The Arlit Mines: structuring the social choice problem

Structuring the evaluation of uranium mines of Arlit (Niger)

Structuration of an evaluation, or social choice problem, according to the Integraal framework for evaluation, is done by specifying, for the problem, the three following categories:

  • Scenarios or options
  • Stakeholders
  • Performance issues

Here is how they were identified, in the case of the Arlit mines study by Aurélie Chamaret:

Scenarios/Options

 

This category was built into Aurélie Chamaret's research by design as a comparaison between different mine sites, size of operation and type.

In this case, the evaluation aims at assessing the performances of different mine sites, according to size and operation type. The evaluation is done by different stakeholders, followint the full array of performance issues defined by the research.

Stakeholder identification

 

 

To identify actors that are affected by the activity and, thereby, have to be implied in the process,  A Chamaret based herself on the typology proposed by Faucheux & Nicolaï (2004) and by O’Connor & Spangenberg that gives elements of analysis in separating four main stakeholder groups for firms:
 
  • Internal stakeholders that have direct interests in companies: they include management, employees, unions, and shareholders. 
  • Traditional external stakeholders identified as the firm‘s partners, that all have a direct commercial importance for the company, such as suppliers, customers, banks, and insurers. 
  • Enlarged external stakeholders, identified as dialogue partners that have an interest or requirements concerning the performances of a plant, a company or an industrial sector, and have a direct incidence on commercial success, such as: local population, NGOs, associations, and partner firms. 
  • Coordinating authorities: government, local authorities, and professional associations.
Based on this typology, on several studies on mine stakeholders, and on local knowledge of Nigerian companies, a list of actors to engage in the process was drawn up:
 
Definition and organisation of steakholders
  LOCAL NATIONAL
Internal stakeholders Management employess Management
  Unions  
Traditional external stakeholders Subcontractors/suppliers  
  Suppliers  
Enlarged external stakeholders Local NGOs  
  Traditional chiefs from
the urban area and rural area 		  
  Traditional chiefs from
the rural area 		  
Coordinating Authorities Local Authorities Ministries
  Institutions Institutions
 

Performance issues

 

The definition of performance issues or categories arose from the interviews given by the researcher to stakeholders in Niger.
The method used was based on a semi-directive approach with two main questions:
  1. According to you, what are the impacts of, and your concerns related to, the mining activity?
  2. How would you measure these impacts? 
Not surprisingly, a large spectrum of sustainability issues was mentioned by the participants, from the preservation of traditional ways of living, to health, through economic development, contributions to state revenue or water access and impacts on biodiversity. 
 
The researcher organized these impacts in nine broad categories based on an analysis of all contributions and on international frameworks:
 
  1. Economic and financial performances
  2. Redistribution of benefits
  3. Local community
  4. Employees health and safety
  5. Employment and equity
  6. Wages and working conditions
  7. Environmental management
  8. Resources and products management
  9. Environmental impacts
 

References

Faucheux, S. & Nicolaï, I. (2004). La responsabilité sociétale dans la construction d'indicateurs : l'expérience de l'industrie européenne de l'aluminium. Nature Sciences Sociétés, 30-41.

O‘Connor, M. & Spangenberg, J. (2007, in press). A Methodology for CSR Reporting: Assuring a Representative Diversity of Indicators across Stakeholders, Scales, Sites and Performance Issues. Forthcoming in the Journal of Cleaner Production.