Deconstructing a single-actor resource ownership model: A study of the proposed uranium mining in the karoo region of South Africa

IF 4.3 2区 社会学 Q2 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES Extractive Industries and Society-An International Journal Pub Date : 2025-06-01 Epub Date: 2025-01-04 DOI:10.1016/j.exis.2024.101609
Moshood Issah , Lanre Abdul-Rasheed Sulaiman , Fatima Aliu , Abdullateef Raji , Ridwan Olabisi Yusuff , Salihu Zakariyyah Abdulbaqi , Sunday Joseph Akor , Ojogiwa T. Oluwaseun
{"title":"Deconstructing a single-actor resource ownership model: A study of the proposed uranium mining in the karoo region of South Africa","authors":"Moshood Issah ,&nbsp;Lanre Abdul-Rasheed Sulaiman ,&nbsp;Fatima Aliu ,&nbsp;Abdullateef Raji ,&nbsp;Ridwan Olabisi Yusuff ,&nbsp;Salihu Zakariyyah Abdulbaqi ,&nbsp;Sunday Joseph Akor ,&nbsp;Ojogiwa T. Oluwaseun","doi":"10.1016/j.exis.2024.101609","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>This study engages the discourse of ‘eminent domain’ – the power of the state to expropriate communally or individually owned properties for ‘public good’ – as it applies in the mineral extractive sector in resource-rich countries, such as South Africa. It is argued that the use of the ‘eminent domain’ principle in the acquisition of land and allocation of mining rights reinforces the notion of the ‘supreme state’. The entrenchment of this idea advances ‘the single metric model’ in which one stakeholder's voice is heard at the expense of other stakeholders. This hierarchical framework privileges the state and the licensed mining companies and excludes resource-rich communities and other egalitarian structures. It is against this backdrop that this study makes a case for the deconstruction of a ‘single-actor resource ownership’ model in South Africa. Using data collected through qualitative instruments, the study concluded that the ‘single metric’ approach, in which the state enforces its agency over the other stakeholders, is rooted in its understanding of ‘rights and sovereignty’ over land and mineral resource ownership in South Africa. This strikes at the centre of a developing conflict among the stakeholders in the uranium-rich community. Therefore, the disaggregation of the current unconstructive policy space dominated by the hierarchic state to one which accommodates diverse views and voices of other stakeholders will create a multi-metric, pluralistic and democratic environment where the ‘public-use principle’ in essence does not exclude the public.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":47848,"journal":{"name":"Extractive Industries and Society-An International Journal","volume":"22 ","pages":"Article 101609"},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Extractive Industries and Society-An International Journal","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214790X24002053","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/4 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study engages the discourse of ‘eminent domain’ – the power of the state to expropriate communally or individually owned properties for ‘public good’ – as it applies in the mineral extractive sector in resource-rich countries, such as South Africa. It is argued that the use of the ‘eminent domain’ principle in the acquisition of land and allocation of mining rights reinforces the notion of the ‘supreme state’. The entrenchment of this idea advances ‘the single metric model’ in which one stakeholder's voice is heard at the expense of other stakeholders. This hierarchical framework privileges the state and the licensed mining companies and excludes resource-rich communities and other egalitarian structures. It is against this backdrop that this study makes a case for the deconstruction of a ‘single-actor resource ownership’ model in South Africa. Using data collected through qualitative instruments, the study concluded that the ‘single metric’ approach, in which the state enforces its agency over the other stakeholders, is rooted in its understanding of ‘rights and sovereignty’ over land and mineral resource ownership in South Africa. This strikes at the centre of a developing conflict among the stakeholders in the uranium-rich community. Therefore, the disaggregation of the current unconstructive policy space dominated by the hierarchic state to one which accommodates diverse views and voices of other stakeholders will create a multi-metric, pluralistic and democratic environment where the ‘public-use principle’ in essence does not exclude the public.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
解构单一参与者资源所有权模型:对南非卡鲁地区拟议铀矿开采的研究
本研究涉及“征用权”的论述——国家为“公共利益”征用公有或个人拥有的财产的权力——因为它适用于资源丰富的国家的矿产开采部门,如南非。有人认为,在土地获取和采矿权分配中使用“征用权”原则强化了“最高国家”的概念。这个想法的巩固推进了“单一度量模型”,其中一个利益相关者的声音以牺牲其他利益相关者的声音为代价。这种等级框架赋予了国家和有执照的矿业公司特权,而排除了资源丰富的社区和其他平等主义结构。正是在这种背景下,本研究提出了解构南非“单一参与者资源所有权”模式的理由。通过使用定性工具收集的数据,该研究得出结论,“单一指标”方法,即国家对其他利益相关者强制执行其机构,根植于其对南非土地和矿产资源所有权的“权利和主权”的理解。这击中了富铀地区利益相关者之间不断发展的冲突的中心。因此,将当前由等级制国家主导的非建设性政策空间分解为容纳其他利益相关者的不同观点和声音的空间,将创造一个多尺度、多元和民主的环境,在这个环境中,“公共使用原则”本质上并不排斥公众。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.60
自引率
19.40%
发文量
135
期刊最新文献
The great disappearing act: Documentary film and the political work of erasing capital in bolivian mining From the desk to the field: Co-designing a retort with Zimbabwean artisanal miners versus literature-based approaches Meaningful stakeholder engagement as a tool for accountability in the mineral industry When do mining companies broadly redistribute resource rents? evidence from China Gold with grief: Exploring the evolving health perceptions and psychosocial lived experiences of galamsey deaths in northern Ghana
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1