With the recent pronouncement by President Aquino that a new mining policy is soon to be released, expectations are high that this new executive policy will respond to the concerns expressed in public fora, campaigns, and newspaper ads.

These are well and good, but do not really tackle the environmental and social questions that continue to be asked of the industry and that are often the basis of the increasing resistance from local governments. As an example, has the concern of the South Cotabato provincial government on the security and quality of water supply ever been comprehensively answered by the Tampakan project proponents? This question is the basis for the provincial government's ban on the use of open-pit mining technology, and which became the basis for DENR to reject the application for an environmental compliance certificate.

In the just concluded international mining conference held at the Ateneo de Davao University, the activity is questioned on its non-inclusion of representatives from the mining industry, thereby eliciting a lament from the Chamber of Mines of the Philippines that the industry's side will not be heard. But then again, do the mining conferences that the industry organizes ensure the participation of those who are not in agreement?

At this point, we are leaving to media the responsibility of ensuring that the different voices are heard, all the while raking in newspaper revenues for every paid advertisement that comes out.

And lost in this cacophony are the more critical concerns of human development and how our country wants to proceed in its development path that ensures the sustainability of its natural resources for the next generation of Filipinos.

Amid the hardened positions, the prospects of agreement from dialogue would now seem distant. For its part, ESSC joined hands with the Bishops'-Businessmen's Conference for Human Development (BBC) from 1998 to 2003 in seeking such a dialogue. Looking back into the history of the conflict, we are reminded of this and other initiatives that attempted to establish a common ground among stakeholders over mining concerns. In 2003, Elisea Gozun, then DENR secretary, outlined the points of agreement at a National Mining Conference participated in by key stakeholders after nine months of engagement. A month later, President Arroyo signed Executive Order No 270 and 270-A, the National Policy on Revitalizing the Mining Agenda in the Philippines, with 11 guiding principles:

• Clear, stable and predictable investment and regulatory policies shall be instituted to facilitate investments in mining, leading to a prosperous minerals industry.
• Value-adding as a measure of optimizing benefits from minerals for the Filipino people shall be pursued through the development of downstream industries to achieve greater productivity and efficiency.
• Small-scale mining shall be promoted as a formal sector of the minerals industry and as part of the development initiative for both downstream and upstream industries.
• Efficient technologies shall be adopted to ensure the judicious extraction and optimum utilization of non-renewable mineral resources to enhance sustainability.
• Protection of the environment shall be of paramount consideration in every stage of a mining operation; mitigation and progressive rehabilitation measures shall be integral components of mining operations.
• The ecological integrity of areas affected by mining operations, including biodiversity resources and small island ecosystems shall be upheld in order to protect public welfare, safety, and environmental quality.
• Mining operations shall be pursued within the framework of multiple land use and sustainable utilization of mineralized areas.
• Remediation and rehabilitation of abandoned mines shall be accorded top priority to address the negative impacts of past mining projects.
• The economic and social benefits derived from mining shall be equitably shared by and among various units of government, as well as the affected communities.
• Sustained information, education, and communication campaigns shall be vigorously pursued, jointly with the industry and other stakeholders, about the minerals industry for purposes of enhancing public awareness and respect for the rights of communities, and reaching informed decisions on mining and related projects both at the national and local levels.
• Continuous and meaningful consultation process with the industry and all other stakeholders shall be instituted, to integrate concerns on minerals in resource management policy and planning.

These principles were intended to reflect the primacy of environmental and social concerns, the need for adding value and industrialization, and the assurance of an equitable share of the country and communities in mining income and value. However, the Mineral Action Plan that came after was seemingly designed in a way that cannot be comprehensively followed through by those tasked with the responsibilities, mostly the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR). With the turn-over of DENR secretaries in quick succession since 2003, these principles gathered dust.

With the global increase in metal prices, the industry and the national government are keen to take advantage of the economic opportunities the situation provides. Without having resolved substantially the past concerns on mining, it is not unexpected that the aggression of mineral development will be met with the same fervor by those opposed to mining.

The conflicts are not new and precisely this persistence of concerns and problems in relation to mining begs the question of how as a society we want to tackle mining at this time in 21st century Philippines.

The need for a genuine dialogue among us Filipinos does persist also, and now must incorporate the increasing challenges faced by the country in terms of the impact of extreme climatic events, the limited capacity of our government agencies to enforce laws and monitor and regulate mining operations, the increasing poverty and marginalization in mineral resource-rich areas, and our own inability to understand the true value of our resources. We need a full understanding of these realities as we seek to respond to our people's needs for genuine and transformative human development and in the national decisions to be made if we are balancing trade-offs as we extract resources.

We list below some of the concerns we are tracking:

1. Environmental concerns

• Mining, ore smelting and metal processing are at the top of the pollution list globally.
• Risks from tailings dams and acid drainage are growing worldwide and the risks of mining in Tampakan are identified in independent reports, but quickly overwritten as technically manageable yet needing greater investigation.
• Increasingly, the trend in Latin America is to establish no-go zones in certain areas, and where mining is prohibited.
• Enforcement is still the biggest problem in the Philippines and the Philippine government has shown no indication that it can monitor, let alone, regulate mining adequately.
  

2. Social concern

• Bribery is a major risk of mining and has been destructive of the National Commission for Indigenous Peoples. As a result, indigenous communities have been so entrapped and divided.
• Human rights are the greatest abuse of the last decade, and now companies are presenting themselves as sources of human development.
  

3. Economic concerns

• The Occupy Movement globally highlighted the growing global inequities, which pervade as well in the stakeholders in mining. The people at the highest level of inequity include mining executives with incomes grossly disproportionate to mining communities.
• A review of national royalties from mining is called for, based on historical trends that many tropical mineral-exporting countries remain impoverished and unable to capture the value of their mineral riches.
• There is a need for an economic calculation of water and other resources, such as agriculture, and their economic losses from the impact of mining. The ongoing mining review that President Aquino himself ordered emphasizes the importance of evaluating the effects of mining on economic, natural, and social capital.
  

4. Political opportunities and developments

• In March, mining again becomes an electoral issue. People in public office are expected to be more accountable to communities and their constituencies in terms of their commitments regarding the environment and mining policies.
• The consolidation of three bills on mining in Congress that aim to further protect the environment and benefit the national economy through better mining policies is nearly complete. If voted on favorably, the consolidated bill should move on to the next Congress.

Given this new record of experiences and lessons, a moratorium on all new licenses or developments is called for, until greater global accountability is attained, including possibly the strengthening the agenda of Rio+20. And a policy of international evaluation, monitoring and regulation with meaningful and effective global and local civil society participation may be necessary to meet high governance standards on environmental and social acceptability for mining projects.