Engagement with relevant stakeholders such as potentially affected communities, local government departments, and other mine sites or large infrastructure developments in the Area of Influence provides a clearer understanding of the potential and actual -related impacts and risks, and how they may be prevented, mitigated, managed, and monitored. Stakeholder engagement should also be conducted for Task 2, 3, 4 and 5.
Impact is not always dictated by numbers. Sites in relatively isolated areas may not see significant in numbers, but local communities may experience significant impacts, while sites located close to urban centres may attract high numbers of but find that in-migrants are easily absorbed. The level of vulnerability to is also best understood through discussions with affected stakeholders.
Definitions and attitudes towards in-migrants are context-specific and evolve over time. Through stakeholder engagement, sites should aim to better understand how local communities define and perceive in-migration.
Section 3A provides detailed guidance on consulting with affected communities and other relevant parties. Consultations around should be anticipated and factored into Stakeholder Engagement Plans (SEP).
Table 4G.2 below provides an overview of the most important stakeholders.
Table 4G.2 -related stakeholders
|
Stakeholder
|
Engagement focus
|
|
Affected communities
|
- Insight into the real and perceived positive and negative impacts of
- How do local populations feel about the prospect of in-migrants?
- What are they be most concerned about?
- How do they feel they might benefit?
- What would be required to address their concerns?
- Monitoring the scale and impacts of
|
|
In- and/or out-migrants
|
- Motivations for in-migration and out-migration
- Challenges (or not) of integrating with local communities
|
|
Local authorities
|
- Local authorities, including police, public health and spatial planning agencies, can provide an assessment of local capacity to manage and plan for in-migration
- Local authorities will be key partners in identifying measures to discourage (if necessary)
- They also need to be involved in planning for the public service and infrastructure requirements that might be needed as a result of
- Monitoring the scale, location, and impacts of
|
|
Academic institutions and local/international
|
- Source of information (and potential partners) in terms of tracking and monitoring indicators such as population growth, health statistics and inflation
- Insights into the impacts of on local populations, including any warning signs of increasing tension
|
|
National/regional government
|
- National and regional governments have a role to play in either limiting or encouraging through transport corridors, tax incentives, funding for infrastructure and public services etc
- National or regional development plans present wider economic development opportunities which can diversify in-migration away from the site
|
|
Other sites and companies (if present)
|
- Provide information about their own experience with
- Collaboration in terms of preventing and managing
- Speaking with a collective voice can be important in lobbying local, regional or national authorities
- Identify and address any cumulative impacts
|
While sites typically need to take the lead in raising awareness of the potential impacts of with external stakeholders, impacts cannot be managed by sites alone. Local communities and local, regional, and national governments all share responsibility for ensuring that is effectively planned for and managed.
The provides a vehicle for coordination at the community level. Where potential impacts are significant, sites should consider setting up a multi-stakeholder coordination group specifically focused on and that involves the relevant authorities.