All that glitters is not gold, a mining conflict in West Papua

All that glitters is not gold, a mining conflict in West Papua

Interdisciplinary Project 2013-2014

Nikki Veerman

Political Science

10262989

Marco Becking

Human Geography

10004199

Coen de Gelder

Ecology

10000606

Tutor: Lucas Rutting Msc

Table of Content

1.

Abstract

2.

Introduction

2.1 Defining the social ecological system

3.

Theoretical Framework

4.

Methodology

5.

Results

5.1.

Stakeholder analysis

5.2.

Ecological impact of the Grasberg mining activities

5.3.

Social impact on the indigenous and local population of the Grasberg mine

5.4.

Political situation regarding policy making for the Grasberg mine

6.

Discussion

6.1.

Policy advice

6.2.

Further work

7.

Conclusion

1. Abstract

2. Introduction

West Papua is a province of Indonesia, with a tropical climate and high biodiversity and the land

contains several precious resources such as gold and copper. Over 200 indigenous tribes are

known to live in the tropical rainforest of this island ( Heidbüchel,2007). One of the largest gold

and copper mines, the Grasberg mine, is located in the remote inland mountains.

The Freeport Rio-Tinto company is an Australian-American mining company that established the

Freeport’s Grasberg mine in Irian Jaya (commonly known as West Papua) (Ballard, 2001). Previous

to the Freeport’s Grasberg mine, the Estberg mine discovered in 1936 by a Dutch geologist was

first exploited (Ibid.), its major success came in the 1960s with the contribution of the Dutch

company ‘Oost Borneo Maatschappij’ and the American company looking for mainly nickel

‘Freeport Sulphur’. However, its development stalled due to the takeover of Dutch New Guinea by

Indonesia in 1962 (Ibid.). While the Freeport mining company regained its contract in 1967 it

continued the mining activities at the Estberg mine until the 1980 where its resources neared to

exhaustion. In 1987 the Grasberg ore body was discovered, exceeded its predecessor at the

Estberg Mountain Establishing the Freeport’s Grasberg mine one of the biggest and most

successful copper and gold mine in the world (Ibid.). Being one of the most successful copper and

gold mine in the world gives the Grasberg mine an extend force of influence at local and national

level. This is mostly due to the Freeport mining company being the largest tax paying company in

Indonesia and has therefore a large voice in the policy making processes, regarding the Grasberg

mine (Soares, 2004).

Even though, the Grasberg mine has improved national economic development, it has also

generated mayor social-ecosystem impacts to the region. This entails social, ecological and

political issues. Since the establishment of the Grasberg mine indigenous and local people have

been forcefully separated from their territories and numerous other regions have been polluted

by the mining activities the Grasberg mine (Heidbüchel, 2007). These issues have been increasing

due to the explosive growth of migration of workers and employment seekers for the Grasberg

mine (Ibid.). Culturally ethnic differences have led to further marginalization of the indigenous

people as they are seen as less ‘civilized’ to the increasingly Indonesian immigrants. Their

impoverishment increases as the natural resources they depend on are also impacted by pollution

of the mine. Thousands of hectares of forest and sago are destroyed and several rivers have been

ruined affecting the biodiversity. Animals and people have suffered impacts as the result of the

tailings dumped in the Ajkwa River. Many communities have lost access to their primary food

source.

In order to understand the various impacts of the Freeport’s Grasberg mine and be capable to

mitigate such impacts, an interdisciplinary approach to this conflict is essential. Therefore, in this

research a policy advice is created, based on literature of human geographical, ecological and

political aspects. This is done in order to attempt a possible mitigation of social-ecosystem impacts

of the Freeport’s Grasberg mine. This will be done by following the main research question:

How can the negative impact of the Grasberg mining activities on the social ecological system of

the Mimika region, Indonesia be mitigated?

This research will first continue with defining the concept of social ecological systems as it is an

essential part of the understanding the impacts caused by the Grasberg mine. It will also establish

a base in which the research depends on. Second, a theoretical framework is created using 3 main

theories of the disciplines used for this research. Third, a methodology is presented. Fourth, the

results from the literature research will be presented answering the sub-questions and the main

question. Fifth, a policy advice is created, recommending different ways to decrease social

ecological system impacts to the region. Sixth, a discussion is given to underline possible issues

encountered in the research and the chosen research approach will be questioned. Finally, a

conclusion is made and recommendations for a possible continuation of this research.

2.1 Defining the Socio Eco system

An ecological system is an interlinked system of organisms and a social system could be described

as a system of organisms tending to form cooperative and interdependent relationships (Andries,

2004). Social-ecological systems are linked systems of people and nature, which sees humans as

part of nature, arguing that the separation between social and ecological systems is artificial and

arbitrary. The term Social-ecological system was introduced Berkes and Folke in 1998 as an

integrated concept of humans-in-nature, because they wanted to give to two equal weight in their

analysis and not treat the social or ecological dimensions as separate. (Resilience dictionary,2013).

The socio ecosystem of the Mimika region, Indonesia, including the regional capital of Timika,

used to fit Redman’s(2004) definition . The Amungme tribe, living in the highlands, and Kamoro

tribe, living in the lowlands, are the indigenous inhabitants of the lands now used for mining

activities and infrastructure. When Freeport entered the area in 1967 the two tribes consisted of

several thousand individuals, organized in small clans with village based social and governance

structures. The Mimika region is just south of the equator and has a high mean annual

temperature and precipitation rate.

Figure 1: Socio-Ecological System

This Results in high biodiversity and fast growing plants. The region contains tropical rainforest,

glacial mountain, river valleys and coastal wetlands, enabling the Amungme and Kamoro the live a

sustainable subsistence life, making direct use of ecosystem for food, shelter and drinking water

(Abigal, 2001). They used the ecosystem services provided with care, causing no negative impact

on the ecosystem stability. As shown in figure 1, and ideal Social-Ecological system is in

equilibrium, both the ecosystem and the human system can remain functioning properly without

losing any of its potential. With the arrival of Freeport’s Grasberg mine, natural resources of great

importance of both the Kamoro and Amungme tribe, were destroyed. Tribal communities were

often forced to leave their villages, and move to the village of Timika. Timika was the fastest

growing economic zone of Indonesia in the 1990’s, and attracted thousands of migrants from

other islands and westerners, causing the Kamoro and Amungme to be a minority (Abigal,2001)

3. Methodology

This qualitative research has been based on scientific literature. First, a literature multidisciplinary

research was done of Freeport’s Grasberg mine conflict focusing on three disciplines: Human

geography, political science and ecology. Each discipline uses different theories contributing to the

understanding of the complexity of the Grasberg mine conflict. In order to make it an

interdisciplinary research, common ground was found using the integrative technique of

extension. This means that assumptions of each theory presented by the various disciplines have

been carefully extended in order to properly connect the theories to arriving at equal

assumptions

_​

.

_​

A stakeholder analysis is done in order to gain insight in power and influence

relations between and among the various stakeholders.

4.Theoretical framework

4.1Ecosystem services

Ecosystem services is a concept based on the idea that human are dependent on services provided

by nature. The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment(2005) categorized four kinds of services :

1) Supporting services, which are services necessary for the functioning of the ecosystem

Nutrient dispersal and recycling by fungi, bacteria, plants and animals. Seed dispersal by plants,

tree and animals, and the production of biomass.

2) Provisioning services, which are products able to obtain from ecosystems. Including sea food,

game, fruits, nuts, crops, spices, water, minerals, pharmaceuticals, biochemicals, industrial

products, timber and bio energy such as hydropower, sun power and biomass fuels.

3) Regulating services, which are benefits obtained from the regulation of ecosystem processes.

These services include, carbon sequestration, climate regulation, waste decomposition,

detoxification, the purification of water and air, crop pollination and pest and disease control

4) Cultural services, which are nonmaterial benefits people obtain through self-reflection,

recreation, spiritual experience. Including cultural, intellectual and spiritual inspiration,

recreational experiences and scientific discovery(Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, 2005)

Without proper functioning ecosystem services humans will not be able to survive. Western

people, like us live in a globalized world and make use of ecosystem services from ecosystem we

do not live in. For example, gold from the Grasberg mine is not sold on the Indonesian market, but

in rich western countries, while the mining activities negatively affects the local ecosystem of

Mimika. By making use of ecosystem services outside of a person’s social-ecological system, the

social and ecological impacts are separated. For the West Papuan people, however this is not

possible, they rely on the ecosystems services provided in the social-ecological system they live in,

depending directly on their ecosystem. The ecosystem services they use to survive are under

pressure of the mining activities of the Grasberg mine.

4.2Empowerment

Empowerment has always been a concept of great social relevance within development

geography. The concept has been demonstrated to be essential for understanding the power

relations amongst individuals, groups of people and even nations as development processes tend

to be limited due to the dominance of a group over another (Rowlands, 1995). Many development

geographers and policy makers have encounter the concept of empowerment through the work of

Caroline Moser (1989) on gender analysis as the concept has an origin with feminist theorists. The

essence of this concept, ‘Power’ has been heavily disputed within the social sciences (Ibid).

Therefore, Rowlands (1995) has been one of the most essential authors to distinguish the

differences in the root-concept of ‘power’ and the different portrayals of empowerment.

A broadly defined empowerment can be seen as the expansion of freedom of choice and action to

shape one’s life, implying control over resources and decisions (Narayan, 2002). Furthermore

within the definition of power three distinctions can be made: ‘Power over’, which is the

enforcement of domination over others (Rowland, 1995) or resisting manipulation; ‘Power to’,

which is creating or improving possibilities for the people empowered; ‘power with’, which is

acting by the empowerment of a group; and ‘Power from within’, which is the enhancement of

self-respect and self-acceptance (Samman & Santos, 2009 cited in Quaedvlieg et al., forthcoming).

These definitions are most commonly used in the comprehension on empowering marginalized

groups within a certain region. Even though the concept of empowerment is well defined, there is

still a debate on the extent a group or individual can be empowered and to what costs. However

there is a general conception on the need to empowerment for marginalized groups and increase

their participation in decision making process.

4.3Greed vs. Grievances

The Political theory used in this report is called Greed versus Grievance. The concept of the theory

questions whether ‘greed’ or ‘grievance’ can be regarded as the most important cause of conflict.

According to the Greed thesis conflicts are far more likely to be caused by economic opportunities

than by grievance (Collier, 2000). The Greed thesis focusses on the owning of natural resources,

because natural resources imply economic opportunities . the link between natural resources and

conflict is well established but jumping to the conclusion that it is evidence of ‘rebel greed’ may be

misleading (Keen, 2012).

The ‘grievance’ thesis is supported by Frances Stewart (2002) who suggests that a major concept

in this complex relationship between Greed and Grievance can be explained by horizontal

inequalities. According to Stewardt (2002) Major root causes include political, economic and social

inequalities; extreme poverty; economic stagnation; poor government services; high

unemployment; environmental degradation; and individual (economic) incentives to fight.

In Timika there is a great deal of conflict and the greed thesis implies that the Grasberg mine

contributes to this conflict. This is because of the natural resources the mine produces, and the

economic benefits who come with it. If economic agendas are driving conflict, then it is likely that

some groups are benefiting from conflict and that these groups therefore have some interest in

initiating and sustaining it.

It is claimed that both greed and grievance play significant roles in the West-Papuan conflict. Even

though the local people wanted to be free for a long time, it is impossible to rule out greed in

combination with the mining activities. The hostility of the local people is mostly based on the

grievance concept, and the hostility of the mining company and the Indonesian military is mostly

based on greed. Both concepts keep interfering with each other, and they probably always will.

5. Results

Following the main theories chosen for this research, several results have been found. First, a

stakeholder analysis will be presented using a power-interest grid in order to identify and

understand the position, relationship and balance between each key stakeholder. Second, an

overview will be presented on the ecological impact of the Grasberg mining activities. Third, the

social impact on the indigenous and local population of the Grasberg mine is being discussed.

Finally, the political situation regarding policy making for the Grasberg mine is going to be

outlined.

5.1 Stakeholder analysis

In order to fully comprehend the relationships between the key stakeholders within this

issue, a power-interest grid method has been chosen. For this analysis three main

stakeholders were chosen according to their direct influences within this issue. Several

independent NGO have not been chosen as key stakeholders due to their indirect influence

to this issue, making the NGO stakeholder depended on one of the main key stakeholders.

Furthermore, this section will continue with an explanation of the interests, power and

influences in relationship with each key stakeholder. Finally, this section will conclude with a

matrix that would briefly summarize the stakeholder analysis.

5.1.1 Indonesian Government

The Indonesian government is an authoritarian government that has been known to be capable to

fully control its influences. This can be seen in the political and military support by the government

towards the Freeport Grasberg mine (Ballard, 2001). Its support and protection towards the mine

goes to the extent that exceeds its monetary value. It has not only gained recognition of its wealth

but also became the first symbol of foreign investments by the government, leading to the

declaration of the Freeport mine to be one of the ten ‘national assets’ (Ibid.). Additionally, being

the 88 percent of total non-oil exports, the Freeport mine has been essential for the provincial

development of Irian Jaya (Ibid.). Therefore, the Indonesian Government has been prepared to

defend its interests in the mine by sending 1800 military troops to protect the mine.

Since the control of the region of Irian Jaya in 1963 by the Indonesian government, there has been

social issue between the New Papua Guineans and Indonesians (Scott & Tebay, 2006). The locals

of the region encountered a large-scale military by Indonesia, resulting in the destruction of small

villages and thus a high migration of Papuans refugees (Ibid.). This military conflict within Papua

guinea was mainly enforced by the national government in order to permanently establish the

Indonesian rule over the region (Ballard, 2001). Additionally, since the rule of the Indonesia on the

Irian Jaya region the military intervention and eradication of Papuans settlements was seen as

necessary as they were perceived as more primitive and less capable for development (Ibid.). Even

though this negative perception of the Indigenous Papuans is decreasing, it is still an influential

factor in the empowerment and acceptance of the indigenous people. This is mostly seen in the

marginalization of the Indigenous people by local land acquisition by the government and lack of

employment possibilities for most of the Papuans (Ballard, 2001).

Being the third largest reserve of copper and the second largest in gold in the world, the Freeport

Grasberg mine has great influence over the region (Ballard, 2001). As it is highly protected by the

Indonesian government, its capabilities for provincial economic development and the perception

as national asset are strong factors that help in the dominance of the Grasberg mine.

Nevertheless, through environmental and social evaluations the mine has dominated both

domestic and international public perception and concern (Ballard, 2001). This occurred due to

the constant denials of human right abuse and exponential increase in mill throughput (Ibid.). The

mill waste is dumped in the Agabogagong River resulting in various environmental impacts.

Additionally, the relocation of the indigenous people of the region has mostly done by military

force as no exact payment is given (Ibid.). There has also been several declarations of the local

population that the Grasberg mine has taken advantage of their strong position and lack of

information to forward their development plans (Ballard, 2001).

5.1.3 Indigenous people

The Indigenous People encountered within this issue are mostly the Amungme and the Kamoro

people (Scott & Tebay, 2006). Historically, the territory of these indigenous people was situated

exactly on the location were the mine is currently situated (Ibid.). Since it permanent

establishment in 1967 the indigenous people, specifically the Amungme, have been strongly

against the establishment and expansion of the mine (Ballard, 2001). This has mostly to do with

the overlapping and negligence of the existing indigenous territories in the area. Even though the

Amungme people have a territorial land ownership, most of this territory is not formally

recognized by the government (Ibid.). Furthermore, payments by the mine have been mostly done

through tobacco and goods in the exchange of land or agreements. However, these types of

transactions were not understood by the indigenous people due to the lack of transparency and

available information (Ballard, 2001). Similarly, many of the agreements were/are signed in the

presence of military forces, which are highly intimidating for the indigenous people due to

historical conflict (the military actions of Indonesia around 1963) (Ibid.).

5.1.4 Between stakeholders

In order to clarify the position of each key stakeholder a table is made illustrating schematically

the perspective of each stakeholder towards the other participating stakeholder. This can be seen

in table 1. Starting from the most powerful to the weakest actor, it can be seen that the

perspective of the Indonesian Government in relation with the Freeport Grasberg mine is

economically and politically very positive (Scott & Tebay, 2006). Similarly, the perception of the

Freeport Grasberg mine in relation with the Indonesian Government is very positive as it improves

the national and provincial economic development (Ballard, 2001). In contrast, the Indigenous

people’s perspective in relation with the Indonesian Government and the Freeport Grasberg mine

is fairly negative. This has to do with the perspective of the Government and the Grasberg mine

for not recognizing the indigenous land rights, human rights, the lack of free, prior and informed

consent and lack of transparency in development plans (Ballard, 2001).

Furthermore, the power and interest relations between the stakeholders is presented in table 2.

In table 2 it can be seen that the Indonesian Government, being an authoritarian government, it

has the highest interest and highest power within this issue. This has mostly to do with the

political and economic importance of the Grasberg mine to the national government. The Freeport

Grasberg mine on the other hand has high power of influence within this issue, but compared to

the national government is has a lower level of interest. This has to do with the single objective of

the mine to produce more capital. Finally, the indigenous people have the lowest power and

lowest interest as they are the most impacted by the interest of the other stakeholders and have

no capacity for influence the direction of development of this issue.

Main

perspective and

relations

between the key

stakeholders

Indonesian

Government

Freeport Grasberg mine

Indigenous

people

(Amungme & Kamoro)

Indonesian

Government

Government

very

protective

and

authoritarian

Largest

corporate

taxpayer in Indonesia and

increases

provincial

development

No

free,

prior

and

informed consent form.

Specifically

for

the

placement

and

development of the region.

Freeport Grasberg

mine

The mine is seen as

one of the biggest

national assets

Third largest reserve of

copper

and

second

largest reserve of gold in

the world. Exponential

increase

in

mill

throughput.

Territorial land ownership

of the indigenous people

does not comply with the

establishment of the mine.

Lack of transparency in

developing plans.

Indigenous people

(Amungme

&

Kamoro)

Land acquisition and

protection

from

military to protect

the

mine

against

protests over land

grabbing

Denials of human right

abuse.

Environmental

and human right issues

have

dominated

both

domestic

and

international

public

perception on mining.

Creation of the Organisasi

Papua

Merdeka

(OPM)

rebel/resistance

movement.

Voluntary

and/or

economic

immigrants are increasing

in the region.

Table 1: Relations between key stakeholders

Interest

High

Low

Power

High

​

Indonesian

Government

​

Lo

w

Power

Low

​

Freeport

Grasberg mine

Indigenous People

Low

5.2 Analysis of theories

All three theories are highly applicable on the case in Timika. There is a complex conflict as a result

of the mining activities. This is because the different interests of different actors. Most interest is

focused on the ecosystem services provided by the Grasberg mine and the environment around it.

The local people benefit especially from the Provisioning services, which are products able to

obtain from ecosystems and the Cultural services. PT Freeport benefits also from the Provisioning

services but by using them in a none sustainable way it affects all the other ecosystem services.

Whether the actors benefit from the ecosystems is partly depending on the resilience and the

purposes. When actors are only driven by greed it is highly presumable that the resilience

becomes second place and that the environment suffers from the activities from those actors. This

is the case in Timika, the mining activities deteriorate the ecosystem services. To prevent or turn

this it is important to have different actors with different interests all possessing power. The

power relations in Timika are not convenient to help the ecosystem services to survive. At the

moment the most of the empowerment is ‘Power over’, which is the enforcement of domination

over others (Rowland, 1995) or resisting manipulation. In Timika it is PT Freeport who has this

power with the help of the Indonesian military over the local people. It is necessary to change

these power relations.

5.3 Ecological impact of the Grasberg mining activities

The social ecological system around Timika West Papua is being disturbed heavily by the mining

activities at the Grasberg mine, exploited by Freeport Mcmoran. The mining activities lead to daily

dump of 110.000 tons of tailings in the Aikwa river, which ends in the Arafura sea (Rifia-Hassan,

2009). These tailings contain large concentrations of dissolved solids, over 85.000 ha of offshore

and 35.000 ha of onshore land has been heavily polluted by these tailings. According to Indonesian

environmental law, Freeport’s waste water is not to exceed 400 milligrams of dissolved solids per

liter. In 2004 waste water contained 37.500 milligrams, including high concentrations of mercury,

dissolved solids per liter when the river entered the lowlands and 7.500 as the river entered the

Arafura sea (Brunskill,2004). Not only toxicity threatens the ecosystem, the physical destruction of

the forest, freshwater, fishing and hunting grounds for locals have disappeared (Rifia-Hassan,

2009).

Figure 3: Daily throughput in 1000x tons per day. (Paull,2006)

Due to the mining activities landslides occurred on the steep slope of the 4500 meter high

Grasberg mountain (Nakagawa,2008). The resilience of an ecosystem cannot be measured

directly, nor can critical thresholds be known in advance. It is known however that ecosystem do

have thresholds, when these are crossed the ecosystem might not be able to return to its original

state, even if the mining activities will have ended. Chapin et al. (2000) argues that current

extinctions are 100-1000 times higher than in pre-human ages. Biodiversity is important in species

interaction, species depend on each other. Experiments have shown that changes in biodiversity

may have impact on the functioning of the entire ecosystem and the services provided by an

ecosystem (Chapin, 2000). Several fish species have already gone extinct in the Ajkwa river in

West Papua, which might lead to drastic changes in the ecosystem function.

Figure 4: Landsat Photo of Ajkwa river system in 4 years. Deposited tailings in pink and waterlogged tailings in blue, cleared forest in light green, (Paull, 2006)

The Aghawagon – Otomona – Ajkwa River system was of immense value to several indigenous

tribes such as the highlands Amungme and lowland Kamoro peoples. Currently there are 35%

fewer fish and aquatic species found in the Ajkwa river, compared to reference sites. Also the

Ajkwa estuary near the Arafura sea has 40-70% fewer families of bottom dwelling species, than

reference sites(wahli,2006). As it is expected high copper and other dissolved solids might not lead

to a direct decrease in species and health, however as metals accumulate in organisms along the

food chain negative effects will be noticed. Measuring the resilience of the West Papuan rainforest

is difficult, it is known however that several freshwater fish species have disappeared from the

Ajkwa river.

Due to flooding’s of the Ajkwa river it is estimated that over 230 square kilometers of dense

tropical rainforest has disappeared until 2006 (Rafai-Hassan,2009). The mine wastes 53.000 tons

of copper annually which is discharged in acid rock drainage and tailings in the rivers systems, this

is a million times higher than achievable in the mining industry. Around 1300 million tons of waste

rock has been dumped in areas around the Grasberg mine from 1980 until 2003. This waste rock

has the potential to become as acid as ph 3, causing contaminated ground water and erosion.

Landslides have killed dozens of indigenous Amungme people. Plants growing of soil

contaminated with tailings have accumulated significantly higher concentrations of copper, zinc,

selenium and arsenic and dissolved copper parts limit respiration in fish gills (Wahli,2006)

Wahli’s Plant and Wildlife Risk Assessment (2006) showed that all plant species growing in

Freeport’s mine tailings soil, compared to uncontaminated accumulate one or more heavy metals.

Leading to an increased health risk for all wildlife foraging directly from leaves, seeds fruits and

nectar. Fish eating birds, large fruit eating birds, and invertebrate eating birds have an increased

health risk due to the persistent, toxic and bioaccumulative metals. Several groups of mammals

such as bats, cuscus, flying fox and pigs are at high risk as a result of exposure and

bioaccumulation of heavy metals (Wahli,2006). It is expected that soil fertility will be reduced,

especially in a rainforest soil with a rapid nutrient cycle, due to a reduction in soil biota such as:

fungi, bacteria and protozoa and invertebrates.

5.4 Social impact on the indigenous and local population of the Grasberg mine

The major success of the company has had various effects, not only on the Indonesian

government and the local government, but also to the people living near the mine (Heidbüchel,

2007). The development of the mine encouraged an increase in migration, to the mining region,

by mainly indigenous people (of the region), immigrants from other parts of Indonesia and

Immigrants outside Indonesia (Ballard, 2001). This caused the population of various towns that are

essential to the mine, such as the town of Timika, to dramatically increase its population in the last

40 years (Soares, 2004). The rapid growth in population and the accumulation of more than 252

different ethnic groups in the region (Scott & Tebay, 2005), have resulted in mayor social issues for

the relatively newly formed local government. These are: sovereignty of the state and social

division within Timika, creating various complex conflicts between the Freeport’s Grasberg mine

and population of Timika (Soares, 2004). The complexity of this social conflict is also caused due to

the differences in power relations amongst the people. This has not only to do with social classes

but also culturally ethnic differences are strongly highlighted with the people that may benefit

from the Freeport’s Grasberg mine (Indonesian immigrants) to the group of people that are mostly

affected by the mine (indigenous people. This conflict in the development of the mine and the

region can be clearly seen in the town of Timika.

The impacts of the development of the Freeport’s Grasberg mine on the society of Timika have

been mostly felled by the indigenous people that have an origin in that region (Heidbüchel, 2007).

The Amungme and Kamoro people originally lived on the same territory were the mine is currently

situated. Since the placement of the Grasberg mine, these indigenous populations have been

removed from their land, their human rights violated and their integrity has been impacted by the

national government (Soares, 2004). The Kamoro people that live in Timika are marginalized by

the Indonesian immigrants and the Kamoro that live outside Timika are neglected by the

government (Ibid.). This can be seen in the people that have access to the resources given by the

Grasberg mine. Employment is given to only Indonesian and international immigrants brought in

by the government (Scott & Tebay, 2005). Indigenous people are not allowed to work in the

Grasberg mine as it is thought that they lack the knowledge to do so (Ibid.).These power relations

amongst the various ethnicities are culturally defined as it is strongly connected with

post-colonialism and the occupation of Indonesia (Soares, 2004). However, further marginalization

of the indigenous people can be seen due to the lack of organizational capacity by the various

indigenous groups.

Therefore, it is important to construct a platform for the Amungme and Kamoro people in order to

encourage participation and structuring their self-determined development plan. Increasing

participation and enabling organization within the Timika population, good governance can be

reached by creating platforms stimulating communication and transparency with all existing

actors (Doornbos, 2001). In this way the indigenous people can be empowered and are able to

contribute to the development of Timika. The establishment of a platform would enable the

national and regional governments to communicate with local and indigenous people and vice

versa. This would allowed better transparency, trust and understanding between actors to

comprehend ecological issues regarding the mind and develop multi-level development plans to

improve further living conditions.

5.5 Political situation regarding policy making for the Grasberg mine

The political situation in West-Papua can be described as troubled. West Papua is officially a

province of Indonesia, yet there is a large independence movement of indigenous Papuans. The

western half of the island of New Guinea has been a province of the Republic of Indonesia since

1969. Formerly the Dutch territory of Netherlands New Guinea, administrative responsibility was

transferred to Indonesia in 1963. One of the most important political conflicts in West-Papua is

the independence movement of indigenous Papuans who try to become independent from

Indonesia. This movement is not tolerated by the national government of Indonesia and

demonstrators are getting violated in their rights, sentenced to jail without a honest trial and

punished in cruel ways (Heidbüchel,2007).

This research is focused on a village near the mine named Timika. There are several actors

concerned in this area regarding the policy making for the Grasberg mine and the impacts the

mining activities cause. The indigenous Papuans are the first to experience the impacts caused by

the Grasberg mine. As explained in the previous chapters the mine has a huge impact on the lives

of the local people who face ecological and social injustice as a result. A road to the coast was

constructed, vegetation surrounding the settlement of Timika was cleared, and the swampland

village became a base for mining operations. The main actor causing these impacts is PT Freeport

Indonesia, the main company regarding the mining activities. As a result of the mining Freeport

used 24,700 acres of mines in West-Papua. 14,000 people use huge trucks and excavating

machines to hollow out mountains dumping the waste in rivers toxicating the environment. With

the transfer to Indonesian control, Papuan resistance to social injustice was brought face to face

with a new political authority: the Indonesian armed forces. They became a contributing factor in

the policy making because of their power used by PT Freeport Indonesia. One last actor is the

Organisasi Papua Merdeka (OPM), also known as the Free Papua Movement. This organization

fights for the rights of indigenous Papuans and is known as the organization behind the

independence movement. They are not that successful because of their lack of an organizational

base and therefore a lack of power in this area.

The main problem is the different interests in the area around Timika. Local people mostly just

want to live their lives and use the natural resources West-Papua has. PT Freeport Indonesia also

wants to use the natural resources but in a less sustainable way. They want to export the gold and

copper, while polluting the environment around the mine. Their interests are shared with the

Indonesian military who have an extra interest in the mine because they get paid money by

Freeport to keep the indigenous Papuans quiet.

This leads to the next problem; absence of an organizational base for indigenous Papuans to

create a strong movement against the (human-rights violating) Indonesian military. There is a

movement, the Organisasi Papua Merdeka , but this movement in not nearly strong enough to

make a difference. This is a very important problem. There is a huge difference in power between

the actors around Timika. As a result not all the parties can play a part in the decision-making. This

problem is hard to solve because all of the different tribes in West-Papua and around Timika.

Another problem may be that the motivation of some actors is driven by greed. Although it is not

possible to confirm the greed-thesis there are several examples who indicate this thesis. Greed is a

strong motivation, usually combined with violating actions, and hard to change.

6. Discussion

6.1 Policy advice for a sustainable exploitation of the Grasberg mine

How can mitigate the negative impact of the Grasberg mining activities on the socio-ecological

system of the Mimika region, Indonesia?

Given the current political and economic conditions and the $40 billion gold reserve in the mine it

is highly unlikely that the mining activities itself will reduce in the coming years or even decades

(Rifai-Hasan,2006). Therefore other ways of mitigating the impact of the mining activities must be

investigated. Due to the complicated political context the rights and needs of the indigenous must

be taken into serious account. Although mining will continue the negative impact on the

socio-ecosystem can be mitigated.

We start with giving some advice to reduce the ecological impact. Almost all mines worldwide use

a system to prevent tailings to polluted the aquatic system, Freeport however has dug some

levees, the area between these levees 230 km2, is expected to fill up with tailings. Although

landslides and earthquakes might complicate the building of a dam, the current release rate of

tailings in the ecosystem is not sustainable (Wahli,2006). Tailings could also be transported by

pipelines, instead of the current situation, where natural waterways are used. Those pipelines will

also reduce the pollution of the ecosystem.

There are a lot of possibilities to reduce pollution, but those possibilities need to be studied more

to make the technologies applicable to the Grasberg mine, therefore, research is a crucial way to

create solutions. For example, there is research that shows that it is technically possible to create

1 million times less copper pollution released as acid rock drainage (Wahli,2006), Freeport must

implement new technologies to reduce to amount of tailings and waste rock.

If the resilience of Mimika's ecosystem is negatively affected for a longer period, the chance of a

character change or a tipping point of the ecosystem is increasing, leading to a reduced

functioning ecosystem (Walker,2004). It is therefore crucial to get insight in the potential long

term impact if the mining activities continue at the current way. The impact on socio-ecosystem

and its services for both the Kamoro and Amungme tribes must be investigated. This solution also

need some research but it is important that this research must be conducted by an independent

party, which has no ties with both national government and Freeport Rio-Tinto.

It is estimated the Grasberg mine will be in production until at least 2040(Wahli,2006), even after

this period the mine could remain to be devastating to the ecosystem. For this reason and the

character change of the ecosystem it is important that the cost and possibilities of cleaning up the

current polluting must be examined.

The current 1% investment fund has a high focus on the development of the city of Timika, while

the Amungme and Kamoro hardly benefit from this fund. Some tribe members however refuse

any money offered through this fund (Abigal,2001). The money from this fund, could be spend on

the long term protection on the ecosystem services, which are threatened by the leaching of

copper and acid water from waste rock, which will continue to flow to the ground water for

decades, if no proper measurements are taken. The long term protection of the ecosystem

services is necessary in order to be able to regain a healthy socio-ecosystem.

Although there is an investment fund for the development of the city Timika, there is no money

for the long term production. Therefore it is needed to create a fund to cover the cost of the

closure and cleaning of the mine.

To reduce the ecological impact it is necessary to have parties who want to invest in those

solutions. Although this paper is not meant to take a political stand, it is of crucial importance the

indigenous tribes and all of West Papuans get more involved in decision and policy making

regarding to the land use of West Papua. Therefore local tribes might have to form a platform or

organization, recognized by the Indonesian national government, which will represent the rights

and needs of the indigenous people of West Papua. In that way they can put forward their

interests and with a base they obtain more power to realize their interests. This solution is hard to

accomplice because of all the different tribes. Nevertheless it is an important one, and if it works it

can create a shift in power, and therefore make a huge difference. In that way, local people can

have an influence in both their human rights and to make a change in the way there ecosystem

gets polluted

Another possible solution is to create a third party without any interest in neither the mine nor

the natural resources and thereby impartial in the Timika case. This party can make decisions

about the conflicts with the main goal to get the most actors satisfied. This solution is called

participatory planning and proven to be successful in cases with corresponding aspects.

As explained before, this party can also do important research with independent results about the

impact of the Grasberg mine on the ecosystems.

6.2 Further work

It can be argued that the objective of this research to empower indigenous population by

encouraging a reorganization of their communities, changing the current political system and

ecological protection, could be ethically not viable. Policy advice from outsiders can be seen as not

ethical as it does not follow the current state of the region.

As this research is mostly a literature research, it is to some extent restricted to the literature that

was available. Even though, much of the literature comes from independent sources, more

information is needed in order to fully understand the cultural, social, political, economic and

ecological complexity within this specific conflict. We tried to get into contact with the authors of

the literature to get more insight in their findings, unfortunately those authors were not as helpful

as we hoped. We also tried to get into contact with local and/or national actors to have a view on

an ‘inside’ perspective of the conflict. This also did not work out because a lot of those actors hide

from the government and are therefore hard to find. If they can be found for further research,

they might become an important source for new insights and information.

7. Conclusion

The purpose of this study is to find an answer to the following question;

“How can the negative impact of the Grasberg mining activities on the socio-ecosystem of the

Mimika region, Indonesia be mitigated?”

This answer is formed into a policy advice what can be found in the discussion.

​

Throughout this

research it can be seen that the most common term regarding the main source of the

conflict is ‘Organization’. Although a lot of the negative impact of the mining activities are

ecologically based, due to the lack of organization among stakeholders the impact of the

Grasberg mine is enhanced at each level. The

​

Social-ecological system links systems of people

and nature, which sees humans as part of nature,

in that way the social ecological system

becomes crucial. In order to mitigate this impact and move towards a more sustainable

manner, structural organization is essential and will create possibilities for both ecological

and social problems.

8. References

● Abigail

_​

, A., 2001

_​

_​

The Amungme, Kamoro & Freeport: How Indigenous Papuans Have

Resisted the World's Largest Gold and Copper Mine

​

CSQ Issue:

​

25.1

​

Mining Indigenous

lands

●

_{Anderies, J. M., Janssen, M. A., & Ostrom, E. (2004). A framework to analyze the}

robustness of social-ecological systems from an institutional perspective.

_​

Ecology and

Society

​

,

_​

9

​

(1), 18.

● Brunskill, G. J., Zagorskis, I., Pfitzner, J., & Ellison, J. (2004). Sediment and trace element

depositional history from the Ajkwa River estuarine mangroves of Irian Jaya (West Papua),

Indonesia.

_​

Continental Shelf Research

​

,

_​

24

​

(19), 2535-2551.

●

_{Chapin III, F. S., Zavaleta, E. S., Eviner, V. T., Naylor, R. L., Vitousek, P. M., Reynolds, H. L., &}

Díaz, S. (2000). Consequences of changing biodiversity.

​

Nature

​

,

​

405

​

(6783), 234-242.

● Daily, G. C. (Ed.). (1997). Nature's services: societal dependence on natural ecosystems.

Island Press

​

.

●

_{Gunderson, L. H. (2000). Ecological resilience--in theory and application.}

_​

_{Annual review of}

ecology and systematics

​

, 425-439.

● Heidbüchel, E. (2007).

_​

The west papua conflict in indonesia: Actos [ie actors], issues and

approaches (pp28-51),

​

Wettenberg: Johannes Herrmann Verlag.

●

Holling, C. S. (1973). Resilience and stability of ecological systems.

_​

Annual review of

ecology and systematics

​

,

_​

4

​

, 1-23.

●

Kirsch, S. (2002). Rumour and other narratives of political violence in West Papua.

_​

Critique

of Anthropology

​

,

_​

22

​

(1), 53-79.

●

Kirsch, S. (2010). Ethnographic representation and the politics of violence in West Papua.

Critique of Anthropology​

,

​

30​

(1), 3-22.

●

Martinez-Alier, J. (2001). Mining conflicts, environmental justice, and valuation.

_​

Journal of

Hazardous Materials

​

,

​

86

​

(1), 153-170.

● Millenium Ecosystem Assessment(MA),2005. Ecosystems and Human Well-Being:

Synthesis. Island Press, Washington.

● Nakagawa, J. (2008). Freeport’s Grasberg/Ertsberg Mine in West Papua, Indonesia.

_​

Human

Resources Development Working Group Capacity Building Network December 2008

​

, 73.

●

_{Pattiselanno, F. (2004, April). Wildlife utilization and food security in West Papua,}

Indonesia. In

​

SEARCA Agriculture and Development Seminar Series, SEARCA Los Baños

​

(Vol.

13).

●

_{Paull, D., Banks, G., Ballard, C., & Gillieson, D. (2006). Monitoring the environmental}

impact of mining in remote locations through remotely sensed data.

​

Geocarto

International

​

,

​

21

​

(1), 33-42.

●

_{Redman, C. L., Grove, J. M., & Kuby, L. H. (2004). Integrating social science into the}

long-term ecological research (LTER) network: social dimensions of ecological change and

ecological dimensions of social change.

_​

Ecosystems

​

,

_​

7

​

(2), 161-171.

● Rifai-Hasan, P. A. (2009). Development, power, and the mining industry in Papua: A study

of freeport Indonesia.

_​

Journal of Business Ethics

​

,

_​

89

​

(2), 129-143.

●

Scott, C., & Tebay, N. (2005). The West Papua conflict and its consequences for the Island

of New Guinea: Root causes and the campaign for Papua, land of peace.

_​

The round table

​

,

94

​

(382), 599-612.

●

Soares, A. D. J. (2004). The impact of corporate strategy on community dynamics: a case

study of the Freeport Mining Company in West Papua, Indonesia.

​

International Journal on

Minority and Group Rights

​

,

​

11

​

(1), 115-157.

● Stockholm Resilience Dictionary, 2013, 04-12-2013 retrieved from

http://www.stockholmresilience.org/21/research/what-is-resilience/resilience-dictionary.

html

● Title photo ,2013 04-12-13 retrieved from:

http://www.almrsal.com/post/38105/grasberg-mine-indonesia-2-astronaut-photo

●

Van den Broek, T., & Szalay, A. (2001). Raising the Morning Star: six months in the

developing independence movement in West Papua.

_​

Journal of Pacific History

​

,

_​

36

​

(1),

77-92.

●

Van Wilgen, B. W., Cowling, R. M., & Burgers, C. J. (1996). Valuation of ecosystem services.

BioScience

​

,

_​

46

​

(3), 184-189.

● Wahli, Indonesian Forum for Environment.(2006) The Environmental Impacts of

Freeport-Rio Tinto’s Copper and Gold Mining Operation in Papua, Jakarta.

●

Walker, B., Holling, C. S., Carpenter, S. R., & Kinzig, A. (2004). Resilience, adaptability and

transformability in social--ecological systems.

​

Ecology and society

​

,

​

9

​

(2), 5.