Exploitation of resources in Isaan needs PUBLIC INPUT
JOHN DRAPER, PEERASIT KAMNUANSILPA
SPECIAL TO THE NATION July 14, 2015 1:00 am
SPECIAL TO THE NATION July 14, 2015 1:00 am
AN UNDERLYING CAUSE OF THE ARRESTS OF THE 14 DAO DIN STUDENTS IS THEIR SUPPORT FOR VILLAGERS IN THE NORTHEAST OVER THE EXPLOITATION OF LOCAL NATURAL RICHES
In a charged atmosphere in which government officials have criticised politicians, red shirts, NGOs, US agencies and even parents for being invisible ""puppet masters"", it is worth considering one underlying cause of the arrests of the 14 New Democracy Movement students - a cause which despite facing ongoing charges, they are still espousing. This is the Dao Din Group's support for villagers in the Northeast regarding natural resources exploitation.
The stand-off has been compounded by complaints over the quality of Environmental Health Impact Assessments (EHIAs), including the National Human Rights Commission severely criticising exploration by Apico, a US-registered company, of the Dongmoon oil field in Khon Kaen. This stance was ignored by the military, which has deployed the state security apparatus to secure drilling sites amid sometimes violent confrontations. And recently, the EHIA for the Asia Pacific Potash Corp (APPC) project in Udon Thani has also been questioned.
Despite the danger, Northeast-based community organisations like the New Isaan Group have given their support to local villagers thrust into confrontations with the state over both ""black gold"" as well as actual gold mining in the case of Tungkum Limited Company in Loei. Meanwhile the Ban Na Mun-Dun Sat Group has resisted petroleum exploration in Kalasin.
The utilisation of the Northeast's resources has always been sensitive and is linked to a national resource-exploitation system with overtones of neo-colonialism and based on resource flows to Bangkok. Salt mining in Mahasarakham caused a major incident in 1971 when the Siew River watershed was contaminated. This resulted in a decade-long occasionally violent conflict between government officials and private companies, and the villagers on whose land nothing could grow, until General Prem Tinsulanonda banned the area's salt industry in 1980. However, it returned, and only when villages in Mahasarakham, Roi Et and Si Sa Ket protested together in 1990 did the government definitively prohibit high-risk salt production.
The state has also permitted exploration and drilling for potash minerals in the region since 1973. For example, Prime Minister General Prayut Chan-o-cha in February of this year granted a concession to Asean Potash Mining Public Co (APMC), based on a July 2014 EHIA, to operate a potash mine in Chaiyaphum, delayed for years due to economic infeasibility and protests.
An illustrative high-profile project linked to regional growth via the Asean Industrial Project, the APMC mine can be worked for 25 years and could create 1,000 jobs, but 50 million cubic metres of saline wastewater will also be produced. Another contentious potash mining development is the APPC Udon Thani project. In addition to possible contamination from tailings ponds, both salt and potash mining cause subsidence.
The present drilling for petroleum deposits should be seen in this wider historical context of fear over exploration, heavy-handed government support including the overriding of EHIAs, poor monitoring, and the occasional disaster, all leading to village-based protests. This problem is not unique to the Northeast, and the case of lead poisoning in Klity Creek in Kanchanaburi is especially tragic given the effect on children's cognitive development. In addition, allegations of contaminated water have been levelled against Akara Resources' gold mine in Phichit.
Some companies firmly attempt to comply with concepts of sustainable development and are welcomed by villagers due to the possibility of jobs or compensation. Though the Shinawatra governments themselves sometimes ran roughshod over villagers' rights, by the 2000s, there were increasing expectations that rural communities would be involved in decision-making. As such, in Phichit, Akara Resources offered to donate Bt37 million per year to 27 villages to provide education, microfinance and infrastructure development, though this has been criticised for going through traditional patriarchal channels.
Nevertheless, the anxiety over pollution is strong due to historical and cultural power differences between Bangkok and the Northeast, and in particular a fear of losing one's livelihood - the land people plough for their rice. And, academic experts and companies like Akara all admit that dust, contaminated water (including groundwater), noise, emissions and toxic metals are real environmental concerns.
The main problem, therefore, is creating mutual trust by ensuring that the EHIA process is valid, the monitoring of emissions is scientific, and fines and enforcement are evidence-based. However, at present, the normal channels for EHIAs are compromised, as under military-backed governments there is an even greater likelihood of undue influence in order to secure favourable EHIA results.
Furthermore, the EHIA process often involves academics, either as owners of, or in partnership with, consulting companies. Thus many villagers' perception is that the impartiality of universities, including Northeastern institutions, has been compromised. This works both ways and was evident last month when a lecturer at Mahasarakham University was summonsed for supporting the environmental protection group in Kalasin. Also, the state is often a partner in mining companies, as in APMC and APPC, thereby creating a conflict of interest.
One solution is to involve external consortiums to assist with overseeing the EHIAs, compensation packages, the monitoring and controlling of emissions during project lifetimes, and subsequent distribution of royalties. Such organisations could involve independent companies but also need to include foreign universities that can partner with Thai universities and therefore rebuild their objectivity.
Given that Thai hyper-nationalists are voicing accusations of ""interference"" against the US, the EU and even the UN, Thailand unfortunately risks isolation and alienating its traditional development partners. Sourcing unbiased sustainable pathways for natural resource management from consortiums led by organisations from historically neutral countries like Switzerland may, however, succeed in rebuilding confidence.
Finally, the neo-colonial aspect of the resource-exploitation system needs to be recognised in order to address the valid concerns of Northeasterners over allocation of mining royalties. Given that the quality of education in the Northeast is the worst in the country, the obvious solution is a regional wealth fund like the Middle Eastern sovereign wealth funds. This would encourage the state and the Northeast to compromise and give Northeasterners a stake in, and partial control over, their own natural resources, one basic principle of the Dao Din Group.
"
The stand-off has been compounded by complaints over the quality of Environmental Health Impact Assessments (EHIAs), including the National Human Rights Commission severely criticising exploration by Apico, a US-registered company, of the Dongmoon oil field in Khon Kaen. This stance was ignored by the military, which has deployed the state security apparatus to secure drilling sites amid sometimes violent confrontations. And recently, the EHIA for the Asia Pacific Potash Corp (APPC) project in Udon Thani has also been questioned.
Despite the danger, Northeast-based community organisations like the New Isaan Group have given their support to local villagers thrust into confrontations with the state over both ""black gold"" as well as actual gold mining in the case of Tungkum Limited Company in Loei. Meanwhile the Ban Na Mun-Dun Sat Group has resisted petroleum exploration in Kalasin.
The utilisation of the Northeast's resources has always been sensitive and is linked to a national resource-exploitation system with overtones of neo-colonialism and based on resource flows to Bangkok. Salt mining in Mahasarakham caused a major incident in 1971 when the Siew River watershed was contaminated. This resulted in a decade-long occasionally violent conflict between government officials and private companies, and the villagers on whose land nothing could grow, until General Prem Tinsulanonda banned the area's salt industry in 1980. However, it returned, and only when villages in Mahasarakham, Roi Et and Si Sa Ket protested together in 1990 did the government definitively prohibit high-risk salt production.
The state has also permitted exploration and drilling for potash minerals in the region since 1973. For example, Prime Minister General Prayut Chan-o-cha in February of this year granted a concession to Asean Potash Mining Public Co (APMC), based on a July 2014 EHIA, to operate a potash mine in Chaiyaphum, delayed for years due to economic infeasibility and protests.
An illustrative high-profile project linked to regional growth via the Asean Industrial Project, the APMC mine can be worked for 25 years and could create 1,000 jobs, but 50 million cubic metres of saline wastewater will also be produced. Another contentious potash mining development is the APPC Udon Thani project. In addition to possible contamination from tailings ponds, both salt and potash mining cause subsidence.
The present drilling for petroleum deposits should be seen in this wider historical context of fear over exploration, heavy-handed government support including the overriding of EHIAs, poor monitoring, and the occasional disaster, all leading to village-based protests. This problem is not unique to the Northeast, and the case of lead poisoning in Klity Creek in Kanchanaburi is especially tragic given the effect on children's cognitive development. In addition, allegations of contaminated water have been levelled against Akara Resources' gold mine in Phichit.
Some companies firmly attempt to comply with concepts of sustainable development and are welcomed by villagers due to the possibility of jobs or compensation. Though the Shinawatra governments themselves sometimes ran roughshod over villagers' rights, by the 2000s, there were increasing expectations that rural communities would be involved in decision-making. As such, in Phichit, Akara Resources offered to donate Bt37 million per year to 27 villages to provide education, microfinance and infrastructure development, though this has been criticised for going through traditional patriarchal channels.
Nevertheless, the anxiety over pollution is strong due to historical and cultural power differences between Bangkok and the Northeast, and in particular a fear of losing one's livelihood - the land people plough for their rice. And, academic experts and companies like Akara all admit that dust, contaminated water (including groundwater), noise, emissions and toxic metals are real environmental concerns.
The main problem, therefore, is creating mutual trust by ensuring that the EHIA process is valid, the monitoring of emissions is scientific, and fines and enforcement are evidence-based. However, at present, the normal channels for EHIAs are compromised, as under military-backed governments there is an even greater likelihood of undue influence in order to secure favourable EHIA results.
Furthermore, the EHIA process often involves academics, either as owners of, or in partnership with, consulting companies. Thus many villagers' perception is that the impartiality of universities, including Northeastern institutions, has been compromised. This works both ways and was evident last month when a lecturer at Mahasarakham University was summonsed for supporting the environmental protection group in Kalasin. Also, the state is often a partner in mining companies, as in APMC and APPC, thereby creating a conflict of interest.
One solution is to involve external consortiums to assist with overseeing the EHIAs, compensation packages, the monitoring and controlling of emissions during project lifetimes, and subsequent distribution of royalties. Such organisations could involve independent companies but also need to include foreign universities that can partner with Thai universities and therefore rebuild their objectivity.
Given that Thai hyper-nationalists are voicing accusations of ""interference"" against the US, the EU and even the UN, Thailand unfortunately risks isolation and alienating its traditional development partners. Sourcing unbiased sustainable pathways for natural resource management from consortiums led by organisations from historically neutral countries like Switzerland may, however, succeed in rebuilding confidence.
Finally, the neo-colonial aspect of the resource-exploitation system needs to be recognised in order to address the valid concerns of Northeasterners over allocation of mining royalties. Given that the quality of education in the Northeast is the worst in the country, the obvious solution is a regional wealth fund like the Middle Eastern sovereign wealth funds. This would encourage the state and the Northeast to compromise and give Northeasterners a stake in, and partial control over, their own natural resources, one basic principle of the Dao Din Group.