Small-scale Mining and Livelihood Dynamics in North-eastern Ghana: Sustaining Rural Livelihoods in a Changing Environment

Abstract

This article examines the dynamics of rural livelihoods in north-eastern Ghana within the context of a changing environment using evidence from the artisanal small-scale mining (ASM) sector. It employs both quantitative and qualitative research methods. The study shows that the challenges which confront rural subsistence farmers, including production risks of land degradation and encroachment on farmlands by ASM operations, are the main drivers of livelihood transformation by rural farmers. The study underscores that many rural farmers are pushed into ASM out of necessity, rather than being pulled by other reasons including a ‘get rich quick’ expectation. Drawing on the prevailing trend of livelihood diversification in rural communities, the study recommends incorporation of ASM activities into a broader rural livelihood framework through the development of supplementary livelihood programmes. This can provide opportunities for sustaining rural livelihoods. Although there has been recent literature on the dangers and contributions of ASM, this study makes a contribution to development studies thinking about ASM by underscoring the vulnerabilities as well as the resiliency of ASM households and communities.

Keywords

Diversification subsistence farming supplementary livelihood sustainability

I. Introduction

Rural livelihood sustainability comprises the household and communal dynamics of subsistence and the interconnectedness of communities with their natural, physical, financial, social and human assets. Sustainable livelihood is a function of livelihood context, conditions and trends, livelihood assets, institutions and structures as well as livelihood strategies and outcomes (Scoones, 2009). In sub-Sahara Africa (SSA), rural livelihoods are the consequences of environmental, economic and socio-political processes; as such, the construction of livelihoods has to be done within these three broad domains (Yaro, 2007). An overview of SSA’s economic development trajectory beginning from the 1980s provides an understanding of the livelihood systems of the region’s rural dwellers. Historically, subsistence farming and associated income-earning activities have been the primary source of household livelihoods until structural adjustment policies began to impose unbearable expenditure patterns on subsistence farmers (Songsore, 1992) and hampered other sectors of the rural economy that had direct links with subsistence food crop farming (Yaro, 2007). The outcome has been a declining food crop production sector and a continuous diversification of rural livelihoods (Osumanu et al., 2016). However, in several rural African economies, direct exchange of labour for income has created a new lease of life. Therefore, this article argues that small-scale mining is one such economic activity with the potential to create resilient rural communities in the face of variable government policies. The article outlines some key contributions of artisanal and small-scale mining (ASM) to rural livelihoods and measures for achieving sustainability.

In spite of causing environmental and health-related problems that harmfully affect residents of mining communities (Amponsah-Tawiah and Dartey-Baah, 2012; Armah, 2013), ASM plays a critical role in poverty reduction in rural areas of SSA and contributes significantly to household livelihoods. Although some of these significant contributions have been highlighted by studies (e.g., Banchirigah and Hilson, 2010; Hilson, 2016; Kelly, 2014), there is a clear need for enhanced sustainability in the sector. However, the available empirical evidence on the contributions of ASM to rural livelihoods has so far been on large scale and extremely disintegrated. The significance of ASM to rural households is better assessed at the household level since livelihoods can vary dramatically between households, individuals, communities and places (Yaro, 2013). Also, insufficient evidence is available to inform policy on the ASM sector in the Upper East Region of Ghana. To ensure a better understanding of rural households’ livelihood vulnerabilities and adaptive capacities in a changing environment, governments and regional international bodies require detail information about the dynamics of household livelihoods and what they mean for efforts to improve the sustainability of ASM. This study makes a contribution to development studies thinking about ASM by underscoring the vulnerabilities as well as resiliency of ASM households and communities. The significance of the study is that its findings will assist in targeting appropriate district-specific livelihood adaptation strategies to ameliorate rural households’ vulnerability to environmental change in the Upper East Region and Ghana at large. This would help to provide improved guidance on appropriate interventions to enhance the resilience of agriculture-dependent households and communities.

Rural households in SSA are increasingly exposed to several livelihood vulnerabilities including climate impacts (rising temperatures, erratic rainfalls and drought), land degradation (Osumanu et al., 2016) and rising costs of farming inputs (Yaro, 2013). These have introduced new dangers to the already vulnerable and marginalized subsistence farmers that lack development and have high levels of poverty (Fold et al., 2014). Rural households’ adaptive capacity plays quite an important role in shaping their livelihood vulnerabilities for any given amount of exposure and sensitivity. Also, adaptation depends on the adaptive capacity of the affected individual, household or community to cope with the impacts and risks of a particular environmental change (Abaje et al., 2015). In rural SSA, the key determinants of individuals, households or communities’ adaptive capacity and resilience (ability to bounce back after hazards/shocks/trends and seasonality of rural livelihoods) are their livelihood assets including financial, physical, natural, social and human capital (Deressa et al., 2008; Gbetibouo et al., 2010; Moser and Satterthwaite, 2008).

In rural SSA, many food crop farmers have abandoned food crop farming for off-farm livelihoods (Barrett et al., 2001; Bryceson, 2002; Ellis, 2006; Maclin et al., 2017). Many of the farmers who have diversified/branched out into non-farm livelihoods are now found in the ASM sector. According to Delve estimates, there are about 6.6 million ASM operators in SSA and about 54 million people’s livelihood depend on the sector (Persaud et al., 2017). Also, Hilson and McQuilken (2014) have suggested that the number of people who were dependent on ASM activities in SSA in 2011 was between 4 and 12 times the number of ASM operators (but mostly around 6 times the ASM miner population). Meanwhile, these estimates are considered by the Africa Minerals Development Centre (AMDC, 2015) as conservative due to the lack of data on ASM. This is because the activity is mostly informal and often operates illegally in remote areas (AMDC, 2015).

While ASM has gathered attention in certain areas, including efforts to transform it into an export-based industry (Hilson and McQuilken, 2014), the emergence of the sector as an alternative livelihood of choice for many rural subsistence farmers has been surprisingly overlooked in development discourse on sustaining rural livelihoods in SSA and, in Ghana, the sector has remained largely informal. Although seriously neglected by policy attention, available evidence indicates that millions of subsistence farmers are engaged in ASM activities throughout rural communities in Ghana (Amponsah-Tawiah and Dartey-Baah, 2012; Armah, 2013). According to estimates by McQuilken and Hilson (2016), 34 percent of Ghana’s gold production in 2014 came from the ASM sector, 1.1 million Ghanaians directly participate in ASM, 50 percent of the ASM labour force is women and 4.4 million people are dependent on the sector.

Notwithstanding the considerable importance devoted to investigating linkages between subsistence farming and ASM (Hilson, 2016; Pijpers, 2011) and the intertwining of farming and mining economies (Maconachie, 2011; Maconachie and Binns, 2007), the resilience of rural livelihoods in the context of changing economic, social and political environments so far remain unclear. Drawing on empirical evidence from ASM communities, this article examines the dynamics of rural livelihoods within the context of a changing environment in north-eastern Ghana. Recent studies in this area in Ghana have addressed child labour in the ASM economy (Hilson, 2010), drivers and implications of rural livelihood diversification into ASM (Hilson and Garforth, 2013), the interconnectedness of the formal and informal ASM sectors (Fold et al., 2014), and the social and technological dimensions of small-scale mining (Ferring et al., 2016). To enhance understanding of the relationship between ASM and sustainable livelihoods, this article augments the literature by bringing together analysis of the problems and opportunities presented by ASM and where the phenomenon fits in the sustainable rural livelihoods policy debate.

II. Conceptual Overview

The conceptual framework used in this study (Figure 1) as a lens to investigate the phenomenon of ASM and rural livelihood sustainability is based on the sustainable livelihoods (SL) framework (Department for International Development, 2003). The framework conceptualizes rural livelihoods to capture its complexities based on subsistence farming and ASM, and the prospects and challenges they present. These prospects and challenges are influenced by several factors, including global or national level policies and regulations over which rural dwellers have no control (and may likely be unknown to them), local practices and institutions, and the opportunities available for households or individuals to diversify their livelihoods.

Figure 1.

Source: Adapted and modified from DFID (2003).

The framework also includes other types of influences associated with household, institutional and subsistence structures to present a holistic understanding of rural livelihoods (Farrington et al., 1999). Rural households and individuals within communities can resist the stress and shocks of subsistence farming, maintain or strengthen their capabilities and resources, provide sustainable livelihoods for themselves and contribute net benefits to other livelihoods at various levels (Chambers and Conway, 1992; Scoones, 2009). Also, this approach includes an understanding of the vulnerability of rural subsistence farmers which may be an outcome of unexpected shocks, long-term trends or seasonal cycles (Moser, 1996).

Household and individual livelihood activities in mineral-rich communities are dynamic but context-specific and their livelihood strategies often remain invisible (Buechler, 2004). This is partly because the roles that different household members undertake in ASM usually reflect existing divisions of labour in subsistence farming, such that women, sometimes with children, combine work in hauling and washing ore with service provision (including supplying food, clothing, water and light mining supplies) for other ASM miners (McQuilken and Hilson, 2016). Therefore, a rural livelihoods framework of analysis provides an understanding of the multiple linkages in household livelihood ventures (Buechler, 2004). These linkages also include the ways institutions and policies affect rural livelihood options and the means by which rural livelihood ventures affect macro-level policies. Within a broader rural livelihoods framework, it is critical to analyse alternative opportunities: This analysis needs to go beyond the technical nature of alternative opportunities and involve analysis of their economic and socio-political constraints to their uptake (Perks, 2011).

There has been widespread diversification of rural livelihoods in mineral-rich communities in SSA (Maconachie, 2011), and households and individuals have pursued strategies that involve complex and dynamic linkages between subsistence farming and ASM economies. This has led Hilson (2016) to suggest that poverty reduction in rural SSA can be achieved through recognizing and strengthening the bonds between ASM activities and subsistence farming. Kelly (2014) outlines the reasons that make ASM attractive in an unstable environment than subsistence farming, including inadequate land access and tenure, land degradation, low economic remuneration, unstable weather conditions, insecurity and lack of relevant skills to enable rural dwellers obtain jobs in other sectors of the economy. ASM income has provided crucial investments for reviving subsistence activities and social networks that are critical to rural economies and livelihoods (Kelly, 2014). This is reflected in the maintenance of links between subsistence farming and ASM in rural SSA despite severe livelihood displacements. These links can facilitate market-oriented food production and provide the much-needed support for rural poverty reduction (Maconachie and Binns, 2007).

III. Methodology

The Study Context

The study context is Nabdam District (Figure 2), which was carved out of the then Talensi-Nabdam District in 2012. The district lies within the Guinea savannah ecological belt, which is located in the tropical continental climatic zone and characterized by pronounced wet and dry seasons. The single rainy season, with monthly total rainfall increasing gradually from March to September each year, forms the period when farmers in the district have to make most of their livelihood. On the average, a rainfall amount of 950 mm is received annually in the district (Department of Geography and Resource Development, 1992).

The district’s predominantly rural population depends mainly on land and savannah resources for their livelihood. Food crop farming is the major occupation but a few people also engage in activities such as craft making/weaving, wood cutting/charcoal production, retail services, local beer brewing, food vending and some white-collar jobs. As a typical agrarian economy, the long dry season affects the livelihood sustainability of many households resulting in most people migrating to cater for that gap. The existence of gold deposits in the district has also provided some opportunities for supplementing livelihood in ASM activities.

Data Collection and Analysis

Data for this study were collected between August–October 2016 using both quantitative and qualitative methods in two phases. The first phase was a survey of 300 household heads sampled from 6 ASM communities in the district—Nangodi, Kongo, Pelungu, Zanlerigu, Damolgo and Gbane (see Figure 2). The sample size of 300 was chosen from a target population frame of 3,205 using International Fund for Agricultural Development’s (2009) sample size determination formula. The sample was apportioned across the six communities (Table 1), according to the relative share of households in each community (Ghana Statistical Service, 2014), and simple random sampling was used to select household heads for questionnaire administration, irrespective of sex.¹ Household heads (or their representatives) were interviewed since they are generally in charge of decision-making and control of household resources. The quantitative data collection also included a separate survey of 90 small-scale miners (15 from each community) randomly selected from various mining sites.

Figure 2.

Source: Ghana Statistical Service (GSS, 2014).

Table 1.

Stratification of study communities by number of households

Community	Total households^a	Sample share (%)	Sample size
Nangodi	835	26.1	78
Kongo	504	15.7	47
Pelungu	384	12.0	36
Zanlerigu	625	19.5	58
Damolgo	358	11.2	34
Gbane	499	15.5	47
Total	3,205	100.0	300

Source: ^aDerived from GSS (2014).

The second phase of the data collection in-volved focus group discussions, semi-structured interviews and personal observations, which were done concurrently. The interviews and focus group discussions were undertaken to obtain information on ASM activities and their effects on farmers’ livelihoods. One focus group discussion was held in each community (totalling 6) with participants ranging from 6 to 10 people (including 3–4 women in each discussion). Participants included sub-chiefs, elders and opinion leaders. The choice of these participants was to gather information on the structure and nature of community natural (land) resource governance and management. In addition, four separate semi-structured interviews were conducted with officers from the District Planning Unit, the Regional Directorate of Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Minerals Commission and the Forestry Commission. The purpose of the interviews was to unearth the institutional strategies at the district and regional level aimed at effective natural (land) resource governance and management as well as sustainable livelihoods. Finally, visits were made to selected farmlands and mining sites to observe the nature of ASM operations and their effects on the environment.

Quantitative data obtained from questionnaire administration were coded and entered into SPSS Version 18 for analysis using descriptive statistics, such as frequency counts, means, percentages and cross-tabulations. A partial eta-squared was used to measure the extent of ASM on farmland encroachment using a scale from 1 = very significant to 5 = no effect. On the other hand, qualitative information obtained from focus group discussions and semi-structured interviews were transcribed and analysed thematically. The themes identified included the nature of ASM in Nabdam District, ecological effects of ASM and factors that influence involvement in the sector and other livelihood activities. Data from focus group discussions, semi-structured interviews and observations were used to triangulate information obtained from the questionnaire survey.

IV. Results

The results are presented in three sub-sections, starting with a description of the nature and practice of ASM in the study area. This is followed by results on the ecological threats of ASM and, finally, the effects of ASM on rural livelihoods.

ASM in Nabdam District

Mining activities in Nabdam District started in the early 1930s with exploratory works by McGuiness and Reid (a German company) in Nangodi in the then Bolgatanga District which led to the discovery of gold in the area. Between 1934 and 1939, 28,000 fine ounces of gold was produced from prospecting and mining in the Nangodi belt. Ever since, there has been a gold rush in the area and ASM has co-existed with subsistence farming for several years. Before 1999, ASM was done in remote rural areas of the district, mainly by migrant miners from southern Ghana but the activity is now very common within settlements (both rural and urban), particularly in Nangodi, Kongo, Pelungu and Zanlerigu, and it involves both indigenes and migrants.

Artisanal small-scale miners operate in gold-endowed communities without regard to mining regulations: Gold is freely mined and traded informally; ASM operators work without licenses (often termed galamsey); they have no registered concessions of their own; and they operate freely within communities (settlements), remote areas and protected areas such as forest reserves. A key informant at the regional office of the Forestry Commission revealed that:

All the three forest reserves in the district are threatened by ‘galamsey’ activities. Illegal miners enter forest reserves at will and cause so much havoc beyond repair. This is against the revised Ghana Forest and Wildlife Policy of 2012. (Semi-structured interviews, October 2016)

One of the policy strategies of the revised Forest and Wildlife Policy of Ghana (Ministry of Land and Natural Resources, 2012) is to reduce, as much as possible, the prospecting and mining of mineral resources in gazetted forest reserves. Illegal ASM operators are disorganized and conduct their activities in a ‘hit and run’ manner (intended for quickness of benefit rather than for permanency), often resulting in clashes with state law enforcement agencies, especially those in charge of protecting forest reserves. Hilson and Yakovelva (2007) and Amponsah-Tawiah and Dartey-Baah (2012) have also reported similar clashes between galamseyers and state agencies in other parts of Ghana.

The results support Fold et al.’s (2014) view that the disorganized operations of ASM are due to their informality. According to a key informant at the regional office of the Minerals Commission:

All the problems (environmental and social) emerging from ASM is because miners operate informally and in direct contravention of state mining laws, particularly the Small-scale Gold Mining Law 1989 (PNDCL 218). Worst of all, illegal miners, including foreigners, are criminals and opportunists who destroy the environment and peoples’ crops. (Semi-structured interviews, October 2016)

Following attempts by the government to ‘formalize’ the illicit activities of ASM operators, Nabdam District Assembly (NDA) established a District Small-scale Mining Committee, comprising the NDA, EPA, the Minerals Commission and security agencies in the district. But the committee has not been able to properly assimilate ASM activities into the district’s formal economic structure. Miners in the district gave reasons for non-registration including not being aware of regulations, financial constraints, cumbersome registration procedures, and not being able to locate registration officials (Table 2). According to the Small-scale Gold Mining Act (Republic of Ghana, 1989), ASM licenses are granted to individuals, corporations or groups of Ghanaians above 18 years of age, as well as enterprises or companies whose directors must be Ghanaians. The Act requires prospective miners to pay various charges covering application, processing and consideration fees to the Minerals Commission before they are granted licenses to mine. In addition, permission from the EPA, Office of the Administrator of Stool Lands (OASL)² and district/municipal assemblies attracts other charges. This suggests that in addition to prohibitive cost, as indicated by International Labour Organization (ILO, 1999), the cumbersome procedures involved in obtaining a license to operate legally and lack of awareness account for ASM operators’ inability to register.

Table 2.
Constraints in registering of ASM

Constraint Frequency (N = 300)^a %

Unaware of regulations 120 40.0

Finance 95 31.7

Cumbersome procedures 73 24.3

Locating officials 42 14.0

Constraint	Frequency (N = 300)^a	%
Unaware of regulations	120	40.0
Finance	95	31.7
Cumbersome procedures	73	24.3
Locating officials	42	14.0

Source: Field survey (2016).

Notes:^aMultiple responses were possible. Sum of percentage is more than 100.

The failure of attempts to formalize ASM in Nabdam District has led to the deployment of forceful measures (in line with government’s policy of ‘operation vanguard’) to curb the activity by ‘flushing out’ illegal miners and assigning mining rights to registered miners (see Hilson, 2017). But this has been met with strong opposition by local residents due to their inability to obtain mining licenses/concessions. An opinion leader said in a focus group discussion at Kongo that:

Our people cannot get license to do mining because they cannot pay the kind of money the District Assembly is asking them to pay. The assembly should just understand and allow them to do their work. (Focus group discussion—Knogo, October 2016)

Agitations were heightened when non-residents, including foreigners, were granted a large part of a 72 km² of land which had been earmarked and gazetted for small-scale mining in the district. This was despite the fact that the Small-scale Gold Mining Act of 1989 prohibits foreigners from undertaking ASM in the country.

Ecological Threats of ASM

Artisanal mining activities have destroyed lands in Nabdam District tremendously: vast parcels have been cleared, trees cut down and massive excavations opened from which many tonnes of earth have been removed. A key informant from the regional EPA remarked that:

Artisanal miners operate in several unprofessional manners, with no concern whatsoever for the environment, causing great havoc to the environment. (Semi-structured interviews, October 2016)

De-vegetation, soil erosion, water pollution and abandoned pits are all pronounced in the district with de-vegetation being the environmental issue of most concern to households (Table 3). The results corroborate the findings of other studies including Hilson and Yakovleva (2007), Banchirigah and Hilson (2010) and Armah (2013). Artisanal miners are concerned with removing ore quickly to both avoid detection and maximize returns, and this results in environmental liabilities. Information gathered from focus group discussions revealed that artisanal miners lack knowledge of the benefits of employing friendly mining methods, in terms of both improved efficiency of operations and environmental sustainability.

Table 3.

Households’ environmental concerns as a result of ASM

Community	Reported environmental problem
Community	De-vegetation (%)	Soil erosion (%)	Water pollution (%)	Abandoned pits (%)
Nangodi	12.2	6.1	2.5	2.5
Kongo	8.0	3.2	4.0	3.2
Pelungu	5.2	4.0	3.4	4.0
Zanlerigu	8.8	5.1	2.1	1.1
Damolgo	4.4	2.0	2.4	2.0
Gbane	8.2	2.0	1.8	1.8
Total (N)	46.8 (140)	22.4 (67)	16.2 (49)	14.6 (44)

Source: Field survey (2016).

The environmental effects of ASM are partly a reflection of the lack of organized exploration of deposits prior to mining in the areas where artisanal miners operate. Miners operate in a ‘trial and error’ manner. It emerged from focus group discussions that illegal gold miners practice bush burning for easy access to areas perceived to have gold deposits. As a result, according to a key informant from the regional office of the Forestry Commission:

[T]he use of fire has become a serious problem causing widespread damage to the environment. (Semi-structured interviews, October 2016)

Bush fires, caused by small-scale gold miners, also affect farming communities seriously as fires do consume their farm produce occasionally.

One devastating effect of ASM in rural communities is encroachment and destruction of farmlands (Table 4). A partial eta-squared $η_{p}^{2}$ test to estimate respondents’ views on the extent of farmlands encroachment and destruction yielded $η_{p}^{2} = 0.329$ , indicating that ASM has encroached on farmlands in Nabdam District significantly. Observations made during visits to selected farmlands and ASM sites revealed that the primary cause of farmlands destruction is uncontrolled and unmonitored ASM operations in the district. Similar to Amponsah-Tawiah and Dartey-Baah’s (2012) observation, removal of vegetative cover and excavation of pits by miners leave behind landscapes of unstable heaps of excavated mining waste and abandoned pits on farmlands in Nabdam District. Removal of plant growth-supporting topsoil renders the land incapable of supporting farming, in addition to being left exposed to erosion.

Table 4.

Households’ views on the effects of ASM on farmlands encroachment

Effect	Frequency	%
Very significant	92	30.8
Significant	128	42.6
Neutral	18	6.0
Not significant	56	18.6
No effect	6	2.0
Total	300	100

Source: Field survey (2016).

Note: R²: 0.329 (Adjusted R² = 294).

Ownership of land used for mining in Nabdam District is problematic. Lands in the district are owned by individual households or clans while others are public lands. However, the study revealed that most mining activities occur on public lands. According to a key informant in Nabdam District Planning Unit:

The District Assembly acquired the lands from their original owners to be leased to prospective mining companies as concessions. In the absence of such companies, the assembly allowed the original owners to continue farming on the lands. This arrangement has been problematic because some land owners have released the lands for illegal mining while other miners mine without contacting owners of the lands. (Semi-structured interviews, October 2016)

In practice, illegal miners move from one parcel to another where they perceive there is gold without contacting land owners.

ASM and Rural Livelihoods

Evidence from Nabdam District support the view that there are both push and pull factors attracting rural farmers to ASM (Ellis, 2006; Maclin et al., 2017). Pull factors revolve around the fact that the sector has become a significant income-earner, providing supplementary and, in some cases, regular, incomes to many rural dwellers in Nabdam District. On the one hand, there are several subsistence farmers, especially the youth, who have voluntarily taken to ASM because the sector provides opportunities for earning higher income than most other sectors of the rural economy, particularly subsistence farming. On the other hand, many more subsistence farmers move into ASM out of necessity on a seasonal basis. This is because ASM provides supplementary and relatively higher income than other off-farm activities that are pursued during the long dry season, such as hunting and quarrying.

Push factors revolve around the impact of ASM on the livelihood sustainability provided by subsistence farming (Kelly, 2014). The popularity of ASM is fuelled by land degradation due to the activities of artisanal small-scale miners. This is what a key informant in the regional office of the Forestry Commission said:

At the moment, ASM, which is supposed to be done on mining concessions that have been allocated to miners, is taking over farmlands and threatening farmers’ livelihood in the district. (Semi-structured interviews, October 2016)

Like other parts of Ghana (see Hilson and McQuilken, 2014; Wilson et al., 2015), there is enough evidence in Nabdam District to suggest that ASM is producing income for provision of basic needs including food, clothing, shelter, children’s education and healthcare (Table 5), all being essential for achieving Sustainable Development Goals 1, 2 and 3 (SDGs 1, 2 & 3) aimed at ending extreme poverty. ASM has created several direct employment opportunities including digging for gold, crushing/milling of gold-bearing ores, gold smiting and buying and selling of gold. Indirect job opportunities include food and water vending, selling of mining-related products, driving and head portage. The combination of direct and indirect job opportunities available in the sector supports McQuilken and Hilson’s (2016) finding that ASM employs a significant number of both men and women in rural areas.

Table 5.

Drivers and livelihood outcomes of ASM

Employment opportunities in ASM	Frequency (N = 300)^a	%
Digging for gold	261	87
Crushing/milling of ores	32	10.7
Gold smiting	3	1.0
Buying and selling of gold	12	4.0
Others	9	3.0
Contribution of ASM to livelihood enhancement	Frequency (N = 300)^a	%
Food	189	63.0
Children’s schooling	99	33.0
Healthcare	142	47.3
Housing	78	26.0
Others	21	7.0

Source: Field survey (2016).

Notes: ^aMultiple responses were possible. Sum of percentage is more than 100.

Undoubtedly, ASM has contributed to reducing vulnerability, empowering households and enhancing livelihoods (Kelly, 2014). Through ASM, acquisition of assets, such as houses, cars and motorcycles, which hitherto were very rare in rural areas, has been possible. ASM generates demand for goods and services by increasing the purchasing power of rural households thereby leading to establishment of businesses that are subsidiaries or complementary to the sector. Businesses such as milling of ores, selling (of motorcycles, water pumping machines and other consumables) and recreational centres have been established in artisanal mining communities across Nabdam District. Besides insecure livelihoods in food crop farming in Nabdam District, several other factors motivate rural farmers to seek employment in ASM. Notable among these are limited formal and informal employment opportunities in rural areas, high levels of poverty, low incomes in other non-farm ventures, and rural dwellers lack of employable skills which constrain their employment in higher-paid jobs (Table 6). Other factors that push subsistence farmers in the district into ASM include reducing availability of land for farming, soil infertility, cash crop non-profitability and climate variability/change.

Table 6.

Motives for seeking employment in ASM

Factors that drive people into ASM	Frequency (N = 300)^a	%
High income earnings	172	57.3
Poverty	98	32.6
Lack of job opportunities	123	41.0
Lack of employable skills	54	18.0
Increasing demand for land	36	12.0
Low agricultural production	132	44.0
Others	12	4.0

Source: Field survey (2016).

Notes: ^aMultiple responses were possible. Sum of percentage is more than 100.

In spite of the several livelihood opportunities provided by ASM, involvement in the sector has also exposed people to some dangers. These include exposure to occupational hazards, such as diseases (environment-related and respiratory illnesses), accidents and injuries, which sometimes cause death or permanent disability making people incapacitated. Some communities also experience raising incidences of violence and conflict between artisanal miners and newly arrived settlers (with intentions of joining the ASM sector), on the one hand, and other community members and farmers who have been displaced by mining, on the other hand. According to an opinion leader:

[A]ggression and conflicts have also occurred because the benefits of ASM are not spread equitably among rural dwellers since gold-bearing rocks are becoming increasingly difficult to access in some communities. (Focus group discussions, October 2016)

There has also been an increase in undesirable social costs usually associated with ASM, including armed robbery, prostitution, wielding of illegal weapons, drugs peddling/abuse and money laundering.

V. Discussion

Statistics available in various United Nations Human Development (UNDP) reports indicate that labour force participation in the agricultural sector in Ghana has declined from 61.0 percent in 1965 to 44.7 percent in 2016, in line with the country’s urban policy which seeks to reduce agriculture labour and increase labour in the service sector. However, studies (e.g., Hilson, 2017; McQuilken and Hilson, 2016) have shown that the ASM sector has attracted most of the agricultural labour force in rural areas. In spite of its destructive practices, several rural farmers in north-eastern Ghana are diversifying income earnings into ASM for two reasons. The first is its relatively high income-earning potential (Ellis, 2006; Hinton, 2005; Mohan, 2000), and the second is that subsistence farming is no longer able to support rural households (Hilson and McQuilken, 2014; Maclin et al., 2017). These findings support the assertion that distress-push rural livelihood diversification seems to be significant even when farming conditions are relatively favourable (Bryceson, 2002; Bryceson and Bank, 2001; Ellis, 2006).

Traditional livelihoods, based on subsistence farming, are challenged in Nabdam District. The general climate and soil conditions in the district make farming extremely vulnerable compelling many farmers to seek their livelihoods on marginal lands which are exposed to annual droughts, floods and bush fires. Erratic rainfall patterns have negatively affected crop production and, in turn, worsened the situation of households. Although ASM is not new in Nabdam District (Wilson et al., 2015), it is gaining increasing attention in recent times due to the significant number of farmers in the district who are participating in the sector. Artisanal miners do not obtain the permits needed to operate legally. The regulation of the ASM sector in Nabdam exhibits the same difficulties identified more generally by the ILO (1999) in being beset with too many regulations that are mostly meant to restrict entry. The findings of this study suggest that lack of awareness of legal requirements, high cost of registration and the cumbersome procedures involved in obtaining a mining license are the major reasons for artisanal miners in Nabdam District operating illegally. While acknowledging the importance of establishing a regulatory body to facilitate the streamlining of ASM into the formal economic sector and making it vibrant (UNDP, 2015; United Nations Economic Commission for Africa, 2003; World Bank, 2005), this approach will not encourage artisanal miners to obtain licenses to operate legally.

There is widespread recognition that, if not properly managed, the ASM sector can cause significant negative effects on individuals and communities (World Bank, 2005). In Nabdam District, like other parts of Ghana (see Banchirigah and Hilson, 2010; Hilson and Yakovleva, 2007), one ramification of ASM is its threat to the environment including farmlands. However, there is convincing evidence that ASM has contributed considerably to rural livelihoods in Nabdam District in terms of its microeconomic drivers and effects, especially the sector’s contribution to household basic needs (Hilson and McQuilken, 2014; Wilson et al., 2015). In addition, as observed by McQuilken and Hilson (2016), Ledwaba and Nhlengetwa (2016) and Persaud et al. (2017), the role of ASM as the mainstay of the rural economy and households is not only seen in the provision of direct and indirect employment to individuals but also in facilitating the establishment and growth of complementary and sustainable livelihood activities (Kelly, 2014).

There are reasons for the continual condemnation of ASM in policymaking circles in Ghana as well as for the actions taken by state institutions to get rid of unlicensed artisanal small-scale miners in the country (Hilson, 2017). First, ASM has been condemned for its negative environmental effects rather than considering the sector’s positive contribution to broader rural livelihood diversification. As a result, it is not surprising that the UNDP (2015) concluded that Ghana has not taken full advantage of opportunities offered by her natural resource endowment to create critical linkages for diversification, growth and development. The second reason for the policy lag on ASM in Ghana is the longstanding perception that food crop farming is a panacea for sustaining rural livelihoods (Nsiah-Gyabaah, 1988; Yaro, 2013). ASM is continuously downplayed in rural livelihood strategies in favour of food crops farming to the extent that while donors and other governments in SSA are making efforts to formalize the ASM sector and integrate it into a wider rural livelihood framework, the Government of Ghana has condemned the activity and declared a ‘fight’ against artisanal miners (Hilson, 2017).

VI. Conclusion and Policy Implications

As elsewhere in northern Ghana, while communities in Nabdam District have suffered some negative environmental consequences of ASM, they have also benefited economically from the sector. This underscores households’ and communities’ vulnerabilities as well as their resiliencies. The findings articulate the livelihood challenges which confront rural subsistence farmers, especially the risks to agricultural production, including land degradation and the opportunities offered by ASM to improve livelihoods and their sustainability, particularly over the dry season. The article makes two things about rural livelihoods in north-eastern Ghana clear. First, many rural farmers are abandoning unviable subsistence farming in favour of ASM out of necessity: to increase income and reduce poverty. Second, subsistence farming has become increasingly unviable due to land degradation and invasion of farmlands by ASM operations. This suggests that while ASM is generating various economic opportunities through linkages with upstream and downstream activities, the sector is also creating instabilities and risks.

The prevailing trend of livelihood diversification in rural communities suggests that supporting subsistence farming alone cannot lead to sustainable rural livelihoods. While the problems posed by ASM are widely known and well-articulated in policymaking circles, the challenges faced by ASM rural communities are seriously downplayed. A first step in addressing the problems of ASM is to understand these challenges and identify the institutional barriers perpetuating unsustainable livelihoods in rural mining communities. This will include revisiting legalization of ASM and simplification of regulations. The second step is to mobilize artisanal miners and help them to secure mining licenses. Also, legalization issues need to be revisited and simplified into regulations. The socio-economic importance of ASM should be acknowledged by incorporating its activities into a broader rural livelihoods framework through the development of supplementary livelihoods programmes. These require a more collaborative approach, which recognizes ASM communities as key stakeholders and which is focused on how farming can coexist with ASM and other land-based income-earning activities.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author received no financial support for the research, authorship and/or publication of this article.

Notes

References

Abaje

I.B.

, Sawa

B.A.

, Iguisi

E.O.

2015: Assessment of rural communities’ adaptive capacity to climate change in Kaduna State, Nigeria. Journal of Environment and Earth Science, 5, 14–23.

African Minerals Development Centre (AMDC) 2015: African women in artisanal and small-scale mining. United Nations Economic Commission for Africa.

Amponsah-Tawiah

and Dartey-Baah

2012: The mining industry in Ghana: A blessing or a curse? International Journal of Business and Social Science, 2, 62–69.

Armah

2013: Impact of small scale gold mining on some water quality parameters of River Ashire. Master of Science Thesis. Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology.

Banchirigah

and Hilson

2010: De-agrarianization, re-agrarianization and local economic development: Re-orientating livelihoods in African artisanal mining communities. Policy Sciences, 43, 157–80.

Barrett

C.B.

, Reardon

and Webb

2001: Nonfarm income diversification and household livelihood strategies in rural Africa: Concepts, dynamics, and policy implications. Food Policy, 26, 315–31.

Bryceson

D.F.

2002: The scramble in Africa: Reorienting rural livelihoods. World Development, 30, 725–39.

Bryceson

D.F.

and Bank

2001: End of an era: Africa’s development policy parallax. Journal of Contemporary African Studies, 19, 5–23.

Buechler

S.J.

2004: A sustainable livelihoods approach for action research on wastewater use in agriculture. In Scott

C.A.N.

, Faruqui

and Raschid

, editors, Wastewater use in irrigated agriculture: Coordinating the livelihood and environmental realities. CAB International, 25–40.

10.

Chambers

and Conway

1992: Sustainable rural livelihoods: Practical concepts for the 21st century. Institute of Development Studies (IDS).

11.

Department for International Development 2003: Sustainable livelihood guidance sheets. www.livelihoods.org/info/guidance_sheets_pdfs/sectionl.pdf

12.

Department of Geography and Resource Development 1992: A socio-economic survey in the Upper East Region with reference to drought and desertification control in Ghana. Environmental Protection Agency of Ghana.

13.

Deressa

, Hassan

R.M.

and Ringler

2008: Measuring Ethiopian farmers’ vulnerability to climate change across regional states (Discussion Paper No 00806). International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).

14.

Ellis

2006: Agrarian change and rising vulnerability in rural sub-Saharan Africa. New Political Economy, 11, 387–97.

15.

Farrington

, Carney

, Ashley

1999: Sustainable livelihoods in practice: Early applications of concepts in rural areas. Natural Resource Perspectives, 42. Overseas Development Institute. https://www.odi.org/sites/odi.org.uk/files/odi-assets/publications-opinion-files/2877.pdf

16.

Ferring

, Hausermann

and Effah

2016: Site specific: Heterogeneity of small-scale gold mining in Ghana. Extractive Industries and Society, 3, 171–84.

17.

Fold

, Jønsson

J.B.

and Yankson

2014: Buying into formalization? State institutions and interlocked markets in African small-scale gold mining. Futures, 62, 128–39.

18.

Gbetibouo

G.A.

, Ringler

, and Hassan

2010: Vulnerability of the South African farming sector to climate change and variability: An indicator approach. Natural Resources Forum, 34, 175–87.

19.

Ghana Statistical Service (GSS) 2014: 2010 Population and housing census: District Analytical Report (Nabdam District). Author.

20.

Hilson

2010: Child labour in African artisanal mining communities: Experiences from Northern Ghana. Development and Change, 41, 445–73.

21.

Hilson

2016: Farming, small-scale mining and rural livelihoods in sub-Saharan Africa: A critical overview. Extractive Industries and Society, 3, 547–63.

22.

Hilson

2017: Shootings and burning excavators: Some rapid reflections on the Government of Ghana’s handling of the informal Galamsey mining ‘menace’. Resources Policy, 54, 109–16.

23.

Hilson

and Garforth

2013: ‘Everyone now is concentrating on the mining’: Drivers and implications of rural economic transition in the Eastern Region of Ghana. Journal of Development Studies, 49, 348–64.

24.

Hilson

and McQuilken

2014: Four decades of support for artisanal and small-scale mining in sub-Saharan Africa: A critical review. Extractive Industries and Society, 1, 104–18.

25.

Hilson

and Yakovelva

2007: Strained relations: A critical analysis of the mining conflict in Prestea, Ghana. Political Geography, 26, 98–119.

26.

Hinton

2005: Communities and small scale mining: An integrated review for development planning. The World Bank.

27.

International Fund for Agricultural Development (IFAD) 2009: Sample size determination formula. Author.

28.

International Labour Organization (ILO) 1999: Social and labour issues in small-scale mines. Sectoral Activities Program, Author.

29.

Kelly

J.T.D.

2014: ‘This mine has become our farmland’: Critical perspectives on the coevolution of artisanal mining and conflict in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Resources Policy, 41, 100–08.

30.

Ledwaba

and Nhlengetwa

2016: When policy is not enough: Prospects and challenges of artisanal and small-scale mining in South Africa. Journal of Sustainable Development Law and Policy, 7, 25–42.

31.

Maclin

B.J.

, Kelly

J.T.D.

, Perks

2017: Moving to the mines: Motivations of men and women for migration to artisanal and small-scale mining sites in Eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo. Resources Policy, 51, 115–22.

32.

Maconachie

2011: Re-agrarianising livelihoods in post-conflict Sierra Leone? Mineral wealth and rural change in artisanal and small-scale mining communities. Journal of International Development, 23, 1054–67.

33.

Maconachie

and Binns

2007: ‘Farming miners’ or ‘mining farmers’?: Diamond mining and rural development in post-conflict Sierra Leone. Journal of Rural Studies, 23, 367–80.

34.

McQuilken

and Hilson

(2016): Artisanal and small-scale gold mining in Ghana: Evidence to inform an ‘action dialogue’. International Institute for Environment and Development.

35.

Ministry of Land and Natural Resources 2012: Ghana Forest and Wildlife Policy. Author.

36.

Mohan

2000: The environmental aspects of adjustment. In Mohan

, editor, Structural adjustment: Theory, practice and impacts. Rutledge, 95–116.

37.

Moser

1996: Confronting crisis: A comparative study of household responses to poverty and vulnerability in four poor urban communities. Environmentally Sustainable Development Studies and Monograph, 8. The World Bank.

38.

Moser

and Satterthwaite

2008: Towards pro-poor adaptation to climate change in the urban centers of low-and middle-income countries (Climate Change and Cities Discussion Paper No 3). IIED.

39.

Nsiah-Gyabaah

1988: Review of rural development strategies in Ghana since independence. Journal of Science and Technology, 18, 37–52.

40.

Osumanu

I.K.

, Kosoe

E.A.

and Nabiebakye

N.H.

2016: Land degradation management in the Lawra District of Ghana: Present practices and opportunities for rural farmers in semi-arid areas. Journal of Natural Resources and Development, 6, 72–80.

41.

Perks

2011: ‘Can I go?’—exiting the artisanal mining sector in the Democratic Republic of Congo. Journal of International Development, 23, 1115–27.

42.

Persaud

A.W.

, Telmer

K.H.

, Costa

2017: Artisanal and small-scale gold mining in Senegal: Livelihoods, customary authority, and formalization. Society and Natural Resources, 30, 980–93.

43.

Pijpers

2011: When diamonds go bust: Contextualising livelihood changes in rural Sierra Leone. Journal of International Development, 23, 1068–79.

44.

Republic of Ghana 1989: Small-scale Gold Mining Act, 1989. Asempa Publishers.

45.

Scoones

2009: Livelihoods perspectives and rural development. Journal of Peasant Studies, 36, 171–96.

46.

Songsore

1992: The economic recovery programme/structural adjustment programme: their likely impacts on the distant rural poor in northern Ghana. In Aryeetey

, editor, Planning African growth and development: Some current issues. Institute of Statistical, Social and Economic Research and UNDP, 154–70.

47.

UNDP 2015: Review of alignment between the Africa mining vision (AMV) and Ghana’s policy/legal frameworks for solid minerals. UNDP.

48.

United Nations Economic Commission for Africa (UNECA) 2003: Reports on selected themes in natural resources development in Africa: Artisanal and small-scale mining and technology challenges in Africa. Author.

49.

Wilson

M.L.

, Renne

, Roncoli

2015: Integrated assessment of artisanal and small-scale gold mining in Ghana—part 3: Social sciences and economies. International Journal of Environmental Resources and Public Health, 12, 8133–56.

50.

World Bank 2005: The millennium development goals and small-scale mining: A conference for forging partnerships for action (Workshop report). Author.

51.

Yaro

J.A.

2007: Peasant livelihoods and land degradation: Evidence from a participatory assessment in the Gia-Kajelo community in northern Ghana. West African Journal of Applied Ecology, 11. http://dx.doi.org/10.4314/wajae.v11i1.45732

52.

Yaro

J.A.

2013: Rural livelihoods at a cross-roads in northern Ghana. In Yaro

J. A.

, editor, Rural development in northern Ghana. Nova Science publishers, 83–100.

Small-scale Mining and Livelihood Dynamics in North-eastern Ghana: Sustaining Rural Livelihoods in a Changing Environment

Abstract

Keywords

I. Introduction

II. Conceptual Overview

The Study Context

Data Collection and Analysis

ASM in Nabdam District

Table 2. Constraints in registering of ASM Constraint Frequency (N = 300)a % Unaware of regulations 120 40.0 Finance 95 31.7 Cumbersome procedures 73 24.3 Locating officials 42 14.0

Ecological Threats of ASM

ASM and Rural Livelihoods

VI. Conclusion and Policy Implications

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

Funding

Notes

References

Table 2.
Constraints in registering of ASM

Constraint Frequency (N = 300)^a %

Unaware of regulations 120 40.0

Finance 95 31.7

Cumbersome procedures 73 24.3

Locating officials 42 14.0