruled by a chief (Lujala and Narh, 2020). Given this understanding,
royalties are to be used in a way that is beneficial to the community and
not just to meet the needs of local chiefs. Several other studies (Dupuy,
2017; Adimazoya, 2013), decry this extortionist tendencies of chiefs.
Chiefs are emboldened by the laws of Ghana which invariably make it
very difficult to initiate an action in court against individuals exercising
fiduciary responsibilities. Section 13 of the recently promulgated Lujala
and Narh, 2020 (Act 1036) has no penal provision for breach of fiduciary
responsibilities. There is also a further requirement as per the law that to
sue a chief, evidence must be adduced to show that all traditional
customary mechanisms for resolving the dispute at hand have been
exhausted. These stringent conditions embolden chiefs, weaken the
resolve by individual members of communities to seek accountability
and result in wanton use of resources that should otherwise serve the
larger community interest.
Lastly, quite obviously the activities of Newmont expose the mem­
bers of the mine-take communities to pollution of diverse kinds.
Meanwhile Newmont is also implementing measures to enable com­
munities adapt. The responsiveness of the measures is, however, un­
clear. Dust, acid rain and cracks on building resulting from blasting have
been traditionally identified to be associated with mining operations in
different parts of Ghana and elsewhere. The conclusion from most
studies is that mining imposes socio-economic costs on mine-take
communities as is leads to loss of land through land acquisition, envi­
ronmental degradation, pollution in varied forms (Aboka et al., 2018;
Lujala and Narh, 2020). This study further corroborates these claims.
However, the evidence also shows that Newmont is implementing
measures through NADeF aimed at improving community resilience and
enhancing adaptation. This is quite progressive and must be deepened
for the mutual benefit and coexistence of the parties.
7. Limitations and future research directions
The main limitation is the refusal/inability of Newmont to partake in
the study, although this was remedied to some extent using secondary
data. Second, the study could have benefited from a wider empirical
comparative analysis of micro level cases from different parts of Ghana.
The number of social variables examined could also have been broad­
ened. It will also be illuminating to undertake a study of this nature by
examining how the variables of social, economic and environmental
sustainability play out in different contexts. In respect of the role of
chiefs and royalties, an understanding of how the situation is likely to
play out in the northern part of the country, where lands are owned by
individuals and families as opposed to traditional authorities would be
informative. It is therefore suggested that future research endeavours
undertake comparative analysis of local micro-level cases, increase the
variables under observation or even examine the issues from the social,
economic and environmental perspectives.
8. Conclusions
This study set out to unpack the links between gold mining opera­
tions and the sustainable development of host communities as a way of
providing a micro as opposed to a macro level analysis of the often-
contested issues about the positive correlation between resource abun­
dance and underdevelopment. Although the main dimensions of
D. Anaafo et al.
sustainable development were examined, this paper focuses only on the
social dimension of sustainable development by investigating the
following variables, i.e., land access and use rights, access by members
of the communities to relevant information and services, stakeholder
participation in decisions affecting their lives, and accountability of
local chiefs in the use of their share of royalties. The study established
that the population of the study area is largely youthful, and therefore in
tandem with national and African population dynamics. It is therefore
important that decision-making in the area is futuristic in orientation. In
this respect the establishment of the Newmont Ahafo Development
Foundation (NADeF) is a plus for the key actors. However, it is important
that the amount of money going into the Foundation is reviewed peri­
odically, taking into consideration, global market trends and local
development needs.
Land access remains relatively stable amid brisk mining operations,
even though the fact that individuals and families have lost their lands to
mining operations is not in doubt. Although they received compensation
for their losses, it is important to ask whether the one-off payment of
compensation under such circumstances are sustainable. How sustain­
able is it for a cocoa farmer to lose his cocoa farm which has the potential
to generate income for a period of 30 years or more for a one-off pay­
ment as compensation? The Government of Ghana and stakeholders in
the mining sector will need to start to think of ways of addressing some
of these issues. Access to information while currently unproblematic, the
content bothered only on the operational activities of the mine as
opposed to general community development issues. It is incumbent on
the Asutifi North District Assembly to initiate measures to engage more
with the inhabitants on general community development.
Participants in the study generally agree that the District Assembly
and local chiefs receive their fair share of royalties. However, account­
ability over the use of royalties is murky. While many study participants
were of the view that chiefs are using such resources to provide
educational and health infrastructure as well as scholarships, chiefs
maintained that the royalties are meant “for the maintenance of the
stool” (the figurative symbol of chiefly authority in Ghana). This con­
trasts with the trusteeship ethos of the chieftaincy institution which only
makes them fiduciary title holders of land for the members of their
respective communities. However, this is not strange, as it has the
blessing of Article 267 (6) (a) of the 1992 Constitution. Future review
and repeal of the mining and mineral laws of Ghana must address this
important issue as it has relevance to the sustainable development of
mine-take communities.
Author statement
David Anaafo: Methodology, Analysis and Discussion.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
Data availability
The authors do not have permission to share data.
References
Aboka, E.Y., Cobbina, S.J., Dzigbodi, D.A., 2018. Review of environmental and health
impacts of mining in Ghana. Journal of Health and Pollution 8 (17), 43–52.
Adimazoya, T., 2013. Staying ahead of the curve: meeting Ghana’s commitment to good
governance in the mining sector. J. Energy Nat. Resour. Law 31 (2), 147–170.
Allan, R., 1995. Introduction: sustainable mining in the future. J. Geochem. Explor. 52
(1–2), 1–4.
Akpalu, W., Normanyo, A.K., 2017. Gold mining pollution and the cost of private
healthcare: the case of Ghana. Ecological Economics 142, 104–112.
9
Resources Policy 80 (2023) 103171
Al-Hassan, S., Amoako, R., 2014. Environmental and security aspects of contemporary
small scale mining in Ghana. Paper presented at the. In: 3rd UMaT Biennial
International Mining and Mineral Conference.
Amponsah-Tawiah, K., Dartey-Baah, K., 2011. The mining industry in Ghana: a blessing
or a curse. Int. J. Bus. Soc. Sci. 2 (12).
Anaafo, D., Guba, B., 2017. Do land reforms have adverse impacts on the livelihoods of
poor land users? Evidence from the Nkoranza South Municipality, Ghana. Can. J.
Afr. Stud./Rev. Can. Études Afr. 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/
00083968.2017.1303390.
Anthony, J. O., Wendy, B. D., Nancy, L. L., & Annmarie, G. Z. (2009). A qualitative
framework for collecting and analyzing data in focus group research. International
Journal of Qualitative Methods 8 (3). Retrieved fromhttp://research.apc.org/
images/2/2f/A_Qualitative_Framework_for_Collecting_and_Analyzing_Data_in_
Focus_Group_Research.pdf.
Appiah, H., 1998. Organization of small scale mining activities in Ghana. J. S. Afr. Inst.
Min. Metall 98 (7), 307–310.
Appiah, D.O., Buaben, J.N., 2012. Is gold mining a bane or a blessing in Sub-Saharan
Africa: the case of Ghana. International Journal of Development and Sustainability 1
(3), 1033–1048.
Armah, F.A., Luginaah, I.N., Taabazuing, J., Odoi, J.O., 2013. Artisanal gold mining and
surface water pollution in Ghana: have the foreign invaders come to stay? Environ.
Justice 6 (3), 94–102.
Aubynn, T. 2013. Mining and Sustainable Development: The Case of Ghana. Retrieved
from https://im4dc.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Mining-and-Sustainable-De
velopment-Ghana.pdf. Retrieved January 28, 2021.
Awoa, P.A., Ondoa, H.A., Tabi, H.N., 2021. Women’s political empowerment and natural
resource curse in developing countries. Resour. Pol. 75, 102442.
Awudi, G.B., 2002. The role of foreign direct investment (FDI) in the mining sector of
Ghana and the environment. In: Conference on Foreign Direct Investment And the
Environment. OECD, Paris.
Ayee, J., Søreide, T., Shukla, G., Le, T.M., 2011. Political Economy of the Mining Sector
in Ghana. The World Bank.
Beck, U., 2000. What Is Globalization? Polity Press, Cambridge.
Carter, N., Bryant-Lukosius, D., Alba DiCenso, A., Blythe, J., Alan, J., Neville, J.A., 2014.
The use of triangulation in qualitative research. Oncol. Nurs. Forum 41 (5), 545–547.
https://doi.org/10.1188/14.ONF.545-547.
Carvalho, F.P., 2017. Mining industry and sustainable development: time for change.
Food and Energy Security 6 (2), 61–77.
Cornwall, A., 2002. Locating citizen participation. IDS Bull. 33 (2), 49–58.
Cowell, S.J., Wehrmeyer, W., Argust, P.W., Robertson, J.G.S., 1999. Sustainability and
the primary extraction industries: theories and practice. Resour. Pol. 25 (4),
277–286.
Creswell, J.W., Clark, V.L.P., 2017. Designing and conducting mixed methods research.
Sage publications, Los Angeles.
Dubiński, J., 2013. Sustainable development of mining mineral resources. Journal of
Sustainable Mining 12 (1), 1–6.
Dupuy, E.K., 2017. Corruption and elite capture of mining community development
funds in Ghana and Sierra Leone. In: Williams, A., Le Billion, P. (Eds.), Corruption,
Natural Resources and Development: from Resource Curse to Political Ecology.
Edward Elgar, Cheltenham.
Emel, J., Huber, M.T., Makene, M.H., 2011. Extracting sovereignty: capital, territory, and
gold mining in Tanzania. Polit. Geogr. 30 (2), 70–79.
Erdiaw-Kwasie, M.O., Dinye, R.D., Abunyewah, M., 2014. Impacts of mining on the
natural environment and wellbeing of mining-fringe communities in Prestea, Ghana.
Greener Journal of Social Sciences 4 (3), 108–122.
Erzurumlu, S.S., Erzurumlu, Y.O., 2015. Sustainable mining development with
community using design thinking and multi-criteria decision analysis. Resour. Pol.
46, 6–14.
Essah, M., Andrews, N., 2016. Linking or de-linking sustainable mining practices and
corporate social responsibility? Insights from Ghana. Resour. Pol. 50, 75–85.
Esteves, A.M., 2008. Mining and social development: refocusing community investment
using multi-criteria decision analysis. Resour. Pol. 33 (1), 39–47.
Ghana Chamber of Mines, 2020. Annual report 2020: promoting environmentally and
socially responsible mining. Retrieved from. http://ghanachamberofmines.org/
wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Ghana-Chamber-of-Mines-2020-Report.pdf.
Retrieved November 28, 2021.
Ghorbani, Y., Kuan, S.H., 2017. A review of sustainable development in the Chilean
mining sector: past, present and future. International Journal of Mining,
Reclamation and Environment 31 (2), 137–165.
Gilberthorpe, E., Banks, G., 2012. Development on whose terms? CSR discourse and
social realities in Papua New Guinea’s extractive industries sector. Resour. Pol. 37,
185–193.
Government of Ghana, 2019. The budget statement and economic policy of the
government of Ghana for the 2020 financial year. Retrieved from. https://www.
mofep.gov.gh/sites/default/files/budget-statements/2020-Budget-Statement-and-
Economic-Policy.pdf. Retrieved November 28, 2021.
Gueye, E.H.M., Badri, A., Boudreau-Trudel, B., 2021. Sustainable development in the
mining industry: towards the development of tools for evaluating socioeconomic
impact in the Canadian context. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 23 (5), 6576–6602. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s10668-020-00948-y.
Hamann, R., Acutt, N., 2003. How should civil society (and the government) respond to
corporate social responsibility? A critique of business motivations and the potential
for partnerships. Dev. South Afr. 20 (2), 255–270.
Hendrix, J.L., 2017. Sustainable mining: trends and opportunities. Chemical and
Biomolecular Engineering Research and Publications: Papers in Sustainable Mining
51–60.
D. Anaafo et al.
Hilson, G., 2000. Sustainable development policies in Canada’s mining sector: an
overview of government and industry efforts. Environ. Sci. Pol. 3 (4), 201–211.
Hinojosa, L., 2013. Change in rural livelihoods in the Andes: do extractive industries
make any difference? Community Dev. J. 48 (3), 421–436.
Jenkins, H., Obara, L., 2008. Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) in the mining
industry–the risk of community dependency. Paper presented at the. In: Corporate
Responsibility Research Conference, 7–9 September 2008. Queens University,
Belfast, UK.
Kamlongera, P.J., 2013. The mining boom in Malawi: implications for community
development. Community Dev. J. 48 (3), 377–390.
Kemp, D., 2010. Mining and community development: problems and possibilities of
local-level practice. Community Dev. J. 45 (2), 198–218.
Khadiagala, G.M., 2015. Global and regional mechanisms for governing the resource
curse in Africa. Politikon 42 (1), 23–43.
Kirsch, S., 2010. Sustainable mining. Dialect. Anthropol. 34 (1), 87–93.
Kitula, A.G.N., 2006. The environmental and socio-economic impacts of mining on local
livelihoods in Tanzania: a case study of Geita District. J. Clean. Prod. 14 (3–4),
405–414.
Kokko, K., Buanes, A., Koivurova, T., Masloboev, V., Pettersson, M., 2015. Sustainable
mining, local communities and environmental regulation. Barents Studies 2, 50–81.
Koning, J., 2001. Social sustainability in a globalizing world: context, theory and
methodology explored. In: Proceedings of the UNESCO/MOST Meeting, pp. 22–23.
The Hague, The Netherlands.
Li, T.M., 2011. Centering labor in the land grab debate. J. Peasant Stud. 38 (2), 281–298.
Loayza, N., Rigolini, J., 2016. The local impact of mining on poverty and inequality:
evidence from the commodity boom in Peru. World Dev. 84, 219–234.
Lujala, P., Narh, J., 2020. Ghana’s minerals development fund Act: addressing the needs
of mining communities. J. Energy Nat. Resour. Law 38 (2), 183–200.
Mabey, P.T., Li, W., Sundufu, A.J., Lashari, A.H., 2020. Environmental impacts: local
perspectives of selected mining edge communities in Sierra Leone. Sustainability 12
(14), 5525.
Maconachie, R., 2010. ‘New spaces’ for change?: diamond governance reforms and the
micro-politics of participation in post-war Sierra Leone. Publ. Adm. Dev. 30 (3),
191–202.
Maconachie, R., Hilson, G., 2013. Editorial introduction: the extractive industries,
community development and livelihood change in developing countries. Community
Dev. J. 48 (3), 347–359.
Meysamie, A., Taee, F., Mohammadi-Vajari, M.A., Yoosefi-Khanghah, S., Emamzadeh-
Fard, S., Abbassi, M., 2014. Sample size calculation on web, can we rely on the
results. J. Med. Stat. Inf. 2 (1), 3–8. https://doi.org/10.7243/2053-7662-2-3.
Mhlongo, S., Mativenga, P., Marnewick, A., 2018. Water quality in a mining and water-
stressed region. J. Clean. Prod. 171, 446–456.
Monteiro, N.B.R., da Silva, E.A., Neto, J.M.M., 2019. Sustainable development goals in
mining. J. Clean. Prod. 228, 509–520.
10
Resources Policy 80 (2023) 103171
Morelli, J., 2011. Environmental sustainability: a definition for environmental
professionals. J. Environ. Sustain. 1 (1), 19–27.
Nti, T., 2020. Illegal Mining and Sustainability Performance: Evidence from Ashanti
Region, Ghana. International Journal of Scientific Research and Management
(IJSRM) 8 (3), 1661–1676.
Prebisch, R., 1950. The Economic Development Of Latin America and its Principal Problems.
UN Department of Economic Affairs, New York.
Reed, D., 2002. Resource extraction industries in developing countries. J. Bus. Ethics 39
(3), 199–226.
Sala-i-Martin, X., Doppelhofer, G., Miller, R.I., 2004. Determinants of long-term growth:
a Bayesian averaging of classical estimates (BACE) approach. Am. Econ. Rev. 94,
813–835.
Shaffer, B., Ziyadov, T. (Eds.), 2011. Beyond the Resource Curse. University of
Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia.
Siakwah, P., 2016. Are Natural Resource Windfalls a Blessing Or a Curse in Democratic
Settings: A Case Study-Ghana?. Doctoral dissertation, Trinity College Dublin.
Siakwah, P., 2017. Are natural resource windfalls a blessing or a curse in democratic
settings? Globalised assemblages and the problematic impacts of oil on Ghana’s
development. Resources Policy 52, 122–133.
Stern, D.I., 1995. The contribution of the mining sector to sustainability in developing
countries. Ecol. Econ. 13 (1), 53–63.
Stevens, P., Lahn, G., Kooroshy, J., 2015. The Resource Curse Revisited. Chatham House
for the Royal Institute of International Affairs.
Suopajärvi, L., Ejdemo, T., Klyuchnikova, E., Korchak, E., Nygaard, V., Poelzer, G.A.,
2017. Social impacts of the “glocal” mining business: case studies from Northern
Europe. Mineral Economics 30 (1), 31–39.
SurveyMonkey, 2022. Sample size calculator. Retrieved from. http://fluidsurveys.com
/university/calculating-right-survey-sample-size/. Retrieved on: August, 2, 2022.
The Daily Statesman, 2017. Reports say Newmont’s operations is adversely affecting
food production. Retrived from. http://www.wacamgh.org/news/52. Retrived on
August 2, 2022.
UNCED, 1992. Earth Summit Agenda 21: the United Nations Programme Of Action From Rio.
United Nations, New York.
Wilson, M.L., Renne, E., Roncoli, C., Agyei-Baffour, P., Tenkorang, E.Y., 2015. Integrated
assessment of artisanal and small-scale gold mining in Ghana—Part 3: Social
sciences and economics. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public
Health 12 (7), 8133–8156.
Worlanyo, A.S., Alhassan, S.I., Jiangfeng, L., 2022. The impacts of gold mining on the
welfare of local farmers in Asutifi-North District in Ghana: a quantitative and multi-
dimensional approach. Resour. Pol. 75, 102458.
World Commission on Environment and Development, 1987. Our Common Future.
Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Zmami, M., Ben-Salha, O., Almarshad, S.O., Chekki, H., 2021. The contribution of mining
sector to sustainable development in Saudi Arabia. Journal of Sustainable Mining 20
(2), 122–135.