Is PNG’s inability to learn smothering our young democracy?
PNG needs to stop the talk & start acting to heighten security

Why corporate social responsibility fails to promote peace in PNG

Kylie McKennaKYLIE McKENNA | Dev Policy Blog | Extract

Read the full article here

SYDNEY - Papua New Guinea has long been a site of analysis for exploring the links between natural resources and conflict, having been used as an example in prominent studies of the natural resource curse and as a source of learning in international debates on corporate social responsibility (CSR).

The forced closure of the Panguna mine in Bougainville in 1989 due to conflict was a major catalyst for the adoption of CSR in PNG.

Despite this 28-year history, company-community conflict remains a significant and ongoing challenge across the country.

A possible explanation is that CSR counterintuitively fosters discontent due to a predominant focus on the distribution of material benefits.

While there is no universal definition of CSR, it has become recognisable shorthand for the onus on business to consider the social and environmental impacts of their activities.

CSR generally manifests as corporate commitments in the form of socio-economic development projects, community–business partnerships, social and environmental impact assessments, the adoption of discretionary codes of conduct, and can also incorporate formal agreements between states and communities.

Contemporary examples of CSR initiatives in PNG include: ExxonMobil’s half yearly environmental and social reports; Newcrest’s AUD$95.8m paid in community expenditure in 2015; and Barrick Gold’s use of the United Nations’ ‘Protect, Respect and Remedy’ framework to guide its response to human rights abuse at the Porgera gold mine.

Over the past decade, the expectations of extractive companies have increasingly widened to encompass conflict prevention and peace building.

This stems from mounting evidence of a correlation between natural resources and armed conflict, such the United Nations estimate that at least 40% of intrastate conflicts globally over the past 60 years have been linked to natural resources.

This has resulted in increased dialogue between business leaders and policymakers on business for peace, as well as avenues to align CSR strategies with the Sustainable Development Goals.

Alongside these discussions, attempts are being made to identify incentives for business to reduce violence, with the primary focus on minimising the costs of company-community conflict.

For extractive companies operating in PNG, two major costs are those caused by destruction of property and loss of productivity due to delay. Actions that interfere with production are not uncommon in PNG.

For example, in August 2014 an attack by “armed villagers” spurred by concerns about hiring practices at the Ramu nickel mine injured five Chinese workers and stopped production for three days.

While in June 2015, daily operations at the Lihir gold mine were disrupted through the placement of taboo ginger plants (gorgors) by landowners at the mine pit and other sites as a “traditional signal they want to hold discussions with the company”.

Community action can also result in the complete loss of a company’s license to operate, as demonstrated in the closure of the Panguna mine in Bougainville.

One concern for future peace and security at extractive sites in PNG is that community interference with production is an effective means to get a response from companies. This includes for example, a higher level of interest in the social impacts of extractive projects following the Bougainville crisis.

It can also influence the calculation and distribution of formal landowner compensation payments based on who has the capacity to shut down operations. The assumption is that company-community conflict can be managed, particularly through material benefits.

This assumption however, may be misguided. Natural resources have undoubtedly produced positive benefits for communities in PNG such as employment, business spin-offs, roads, hospitals and training. Yet as Filer and Macintyre argue, these benefits have largely been “off-set by a range of economic, social, political, and environmental risks and costs”.

This frustration was expressed recently in landowner anger towards operator of the PNG LNG project, ExxonMobil, for constructing a hospital while not also providing beds or staff. Poor CSR results are also evident in the long-term.

A critique of CSR at the Ok Tedi mine for example, reports on “claims made by participants that, after nearly 20 years of mine operation, they had little to show in terms of socio-economic progress and development”.


Kylie McKenna is research principal at the Institute for Sustainable Futures at the University of Technology Sydney. She is the author of ‘Corporate Social Responsibility and Natural Resource Conflict’ (2016), which identifies limitations in the range of justice claims CSR has been designed to redress


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Philip Kai Morre

Corporate Social Responsibility as discussed by Kylie McKenna has to be adapted because this will be one of the workable solutions in addressing landowner issues in PNG where mining is operating.

Big transnational companies and the government must address this burning issue quickly where landowners are integral part of mining development.

Companies should have social and environmental plans to support sustainable development. Any companies who proceed without landowner input are doomed to fail so mining companies have to learn to listen to landowners grievances to sustain their operation.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)