Global demand for minerals, fuels and forest products is a daily headline around the world. On the surface, the promise of jobs and the projections of contribution to national development may appear full of hope for citizens, governments and investors alike. However, below the surface conflicts over natural resources are increasing, particularly in relation to extractive industries, as a growing number of farmers, indigenous communities and other traditional land users are losing their rights to the powerful forces of commercial mining, energy and forestry.

Confrontations over land rights and extractive industries are a worldwide phenomenon. Mining affects the resources and people of an entire territory, and over long periods of time. Even while only one percent of concessions may result in the development of active mines, as was reported in a recent regional seminar hosted by the Peruvian Center for Social Studies (CEPES) on farming communities in Latin America, the presence of concessions (and physical manifestation of exploratory activities, such as boreholes) can generate disputes and uncertainties over tenure, regardless of whether commercial interests proceed to the mineral exploitation stage.

Emerging confrontations around uranium mining in Canada illustrate the classical arguments upon which claims: that the law

provides them with sub-surface rights; that mines contribute to economic growth; and that today’s mining practices are safe. In a legitimacy versus legality approach to public policy, governments often neglect to scrutinize these claims. Old laws are often left to overlap with new ones, both within and across ministries and between different levels of government. The current case near Ottawa, Canada’s capital, hinges on a law from the 1800s, raising concerns as to how it can be in harmony with relevant national and provincial norms of the 21st century. Competing resource claims are difficult policy issues.












For the International Land Coalition and other organizations concerned with peoples’ resource rights, it is commonly recognized that governments have a responsibility to ensure that their laws are both coherent within their jurisdiction and consistent with global norms, including the international agreements to which they are a party.

There is a wide that can be used to establish public policies to legislate and regulate among competing resource claims, which are essential for ensuring sustainable and equitable resource use. Reform of the mining and energy sector is occurring worldwide, particularly with respect to environmental protection, nuclear safety, and the downstream and watershed effects of mining residues. Now, more attention needs to be given to the land and territorial rights of citizens who live in and around sites proposed for mining concessions or exploration. Land rights conflicts, and particularly those involving extractive industries, point to the need for legal frameworks which reflect the full body of resource and environmental laws and safeguards, including voluntary or ratified international agreements in these domains. Principles concerning decision-making and equitable distribution of benefits from resource use, such as that of free, prior and informed consent, are increasingly seen as the basis for protecting the resource rights of farmers, Indigenous Peoples, and other users and tenants of the land. In this way, the interests and needs of all citizens, and particularly those affected directly by extractive industries, can be placed at the centre of decision-making by governments and parliaments, rather than on the basis of the powerful lobbying by commercial interests.