Governance of Extractive Industries in SEA_Oxfam

Extractive Industries Program Oxfam America, East Asia

Workshop Report and Proceedings

M a n a g i n g R e s o u r c e s f o r R e g i o n a l P r o s p e r i t y

GOVERNANCE OF EXTRACTIVE INDUSTRIES

IN SOUTHEAST ASIA

Disclaimer

Oxfam has recorded the workshop presentations and discussions for educational purposes, and intends to cause no misrepresentation or harm. We do not control or guarantee the accuracy, relevance, timeliness, or completeness of the information. The views and opinions expressed in this report and proceedings are of the speakers and participants and do not necessarily state or refl ect those of Oxfam.

1Governance of Extractive Industries in Southeast AsiaManaging Resources for Regional Prosperity

CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

FOREWORD

ACRONYMS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

INTRODUCTION

OBJECTIVES AND METHODOLOGY

THEMES AND ISSUES Themes Issues

CIVIL SOCIETY ADVOCACY SPACE

Advocacy space strategizing Impact and revenue strategizing

STAKEHOLDER CAPACITY BUILDING NEEDS

PRINCIPAL RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CIVIL SOCIETY

FEEDBACK FROM PARTICIPANTS

APPENDICES

A – Workshop agenda B – Workshop presentations and discussions C – Advocacy strategies through industry processes D – Speakers’ biographies E – Some useful resources F – Workshop participant list

02

04

06

08

09

10

17

24

27

29

26

2 Governance of Extractive Industries in Southeast AsiaManaging Resources for Regional Prosperity

FOREWORD Governance of Extractive Industries in Southeast AsiaManaging Resources for Regional ProsperityFOREWORD

The regional workshop on Governance of Extractive Industries in Southeast Asia, Phnom Penh, 30 March-1 April 2010, provided an open platform for key players from across the extractive industries

sector to work together in a meaningful way. National governments, private sector, civil society from Cambodia, Vietnam, Laos, China, Thailand, Indonesia, the Philippines, Myanmar, and Timor Leste, and resource persons from Australia, Mongolia, Canada, the United Kingdom, and the United States shared experiences and insights about the current situation of extractives in their respective countries. It was a privilege to be amongst them and see them working together toward a stronger regional collaboration and deeper insight into the transparent and accountable processes needed if extractive industries are to ultimately benefi t states, including their poorest peoples.

During the three-day workshop, extractive industry experts discussed critical issues such as standard corporate practice, social and environmental challenges, responsible revenue management, and engagement strategy for civil society within the sector. It was clear that many took a real interest in the disclosure of information about payments made to governments and about the potential benefi ts and costs of oil, gas, and mining projects, particularly costs to communities, women, and indigenous people. The Extractive Industry Transparency Initiative, (EITI) was another favored area of discussion, with Indonesia taking a particular lead given the country was about to become the second implementing member of this global initiative in the region.

Many took a real interest in the disclosure

of information about payments made to

governments and about the potential benefi ts

and costs of oil, gas, and mining projects,

particularly costs to communities, women,

and indigenous people.

FOREWORD


FOREWORD

The workshop drew upon the shared belief that although revenues from extractive resources are variable and fi nite, if managed wisely they can signifi cantly contribute to national development efforts by bridging fi nancial gaps in planned public sector investment, creating opportunity to diversify local economies, and at the same time reduce fi nancial dependency on development partners. There was a clear desire to work toward solutions and support development of legal mechanisms and investment strategies to ensure these opportunities are realized.

Ultimately, from the workshop, participants shared an increasing understanding of the complexity of the issues involved in the extractive sector; the need for revenues to be managed transparently, accountably, and with foresight; the need for genuine consultation and collaboration between governments, civil society, and the private sector on social and environmental challenges; the need to continue building capacity so that each of these actors can engage with the others effectively throughout each dimension of the sector’s value chain.

I hope the workshop has set the stage for further open and constructive discussion. I also hope that these documents can enrich that discussion. The documents contain an analytical report and the proceedings of the workshop. They provide valuable insights to the various critical subjects discussed in the workshop. The CD attached at the back of this document provides the visual complement. A short video is also available at www.youtube.com/oxfamamerica.

Finally, I would like to thank my colleagues at Oxfam America, particularly Ms Lim Solinn, who made space to accommodate the increasing number of participants in the workshop. I would particularly like to express my appreciation to Danida for their genuine and generous support to Oxfam America’s Extractive Industries program. And fi nally I would like to express my gratitude to Oxfam’s key partners from across the region for their kind assistance and contribution to the success of this workshop.

Brian LundRegional DirectorOxfam America East Asia Regional Offi ce

Although revenues from extractive resources are variable and fi nite, if managed wisely they can signifi cantly contribute to national development efforts by bridging fi nancial gaps in planned public sector investment, creating opportunity to diversify local economies, and at the same time reduce fi nancial dependency on development partners.


LIST OF ACRONYMS

ACB ASEAN Center for Biodiversity

ADB Asian Development Bank

AICHR ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights

ASEAN Association of South East Asian Nations

BIC Bank Information Center

BRICs Brazil, Russia, India, and China

CAFOD Catholic Agency For Overseas Development

CEO Chief Executive Offi cer

CODE Consultancy on Development

CRRT Cambodians for Resource Revenue Transparency

CSO Civil Society Organization

CSR Corporate Social Responsibilities

DANIDA Danish International Development Agency

DPA Development and Partnership in Action

EARO East Asia Regional Offi ce (of Oxfam America)

EIA Environmental Impact Assessment

EISEI Extractive Industry Social and Environmental Impact (Network)

EITI Extractive Industry Transparency Initiative

LIST OF ACRONYMS


LIST OF ACRONYM

ESIA Environmental and Social Impact Assessment

EWMI East West Management Institute

FDI Foreign Direct Investment

FOI Freedom of Information

FPIC Free, Prior, and Informed Consent

GDP Gross Domestic Product

HRIA Human Rights Impact Assessment

IFC International Finance Corporation

IFIs International Financial Institutions

ISO International Standard Organization

IUCN International Union for Conservation of Nature

Lao PDR Lao People Democratic Republic

MDT Mekong Development Triangle

NGOF NGOs Forum (of Cambodia)

NGOs Non Governmental Organizations

NPA Norwegian People’s Aid

OA Oxfam America

OHCHR Offi ce of the High Commissioner for Human Rights

OSF Open Society Forum

PanNature People and Nature Reconciliation

PIPlinks Philippine Indigenous Peoples Links

PWYP Publish What You Pay

RWI Revenue Watch Institute

SAPA Solidarity for Asian People’s Advocacy

SEACA Southeast Asian Committee for Advocacy

UN United Nations

UNDP United Nations Development Programme

WBG World Bank Group

WCS Wildlife Conservation Society

YRDP Youth Resource Development Program


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

With the extractives industries emerging rapidly in Southeast Asia, Oxfam America East Asia Regional Offi ce, with the support of Danida, organized a three-day regional workshop in late March

and early April 2010 in Phnom Penh, Cambodia, for three key stakeholders – government, companies, and civil society – to share information and to work together to maximize the benefi ts of the extractive industries and minimize the costs, and for civil society to plan strategies at national, regional, and international levels to increase its effectiveness in contributing to the governance of the extractive industries throughout the region, especially through social and environmental impact assessment and responsible revenue management.

This document provides a useful snapshot of the presentations and discussions that were given and took place at the workshop. In addition, it provides guidance on national, regional, and international advocacy spaces, and advocacy strategies for social and environmental impact assessment and responsible revenue management. Lastly, this document offers both valuable analysis of the major common themes and shared issues and timely suggestions on the capacity building needs of the three stakeholders, which arose during it.

Workshop discussions on advocacy spaces revealed that civil society in the region is still in the problem identifi cation, evidence gathering, and solution


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

setting stage of advocacy, and events such as the workshop are important in sharing facts and ideas on these preliminary strategizing phases. At the same time, however, the goal of governance and objectives of social and environmental impact assessment and responsible revenue management are known and accepted, so it was possible for participants to strategize more concretely in relation to them using two linked and overlapping processes: the ten stages of mining development, which include the different steps of project fi nancing, and the extractives industries value chain. Strategizing on these objectives employing these processes identifi ed new advocacy spaces and highlighted the importance of connecting national, regional, and international advocacy to use them all in a coordinated way.

Common themes include: regional trends in and drivers of the extractive industries; weakness of national governance principles and frameworks, especially on social and environmental impact and responsible revenue management; lack of government, company, and civil society knowledge and capacity; and national, regional, and international advocacy spaces and strategies. Shared issues include the threats to culture, livelihoods, and biodiversity; extractive industries’ ‘gender blindness’; changing trade and investment patterns; and strengthening of ASEAN regionalism.

Both government and civil society currently lack knowledge of and expertise in the extractives industries, so most of the capacity building suggestions go towards building this awareness and these skills so that government can negotiate and manage effectively and accountably in the national interest for human development, and civil society can monitor and evaluate government and company actions to ensure effectiveness and accountability and, moreover, to prevent harm and guarantee compensation. For companies, their new arrival in the region is their weakness, and they need to develop their appreciation of local communities and ecosystems to shape their practice for genuine consultation and suffi cient protection; otherwise they will not be granted their ‘social license to operate.’

And, fi nally, the principal recommendations for civil society focus on advocacy strategizing, which needs to happen more often at the regional and international levels for shared awareness of national level evidence, issues, positions, and tactics, and to create opportunities for joining up insider and outsider campaigning activities for greater leverage and lasting success.


INTRODUCTION

The emergence of the extractive industries in Southeast Asia is a welcome and exciting addition to the economic development and diversifi cation of the region. The potential public revenues from

the industry are great, and their potential to be spent wisely for human development and poverty eradication is even greater. Extractives reserves are fi nite, so it is crucial to adopt best practice governance principles and introduce global standard governance frameworks from the outset to maximize the enormous benefi ts that the industry can bring, and to minimize the disastrous and long-term costs that it can cause, in its relatively short life.

However, while the extractive industries have emerged naturally with the region largely stable at long last after its traumatic post-colonial infancy, the governance of the region’s resource-rich countries is still characterized by underdevelopment. Typical governance indicators – such as anti-corruption, human rights, the rule of law, and public administration – are still quite weak, but they are improving slowly in these countries. Their governments and civil societies must cooperate in regulating and supervising the extractive industries; and, extractives companies need to be mindful that their attitudes and practices will impact on the success of national development goals and objectives. Everyone wishes to see these countries count their ‘resource blessings’ not the costs of the ‘resource curse.’

The four key ingredients required for successful extractive industries are political will, capacity building, information sharing, and multi-stakeholder dialogue. Without enlightened leadership, the industry cannot be governed effectively to achieve human development. Without sufficient skills, government cannot negotiate contracts and manage revenues in the national interest. Without adequate knowledge, civil society cannot monitor government and companies to ensure accountability. Without ongoing discussion, the four stakeholders – government, companies, civil society, and communities – cannot cooperate, increasing the likelihood of missed opportunities and exacerbating the risk of confl ict to the detriment of all.

INTRODUCTION

The four key ingredients required for successful

extractive industries are political will, capacity

building, information sharing, and multi-

stakeholder dialogue.




The extractive industries – oil and gas and mining – are rapidly emerging as one of the major sectors in ASEAN for new investment by country members and their key bilateral investment and trading partners.

The growing importance of the industry is seen in new ASEAN policies like the Mining Action Plan and Trans Gas Pipeline Action Plan. Therefore, it is crucial for civil society in this region to start developing a regional advocacy strategy on extractive industries issues – particularly social and environmental impact and responsible revenue management – and to identify the opportunities to promote policies on transparency and accountability of the industry with ASEAN members and their partners.

Oxfam America East Asia Regional Offi ce (OA EARO), with the support of Danida, organized a regional workshop on the ‘Governance of Extractive Industries in Southeast Asia’ from 30 March to 1 April 2010 at the Sunway Hotel in Phnom Penh, Cambodia. The workshop consisted of a one-day plenary for general invitees for sharing experiences and analysis of the extractives industries in ASEAN, and a two-day workshop for civil society for advocacy strategizing towards ASEAN members and their partners, particularly regarding social and environmental impact and revenue management.

The workshop brought together key delegates from civil society in Southeast Asian countries: Cambodia, China, Indonesia, Lao PDR, the Philippines, Myanmar, Thailand, Timor Leste, and Vietnam. Moreover, it included resource persons with a signifi cant extractive industries experience from Australia, Canada, Mongolia, the United Kingdom, and the United States.


THEMES AND ISSUES

During the workshop, the presentations and discussions revealed common themes and shared issues relating to the governance of the extractive industries in Southeast Asia. Common themes included:

regional trends in and drivers of the extractive industries; weakness of national governance principles and frameworks, especially on social and environmental impact and responsible revenue management; lack of government, company, and civil society knowledge and capacity; and, national, regional, and international advocacy spaces and strategies. Shared issues included the threats to culture, livelihoods, and biodiversity; extractive industries ‘gender blindness’; changing trade and investment patterns; and strengthening of ASEAN regionalism. These themes and issues are discussed below.

THEMES

Trends and drivers

The trend in the extractive industries in Southeast Asia in recent years is rapid expansion and increased activity. Big international companies, and medium and small regional ones, have been establishing commercial presence and starting to prospect and explore for oil and gas and a host of commodities and precious metals and minerals. Some companies have even commenced feasibility studies. While the extractive industries are well-established in the older resource-rich ASEAN members, Indonesia, the Philippines, and Thailand, they are new-comers to some of the younger ones, Cambodia,

THEMES AND ISSUES


THEMES AND ISSUES

Lao PDR, and Vietnam (other than artisanal mining). These countries have substantial deposits of oil and gas, metals, and minerals, but their commercial volumes and viability are still being determined, and the regional infrastructure needed to facilitate their exploitation is still being constructed.

There are two primary drivers behind extractive industries expansion and activity. First, the region is now reasonably politically stable and economically open. The formerly authoritarian Indonesia has consolidated national and local democracy, and the previously closed economies of Cambodia, Lao PDR, and Vietnam are being liberalized. Second, the demand for oil and gas, metals, and minerals has increased exponentially, with Chinese export-oriented manufacturing becoming the centre of global value chains and the Chinese economy booming. A ‘great race’ for scarce resources has started between the big mining companies, and it is likely to keep intensifying with the global economy emerging from the recent fi nancial crisis.

Principles and frameworks

At the national level, the widely accepted international principles of good governance – transparency/information, consultation/participation, and accountability/responsibility – are often lacking. While progress towards truly people-centered politics is slowly but surely being made, the countries of this region have a history of elite – often authoritarian – rule under which economic decisions and economic benefi ts have usually been reserved for and shared by the bureaucratic, commercial, and political classes. Consequently, these principles – and their important implications for sharing power more widely for improved decision-making and benefi t distribution – are relatively new, and they can or do threaten existing interests. The advocacy space available for parliamentarians, civil society, and the media to popularize these principles and to utilize them for poverty eradication and human development varies, and this space has a bearing on the level of political willingness to design and to implement governance frameworks for the extractive industries that embody them.

The most well-known governance framework for the extractive industries is the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI). Depending on national context and political will, governments can use EITI to develop an initial governance framework for extractive industries, and they can build on it by designing comprehensive and coherent policy, legal and institutional structures, and processes to ensure that the extractive industries are well governed, from company arrival to departure and from government revenue collection to expenditure.

The advocacy space available for parliamentarians, civil society, and the media to popularize these principles and to utilize them for poverty eradication and human development varies...

A ‘great race’ for scarce resources has started between the big mining companies, and it is likely to keep intensifying with the global economy emerging from the recent fi nancial crisis.


THEMES AND ISSUES

An ideal policy framework will situate the expansion of the extractive industries within a national development plan or poverty reduction strategy so that they are mutually supportive. Such a legal regime should include: company, investment, mining, and petroleum laws that are in harmony with the different stages of extractives development; land laws that guarantee clear and enforceable ownership and use to protect current owners and allow extractives operations; environmental law that requires detailed and genuine environmental impact statements to be prepared, providing suffi cient time for rigorous research and community consultation; various laws to ensure that human rights are respected and protected, such as the right to food for indigenous peoples who rely on forests or the right to housing for those who are resettled; taxation and anti-corruption laws that support revenue collection and prevent and punish leakage; and information and budget laws that allow access to information and participation in planning. Institutional architecture is crucial too. Government ministries, departments, and agencies making decisions concerning the extractive industries should communicate and cooperate with each other in accordance with the law. They should not operate hierarchically, where the authority of one institution is superior to that of another institution despite their equal importance in the overall extractive industries process. Further, they should initiate multi-stakeholder dialogue that captures experiences and opinions from beyond theirs for complete policymaking.

Within Southeast Asia, such policy, legal, and institutional frameworks generally exist in part or not at all; and, where they exist in part, they frequently suffer from a lack of implementation. The challenges for the resource-rich countries of this region are to introduce and use them, applying the principles of good governance to assist guiding their decisions and actions. One of the lessons of the presentations and discussions is that political leadership is crucial in introducing and sustaining good governance. In Indonesia, for instance, President Yudhoyono has been instrumental at the national level in requiring the country to prepare itself to join EITI; and his leadership has a regional dimension, too, building pressure for the leaders of other countries to consider joining.

Knowledge and capacity

One of the most frequently heard remarks of government and civil society in the workshop is that they lack the capacity to regulate and supervise, and to monitor and evaluate, rapidly expanding extractives industries for the moment at least, and so they require assistance in building it to do so. For government,

An ideal policy framework will situate

the expansion of the extractive industries

within a national development plan or

poverty reduction strategy so that they are

mutually supportive.


THEMES AND ISSUES

this weakness is often in technical expertise in various fi elds, like geologists for exploration, lawyers for negotiating, scientists for assessing, and accountants for managing. The lack of capacity in government affects governance, because, without such sophisticated expertise, decision-making can be dominated by politics or corruption rather than guided by commerce or science. This has often resulted unfair share of government’s ‘take’.

While big extractives companies have extensive experience working in different countries with varying development and working with new local cultures and traditions, Southeast Asian countries might be new to them, and they need to take the time to understand the complex histories and realities to obtain their ‘social license to operate.’ This need for knowledge acquisition and complementary capacity building might be even more urgent and necessary for medium and small extractives companies that might be invisible to the international press, but whose impact can be more than visible for communities living on land that they wish to occupy and exploit.

For civil society, understanding the complexity of the extractive industries and governance frameworks from a low base of knowledge and experience is made more diffi cult because of the barriers to information that exist in the absence of disclosure rules and political will. This information gap relates most strongly to commercial documents and data such as contracts and payments, which should, of course, be made public because they concern the exploitation of national resources and contributions to national budgets.

Therefore, it is important that government, companies, and civil society work together, in conjunction with communities, and share information and ideas to improve government policymaking, legislating, and supervising, company establishing and operating, and civil society monitoring and participating. Such ‘tripartism’ is best practice because it increases consensus and stability by reducing grievances and confl ict. It is the ‘ASEAN way’ forward.

Spaces and strategies

The workshop provided a number of processes that relate to the extractive industries. The fi rst is the ten stages of mining development, which follow the stages that companies follow in starting, running, and ending mining. The involvement of fi nanciers is guided by these stages. The second is the extractive industries value chain that focuses on the interplay between company and government activities from mining decision to spending revenue. The fi rst and second processes overlap and complement each other. The third is the project cycle of international fi nancial institutions that might


THEMES AND ISSUES

fi nance extractives projects – which can be leveraged by companies for additional fi nancing – or related development projects like infrastructure.

These processes create spaces and strategies for advocacy at national and international levels. During the ten stages of mining development, for example, national civil society could advocate government for transparency and participation in the exploration and contracting stages, while international civil society could advocate banks and shareholders for standards in the fi nancing and constructing/commissioning stages. Free, Prior, and Informed Consent (FPIC) principles can be argued along the extractive industries value chain. At the downstream management link of the value chain, for instance, national civil society could advocate for national government to join EITI for revenue collection, and to adopt suitable budget and planning laws for revenue spending.

While national governments are well known to national civil societies, whether they be a target, supporter, or even partner, companies are not; and it was evident in the workshop that national civil societies tend to favor national government-oriented strategies. By contrast, international civil society has considerable experience in corporate responsibility/accountability advocacy through CEOs, company employees/shareholders, institutional investors, international organizations, business bodies, politicians/parliamentarians, and consumers using insider and outsider tactics. There is much knowledge that national and international civil society can share with each other, and generous scope for coordinated and simultaneous national and international advocacy, particularly if companies are headquartered in Western countries or listed on Western stock markets.

ISSUESCulture, livelihoods, and biodiversity

The extractive industries are an intrusive business that can cause signifi cant harm to communities by alienating them from their land and/or requiring their relocation and resettlement, and substantial damage to the existing biodiversity by removing forest or consuming/polluting water. The negative effects of extractives, particularly mining, make it essential that governance principles and frameworks refl ect best practices and global standards. Communities must be able to participate to express their opinions and to negotiate their futures with complete information through FPIC principles, and governments must be accountable for their decisions to allow mining, including decisions to relocate and resettle communities. Indigenous

There is much knowledge that national

and international civil society can share with

each other, and generous scope for coordinated and

simultaneous national and international

advocacy...


THEMES AND ISSUES

peoples are especially vulnerable to disastrous alienation because their livelihoods are so closely attached to their land. Thus it is imperative that social and environmental impact assessments be carried out effectively and taken into account genuinely to ensure that livelihoods and biodiversity (which cannot speak in its own defense) are recog-nized and protected.

Gender blindness

Like many countries, Southeast Asian ones continue to be predominantly patriarchal, which results in governance frameworks, impact assessments, and decision-making that are blind to gender. The extractive industries in these countries are unlikely to be an exception. Some examples of gender blindness that might be experienced in the industry include women losing their traditional livelihoods and men obtaining mining employment, and families and communities being disrupted by harmful social issues like prostitution and HIV/AIDS.

Decentralization

With the fall of the ‘centralizing’ Suharto regime, Indonesia has experimented with government decentralization. It has shifted responsibility for governing the mining industry to local governments, but retained control of the oil and gas industry because it is more strategic and requires dealing with powerful oil and gas companies. This decentralization has revealed a number of limitations in governance principles and frameworks. In terms of principles, local governments have remained suspicious about central government reporting and distribution of oil and gas revenues. In terms of frameworks, local government land law has resulted in awarding licenses to small mining companies that cannot reach scale on the one hand, and fail to comply with environmental procedures and safeguards on the other hand. The Indonesian experience is a good lesson learned for other ASEAN countries, such as Cambodia, which have extractives industries rapidly emerging alongside new experiments with decentralization and deconcentration in their good governance programs.

It is imperative that social and environmental impact assessments be carried out effectively and taken into account genuinely to ensure that livelihoods and biodiversity are recognized and protected.


THEMES AND ISSUES

Trade and investment patterns

Chinese investment in and trade with Southeast Asian countries has grown quickly in the last fi ve years, facilitated by increasing trade and investment liberalization. Terms of trade were relatively even initially, with mutual exchanges of agricultural and manufacturing goods. However, the trend since then has been in China’s favor, with it exporting manufacturing goods to the region and the region increasingly supplying raw materials to it. Chinese companies have driven this shift, by investing in the agriculture, energy and extractives industries in these countries. They can be public or private companies. The large ones tend to be state-owned enterprises that pursue mixed commercial and political objectives with strong support from Chinese missions, while the small ones tend to be private profi t-seekers operating independently. While China is slowly introducing the governance principles and frameworks needed to regulate industries like extractives to prevent exploitation and damage, its efforts have largely been concentrated so far on its domestic economy. Accordingly, there is justifi ed concern about the policies and practices of Chinese companies. In the same way, there is reasonable worry concerning investors from other Asian countries, including from within ASEA, that have only recently joined the global economy without the benefi t of corporate responsibility/accountability advocacy and regulations at home or on the international plane.

ASEAN regionalism

Finally, ASEAN has recently started to strengthen its regionalism to give it recognized legal status and greater institutional coherence There are a number of drivers behind it. First, the core goal of ASEAN is regional stability, but the rise of China and India – and the wider implications for power relations in the Indian and Pacifi c Oceans – has convinced ASEAN that it needs to be more coordinated in its approaches and responses. Second, the region’s economic integration has been proceeding quickly without policy or institutional supervision. In 2006, the members signed the ASEAN Charter for economic, political-security and social-cultural development. At the same time, ASEAN shifted from being closed to civil society, to opening the door for ongoing consultation on the objectives and contents of regionalism. ASEAN policies and projects will touch upon the extractive industries in the region, directly or indirectly, and civil society now has a seat at the table for contributing to the design and implementation of these policies and projects, but the extent and infl uence of its involvement will be tested in time.

ASEAN has recently started to strengthen

its regionalism to give it recognized legal status

and greater institutional coherence.



Sessions 8 and 9 of the workshop involved joint advocacy planning and strategizing with the goal of improving good governance in the extractive industries in Southeast Asia.

ADVOCACY SPACE STRATEGIZINGIn Session 8, two groups discussed ‘advocacy spaces’ at the national level. The fi rst group discussed such spaces in Myanmar, the Philippines, Timor Leste, and Vietnam, while the second group did so regarding Cambodia, Indonesia, and Lao PDR. Simultaneously, a third group discussed advocacy spaces at regional/international levels. These exercises included representatives from government and the private sector to ensure the point of view of governments, companies, and investors were fully taken into account. Their contribution proved to be both instructive and fruitful.

Group 1 – Myanmar, the Philippines, Timor Leste, and VietnamThe participants from Myanmar said that they need more research and analysis, especially on social and environmental impacts, and more capacity building. Those from the Philippines indicated that they want to see a freedom of information law passed and would like more capacity building, including on EITI. Vietnamese participants agreed that they require more research and analysis and capacity building, and they would like to do more awareness raising through articles, dialogue, and workshops. They thought that the assistance of international NGOs is important for capacity building. Timor




Leste’s participant said that his country will need more capacity building for the media and women’s organizations in future, and civil society needs to do more to promote the freedom of information law and lobbying parliamentarians. Overall, the participants from these four countries thought more ongoing regional networking is important.

Group 2 – Cambodia, Indonesia, and Lao PDRThe Cambodian participants suggested the following activities for advocacy on the extractive industries: conducting independent EIAs to generate evidence for lobbying and media work; public awareness raising on EITI; developing EITI best practice models and joint monitoring indicators to benchmark government/company operations and to guide NGO lobbying and advocacy; lobbying government on a range of issues including new or amended ESIA and mining, petroleum, and taxation laws; greater community and civil society participation in ESIAs and revenue management, and the adoption of the EITI by 2012; lobbying home country governments of mining companies to take greater responsibility for the operations of their companies; and facilitating community dialogue with government and companies.

Indonesia’s participants wanted civil society to strategize and coordinate more effectively to push harder to join EITI, conduct an audit of current laws relating to the extractive industries (land, contract, environment, etc.), understand better Chinese companies, and pilot two FPIC projects in mining and oil/gas.

Finally, in Lao PDR, there is a need for greater awareness raising on EITI, obtaining more information, advocacy on full social and environmental impacts in the Ministry of Energy and Mines in coordination with the water resource and environment agency, advocacy for benefi t sharing in coordination with the Ministry of Planning and Investment on strengthening the investment regulatory framework, awareness raising in the Ministry of Finance on the transparency principle and benefi t of the EITI, and, in general, improved coordination within relevant government sectors.

Group 3 – Regional/internationalThe group discussing regional and international advocacy spaces started by agreeing that there should be an overarching goal of responsible extractive industries development. It identifi ed different categories of companies that



could be targeted for advocacy – Western big mining companies, regional big mining companies, and national mining companies. The strategy that it formulated includes a number of activities: build a movement from the community level up; strengthen national and regional environmental and human rights policies and laws, including ASEAN if and where appropriate; research and analyze, and lobby Western and regional big mining companies through their employees, shareholders, stock markets, industry associations, retailers, and consumers; and lobby the Asian Development Bank and World Bank to stop funding fossil fuel projects and strengthen FPIC principles.

Therefore, most civil societies in the region need to do more research and analysis, and require more capacity building, on the extractive industries. In terms of national level targets, the participants focus on government rather than companies and seek to improve the regulatory framework so that information is accessible and governance mechanisms are effective. They suggest different tactics, from capacity building to lobbying, depending on the political system and its advocacy space. There was a shared view that collective action nationally and regionally is vital for greater leverage. At the regional/international level, there are new avenues to target big companies, and international NGOs headquartered in the same cities as these companies can play a useful role coordinating and carry out this advocacy, where they are able to.

IMPACT AND REVENUE STRATEGIZINGFor Session 9, participants were divided into two groups, one to discuss strategies for addressing social and environmental challenges, and the other to consider strategies for increasing revenue management transparency along the extractive industries value chain.

Three different but related processes were shared during the presentations before planning that provided a useful basis for discussing advocacy and strategies:

Most civil societies in the region need to do more research and analysis, and require more capacity building, on the extractive industries.



1. Ten stages of mining development

RECONNAISANCE – Requires air survey, ground truth, examination of roads, topography, river systems. An evaluation of the potential license area1

RAISING FINANCE – Origin of mining company dictates sources of funding. Ethical questions arise when origin is from poorly regulated jurisdictions6

PROSPECTING – Requires the removal of samples, geochemical investigation of water courses, use of local tracks and roads, marking of survey points2

SUPPLY CONTRACTS – Create downstream issues e.g. temptation to incentivise customs and tax offi cials to speed import procedures7

EXPLORATION 1. (initial drilling) – Requires machinery on to site, creating work areas and access. It makes noise & dust. People may need to move3

BUILDING MINE – May require full scale relocation of community, clearance of large areas of vegetation, signifi cant improvements to infrastructure8

EXPLORATION 2 (infi ll drilling) – Requires more machinery , much more drilling (several months), possible disruption of land and community4

COMMISSIONING – Requires a surge in local labour and some is likely to be retained for long term. Issues relate to pay, conditions, contracts, training9

FEASIBILITY - Intrusive activity ceases, but a few offi cials return from time to conduct social and environmental impact assessments5

PRODUCTION – Mining has become part of the local community. Issues relate to long term benefi ts, community relations, eventually closure10

2. E

xtra

ctiv

e in

dust

ries

valu

e ch

ain

TRA

NS

PAR

EN

CY

IN E

I VA

LUE

-CH

AIN

How

doe

s no

n-st

ate

acto

rs (C

SO/N

GO

/affe

cted

com

mun

ity) i

nvol

ve in

all

deci

sion

mak

ing

proc

ess

inlin

e w

ith o

vera

ll Ex

trac

tive

Indu

stri

es V

alue

Cha

in?

Free

dom

to In

form

atio

n A

ct

Con

trac

t Tr

ansp

aren

cy

Dec

isio

n To

Ext

ract

Sele

ct

Com

pani

esN

egot

iate

C

ontr

act

Col

lect

Re

venu

esLo

ng-te

rm

Plan

ning

Cre

ate

budg

etSp

end

mon

ey

Mon

itor

Serv

ice

deliv

ery

EXIT

Prio

r & in

form

ed

Con

sent

Acc

ount

ing

Stan

dard

sBu

dget

Mon

itori

ng

The

Proj

ect

Cyc

lie

Eval

uatio

n

Cou

ntry

A

ssis

tanc

e St

rate

gy

Neg

otia

tions

an

d Bo

ard

App

rova

l

Implementation

and Supervision

Preparation

App

rais

al

Implementation and Completion

Identification

INPU

T!

Are

ther

e op

port

uniti

es to

inte

rven

e at

the

Bank

s?

3. I

FI p

roje

ct c

ycle

.



Participants agreed that the ten stages preceded the value chain and linked up with it. Consequently, the strategizing focused on these two linked up processes rather than the project cycle. For social and environmental challenge, this group identifi ed opportunities for civil society’s policy responses in each of the following stages of mining development:

reconnaissance; prospecting; initial and advanced exploration; preliminary and defi nitive feasibility; fi nancing; contracting; constructing; commissioning; production; and decommissioning.

The group strategizing on resource revenue transparency largely used the extractive industries value chain but examined the issue in relation to the stages of mining development before the value chain too:

decision to extract; contracts; fi scal terms; extraction process; trading commodities; revenue collection; revenue management; and development projects and policies.

See Appendix C for the details of advocacy strategies in each of the stages of the two key themes.



For civil society:

Understand governance principles and frameworks in design and implementation:

Transparency/information, consultation/participation, and responsibility/accountability Extractives policy in national development plan/poverty reduction strategy including measures to prevent resource curse symptoms such as economic impacts (including Dutch disease), social and environmental impacts, political conditions linked to large revenues, and transboundary and regional confl icts over overlapping claimed resources Company, investment, mining and petroleum, land, environmental (including ESIA), human rights, taxation, anti-corruption, FOI, budgets, and planning laws and regulations Cooperative ministries, departments, and agencies

Understand the ten stages of development/extractive industries value chain, including their links

Understand gender dimensions of the extractive industries and their differential gender impact

Understand the trade-offs between indigenous culture and livelihoods and extractive industries

Understand the power dynamics in government and identify political/ bureaucratic champions




Understand extractives industries and fi nance sector stakeholders in the region and elsewhere

Understand objectives/practices of Asian extractives companies and tailor advocacy strategies

Understand changing nature and role of ASEAN and utilize advocacy spaces for development

For companies:

Practice and promote best practices and global standards – extractive industries, anti-corruption, environment, and human rights – in developing countries’ operations and to their governments

Understand, respect, and protect traditional culture and livelihoods and existing biodiversity, including gender dimensions of the extractive industries and their differential gender impacts

For governments:

Understand governance principles and frameworks in design and implementation: Transparency/information, consultation/participation, and responsibility/ accountability Extractives policy in national development plan/poverty reduction strategy including measures to prevent resource curse symptoms such as economic impacts (including Dutch Disease), social and environmental impacts, political conditions linked to large revenues, and transboundary and regional confl icts over overlapping claimed resources Company, investment, mining and petroleum, land, environmental (including ESIA), human rights, taxation, anti-corruption, FOI, budget, and planning laws and regulations Cooperative ministries, departments, and agencies

Acquire appropriate technical skills for geological surveying, contract negotiating, impact assessing, revenue accounting, and other complex government level analysis and procedures

Understand, respect, and protect traditional culture and livelihoods and existing biodiversity, including gender dimensions of the extractive industries and their differential gender impacts

Understand the changing nature and role of ASEAN and utilize advocacy spaces for development

Understand, respect, and protect traditional culture and livelihoods and existing biodiversity, including gender dimensions of the extractive industries...


PRINCIPAL RECOMMENTDATIONS FOR CIVIL SOCIETY

Build its knowledge of the extractive industries to engage with governments and companies

Construct and disseminate baselines, and build evidence of social and environmental impact

Develop policy and legal and institutional models that draw on best practice and global standards

Plan joint national and regional advocacy strategies at national, regional, and international levels

Advocate for governments to join EITI in the fi rst place to start building governance frameworks

Build alliances with communities, government, donors, international civil society, and the media

Think widely in alliance building, linking with other good governance campaigns/programs

Continue monitoring and dialogue throughout project life, and keep evaluating advocacy strategy

PRINCIPAL RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CIVIL SOCIETY



At the conclusion of the workshop, the participants were asked to provide their feedback anonymously in writing, and it can be summarized as follows.

New topics

For the majority of the participants who provided feedback, even the most fundamental governance, process, issues, and stakeholders were new, such as EITI, value chain, country situations, and PWYP. In addition, many participants were introduced to embryonic ASEAN advocacy and China engagement strategy for the fi rst time. A number of them commented on the value of having an industry expert present, Mr Thompson, and inviting government to present its viewpoint. Finally, there were some new topics even for more experienced advocates such as shareholder resolutions.

Important issues

The participants identifi ed different dimensions or elements of governance and advocacy to be the most important issues:

Continuing EITI promotion/adoption Increasing access to information Increasing community participation Understanding responsible revenue management

Unpacking social and environmental impact assessment Continuing joint civil society strategizing based on extractive industries

value chain

FEEDBACK FROM PARTICIPANTS



Continuing civil society coalition building and leveraging Increasing civil society participation in international organization planning Continuing civil society capacity building

In addition, some of the more experienced advocates suggested more sophisticated goals and strategies such as introducing an international regime for access and benefi t sharing, implementing ecosystem services payment, and clarifying FPIC.

Future activities

Consequently, the participants suggested future activities that refl ected their new topics and important issues, like organizing more capacity building on EITI, PWYP, and ASEAN, arranging information sharing on social and environmental impacts, arranging joint advocacy strategizing and implementation. In addition, some participants recommended organizing capacity building on new topics like industry fi nancing and indigenous peoples.

Overall

Overall, the participants were thankful for the opportunity to exchange country experiences and excited by the prospect of designing joint strategies at regional and international levels.


APPENDICES

A – WORKSHOP AGENDADAY 1 – SHARING EXPERIENCES & SECTOR UPDATES

Time Theme

07:35 – 08:45 Registration & coffee/tea

Session 1 ECONOMIC DIVERSIFICATION: RATIONALE FOR INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT

08:45 – 10:00Opening speeches & keynote

Welcome and workshop overviewLIM Solinn, Regional Coordinator, Oxfam America East Asia Regional Offi ce Opening speech Brian Lund, Regional Director, Oxfam America East Asia Regional Offi ceSpecial remarks Dr. Filiberto Pollisco, Jr, ASEAN Centre for BiodiversityDouglas Broderick, Resident Coordinator, United NationsKeynoteH.E. Dr. Hang Chuon Naron, Permanent Vice Chair, Supreme National Economic Council

10:00 – 10:30 Group photograph & break10:15 – 10:45 Press conference

Session 2 THE BUSINESS CASE FOR STANDARD CORPORATE PRACTICES: THE INDUSTRY UP CLOSE

10:30 – 12:00Presentation followed by panel discussion Q&A

Scaling up efforts: interactive debate about the viability of Corporate Social Responsibilities for economic & ecological success. Moderated panel and interaction with the audience. Presentation on industry fi nancing will set the stage for panel discussion.

ModeratorLarry Strange, Director, Cambodian Development Resource Institute

Presentation Richard Thompson, International Investment Expert , Mining Industry

PanelistsGeorgia Beans, Country Director, PACT-Cambodia Kisma Rahadjo, Secretary General, Ministry of Economic Affairs for Energy and Natural Resources, Indonesia Chan Sophal, Advisor, Leopard Capital

12:00 – 13:30 Lunch break

APPENDICES


APPENDICES

Session 3 ADDRESSING GOVERNANCE CHALLENGES TO ENSURE POVERTY ALLEVIATION

13:30 – 14:45 Presentation followed by panel discussionQ&A

Discussion on two selected key themes covering main challenges faced by industry governance to ensure its end-objective, people-centered development. A brief introduction provides a global snapshot of the industry, setting the stage for panel discussions.

THEME 1: SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL CHALLENGES

ModeratorJason Jones, Advisor, Cambodian Extractive Industry Social & Environmental Impacts Network

PresentationBhanumathi Kalluri, Director, Asia-Pacifi c Offi ce, International Women and Mining Network

Panelists Puth Sorithy, Director, Department of EIA and Representative of Ministry of Environment in Cambodia Development Council Xiong Tsechalicha, Coordinator, International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), Lao PDR Andy Whitmore, Managing Editor, Mining & Communities Project, PIPLinks, the Philippines

14:45 – 16:00 Presentation followed by panel discussion Q&A

THEME 2: RESPONSIBLE REVENUE MANAGEMENT

Moderator Eric Sidgwick, Senior Economist, Asian Development Bank

PresentationH.E. Dr. Phan Phalla, Deputy Secretary General of Supreme National Economic Council

Panelists Muhammad Husen, Deputy Coordinating Minister, Ministry of Economic Affairs for Energy and Natural Resources, Indonesia, Fabby Tumiwa, Director, Institute for Essential Service and Reform Mam Sambath, Chairperson, Cambodians for Resource Revenue Transparency

16:00 – 16:15 Coffee/tea break

Session 4 TOWARDS SUCCESSFUL MANAGEMENT: CONSTRUCTIVE MULTI-STAKEHOLDER DIALOGUES

16:15 – 17:30Presentation followed by panel discussion Q&A

Interactive debate on what issues and needs should be addressed and by whom, through moderated panel and interaction with the audience.

ModeratorLIM Solinn, Regional Coordinator, Oxfam America East Asia Regional Offi ce

PresentationNorly Grace, Regional Coordinator, Mekong/Southeast Asia, Bank Information Centre

PanelistsRadhika Sarin, International Coordinator, PWYP internationalMericio J Dos Reis, Executive Director, Luta Hamutuk Institute, Dr Filiberto Pollisco, Jr, Director, ASEAN Centre for Biodiversity, Glenn Kendal, Extractive Industry Advisor, United Nations Development Program

17:30– Closing day 1 followed by social drinks


APPENDICES

DAY 2 – COUNTRIES, THEMES, ACTORS & SPACES UP CLOSE

Time Theme

07:30-08:00 Registration

Session 5 COUNTRY CONTEXTS: UPDATES ON RESOURCE REVENUE MANAGEMENT

08:00 – 10:00Opening presentations Q&A

Workshop overview (days 2 and 3)Brian Lund, Regional Director, Oxfam America East Asia Regional Offi ce

ModeratorLIM Solinn, Regional Coordinator, Oxfam America East Asia Regional Offi ce

Selected Country PresentationsMam Sambath, Chairperson, Cambodians for Resource Revenue TransparencyRidaya Laodengkowe, Coordinator, PYWP, Indonesia Lord Byron Abadeza, Coordinator, Bantay Kita/Transparency and Accountability Network, Philippines, Sengelmaa Dashnyam, Coordinator, Open Society Forum, Mongolia


Session 6 COUNTRY CONTEXTS: UPDATES ON SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

10:15 – 12:15PresentationsQ&A

Selected Country PresentationsDavid Allan, Sustainable Development Knowledge Network, MyanmarTrinh Le Nguyen, Director, PanNature, VietnamAndy Whitmore, Director, PIPLinks, the PhilippinesXiong Tsechalicha, Coordinator, IUCN, Lao PDR

12:15 – 13:30 Lunch Break

Session 7 NATIONAL & GLOBAL CONNECTION: UNDERSTANDING THE ROLES OF KEY STATE & NON-STATE ACTORS

13:30 – 15:30Presentations & group discussions

Discussions on representative issues. The background presentations will provide information, setting the stage for group discussions.

Moderator

Matthew Coghlan, Consultant

THEME 3: PRIVATE SECTOR AND FINANCIERS

Standard Corporate Practice & Industry Fundraising – Richard Thompson, Investment Expert, Mining Industry

Publish What You Pay Global Campaign – Radhika Sarin, International Coordinator, PWYP

Shareholders Activism and Global Legislation Movement – LIM Solinn, Regional Coordinator, Oxfam America East Asia Regional Offi ce

15:30 – 17:00Presentations & group discussions

THEME 4: INTERNATIONAL FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS AND BILATERAL DONORS

Who Is Who? & IFI’s Study on Sector Development in Southeast Asia – Norly Grace, Regional Coordinator, Mekong/Southeast Asia, Bank Information Centre Advocacy Space to Consider – Consuelo Katrina Lopa, Regional Coordinator, Southeast Asian Committee for Advocacy

17:00 – 17:05 Closing day 2


APPENDICES

DAY 3 – STRENGHTENING NETWORK & JOINT STRATEGY

08:00-10:30 Session 7 continued

THEME 5: GOVERNMENT, INTER-GOVERNMENTAL BODIES, & THEIR BILATERAL PARTNERS

Moderator, Fabby Tumiwa, Director, Institute for Essential Service Reforms

Presentations (90mins)Mondolkiri & Mining Industry – Edward Pollard, Advisor, Wildlife Conservation Society, Development Triangle and Indigenous People – LIM Solinn, Regional, Coordinator, Oxfam America Greater Mekong Sub-Region Socio-Economic Development Corridors and Bilateral Partners – Chris Adams, Program Manager, Oxfam Hong Kong, ASEAN & Free Trade Agreements – Wahyuningrum (Yuyun), Policy Advisor – ASEAN, Oxfam International Gender Engagement Strategies Across Actors – Bhanumathi Kalluri, Director, Asia Pacifi c Offi ce, International Women & Mining Network Q&A 60mins


Session 8 STRATEGIZING TOGETHER: EXTRACTIVE POLICY ADVOCACY

10:15 – 12:00

Moderator, LIM Solinn

Session 7 Recap (3 minutes each)Theme 3: Private Sector and Financiers – Ridaya Laodengkowe

Theme 4: IFIs & Bilateral Donors – Chandra Kirana

Group brainstorming session on advocacy space with actors at national, regional, and global level.

12:00 – 13:30 Lunch Break

13:30 – 15:00Parallel Sessions

Plenary discussions on regional policy advocacy – Introduction by Matt Coghlan What should we invest in? When?What resources do we need?

Session A: Social & Environmental Challenges ModeratorChris Adams, Program Manager, Oxfam Hong Kong

Session B: Resource Revenue Transparency Moderator Ridhika Sarin, International Coordinator, Publish What You Pay

Plenary Reports from moderators (5 minutes each) – Matt Coghlan

Session 9 NEXT STEPS & ANNOUNCEMENTS

15:00 – 16:00Plenary session

Moderator

LIM Solinn, Regional Coordinator, Oxfam America East Asia Regional Offi ce

16:00 – 16:05 Wrap-up

16:15- Departing the hotel for Phnom Penh boat cruise dinner


APPENDICES

B – WORKSHOP PRESENTATIONS AND DISCUSSIONS

Day 1 – Sharing experiences and sector updates

Session 1 – Economic diversifi cation: rationale for industry development

Ms Lim Solinn, Regional Coordinator, OA EARO, welcomed the participants and provided an overview of the workshop. Mr Brian Lund, Regional Director, OA EARO, gave the opening speech. Mr Lund emphasized that the growth of the extractive industries in Southeast Asia is an important and a timely one. The extractive industries can bring huge benefi ts to the region providing that policies and institutions capture the benefi ts and mitigate the costs. He offered two propositions. First, resources need to be managed in a transparent and accountable manner, and revenues need to be re-invested to provide basic services and to diversify economies. Second, social and environmental challenges must be addressed through genuine consultation and transnational collaboration at all levels. For this, government and civil society need stronger capacity along extractive industries value chains.

Dr Filiberto Pollisco Jr, Director, ASEAN Centre for Biodiversity, and Mr Douglas Broderick, Resident Coordinator, United Nations, Cambodia, made special remarks. Dr Pollisco discussed the connection between business, poverty, and biodiversity. Business needs raw materials that are ‘living’ for extraction and production. The poor often live in areas with high biodiversity, and they depend on it for their livelihoods. Southeast Asia constitutes 3% of land on the planet, but 20% of its biodiversity. Countries need to fi nd a balance between sustainable development and biodiversity protection.The Convention on Biodiversity requires biodiversity benefi t sharing for sustainable development and poverty reduction. ASEAN has committed to be clean and green through its Vision 2020. Mr Broderick spoke on the extractive industries in Cambodia and said that all Cambodia’s stakeholders share the common goals of wealth generation and social development. This requires stronger relationships and broader dialogue to identify and solve problems. Access to information is the key in strengthening relationships and broadening dialogue.

His Excellency Dr Hang Chuon Naron, Permanent Vice Chair, Supreme National Economic Council, Cambodia, gave the keynote address and offered a description of the economic and social context in which the new extractive

The extractive industries can bring huge benefi ts to the region providing that policies and institutions capture the benefi ts and mitigate the costs.

Southeast Asia constitutes 3% of land on the planet, but 20% of its biodiversity. Countries need to fi nd a balance between sustainable development and biodiversity protection.


APPENDICES

industries are emerging in Cambodia. Cambodia has been growing at up to 10% of its GDP every year for a decade, while poverty has been reduced by 20%, from 50% of the population in the early 1990s to 30% in 2007. One of the most successful drivers of poverty reduction has been the growth of the garment and tourism industries, which have employed signifi cant numbers of people. There is potential for extracting oil and gas and coal, gold, iron ore, and limestone. Cambodia has put in place laws for and taxes on the industry. He discussed the need to improve the capacity of ministries and departments to ensure a level playing fi eld when it comes to dealing with companies. Alongside that, he explained that EITI is a mechanism that provides a platform for companies, governments, and civil society to exchange information and views and, through this kind of dialogue, the playing fi eld is leveled. However, EITI does not address all the challenges in the management of this sector, and he appreciated that the discussion at the workshop was rather around broader governance, as government needs to adopt a holistic economic policy, from upstream to downstream management, to ensure that the development of this industry will benefi t all Cambodians.

GOVERNMENT

LowIncentives

HighIncentives

HighIncentives

Oil Companies Monitor (NGOs)

Need for LevelPlaying Field

EITI Triangle

EITI is a mechanism that provides a

platform for companies, governments, and civil

society to exchange information and

views and, through this kind of dialogue, the

playing fi eld is leveled.


APPENDICES

Session 2: The business case for standard corporate practices: the industry up close

Mr Richard Thompson, an international mining investment expert, presented on mining stages, company categories and fi nancing phases and sources, and business risks. There are ten stages of mining operation: reconnaissance, prospecting, initial and advanced exploration, preliminary feasibility study, defi nitive feasibility study, raising fi nance, negotiating contracts, construc tion, commissioning, and production. Mr Thompson said that the legal framework needs to be in harmony with these stages and to be clear and transparent. He explained that there are three categories of mining companies: multinational companies (very large mines, global operations, narrow commodity focus, publicly or nationally owned); medium companies (large mines, often regional operations, narrow commodity focus); and small companies (small mines, mainly exploration, wide commodity focus). He pointed out that good companies enjoy long-term stability, and a clear legal regime may ecourage such compa nies to stay. Mr Thompson described the phases and sources of fi nancing for mining operations. Mining companies start with equity from shareholders, then seek venture capital from specialized funds and selected banks, and then take on debt from commercial banks and export credit agencies. Lastly, he set out the risks that mining companies face: fi nance availability and cost, commodity price fl uctuations, infrastructure weaknesses, and social and environmental factors – skills, wages, opposition, topography, hydrology, etc.

Three panelists replied to Mr Thompson’s presentation. Ms Georgia Beans, Country Director, PACT-Cambodia, asked if the development community can work with extractive industries. They have different motivations, pressures, models, relationships, and accountability, but they share the same interest of responsible business and development. Mr Muhammad Husen, Deputy Coordinating Minister, Ministry of Economic Affairs for Energy and Natural Resources, Indonesia, discussed some of the features of the extractive industries in Indonesia. The governance of the mining industry has been decentralized to district governments but the central government has control of the oil and gas industry. The mining industry is complex but environmental damage is common, and so the central government has intervened with a stronger environmental legal regime. The central government has started EITI sign-up by indicating support for its implementation. Mr Chan Sophal, Advisor, Leopard Capital, said that feasibility studies are crucial because they

Good companies enjoy long-term stability, and a clear legal regime may encourage such companies to stay.


APPENDICES

reduce risks but there are signifi cant problems in doing them because of short time, large areas, and incorrect data. Further, government capacity is low, and it can have trouble understanding long contracts. Thus, multi-stakeholder dialogue is important.

Discussion:Mr Thompson said that mining companies should consider country governance issues before they invest and, if they or their fi nanciers are suffi ciently risk aware and averse, they will not invest if the governance is weak. This, in turn, creates the demand for government to supply governance that is strong to encourage mining companies to invest. Further, he said that big mining companies are employing CSR experts to achieve best practices in their global operations, but the mining market is competitive and there will be smaller mining companies that are prepared to take greater risks with weaker governance, perhaps for higher returns. Therefore, there is a role for international institutions to set the global standards that countries adopt and their companies follow.

Ms Beans explained that PACT cannot always access essential information from extractives companies regarding their CSR performance, but it will examine different sources (including articles of association and concession agreements) and review different areas (human rights, health and safety, environment) in deciding which to partner.

Mr Husen said that the Indonesian government works with local governments on mining, and it shares oil and gas revenues with them. However, one of the key problems with local governance of mining operations is small land allocation that makes it diffi cult now for medium and big mining companies to invest. This results in small mining companies operating but not reaching suffi cient scale; therefore, production decreases.

Mr Thompson said that big mining companies will follow best practice/global standards if civil society works at two levels: regulators and companies. Regulators can improve the content and enforcement of reporting requirements and big mining companies will start to follow them once they see that the wind in their industry is blowing in that direction, but companies should be kept in the loop so that they can assist and are not taken by surprise. Mr Sophal added that the local context is a binding constraint that might prevent best practice or global standards being achieved so there is a need to be realistic.

Feasibility studies are crucial because they

reduce risks but there are signifi cant problems in doing them because of short time, large areas,

and incorrect data.

Big mining companies will follow best practice/

global standards if civil society works at two

levels: regulators and companies.


APPENDICES

Mr Husen said that Indonesia was disappointed with President Obama’s visit postponement because President Yudhoyono could have used it to publicize his signing of Indonesia’s EITI commitment. EITI will provide greater transparency to ensure that all interested stakeholders can participate in the industry.

Mr Thompson offered refl ections in closing. He said that best practices/global standards exist for the extractive industries, and to a level of great detail in some cases, such as the ISO standard on drilling. However, government needs the capacity to apply and achieve them, including ensuring that the companies adopt and use them, which will take time and investment. In addition, he remarked that EITI is valuable but not every government has the capacity yet, but it is a mechanism that should be worked towards with capacity increases.

The panel discussion ended with a representative from a Cambodian retail oil company, Sokimex, seeking to access the rules and regulations, contracts and licenses, for the petroleum sector, and she was responded to by Dr. Leang Chhay Ly, Deputy Director General of the Cambodian National Petroleum Authority.

Session 3: Addressing governance challenges to ensure poverty alleviation

Theme 1: Social and environmental challengesMs Bhanumathi Kalluri, Director, Asia-Pacifi c Offi ce, International Women and Mining Network, identifi ed three emerging issues from civil society’s view regarding mining. First, the myth of mining is that it benefi ts local communities but the reality is the opposite. The work is dangerous, dirty, and demanding, and the operations use land and water. Second, the state is being delegitimized because it is failing to meet its responsibilities and allowing the market to dominate despite constitutional guarantees. Third, local communities are being included nominally or they are simply excluded. There must be legal accountability through mining value chains, including in defi ning the development model that they exist in and should support.Local communities must participate in decisions, and the state must take punitive action against company breaches.

Three panelists replied to Ms Kalluri’s presentation. The fi rst panelist, Mr Puth Sorithy, Director, Department of EIA, Ministry of Environment, Cambodia, explained that Cambodia’s environmental protection and natural resources law requires investors to conduct environmental impact assessments (EIA).

Best practices/global standards exist for the extractive industries... However, government needs the capacity to apply and achieve them, including ensuring that the companies adopt and use them...

There must be legal accountability through mining value chains, including in defi ning the development model that they exist in and should support.


APPENDICES

Further, a sub-decree sets out their substance and procedure. However, Mr Puth said that investors have not been conducting them, and the government has low human and fi nancial resources to enforce and assist them. There are further weaknesses in the legal framework such as the lack of industry-specifi c guidelines, defi nitional issues like ‘public comments,’ and the short time for conducting inspections and gathering information, which results in reliance on secondary sources.

The second panelist, Mr Xiong Tsechalicha, Protected Areas Coordinator, International Union for Conservation of Nature, Lao PDR, said that the growth in the extractive industries in Lao PDR is mainly in mining, and more than 100 companies from ten countries have invested in the country so far. However, Lao PDR’s economy is largely rural, and many people are dependent on forest resources. Despite the well-established legal framework in the mining sector, some biodiversity-related challenges in light of the rapidly growing investment include: the possibility of mine concessions overlapping with protected areas; issues related to the use of toxic chemicals and waste handling; indirect impacts such as road construction to provide increased access; and limited government monitoring capacity.

Finally, the third panelist, Mr Andrew Whitmore, Managing Editor of the Mines & Communities website, United Kingdom, and Communications Offi cer at PIPLinks, the Philippines, shared the situation in the Philippines, where indigenous peoples have a long history of being adversely affected by mining. Mines-affected communities have issued declarations at meetings in Manila and London. The key demands in both declarations are for a rights-based approach to dealing with affected communities, which mirror the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Indigenous peoples are more than stakeholders; they are rights-holders, and they must be treated equally in negotiations, specifi cally through the mechanism of FPIC. The mining industry has struggled to operationalize FPIC, which it sees incorrectly as a right of individual veto. The rules of FPIC are essentially common sense, but its application depends on the context. However, it creates greater security and less risk, and it is being used effectively in some cases; for example it has been adopted by the Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil, and Rio Tinto withdrew from a uranium mine at the request of indigenous peoples.


APPENDICES

Discussion: Mr Thompson commented that Ms Kalluri’s presentation offered a stark warning of the harm that can be done when the industry is complacent about people and the environment. Ms Kalluri explained further her concept that the market is taking over the state in India because the government grants the company what it wants to the detriment of the people, such as alienating land (and then making false promises of education, health, and livelihoods).

Mr Whitmore said that the two key lessons of using FPIC are to use it early and to keep using it. While identifi cation of the stakeholders whose consent is required is problematic, it should be done broadly, like including communities living downstream that might not be displaced by the mine but might be harmed by its waste. However, he noted that communities will accept mining if they are properly consulted and the benefi ts outweigh the costs. A rights-based approach using FPIC is needed for their protection because the communities should not be harmed and the law should protect the vulnerable from harm. Ms Kalluri added that EITI provides a useful mechanism for identifying the stakeholders.

Mr Puth commented on EIAs in Cambodia and said that their application is being widened so that garment factories, for example, will have to complete them to ensure that their washing, dyeing, sewing, and printing are not harming the environment or that such harm is being mitigated or compensated in accordance with the law. One of the main weaknesses with EIAs is that the time granted for their completion is not suffi cient, particularly for public consultation. There is a legal issue regarding who is entitled to comment. Finally, Cambodia requires local and foreign companies to comply equally with the law.

Theme 2: Responsible revenue managementHis Excellency Dr Phan Phalla, Deputy Secretary General, Ministry of Economy and Finance, Cambodia, examined the steps that the government in Cambodia has taken to date with regards to responsible revenue management. First, the extractive industries are only in their infancy and government capacity is weak. This needs to be recognized. Second, though the government is studying EITI and has not yet decided to sign on to it, it has decided to embed its principles – transparency and accountability, revenue disclosure, and public involvement – in the laws and regulations that are being developed,

Communities will accept mining if they are properly consulted and the benefi ts outweigh the costs.


APPENDICES

such as the laws on management and exploitation of oil and gas, on petroleum taxation, and so on. Moreover, the government has established an interministerial working group on resource revenue that will, amongst other things, assess institutional/capacity requirements, defi ne revenue types, guide report preparation, share information, and develop understanding. Third, it has identifi ed and proposed capacity building in geology, engineering, taxation, etc.

The three panelists were Mr Muhammad Husen, Deputy Coordinating Minister, Ministry of Economic Affairs for Energy and Natural Resources, Indonesia, Mr Fabby Tumiwa, Director, Institute for Essential Services Reform, Indonesia, and Mr Mam Sambath, Chairperson, Cambodians for Resource Revenue Transparency (CRRT), Cambodia. Mr Husen outlined Indonesia’s revenue management challenges. The fi rst is energy security. EITI improves the investment climate by decreasing information costs. In Indonesia, distributors/retailers are required to supply oil at a reduced price. The second is fi scal pressure. EITI ensures that revenue is being received by government and deposited in the treasury. The third is revenue sharing between central and local governments. EITI confi rms that central government transfers are correct. The President of Indonesia has signed its EITI regulation.

Mr Tumiwa discussed collection principles, distribution issues, and management issues. The revenue collection principles are taxation, neutrality, lawful/consistent/predictable, non-discrimination, effi ciency. Revenue distribution issues include confl icting ownership and control, political interference, delivery capacity, and central-local government relations. Revenue management issues relate to who provides services and how they are accountable. Additionally, civil society can be involved in the entire extractive industries value chain through freedom of information law, FPIC for decisions, transparent contract negotiations, EITI and international accounting standards for revenue collection, and budget monitoring.

Mr Mam commented on several aspects of the discussion in the context of Cambodia. First, contract disclosure will allow the comparison of terms, collection, and spending. Second, if Indonesia signs up to EITI, there will be pressure on Cambodia to do so. Third, CRRT now needs a better mechanism for representing its positions to the government. Fourth, revenue distribution should support poverty reduction, especially agriculture, education, and health. Fifth, donors should be building capacity within the government.

Civil society can be involved in the entire

extractive industries value chain through freedom

of information law, FPIC for decisions, transparent

contract negotiations, EITI and international

accounting standards for revenue collection, and

budget monitoring.


APPENDICES

Discussion:Mr Husen said that the driver for Indonesia committing to EITI is President Yudhoyono, and it is the beginning for considering revenue distribution, including environment rehabilitation. Mr Tumiwa explained that extractive industries revenue is 40% of Indonesia’s budget, and more than 50% in the case of some local government budgets, so management is crucial. Mr Husen said that environmental damage is a problem in Indonesia and has become worse with decentralization because the Indonesian government worked with big mining companies using best practices/global standards, but local government does not do so with small mining companies. He said that the government is introducing new law that creates environmental offenses, but he noted that enforcement might reduce production.

Mr Mam agreed that transparency is an important but problematic issue in Cambodia because, for example, the mining law prevents voluntary disclosure without permission. Further, the requirement of transparency needs to be extended to other laws like the budget. His Excellency Dr Phan said that Cambodia’s government wants NGOs to be involved but it decided to engage with certain NGOs to be a bridge between it and the public. Additionally, the public can be involved directly through a new government website, although Internet access is still limited for many.

Session 4: Towards successful management: constructive multi-stakeholder dialogues

The last presenter of the day was Ms Norly Grace Mercado, Regional Coordinator, Mekong/South East Asia, Bank Information Centre. Ms Mercado suggested different advocacy arenas for infl uencing policy, process, and practices in the extractive industries: IFIs (sustainability policy and performance standards), regional and international bodies (ASEAN and UN), governments (elections and lobbying), and companies (voluntary governance and ethical investors). She mentioned that there is an IFC consultation on the current review of its sustainability policy/performance standards in Hanoi in June 2010.

The fi nal panel consisted of: Ms Rhadika Sarin, International Coordinator, Publish What You Pay, United Kingdom; Mr Mericio J Dos Reis, Executive Director, Luta Hamutuk Institute, Timor Leste; Dr Filiberto Pollisco Jr, Director, ASEAN Centre for Biodiversity; and Mr Glenn Kendall, Extractive


APPENDICES

Industries Advisor, UNDP, Cambodia. Ms Sarin shared her experiences of engagement with EITI. ‘Multi-stakeholderism’ is the principle that must be realized in practice in producing and publishing reports on company payments and government revenue for EITI credibility. EITI has been successful but it is not the end of good governance in extractive industries – what happens upstream in the contracts and downstream in the spending is important too.

Mr Dos Reis described the governance of the petroleum industry in Timor Leste. He said that it adopted best practices: a petroleum fund system from Norway and EITI. The petroleum fund system requires revenues to be deposited in a US bank account and withdrawals to be subject to parliamentary approval. EITI provides civil society with space to discuss governance issueswith government and business at the same time. Timor Leste published its fi rst EITI report in 2009, and it revealed differences of opinion: business wanted aggregated data, civil society argued for disaggregated data, and the government sat on the fence, so they agreed to use aggregated data for the fi rst report. The government started the EITI validation process in 2009 to be an approved country.

Dr Pollisco noted the diffi culty of infl uencing policy in ASEAN because it requires consensus. There are three working groups for the three pillars of the ASEAN Charter: economic, political/security, and social/cultural. There is no extractive industries working group, but one or more of the three groups could work on the governance of the industry.

Mr Kendall offered an example of the lessons from his involvement in the multi-stakeholder dialogue in Canada in the context of the Whitehorse mine initiative: mutual respect is not automatic; leadership is required; process is important; sequence of issues is important; and legal and political institutions and practices keep playing a role. For Cambodia, where the industry is in its early days, these lessons might translate to recognizing capacity limitations; identifying leaders; and building knowledge for now. Thus, multi-stakeholder dialogue is not straightforward but it is essential for the people.

Discussion:Ms Sarin explained that PWYP advocates for governments to join EITI and it hopes that it is becoming a global standard for all resource-rich countries, not just a mechanism for developing countries to structure and ensure participation and transparency in their extractives industries. Norway adopted it to set an example for developed countries. A workshop participant suggested that the lessons civil society has learned from ASEAN so far are that

Mutual respect is not automatic; leadership is required; process is

important; sequence of issues is important; and legal and political

institutions and practices keep playing a role.

The lessons civil society has learned from ASEAN

so far are that structure and processes are needed

to be put in place to ensure consultation

and participation, but consensus will have to be

taken into account...


APPENDICES

structure and processes are needed to be put in place to ensure consultation and participation, but consensus will have to be taken into account because the members have their own political systems and development needs, and ASEAN decision-making requires agreement. Mr Dos Reis explained that oil and gas revenue in Timor Leste is deposited into a US bank account, although the Timor Leste government has recently diversifi ed its accounts for greater income and security, and only 5% of it is used for development and other projects in the country.

Day 2 – Countries, themes, actors, and spaces up close

Session 5: Country contexts: updates on resource revenue management

Civil society participants in the workshop offered the following country updates:

CAMBODIA

Mr Mam presented an update on resource revenue management in Cambodia. There is high-level political recognition that extractives revenue must be managed well. Since 2009, revenue has been reported at an aggregate level. The Ministry of Finance chairs an interministerial working group on the extractive industries. The working group drafted a revenue transparency plan and presented it to the National Assembly. Attempts to obtain a copy have been unsuccessful. To date, there is no large revenue but only concession fees from oil and gas. There is information online but many people do not have internet access so the government should publish hard copies of it too. The government is adopting EITI principles but is still considering whether it will sign up. A 2009 public fi nance management report noted the government lacks experienced staff but is undertaking a capacity assessment. Mr Mam said that there are challenges: the revenue management plan needs to be published in hard copy; a list of companies and granted and pending licenses needs to be published; the disconnect between the National Strategic Development Plan and national budget law needs to be addressed; and, the legal framework needs to be reviewed and amended with public consultation because it is no longer applicable to the new environment.

INDONESIA

Mr Ridaya Laodengkowe, Coordinator, Publish What You Pay, Indonesia, presented an update on resource revenue management in Indonesia. He quoted data from the Ministry of Energy and Natural Resources that, in the last fi ve years, the contibution of extractive revenue to Indonesia’s


APPENDICES

national budget has been about one third, subject to commodity prices. This contribution is mainly from 19 big companies in Indonesia, extracting oil and gas, coal, copper, gold, nickel, and tin. The issue of revenue management transparency is signifi cant, and is more relevant because government in Indonesia has been decentralized since the end of Suharto’s rule and local governments receive oil and gas revenue shares from the central government. Further, decentralisation allows local governments to grant limited mining concessions – and they have granted over 7,000 so far. There are no data on the revenue contribution of these mining companies to local government, but the environmental costs of their operations are extensive and obvious. Indonesia has different categories of revenue such as entitlements and taxation. The problems that Indonesia faces in extractives include: confl ict, especially in Aceh and West Papua, which have more autonomy and receive greater revenue; local governments awarding concessions without competitive bidding processes, establishing an appropriate regulatory institution and clarifying revenue streams; ‘resource curse’ social and environmental problems; weak local environmental and social standards; company tax evasion; and lack of data transparency including disaggregation. Since 2007, PWYP, Indonesia consists of 35 members from nine resource-rich provinces. Members engage in alternative accounting, local government capacity building, freedom of information campaigning, and EITI campaigning in Indonesia and within ASEAN. The lessons learned include the usefulness of a genuine democratic system and values in terms of freedom of speech and information, and political awareness and accountability.

THE PHILIPPINES

Mr Lord Byron Abadeza, Coordinator, Bantay Kita/Transparency and Accountability Network, presented an update on resource revenue management in the Philippines. Mr Abadeza explained that Bantay Kita is a network of individuals and organizations working on revenue transparency in the mining industry. The Philippines is resource rich and has 24 mining projects at the moment. There are concerns about the resource curse because the government is only sharing 7.5% of its mining revenue and there are minimal backwards and forwards linkages between the industry and community/local economy. The industry is characterized by weak rule of law and poor regulation, which lead to tax evasion and environmental damage. His network is concerned about the lack of transparency along the entire value chain: contracts, operations, revenue, and spending. The Philippines needs to rationalize legal frameworks and introduce freedom of information legislation.


APPENDICES

MONGOLIA

Ms Sengelmaa Dashnyam, Coordinator, Open Society Forum (OSF), presented an update on resource revenue management in Mongolia. She explained that Mongolia is at the crossroads in pursuing more balanced development versus potential further unequal development. The percentage of the population living under the national poverty line decreased from 36.3 percent in 1990 to 32.2 percent in 2006, but has increased since. International experiences demonstrate that there is no automatic link between drastic growth and poverty reduction. The mining sector accounts for around 30% of GDP, 70% of total industrial output and 78% of total export income. There were 1,953 exploration and mining companies with both domestic and foreign investment registered in 2010, but only up to 450 of them are active. Mining accounts for only 5% of employment, and its social effects are being felt in rising cases of child labor and artisanal mining. There are EITI and PWYP coalitions in her country. They have brought cases for compensation for environmental damage, as well as advanced arguments over license issuance and contract transparency. The government has agreed to join EITI. There have been two EITI annual reconciliation and audit reports produced, in which 25 companies were included in 2006 and 38 companies were included in 2007. Although US$8 million in discrepancies were discovered in the 2007 report, of which US$538,000 remains unresolved, the PWYP coalition was most critical of the exclusion of two mining companies from the annual reconciliation audit report simply because they could not provide data. Coalition members have organized ‘EITI at local level’ in more than 10 provinces and sub-provinces since its establishment and have been advocating the importance of local level open discussion and conferences, which could lead to potential tripartite agreement.

Discussion:Ms Dashnyam said that Mongolian civil society is advocating and capacity building at national and local levels, and it invites the Mongolian government to assist in organizing and contributing. The government is crucial for introducing civil society to mining companies to start dialogue. Therefore, a relationship between civil society and government based on open access and mutual trust is important. One tactic civil society uses for greater transparency is to write letters to the government demanding disclosure and publish the letters in newspapers. The government responded to one such demand by providing mining agreements but refused to share oil agreements, in part because the mining law requires disclosure but the petroleum law does not. The government is not always open; for example, it granted a lease

International experiences demonstrate that there is no automatic link between drastic growth and poverty reduction.


APPENDICES

to a Chinese company to mine uranium without disclosing it, and it often commissions risk management studies without giving notice of them. Civil society is pushing for a freedom of information law, but the government is reluctant and makes national security and commercial secrecy arguments against it. Further, Ms Dashnyam said that Mongolia has moved from candidate to compliance in EITI, but the government failed to meet some of the indicators in its report. While companies report to international accounting standards, the government lacks the capacity to do so, so the reconciliation of revenue data is diffi cult. Notwithstanding, the government supports EITI. Civil society uses the media, and especially television, to disseminate results in the cities, but it needs to visit rural areas because access to media is limited.

Mr Laodengkowe said that the Indonesian government is still skeptical of EITI because it is an external mechanism, but it has two powerful local champions. Ms Chandra Kirana Prijosusilo, Revenue Watch, Indonesia, added that, while the EITI is voluntary, once Indonesia has joined it, it is then mandatory for government and companies to comply with it.

Following his comments on the Cambodian interministerial working group on the extractive industries, Mr Mam said that it needs to be established by regulation with clear and agreed roles and responsibilities, including implementing EITI principles, monitoring extractive industries’ operations, and discussing revenue management. He said that civil society would like to be a member of the working group but that will require the Prime Minister’s approval. Further, civil society is advocating for the aggregated data that the government is currently publishing online to be more detailed and disaggregated.

Ms Sarin pointed out that EITI principles and mechanisms can be adapted to other sectors for greater participation and transparency; for example, Liberia has adapted them for its forestry sector, and Bulgaria and Ukraine are proposing to adapt them for their pipelines construction.

Mr Abadeza discussed transparency in the Philippines. The right to information is in the constitution and it is honored by principled public servants and monitored by civil society. However, the EITI offers the potential of linking the different stakeholders and maximizing revenue collection and spending.

EITI principles and mechanisms can be

adapted to other sectors for greater participation

and transparency...


APPENDICES

Session 6: Country contexts: updates on social and environmental impacts

Civil society participants in the workshop offered the following country updates:

MYANMAR

Mr David Allan, Sustainable Development Knowledge Network, Myanmar, presented an update on social and environment impacts. The extractive industries in the country are gas, some oil, and metal and minerals (copper, gold, and gemstones). Many of the mining operations are small/artisanal. Key challenges include strong sovereignty, connections with democracy and human rights, and the need for wider economic reforms such as exchange rates. There are concerns with ESIAs because the baselines often do not exist, there is a lack of technical capacity, they take place with little or no consultation, and they are not shared or disseminated. The Chinese pipeline through the country is likely to have social and environmental impacts.

LAO PDR

Mr Tsechalicha presented an update on social and environment impacts. The mining industry received the highest amount of investment in 2009 of US$2.2 billion and the contribution of it to GDP is expected to be 10% in 2010. The investors are from China, Thailand, South Korea, and other countries. The procedures for mining approval are not suffi ciently well understood. There are examples of social and environmental impact: community displacement and disruption. However, comprehensive information on impact is lacking or not publicly available. Further, the government has limited capacity to address related environmental issues. To promote sustainability in the extractive industries, especially in the mining sector, it is important to introduce ESIAs, to promote CSR in the private sector, to increase awareness raising at district and provincial levels, and to coordinate and cooperate with neighboring countries where transboundary impacts are experienced.

PHILIPPINES

Mr Whitmore presented an update on social and environment impacts. The Philippines is a useful case study for ASEAN because it has a long history of mining that has left a bad legacy, and a strong and vibrant civil society, especially among indigenous peoples. It has an advanced law on indigenous

The Philippines is a useful case study for ASEAN because it has a long history of mining that has left a bad legacy, and a strong and vibrant civil society, especially among indigenous peoples.


APPENDICES

peoples, but poor implementation. This law clashes with provisions in a much-criticized mining law. Civil society groups have proposed an Alternative Mining Bill, which has been the subject of an open consultation. Government claims an increase in forest cover, but data are suspect. Recent research has emphasized the limited number of local jobs that have been created by the mining industry.

Discussion:The moderator requested participants to describe social and environmental impacts in other Southeast Asian countries. Mr Jason Jones, Advisor, Extractive Industries Social and Environmental Network, spoke on Cambodia and said that the government lacks the capacity to conduct ESIAs and is reluctant to consult with communities. The absence of a comprehensive and compatible land use plan results in overlapping land use and creates confl ict. One of the costs so far has been alienation from land, which has affected livelihoods. There is a concern that the quantity and quality of water will be reduced by mining. The land confl icts have been militarized by the government’s use of the army to defend company interests. Mr Laodengkowe said that confl icting land use is present in Indonesia too, and the local government approach is usually to take and compensate but not to examine sharing arrangements. Mr Tran Trung Kien, Program Offi cer, CODE, discussed the situation in Vietnam. One of the main environmental impacts there is pollution. Social impacts include livelihood change and loss, especially for indigenous people, leading to confl ict. While the EIA law is strong, its implementation is weak. Further, civil society monitoring of the extractive industries is slight, but it is planning to increase it and to prepare an extractives database. There is hope that Vietnam will adopt EITI principles.

In response to questions on allies and strategies, Mr Whitmore replied that allies in the Philippines are other civil society organizations and the media, and sometimes politicians. A strategy that civil society used there to address confl icting land use was to seek court determinations, including preparing and submitting maps of land use that were verifi ed by indigenous peoples. Mr Allan explained that, in Myanmar, it is necessary to work with approachable and interested senior public servants to assist in organizing and running seminars and discussions. In terms of strategy, it is important to be factual and not political. He noted that ASEAN is becoming increasingly central to getting issues on national agendas, and vice versa. Mr Tsechalicha said that, in view of stakeholder participation in the extractive industries in Lao PDR, involvement of mass organizations can contribute to meaningful discussion, including on benefi t sharing.


APPENDICES

There was a wide-ranging discussion on ESIAs. Some of the points that were made include: ESIAs should be living documents that are monitored and evaluated throughout the mining process; there are mining licenses being issued to big companies before conducting ESIAs; there are many mining licenses being issued to small companies, which makes conducting ESIAs diffi cult; many social and environmental issues are transnational so perhaps there is a need for a regional ESIA; it is diffi cult to conduct ESIAs in the more repressive countries; local governments need to understand the purpose and process of ESIAs better; ESIA law is needed for clarity and enforcement; there is a danger that ESIAs are being used for public relations; there is a trend of conducting ESIAs without consultation or publication; there are a number of different tools and the one that is used should be the one that suits the purpose, such as a human rights impact assessment (HRIA) if that is what is required; preparing documents in advance for ESIAs is important to ensure that relevant and accurate information is submitted to government, and it is under pressure to take it into account; and there are UN committees that could consider ESIAs if government does not, such as submitting a HRIA to the UN Committee on Racial Discrimination.

Session 7: National & global connection: understanding the roles of key state and non-state actors

Theme 3: Private sector and fi nanciersMr Thompson presented on corporate practice and industry fundraising. He suggested that there are opportunities for civil society advocacy in the ten different stages of mining development. Western civil society organizations can follow up if there are Western mining companies involved. The Western media can be useful in raising the profi le of concerns. Targeting the banks needs to be done before fi nance is granted so that they are aware of the risks that are involved in granting it. Good companies and fi nanciers do not want trouble. The planning stage is an advocacy opportunity to obtain local livelihood benefi ts such as job creation, but it must be noted that the need for labor declines markedly once mines are constructed. Advocacy for government transparency is important to ensure that revenue is well used. Solidarity is crucial – united we stand, divided we fall. Leadership is important too, including building and using a platform for dialogue with government and companies. The advocacy plan should be based on the ten different stages of mining development, including targets and dates. The issues need to be broken down and understood. Targets need to be relevant – if you can convince the CEO, your demands

ESIAs should be living documents that are monitored and evaluated throughout the mining process...


APPENDICES

might be met. Companies want to hear logical arguments supported by strong evidence, but persistence is important because companies hold different views and take different approaches. Building the confi dence of government and companies is important for fi nal success. One tactic might be to share the advocacy plan with the companies so that they have the option of working together to achieve a win-win outcome for both sides. Frequently reviewing the advocacy plan is critical. A good metaphor for mining companies is an elephant: elephants eat a lot and produce a lot of waste, but they need four legs to be able to walk, and the four legs are policy, strategy, law, and regulation.

Ms Sarin presented an overview of the Publish What You Pay (PWYP) campaign. The campaign started when faith-based organizations recognized that aid was being undermined by resource revenue. The national PWYP coalitions have national coordinators, and they are independent of the Secretariat. The PWYP Secretariat assists with advocacy, capacity building and coalition building; for instance, in Timor Leste, the national coalition was having diffi culty convincing oil companies that they should publish disaggregated data in the fi rst EITI report, and the Secretariat arranged for them to lobby the companies at their headquarters, and it provided information that the same companies agreed to publish disaggregated data in Nigeria. The Secretariat provides capacity building on anti-corruption, environment, freedom of information, and human rights. The initial focus of the campaign was the middle of the extractives industries value chain – that is, company payments/government revenue – but it now works on government/company licensing/contracts at the start of the chain and government spending at the end of that chain. National/international advocacy is mutually supportive; for example, international stock market advocacy can support national EITI advocacy because the greater the source of information, the more accurate the level of verifi cation. Two of the current challenges are widening the concept of transparency beyond revenue to environmental and social impacts, and securing the interest of Chinese companies.

Ms Lim presented on shareholder activism and the global disclosure/information legislation movement. Shareholder activism can be cost effective because it can change the global practices of big companies; for instance, shareholders fi led a resolution with Newmont, a US mining company, complaining about its negative engagement with local communities, and, so, Newmont commissioned independent reviews on separate continental operations to review their community engagement policies, and their health

Two of the current challenges are

widening the concept of transparency beyond

revenue to environmental and social impacts...

The advocacy plan should be based on the

ten different stages of mining development, including targets and dates. The issues need

to be broken down and understood.


APPENDICES

and safety practices. In addition, Oxfam America is fi ling its shareholder resolution with Chevron, a US oil company, calling on it to fully disclose revenue/payments in the countries in which it operates, including Cambodia. However, shareholder activism can take time because its success depends on company and shareholder relationships. There is an emerging global movement to persuade governments to legislate requiring companies to disclose payments/revenue and governments to allow access to information; for example, in the United States, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee is examining the Energy Securities Through Transparency Bill, and, if it is passed by the US Congress, it will require companies that are registered with the US Securities and Exchange Commission to disclose payment details made to host governments on a contract by contract basis. Since more than 90% of major oil and gas companies, including major Chinese state-owned corporations, are registered, this legislation will be a turning point. There are legislation movements in Canada and the European Union demanding a similar law, which is important because it will prevent US-registered companies relocating to their stock exchanges to avoid compliance with the US law.

Discussion:Mr Whitmore noted that his NGO does a large amount of shareholder activism based in London, and he is in touch with others doing it in other countries, so he or they can put forward questions if you have them and arrange for you to attend meetings. Mr Dominic Renfry, DAC, suggested that civil society needs to change its mindset and work more closely with government, especially for access to information. Ms Lim replied that there are a couple of legitimate ways to obtain the contracts in Cambodia, but civil society must consider what to do with them. Ms Prijosusilo said that ‘now’ is always the time for joining EITI, rather than merely adopting its principles because of a lack of understanding or capacity, because it is a mechanism that provides for consultation and transparency. She said that if a country is not ready for EITI, then it is not ready for extractive industries.

On the strategy of infl uencing CEOs when they are interested in making a profi t, Mr Thompson said that, while they are busy, they will be interested because they do not want shareholder or fi nancier problems and they do not want to make mistakes that result in them being fi red.

In relation to the militarization of mining, Mr Abadeza and Mr Whitmore said that there are examples from the Philippines where civil society and

There is an emerging global movement to persuade governments to legislate requiring companies to disclose payments/revenue and governments to allow access to information...

‘Now’ is always the time for joining EITI, rather than merely adopting its principles because of a lack of understanding or capacity, because it is a mechanism that provides for consultation and transparency.


APPENDICES

indigenous people have negotiated with the army, so that they are not seen to be the enemy. Ms Sarin added that peer-to-peer learning is extremely valuable for the military, and it can be promoted by international donors.

Concerning taking advantage of cooperation between national PWYP coalitions, Ms Sarin said that EITI is at a critical juncture where 22 countries have commenced the process of joining but only two have fi nished it. Ultimately, fi nishing it is dependent on political will. Civil society needs to appreciate that EITI is not a ‘silver bullet’ that will result in the rule of law.

A participant wanted to know how to do advocacy during the ten stages of mining development if there is no information available. Mr Thompson said that the fi rst objective of advocacy in these circumstances is to obtain the information through educating those who possess it on its usefulness for business and development. Ms Sarin commented that concession contracts can be pieced together from different sources, such as from company headquarters and stock exchanges, and there have been two reports on commercial secrecy and the corporate veil. Shareholder advocacy is useful because company failure to engage can affect share price.

Theme 4: International fi nancial institutions and bilateral donorsMs Mercado presented on ‘Who’s who in IFIs’ and their involvement in the extractive industries in Southeast Asia. She recalled that international fi nancial institutions (IFIs) include multilateral development banks, monetary authorities, export credit agencies, and bilateral banks. Why do IFIs matter? They manage lending portfolios of US$30-40 billion and provide technical assistance that infl uences government policies. They pushed the Washington Consensus through conditionality/structural adjustment. They set some international standards. They were secretive, and some of them still are. They are advocacy targets, but they are also information sources, pressure points, accountability channels, and lightning rods. What are their structures/governance? The World Bank Group (WBG) has an inspection panel to review complaints made against it. The Asian Development Bank (ADB) has a compliance review panel. The International Finance Corporation (IFC) has social and environmental standards that guide its investments in the extractive industries. The IFC is important because commercial banks and export credit agencies have adopted its standards, and governments use IFC lending to leverage lending from other sources. However, the standards do not provide for suffi cient contract and revenue transparency; for example, the contract disclosure requirement has

EITI is at a critical juncture where 22

countries have commenced the process of joining but only two

have fi nished it.


APPENDICES

never been triggered for extractives. What are the emerging trends? The WBG is increasing technical advice and project investment in the extractive industries to facilitate growth. Further, it is fi nancing the private sector through intermediaries that might avoid standards and commit other unethical or even illegal acts such as using tax havens. Asia is the main destination, and the extractives, infrastructure, and plantation sectors are the main recipients of fi nancing. The IFC is reviewing its social and environmental standards. What can civil society do? Civil society advocacy needs to be based on the specifi c IFI project cycle.

A typical IFI project cycle might be: country assessment strategy (advocate here), identifi cation, preparation (advocate here), appraisal (advocate here), negotiation/approval, implementation/supervision, completion, and evaluation.

Ms Consuelo Katrina Lopa, Regional Coordinator, Southeast Asian Committee for Advocacy (SEACA), presented on ‘advocacy space.’ She explained that civil society in Southeast Asia has a weak history of engagement with government, and it lacks a ‘regional consciousness.’ Further, ASEAN has no history of engagement with civil society because its notion of regionalism only involves business and government. However, civil society and ASEAN are undergoing a transition with the agreement on the ASEAN Charter and creation of the ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights (AICHR). Civil society is critiquing the state-centered, elite-level idea that ASEAN has of itself, and trying to imagine alternatives on people/grassroots, inclusion/participation cooperation/diversity, proposing/opposing, and transparency/accountability. The ASEAN civil society movement, Solidarity for Asian People’s Advocacy (SAPA), is expanding its constituency beyond its founding civil society organizations by reaching out to indigenous and rural peoples and national/regional civil society organizations/networks. There are specifi c advocacy spaces for it with ASEAN processes and institutions: ASEAN CSO accreditation process; ASEAN Secretariat; ASEAN Institute of Strategic and International Studies; ASEAN Foundation; AICHR; ASEAN Commission on Women and Children; and national level political and bureaucratic champions.

Discussion:On being asked what avenues in ASEAN could be used for pushing the EITI, Ms Lopa said parliamentarians are under the economic pillar of the ASEAN Charter. One participant thought that ASEAN should not be the focus, but that the more developed countries, Malaysia and Singapore,

Civil society and ASEAN are undergoing a transition with the agreement on the ASEAN Charter and creation of the ASEAN Intergovernmental Commission on Human Rights...


APPENDICES

should be understood better for their involvement in the extractive industries, especially their fi nancing. Ms Lopa suggested that civil society needs to be mindful of ASEAN’s tradition of non-interference, which governments in the region might invoke if transparency is pushed too hard.

Ms Mercado said that the new World Bank energy strategy is being used to promote projects for renewable energy such as hydropower. A participant contributed that the ADB supports EITI, but it does not make EITI a condition of fi nance/project approval.

Day 3 – Strengthening network and joint strategy

Session 7 continued

Theme 5: Government, inter-government bodies, & their bilateral partnersMr Edward Pollard, Advisor, Wildlife Conservation Society, presented on the mining industry in Mondulkiri. Mondolkiri is a province in eastern Cambodia with a low population of mainly indigenous people who have strong links with the land. 70% of the province is protected, and 50% of the population live near or in the protected areas. The mining industry in Mondolkiri has grown rapidly since 2007 and is a microcosm of the industry in the rest of the country. Mining companies are still in the prospecting and exploring phase and have not started extracting, with the exception of stone/gravel quarries. Mr Pollard said that 22 exploration licenses are known to have been granted, mainly for bauxite and gold, but there could be more. The companies are Australian, Chinese, and Vietnamese. Licenses overlap with protected areas, important for fi shery, non-timber forest products, and water, which the companies have not appreciated so far. The key lesson for civil society is the diffi culty of obtaining accurate and timely information on mining. Civil society’s traditional Cambodian government partner, the Forestry Administration, is often in the dark. Civil society tracks company press releases, and they are often the source of news. Company consultation approaches vary; and, if a company leaves, it is usually replaced by another, unrelated, company so the consultation process has to restart. Some companies are relatively open and engage with the communities in the province, while others only follow forest, land, and mining laws loosely and often argue that an environmental impact assessment is not required by law.

Ms Lim presented on the Mekong Development Triangle and indigenous peoples. She described the commonalities of indigenous peoples in the Mekong sub-region – culture/dialect, climate/environment, livelihood/community, independence/traditions. Mekong governments have their

The key lesson for civil society is the

diffi culty of obtaining accurate and timely

information on mining.


APPENDICES

national visions plus a shared sub-regional vision: the Mekong Development Triangle (MDT). The MDT covers agriculture, conservation and preservation, electricity, infrastructure, mining, trade, and tourism. China is the preferred investor to support the MDT. At the moment, there is no clear overarching sustainable development policy in it that would focus on Participatory Land Use Planning to take into account the social and environmental impacts. The regulatory environment is inadequate, so there will be no independently reviewed ESIAs. There is concern that the MDT is being planned and implemented without consultation, and that will lead to physical displacement and livelihood loss without compensation. The loss of land by indigenous peoples will not only result in livelihood interruption, but also the loss of their tradition and ways of life.

Mr Chris Adams, Regional Program Manager, Oxfam Hong Kong, presented on China and the Mekong. Within the Mekong, the key driver of change is its integration into East Asia’s economy, with China increasingly at the center, although Korea and Japan will continue to play roles. China imports resources and exports manufactures, so the trade balance is in its favor. 40% of China’s FDI is to Asia. In the Mekong, the Chinese invest in agribusiness, energy, extractives, and infrastructure. China is the largest source of FDI in Cambodia. Chinese aid is small but increasing, and it is given outside the formal donor processes and tied to national interests and state-owned enterprises. Chinese soft and hard power is increasing to support its core interests of growth and stability in accordance with the principles of non-interference and co-existence. The Mekong has little choice but to accommodate it. Declining opportunities within China are driving companies to expand their operations, as well as stronger internal/weaker external regulation, and access to trade preferences. Underpinning this expansion is the government’s ‘Go Out Policy, ’ its huge trade surplus, historical/cultural ties, geographic proximity and border relations, trade and investment liberalization, and declining multilateral and Western private investment in the Mekong. Within the Mekong, countries and people want capital access and low cost infrastructure, consumer goods, and export opportunities. There are positive and negative consequences of economic integration. Positive effects include new infrastructure, greater revenue, increased employment, and reduced aid dependence. Negative effects include economic bubbles and land alienation. Civil society can infl uence China/Chinese companies through national, regional, and global processes that lead to increased regulation and effective standards. However, the political economy of China needs to be understood to make a difference.

Chinese soft and hard power is increasing to support its core interests of growth and stability in accordance with the principles of non-interference and co-existence. The Mekong has little choice but to accommodate it.


APPENDICES

Chinese company bottom lines include profi ts and politics, and change in China is policy-driven. The Chinese government is sensitive to public opinion/international reputation, but it will design solutions on its own terms, subject to its principle of non-interference. Good strategies include: evidence-based policy dialogue with Chinese think-tanks; framing issues collectively such as for the BRICs; starting with non-sensitive sectors; and working with leading companies and industry associations. Some tactics might be to raise awareness of international standards and processes; do CSR training; arrange media visits and make the case for ‘acting now or getting caught/damaging reputation sooner or later. ’ Within China, there have been initiatives in CSR, green credit, environmental guidelines, and stock market listing. In closing, Mr Adams said that we need to recognize that the decline of the US and rise of the BRICs will result in changes to the international system that we might not want but that we will have to accept. A multipolar world is emerging in which versions of modernity will not be based necessarily on the enlightenment principles of Europe or the US.

Ms Wahyuningrum (Yuyun), ASEAN Policy Advisor, Oxfam International, presented on ASEAN. Yuyun discussed the evolution of ASEAN. She said that it is a diverse group. The power used to lie in Indonesia, but there has been a recent shift to the Mekong countries. The ASEAN Charter was designed to increase international recognition, and the Bali Concord II 2003, amongst other frameworks and agreements, will create a single economic market. Some changes have taken place in ASEAN of late with the recognition of civil society and good governance, but the principles of consensus decision-making and sovereignty/non-interference remain. ASEAN’s Vision 2015 is for three economic, political/security, and social/cultural ‘communities.’ Yuyun concluded that ASEAN is now serious about ‘community building. ’ Different ASEAN frameworks and agreements touch on the region’s extractive industries. She suggested a range of strategies: campaign for ASEAN governments to sign the EITI; propose an extractive industries framework; build ASEAN member country champions; lobby at ASEAN meetings; leverage the AICHR priority of business and human rights; target external fi nancing companies; target the ASEAN member leading it for that particular year and challenge it to leave positive development milestones in community building.

Ms Kalluri presented on impacts on women and children, indigenous peoples, and their environment. A gender critique of mining would identify

A multipolar world is emerging in which

versions of modernity will not be based

necessarily on the enlightenment principles

of Europe or the US.


APPENDICES

the following things: mining is a masculine, patriarchal, and discriminatory industry, where women and children suffer the social costs it creates: HIV/AIDS, domestic violence, lower reproductive health, community displacement, and livelihood loss. Gender bias is present in all relevant decision-making fora: families/communities, mining companies, political parties/government bureaucrats, banks/investors, and traders/purchasers. Indigenous women are more vulnerable because they are more isolated. How can women and children be supported in facing patriarchal mining? They need information and participation so that they can understand and object/demand. They need their resources, status, rights, health, education, and institutions to be mapped. They need champions in community/government. More specifi cally, they need to be able to participate in FPIC processes and decisions. They need to be taken into account in resettlement and rehabilitation to ensure that they have joint land ownership and access to employment. They should receive minimum wages and specifi c conditions if they are employed in mines, such as female toilets and children’s crèches. The national legal/political regime is crucial for land laws and women’s/labor ministries. At the international level, women’s movements and trade unions are important advocates, but the entire extractive industries value chain needs to be gender analyzed and sensitized, including EITI.

Discussion:In discussing advocacy opportunities, Mr Pollard noted that the present diffi culty of engaging with companies exploring in Mondolkiri is not a positive sign for future engagement. Mr Adams suggested that the means to infl uence Chinese companies is a combination of good governance and factual advocacy: stronger laws and enforcement, good/bad examples, and existing Chinese policy. Yuyun defended the focus on ASEAN because the ASEAN Charter will be implemented and it gives new hope to civil society. There has been a ‘change of mood. ’ The ASEAN Secretariat is now more open to meeting with civil society, and even the more conservative ASEAN members are willing to speak to them, like Myanmar, Singapore, or Vietnam. Civil society wants to bring ‘people’ into the ‘center’ of ASEAN and to support national and regional reforms to benefi t them. The next step is to start being more strategic in engagement with ASEAN by preparing different strategies for the chairing member; the Vietnamese government, for example, is very thorough, so it appreciates detailed facts and well-reasoned policies from civil society.

At the international level, women’s movements and trade unions are important advocates, but the entire extractive industries value chain needs to be gender analyzed and sensitized, including EITI.


APPENDICES

C – ADVOCACY STRATEGIES THROUGH INDUSTRY PROCESSESFrom group strategizing discussion, it was agreed that that community engagement should take place in all phases, starting from the feasibility phase, to prepare the community for livelihood changes.

Social and environmental challenges:

Reconnaissance: build relationships with relevant ministries; monitor industry, journals, conferences, and websites; assess stakeholders and risks; prepare and update country backgrounders; and develop profi le with extractives industries.

Prospecting: establish reporting standards in company home countries; monitor company reporting against these standards; and develop licensing procedures and guidelines for ESIAs.

Exploration: raise awareness within communities; conduct baseline ESIA assessments; demand and monitor ESIA processes; demand exploration report publication; and become shareholders in big companies.

Feasibility: facilitate engagement between communities and companies; share ESIAs and community views with key stakeholders; and demand benefi t-sharing agreements including mitigation and

decommissioning plans.

Financing: demand best practices and global standards; identify, contact, and monitor key fi nanciers; prepare mock report on practices/standards; demand contracts to comply with IFI standards; and demand disclosure of incentives paid by companies/offered by governments.


APPENDICES

Contracting: inform suppliers of potential risks.

Construction, commissioning, and production: monitor and ensure compliance with practices, standards, contracts, and

agreements; monitor labor rights; demand, design, and monitor community development programs; and continue stakeholder engagement.

Decommissioning: ensure funding; demand compliance with contractual obligations; publicize non-compliance; continue stakeholder engagement;

ensure notice of closure; and demand remediation.

Civil society: expand networking to the media and legal professions; and increase capacity building for and movement building of civil society.

Policy level: increase knowledge of and interaction with country assessment strategies

and ASEAN; expand understanding and number of enforcement mechanisms to ensure

accountability; build greater public awareness including via the media; encourage government institutional capacity building; and demand policy development in multi-stakeholder processes.

Resource revenue transparency:The group strategizing on resource revenue transparency largely used the extractive industries value chain but examined the issue in relation to the stages of mining development before the value chain too:1. decision to extract;2. contracts;3. fi scal terms;4. extraction process;5. trading commodities;


APPENDICES

6. revenue collection;7. revenue management; and8. development projects and policies.

Before the value chain: advocate for freedom of information law; advocate for transparent and competitive licensing procedures; and, build coalitions of anti-corruption, FOI, IFI, and tax advocacy organizations

and networks.

Decision to extract: infl uence public processes before decision to extract such as ESIA; and advocate for fair and just compensation to affected communities.

Contracts: advocate for contract disclosure and obtain documents from IFIs and

fi nanciers; build civil society capacity to understand terms and conditions, their

meanings, and implications; and study other contractual terms and conditions and advocate for model

contracts for development.

Fiscal policies: build civil society capacity to understand budget laws/fi scal policies; advocate for simplifi cation or reform of public fi nancial management; and advocate for mechanisms to ensure responsible revenue management.

Trading commodities: advocate for transparency to prevent transfer mispricing.

Revenue collection: build allies in tax administration; and advocate for better tax administration.

Revenue management: advocate for a transparent and participatory budget law and process; and advocate for benefi t sharing to affected communities.

Development projects and policies: advocate for linked planning and budget laws and processes.


APPENDICES

D – SPEAKERS’ BIOGRAPHIESDr. Filiberto A. Pollisco, Jr., Msc and Ph.D. Forestry Dr. Pollisco is a Programme Development Specialist in the ASEAN Centre for Biodiversity. He specializes in forest ecology and land management/land use planning; biodiversity conservation in genetic, species, and ecosystems levels; and ecotourism. He has vast experiences in project management, monitoring and evaluation, and environmental impact assessment (EIA). He was formerly an Assistant Director / Supervising Science Research Specialist (handling sloping land management, solid waste management, organic agriculture, soil and water conservation, and project development) at the Philippine Council for Agriculture, Forestry and Natural Resources Research and Development (PCARRD). He has also been a consultant in various EIA and development projects on protected areas, watershed management, coastal zones / mangrove ecosystems, and ecotourism. Nonoy has a PhD in Forestry specializing in Biodiversity Conservation and Ecotourism, and a Masters of Science Degree in Forestry from the University of the Philippines in Los Baños.

Mr. Douglas BroderickDouglas Broderick is the UN Resident Coordinator and UNDP Resident Representative, Cambodia Mr. Broderick leads the UN Country Team in Cambodia. He has more than 27 years international development experience working as a senior manager with the United Nations in Bangladesh, China, North Korea, Armenia, (former) Yugoslavia, Eritrea, Rwanda and Djibouti. He has worked with Catholic Relief Services in Iraq, the US, Jerusalem, the West Bank and Gaza, Egypt and Thailand. Before joining the UN Cambodia, Mr Broderick was the Country Representative of the World Food Programme in Bangladesh where he chaired the Disaster Management Team especially for the UN response to Cyclone Sidr and managed the UNs initial response to bird fl u outbreak. Mr Broderick was educated at the University of California, Berkeley USA and Universities in Spain and Mexico. He is also a graduate of the Senior Managers Programme at Harvard University.

Larry StrangeLarry Strange is the Executive Director of the Cambodia Development Resource Institute (CDRI), since December 2003. From 1993-2003 he was the Director of The Asia-Australia Institute at the University of New South Wales in Sydney, working on issues of Asian regionalism, major political, economic and social trends in East Asia, and their impact on Australian foreign policy. Prior to that he worked in senior management roles in both government and civil society. His educational background is in Asian history and politics, with a specialist interest in Southeast Asia and India, law, and international relations. He has particular research and policy interests in East Asian regional integration and the political discourse of national identity in response to regionalism and sub-regionalism, and in the impact of international development assistance policy and practice on developing countries in the Asian region.


APPENDICES

Dr. Hang Chuon Naron MA, Ph.D. International EconomicsDr. Hang is the Secretary General of the Ministry of Economy and Finance and Permanent Deputy Chairman of the Supreme National Economic Council (SNEC), a government think tank. He has authored various government policy papers and books on Cambodian economy and public fi nance. He is a member and chairperson on the Board of Directors of a number of State-Owned Enterprises, as well as research institutes and NGOs. As political and economic analyst he served in various diplomatic missions and research institutions and worked as a World

Bank consultant to the Royal Government of Cambodia. He held various positions at the Ministry of Economy and Finance, and was Deputy Secretary General in charge of Policies, including fi scal and fi nancial policies, ASEAN, fi nancial industry, economic analysis as well as negotiation with the IMF and the World Bank. Dr. Hang studied International Economics at Kiev State University and the Moscow State Institute of International Relations

Mr. Brian LUND MBA, B Agr Sci Brian Lund is the East Asia Regional Director of Oxfam America. Mr. Lund is able to bring the insight of over 25 years experience in natural resource management including 10 years in Cambodia to the discussion on sustainable land use manage options; the environment, community and State interests. He is responsible for Livelihood Development and Microfi nance for the Rural Poor, Trade Policy and Aid Effectiveness Debate, Climate Change Adaptation and Emergency Response Capacity for Oxfam America in East Asia. His work has included sustainable

agriculture, coastal management, protected area management and mine site rehabilitation. Currently Mr. Lund’s Extractive Industry Specialist Team is working directly with local and international civil society to raise awareness of the extractive industry potentials that will come from quality connection between State, industry and the community in Cambodia

Mr. Richard Thompson, ACSM, MIMM, SME.Richard Thompson is a consulting mining engineer and has worked for over 40 years in the mining industry and industrially related sectors. His expertise encompasses mining techniques, the application of mining equipment in specifi c mining conditions, production effi ciency of both fi xed assets and labor, development of purchase cost reduction programs, mine project evaluation, mining investment promotion, project management and training. He has extensive geographic practical experience gained in Europe, the Eastern Bloc, the Middle

East, Africa and the Americas. Richard established an independent business, RTT Mining, in 1989. Since 2003 he has worked on four major international projects funded by JICA, the Japan International Cooperation Agency, to plan the development of the mining sector and promotion of inward mining investment for the Governments of Mauritania, Laos, Serbia and Cambodia.


APPENDICES

Ms. Georgia BeansGeorgia Beans is the Country Representative for Pact, Inc. in Cambodia. She previously held the position of V.P. Operations in Pact Headquarters and has experience with Pact Corporate Social Responsibility work across Pact’s 23 country offi ces. Pact houses a Corporate Community Engagement (CCE) Unit in its head off in Washington, DC. Pact has developed corporate engagement relationships with a wide range of corporate actors including Pfi zer, Nike, Hewlett Packard, Rio Tinto, Anvil Mining, Phelps-Dodge, Freeport Mcmoran Mining, Chevron, Microsoft, Terra Global Capital and Levi-Strauss. Pact has supported CCE programs in climate change mitigation, health, HIV/AIDS prevention, livelihoods, natural resource management, agriculture, and micro-enterprise development. Ms. Beans will share many of the lessons learned from Pact’s engagement with the private sector in extractive industries in the mining, oil, gas, and carbon trading sectors.

Mr. Jason D. Jones, LEED APJason Jones has recently joined Cambodia’s nascent Extractive Industry Social and Environmental Impacts (EISEI) Network as an advisor. Pursuant to completing a comprehensive, Southeast Asiafocused, course of study at the University of Hawaii at Manoa (BA, MA), Mr. Jones has gained signifi cant private sector experience in the fi elds of environmental planning, sustainable design and cultural resource management throughout Asia and the USA. Mr. Jones has specifi c experience with a range of projects relating to transportation, master planning, water resource management, environmental conservation and extractive industry feasibility studies.

Mrs. Bhanumathi Kalluri, Master of Arts (Social Work-Urban and Rural Community Development)Mrs. Bhanumathi Kalluri is Director of the Dhaatri Resource Centre for Women and Children and has worked at both grassroots and policy advocacy for almost 20 years. She has worked with indigenous communities and has experience in community campaigns, capacity building of community organizationsand in networking at national and international level on land and resource rights, legal, governance and policy issues, evidence based research and lobbying, particularly from a gender rights perspective. She coordinates the International Women and Mining Network campaigning for rights of women displaced and women workers affected by the extractives industry.

Mr. Muhammed Husen, Ir, in Geology, M.Sc.Mr. Husen is the Deputy Coordinating Minister at the Ministry of Economic Affairs for Energy and Mineral Resources and Forestry in Indonesia.


APPENDICES

Mr. Xiong Tsechalicha, MSc. Env. Mngt & Devt.; BA. Economics Xiong Tsechalicha is the Protected Areas Coordinator with the IUCN Lao Country Programme. He has over 10 year experience working in the fi eld of environmental management and development in Lao PDR. His areas of expertise are natural resources management, environmental and social impact assessment, environmental education and community development. His major work experiences include environmental and social impact assessment of a hydropower project, study on economic instruments in environmental mana-

gement, forest land surveys, public consultation in relation to a large-scale mining project and work on health awareness of mercury application in small-scale and artisanal gold mining in Lao PDR. He also worked on Protected Area (PA) review methodology for classifi cation of the Lao national protected areas in accordance with the international PA category system and started to get involved in Strategic Environmental Assessment.

Eric Sidgwick, MA Int Rel, Msc Econ, BA Econ,Eric Sidgwick is the Senior Country Economist at the Cambodia Resident Mission. Mr Sidgwick is responsible for overseeing ADB’s operations and relations with Government in the areas of governance, fi nance, trade and private sector development. In the past Mr. Sidgwick worked for the IMF and the World Bank as an international macroeconomist for over a decade. He has extensive experience in analyzing a range of real, fi scal, monetary, banking, and external sector issues affecting the maintenance of macroeconomic stability, the

promotion of economic growth, and the reduction of poverty. He has worked in a wide cross-section of Asian countries, including Bangladesh, Cambodia, Lao, P.D.R., Malaysia, Mongolia, Nepal, Papua New Guinea, Sri Lanka, and Thailand.

Ms. Chandra KiranaChandra Kirana Prijosusilo, is the Asia Pacifi c Program Coordinator for the Revenue Watch Institute (RWI). She holds a degree in Clinical and Developmental Psychology, and has spent more than 20 years in the fi eld of sustainable development. In 1989, she initiated an environmental NGO to promote sustainable farming and biodiversity conservation. In 1994, she began working at the ASEAN level as a Greenpeace International Campaigner. Her engagement with extractive industries began in 2001 when she was asked assist in the

design and the running of the Extractive Industries Review review. The EIR was designed to review if and how the WB oil, gas and mining portfolio throughout the 1990s contributed to poverty reduction and sustainable development. Since then she has continued to focus her work within the extractive industries sector.


APPENDICES

Mr. Mam SambathMam Sambath, Executive Director, has worked for DPA for over 14 years. He is Chairman of CRRT and the Chairman of the National-level Extractive Industry Social and Environmental Network. He holds an MA in Veterinary Science of the Mongolia Institute of Agriculture and an MA in Public Administration and Policy from Western University in Phnom Penh. Mr. Mam has extensive experience in community development, leadership and management, governance, capacity building, research, M&E, advocacy and lobby. He is strongly engaged in the social and environmental impacts of EI and the promotion of the transparency and accountability of EI revenue. He works closely with the community and public institutions and focuses on strengthening ties with private mining companies and government institutions. Mr Mam has participated in the exchange event on Revenue Management in Timor Leste; the International Conference on Contract Transparency and NGO meeting on Advocacy Lines and Capacity Building in Washington D.C; and was a panelist for the International Conference on the Sustainable Development/Investment in the Mekong Countries in Beijing, China

Mr. PUTH Sorithy, MSc in Renewable Natural Resources, BSc in Forestry Mr. PUTH Sorithy is the Director of the Department of Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA), Cambodian Ministry of Environment. Mr. PUTH will bring the insight of over 10 years experience in EIA in Cambodia including almost 3 years in managing the EIA proces. His work includes overseeing and coordinating the preparation of EIA for investment/development projects/existing activities and making recom-mendations to decision makers on the projects/activities in association with environmental aspects as well as leading monitoring to ensure environmental management plans as stated in the approved EIA reports are complied with.

Mr. Glenn Kendall, MA (Econ)Glenn Kendall is Policy and Management Advisor, Extractive Industries, UNDP Cambodia. Mr. Kendall brings nearly 20 years of experience in mining and energy policy in both developed and developing country contexts. He has led UNDP Cambodia’s extractive industries (EI) activities since April 2009. Current UNDP Cambodia priorities in this area include capacity development support for Royal Government of Cambodia ministries and agencies involved in oil & gas and mining, and bringing new international EI knowledge to Cambodia, for example through UNDPs innovative Solution Exchange program. Most importantly, UNDP Cambodia supports the building of bridges between government, civil society and the private sector to help ensure that the industry develops responsibly and for the benefi t of all Cambodians.


APPENDICES

H. E. Dr. Phalla Phan , Ph.D. Econ H.E. Phan is currently the Director of IT Department in the Ministry of Economy and Finance and Deputy Secretary General of the Supreme National Economic Council. joined with the Ministry of Economy and Finance and a Researcher at the Supreme National Economy Council in 2004. He has engaged actively in the Public Financial Management Reform Program, the development of national and sector strategic plans and ASEAN’s affairs. He earned his Ph.D. in Economics from Australia.

Ms. LIM Solinn, MSc. Env. PoliciesSolinn Lim is the Regional Programme Coordinator of Oxfam America’s Extractive Industry Programme in East Asia. Ms Lim serves as a technical review advisor for Critical Ecology Partnership Fund – a joint grant portfolio for Indo-Burmese region’s biodiversity conservation and a member of VBNK’s board of directors – a leading manager’s training institute in Cambodia. In the past Ms. Lim was the Executive Director of a premier national conservation NGO in Cambodia in 2002. Her leadership has contributed to four-fold growth of the organisation. She has

over 12 years of extensive experience in the areas of Natural Resources and Environmental Management in Cambodia and various other countries in the region. She holds a MSc. in Environmental Policies from Oxford University.

Ms. Norly Grace P. Mercado, BA Publ Adm. MA Industr and Org. Psych.Norly Grace is the Mekong/South East Asia Regional Coordinator of the Bank Information Center (BIC). Norly has thirteen years of extensive experience in civil society network in Asia coordinating advocacy work, research, problem project monitoring as well as resource mobilization. Before BIC, she was with the Penang-based Pesticide Action Network-Asia and the Pacifi c (PAN AP) and the People’s Coalition on Food Sovereignty (PCFS) in her capacity as Coordinator, then eventually as Programme Consultant. She had also worked with Friends of the

Earth Philippines (LRCKSK) as Team Leader for its Campaigns Support and Linkages before handling the role as the Associate Executive Director. During the formative stage of the NGO Forum on ADB, Ms. Grace was part of its Secretariat doing advocacy-oriented research and analysis for its network members. She did Human Resource and Organizational Development consultancies for several groups in the region.

Ms. Radhika Sarin Radhika Sarin is the International Coordinator of the Publish What you Pay (PWYP) global civil society coalition that campaigns for transparency in the payment, receipt and management of revenues from the extractive industries. PWYP advocates for disclosure at national, regional and international levels through both voluntary and mandatory approaches such as national legislation, fi nancial regulations, stock market listing rules, and international accounting standards. Ms. Sarin is based in London and travels frequently to support the


APPENDICES

work of coalition members, coordinate advocacy efforts, and foster learning and exchange within the coalition. She also serves on the Board of the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI). Ms. Sarin has been working in the fi eld of environment and development for the past ten years, including in efforts to promote social, environmental and human rights criteria into mining policies and practices. Ms. Sarin holds Master of Science and Bachelor of Science degrees from Stanford University, where she specialised in sustainable development.

Mr. Mericio J. Dos Reis (Akara)Mericio J. Dos Reis (Akara) is the Director of Luta Hamutuk Institute, Timor Leste. He was a representative of Civil Society Organization in Timor Leste at the EITI Multi Stakeholder Group. In Luta Hamutuk Institute he is responsible for Oil Transparency and State Budget Transparency issues. He is also responsible for external networking. As a background that he spent around 10 year in developing Participatory Monitoring Based Advocacy in Timor Leste, before join Luta Hamutuk Institute.

Mr. Rodrigo U. Fuentes B.Sc., Forestry M.A., Urban and Regional Planning Mr. Rodrigo U. Fuentes is the Executive Director of the ASEAN Centre for Biodiversity (ACB) based in Los Banos, Laguna. He is a sustainable development and urban and regional planning expert who served in various capacities as a consultant with the Asian Development Bank, the World Bank, and the Overseas Economic Cooperation Fund’s and various United Nations agencies. He worked as an Environmental Offi cer of the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacifi c (UNESCAP). He is a former Director of the Environmental Management Bureau of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources of the Philippines and former advisor to the Secretariat of the UN Convention to Combat Desertifi cation (UNCCD), Bonn, Germany. Rod is also a recognized expert in environmental programme design and project development, policy and institutional assessment, environmental monitoring and assessment, and capacity development in environmental management and sustainable development.

E – SOME USEFUL RESOURCESIn addition to the presentations that can be found in the accompanying CD-ROM, workshop participants considered that the following resources are valuable for extractive industries governance advocacy:

ASEAN Economic Community Blueprint ASEAN Minerals Cooperation Action Plan2005-2010 ASEAN Plan of Action for Energy Cooperation 2010-2015 Christian Aid and PIPLinks, Breaking promises, making profi ts: Mining in the Philippines, December 2004 Coffey International Development Ltd, Validation of the Extractives Industries Transparency

Initiative (EITI) in Mongolia, January 2010


APPENDICES

Doyle, Cathal, Free Prior Informed Consent (FPIC) – a universal norm and framework for consultation and benefi t sharing in relation to indigenous peoples and the extractive sector, Paper prepared for OHCHR Workshop on Extractive Industries, Indigenous Peoples and Human Rights, Moscow, 3-4 December 2008 EITI International Secretariat, Board Paper 12-4-A, , Mongolia Validation, For Decision, 30 March 2010 The Manila Declaration of the International Conference on Extractive Industries and Indigenous

Peoples, 23-25 March 2009 Mines & Communities: The London Mining Declaration, October 2007 Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade and UNDP, Trade Policy and Human Development in

Mongolia, 2008 Open Society Forum, License Watch #11, 11 May 2009 Open Society Forum, ‘Issues to be refl ected in Oyutolgoi agreement’, 6 October 2009 Oxfam Australia, Community-company grievance resolution: A guide for the Australian mining

industry, 2010 Presidential Regulation, Republic of Indonesia, Number 26, Year 2010, Regarding Transparency

of National/Local Extractive Industry Revenues (Translation) Ruggie, John, ‘Putting the “Protect, Respect, Remedy” Framework into Practice’, 29 April 2010 Sampat, Payal, ‘Scrapping Mining Dependence’, in Worldwatch Institute, State of the World 2003,

pp110-129 Whitmore, Andy, ‘The emperors new clothes: sustainable mining?’, in Marker B R, Petterson,

M G, McEvoy, F, and Stephenson, M H (eds), Sustainable Minerals Operations in the Developing World, 2005, pp233-242 Weitzner, Viviane, Bucking the Wild West – Making Free, Prior and Informed Consent Work,

Speaking Notes for Free, Prior and Informed Consent Panel, Prospector and Developers Association of Canada annual convention, 3 March 2009

F – WORKSHOP PARTICIPANTS LIST

No. Name of Participants Position Organization Country E-mail

1 Chheng Kimlong Economist US Embassy Cambodia [email protected]

2 Buonsan Bathya Adviser Youth Resource Development Program Cambodia [email protected]

3 Chan Ramy Senior Project Assistant Youth Resource Development Program Cambodia [email protected]

4 Chan Sophal President CEA Cambodia

5 Chan Soratha Advocacy DPA Cambodia [email protected]

6 Cheang Sokha Executive Director Youth Resource Development Program Cambodia [email protected]

7 Chhay Sarath Coordinator Cambodians for Resource Revenue Transparency Cambodia [email protected]


APPENDICES

8 Brian Lund Regional Director Oxfam America Cambodia [email protected]

9 Chhet Takk Core Group Youth Resource Development Program Cambodia

10 Chhun Chea Offi ce Assistant Oxfam America Cambodia [email protected]

11 Chhun Sophal Offi ce Chief DoEIA/MoE Cambodia [email protected]

12 Chim Chamnap Interiam Finance Oxfam America Cambodia [email protected]

13 Chou Huot Researcher EIC Cambodia [email protected]

14 Claudia Feo Regional Director NPA Cambodia [email protected]

15 Dara Rith Extractive Industry Impact Offi cer

Development and Partnership in Action Cambodia [email protected]

16 Dek Vimeanpheakdey Program Offi cer SCW Cambodia

17 Dewi P 3rd Secretary Indonesian Em bassy Cambodia

18 Dominic Renfrey Extractive Industry Impact Advisor

Development & Partnership in Action Cambodia [email protected]

19 Douglas Broderick Resident Coordinator United Nation Cambodia [email protected]

20 Edward Pollard Policy advisor WCS Cambodia [email protected]

21 Em Chan Makara ED SCY Cambodia

22 Filicity James Advocacy Support Offi cer DPA Cambodia [email protected]

23 Geogia Bean Country Representative PACT Cambodia [email protected]

24 H.E. Hang Chuon Naron Vice Chairman Supreme National

Economic Council Cambodia [email protected]

25 Hem Vanna V. Ditector FGH Cambodia [email protected]

26 Hon Navoun PC HA Cambodia [email protected]

27 Juhani Platt Political/ Economic Offi cer US Embassy Cambodia [email protected]

28 Kak Soknim Retail Manager Sokimex Cambodia

29 Katrin Seidel HBF Cambodia [email protected]

30 Khan Chanthavy Adm Intern Oxfam America Cambodia [email protected],

31 Kheang Seangly Climate Change Intern Oxfam America Cambodia [email protected]

32 Khem Chhorvida Young Reporter SCY Cambodia

33 Khun Borin Executive Director CARDH Cambodia

34 Khun Darith Regional Adm Oxfam Amerca Cambodia [email protected]

35 Kim Philly Eng.Resource CRRT Cambodia [email protected]

36 Kong Sopheaktra Core Group Youth Resource Development Program Cambodia


APPENDICES

37 Kourn Kim Core Group Youth Resource Development Program Cambodia

38 Larry Strange Executive Director CDRI Cambodia [email protected]

39 Lav Bunrithy Program Offi cer-EI Oxfam America Cambodia [email protected]

40 Leang Chhaly Dep. Director General CNPA Cambodia [email protected]

41 Lim Solinn Regional Program Coordinator-EI Oxfam America Cambodia [email protected]

42 Lim Mon Coordinator CIDDA Cambodia

43 Ly Chhay Young Reporter SCY Cambodia

44 Ly Pichadaroat EDC Project Offi cer NGOF Cambodia [email protected]

45 Mach Khemra Core Group Youth Resource Development Program Cambodia

46 Mam Sambath Executive Director Development and Partnership in Action Cambodia [email protected]

47 Matt Maltby TA FFI Cambodia matt.mabtby.ffi @gmail.com,

48 Matthew Duckworth Second Secretary Australian Embassy Cambodia matthew.duckworth@dfat.

gov.au

49 Michael Engquist Management Advisor DANIDA Cambodia [email protected]

50 Mona Laczo Dep. Regional Director Oxfam America Cambodia [email protected]

51 Ngy Mithuna Offi ce Chief MoE Cambodia [email protected]

52 Molly Sterns Comm Adv DPA Cambodia [email protected]

53 Nop Polin National Climate Change Offi cer Oxfam America Cambodia [email protected]

54 Noth Monyrath Sr. Pro. Manager AusAid Cambodia

55 Ouk Thira Project Offi cer for Cambodia, CEPF,-RIT Bird Life International Cambodia [email protected]

56 Pao Roatana CO CRR Cambodia

57 Pen Ratana PC HBF Cambodia ratana@hbf

58 Pen Sophal Media Offi cer UNDP Cambodia [email protected]

59 Peng Navuth Deputy Director MIME Cambodia

60 Phan Sothea Programme Associate Oxfam America Cambodia [email protected]

61 Phean Sophoan Regional Policy Offi cer Oxfam America Cambodia [email protected]

62 Phork Panha Offi cer MoE Cambodia

63 Prak Bauraksmey PO NPA Cambodia [email protected]

64 Puth Sorithy Director of Department of EIA

Ministry of Environment Cambodia [email protected]

65 Ream Chamroeun YR SCY Cambodia


APPENDICES

66 Rithy Chandara Program Assistant CCAF Cambodia

67 Ros Chhorvivoan Executive Director VSG Cambodia

68 Rous Dara Core Group Youth Resource Development Program Cambodia

69 Sam Sovanna Country Director Oxfam Australia Cambodia [email protected]

70 San Boran Editor SCY Cambodia [email protected]

71 Seab Kanha Core Group Youth Resource Development Program Cambodia

72 Seang Soleak Regional Communication Offi cer Oxfam America Cambodia [email protected]

73 Seng Sovathana PO Trocaire Cambodia

74 Sey Peou Core Group Youth Resource Development Program Cambodia

75 Shi Lily Research consultant HBF Cambodia [email protected]

76 Sinthay Neb Director API Cambodia [email protected]

77 Sok Sina Public Finance GTZ-NAA Cambodia [email protected]

78 Sor Sontheary Economic Researcher SNEC Cambodia [email protected]

79 Soum Sokunthea YRDP Staff Youth Resource Development Program Cambodia

80 Svay Phoeurn CPN Preah Vihear Cambodia

81 Tang Sunhao PM NPA Cambodia [email protected]

82 Tep Socheata Assist for Dr. Cheam Yeap NA Cambodia

83 Terry Parnnel Advisor East West Management Institution Cambodia [email protected]

84 Thy Try Advocacy DPA Cambodia [email protected]

85 Tobias JacksonCountry Programme Manager for Cambodia &Myanmar

Oxfam Hong Kong Cambodia [email protected]

86 Tong Kimsun Researcher CDRI Cambodia [email protected]

87 Vivann Dvong Business Facilitator Vivann Consulting Cambodia [email protected]

88 Wayae Sharpe Chief Editor UNDP Cambodia [email protected]

89 Yim Sorya Adm Associate Oxfam America Cambodia [email protected]

90 Yos Monyrath Deputy Director General MIME Cambodia

91 Wahyuningrum (Yuyun) Policy Advisor - ASEAN Oxfam International Hong Kong [email protected]

92 Bhanumathi Kalluri Director Asia-Pacifi c Offi ce, International

Women and Mining Network India [email protected]

93 Chandra Kirana Coordinator PWYP-Indonesia Indonesia [email protected]


APPENDICES

94 Fabby Tumiwa Asia Pacifi c Coordinator Revenue Watch Institute Indonesia [email protected]

95 Kisma Raharjo Assistant of Deputy Coordinating Minister

Ministry of Economic Affairs for Energy and Natural Resources

Indonesia [email protected]

96 Morentalisa Hutapea Offi ce Chief

Ministry of Economic Affairs for Energy and Natural Resources

Indonesia

97 Muhammad Husen Excecutive Director Indonesia Mining Association Indonesia [email protected]

98 Ridaya Laodengkowe

Program Coordinator-Regional Offi ce Jakarta InWent Indonesia [email protected]

99 Xiong Tsechalicha Oxfam Solidarity Belgium Lao PDR [email protected]

100 David Allan Director Sustainable Development Knowledge Network Myanma [email protected].

mm ; [email protected]

101 Naw Ei Ei Min Coordinator Spectrum Myanma [email protected]

102 Sengelmaa D Senior Mining Specialist The World Bank, Mongolia Country Offi ce Mongolia [email protected]

103Consuelo Katrina A. Lopa (Corinna)

Regional Coordinator SEACA / South East Asian Committee for Advocacy Philippines [email protected]

104 Filiberto Pollisco Executive Director ASEAN Centre for

Biodiversity (ACB) Philippines [email protected]

105 Lord Byron Abadeza Project Coordiantor BANTAY KITA/ Transparency & Accountability Network Philippines [email protected]

107 Norly Grace Mercado Regional Coordinator BIC Thailand [email protected]

108 Mericio J. Dos Reis (Akara) Executive Director Luta Hamutuk Institute Timor Leste

[email protected]; [email protected]

109 Andy Whitmore Editing Manager PIPLinks United Kingdom [email protected]

110 Radhika Sarin International Coordinator PWYP United Kingdom

[email protected]

111 Richard Thompson Mining Investment Expert CAFOD United Kingdom rttmining@btinternet,com

112 Nguyen Hai Van Policy Researcher People and Nature Reconciliation Vietnam [email protected]

113 Tran Trung Kien Director Consultancy for Development and Envrionment Vietnam [email protected]

114 Khan Chanthavy Adm Intern Oxfam America Cambodia [email protected],

115 Brigitte Reisenberger Researcher Unknown [email protected]

Oxfam

Oxfam is an international confederation of 14 organizations working together in 99 countries and with partners and allies around the world to fi nd lasting solutions to poverty and injustice.

We work directly with communities and we seek to infl uence the powerful to ensure that poor people can improve their lives and livelihoods and have a say in decisions that affect them.

For further inquiries, please contact Oxfam America East Asia Regional Offi ce

4th Floor, #64 Street 108, Sangkat Wat Phnom, Khan Daun Penh, Phnom Penh, Cambodia. Tel: (+855) 23 210 357E-mail: [email protected]: www.oxfamamerica.org

Documents

Governance of Extractive Industries in SEA_Oxfam