Wellness & Fitness

Factor in hidden health costs of mining when signing deals

base

A mining site in Kwale. The company that is licensed to mine titanium in Kwale, Base Resources, is set to shelve a takeover bid of a Madagascar-based rival. FILE PHOTO |

There has been much talk about the expanding mining industry recently. Exploration in oil, coal, offshore gas and the elusive gold are at various stages.

This will also likely increase as more discoveries of deposits are made. Occasionally residents demonstrate against the mining activities and sometimes halt operations.

Healthcare workers have a role to evaluate how best these activities can be done without harming the local community’s health.

Secondly, how the resources raised from these activities can be used to support social programmes of which healthcare is the most important. Because of this we seek a voice in how these funds can be best used in our domain.

That most mining activities affect the environment and health is a fact. Some of these issues are addressed by the environmental feasibility studies before mining starts, but healthcare has an interesting linkage with the environment and the socio-economic changes mineral wealth brings about.

Some of these take time to develop and may be unforeseen now. As such their consideration is often missing in the agreements.

Common practice is that explorers will support health projects, buy an ambulance here, renovate a hospital there, train some medical personnel and the like. But is that all?

How do we evaluate and mitigate these future effects?

A key factor emerging as the root cause of hegemony from many communities leading to unrest is the perception of “fairness” of the agreements.

As it stands, the national government enters into the contracts regarding regulation of extraction. The county government receives a small portion of this while the community has minimal tangible benefits.

Long-term effects

Without specific laws dedicating portions of these revenues to healthcare, these funds are often channelled to other areas.

In the long run, when the health problems arise no help will come to the community.

Since some of the extractive operations lead to health consequences over a long time, how are the interests of the future generation protected?

Hostilities seen in many communities are deemed to be “politically instigated.” Whether correctly or not that is up for debate. What it shows is that many communities are now becoming aware of some of the potential long-term effects of mining on their lives.

One of the areas under contention is what ratios or formulas for “compensation” should be used.

The national government may be comfortable with a portion of the sales, but is that the fair model for the community?

As the Bhopal tragedy case shows, years after health tragedies arise, getting compensation becomes tricky. Who cares for the affected? The national government which took the bulk of revenues or the county government under whose docket healthcare is offered?

Smoke and dust bellowing from many clinker snorkel towers and from mineral extractive activities are rising. What contribution mining activities will continue to have as associative factors for illnesses is unknown.

Independent long-term data collection is needed for evaluating health effects of these activities.

[email protected] Twitter:@edwardomete