IOS 5 feb 20

[5/2 15.52] Diskusi Pustaka Saga: Welcome in our IOS 2020's Group. thanks for joining us. Staytune on the schedule, please. 😊🙏.  We would like to inform that Mr. @⁨Roald⁩  will give presentation on 07.00 PM (GMT +7).
[5/2 20.00] +62 856-3205-774: Good evening ladies and gentlemen welcome back in IOS 2020 🤗.

Today we have *Mr. Roald Leeuwerik* as the keynote speaker with the topic of *Seabed Mining and its Societal Acceptance (a Case Study in )*.

First, I would introduce myself. I am Dita Wisudyawati, a MSc graduates of Wageningen University and Research, the Netherlands.

In this case, I am responsible as the event organizer of IOS and the host of IOS group today.

We also have a translator to help us in translation if it's necessary. Her name is Ms. Shobrina. Ms. Shobrina the floor is yours 😊🙏🏻.
[5/2 20.14] +62 856-3205-774: Thank you very much for time and help Ms. Shobrina. Hope everything goes well today.
Here we go, ladies and gentlemen...today we have the order of IOS as following :

1. Introduction by Mr. Roald

2. Presentation of the topic by Mr. Roald

3. Discussion

4. Closing including conclusion statement by Mr. Roald

5. Closing by me as the host.

So let's start IOS today. Mr. Roald, the floor is yours 😊🙏🏻
[5/2 20.15] +31 6 42051229: I am Roald Leeuwerik and have studied Aquaculture and Marine resource management at Wageningen University. Today I will present about seabed mining and its societal acceptance using the concept of the ‘Social License to Operate’ (SLO). Firstly, I will tell you something about seabed mining and introduce the SLO. Lastly, I will present some main results from my MSc thesis on this topic.
[5/2 20.15] +31 6 42051229: What is seabed mining and why is it being looked at?
[5/2 20.16] +31 6 42051229: Seabed mining is promising in different ways. First of all, many reserves on land are dwindling and this may be compensated by exploitation offshore. In addition, various valuable metals (e.g. copper, cobalt, rare earth metals) have been found in high concentrations, also in very deep waters. You may have heard from Nautilus Minerals and the ‘Solwara site’, situated in Papua New Guinea territorial waters. Many of the resources are needed for future development, for instance for the production of solar panels.
[5/2 20.17] +31 6 42051229: Apart from the potential that seabed mining offers, various actors (e.g. NGO’s, scientists) also see various risks. One can think of the removal of benthic organisms through drilling, habitat destruction and the generation of sediment plumes. Sediment plumes can be transported over large distances through currents and thereby smother benthic organisms or make waters turbid and reduce photosynthesis rates for instance.
[5/2 20.18] +31 6 42051229: These economic interests but also the potential impacts make seabed mining a socially and politically sensitive topic. It is also not yet taking place at a large scale but is still mostly limited to exploratory missions.
[5/2 20.18] +31 6 42051229: Some exceptions of countries that have seabed mining operations taking place are Indonesia (tin mining in Bangka Belitung) and Namibia (marine diamond mining). Concerning Namibia, what is interesting is that a newly proposed project on marine phosphate mining is facing serious societal opposition. Meanwhile, marine diamond mining is already taking place at large commercial scale since 1994 and is (still) largely undebated.
[5/2 20.19] +31 6 42051229: Against this background, I decided to use the “Social License to Operate” (SLO) as theoretical concept to better understand the societal debate on the development of the seabed mining industry, focussing in particular on the Namibian cases.
[5/2 20.21] +31 6 42051229: So why is there a SLO and what is it about?
[5/2 20.22] +31 6 42051229: Firstly, the SLO has emerged from a demand of societal stakeholders to be more strongly engaged in decision-making procedures. Recent decades have seen the traditional role of governments as unique decision-making authority being weakened. Increasingly, stakeholder expect and actively demand to be involved in decision-making.
[5/2 20.23] +31 6 42051229: Secondly, the SLO is the result of an overall trend of reduced trust in governmental authorities. Governments have not always been able to deliver on their promises, or made economic interests prevail over societal interests. Because the SLO is concerned with the on-going acceptance or approval of a project by societal stakeholders, governments now face more intense scrutiny of their decisions.
[5/2 20.25] +31 6 42051229: How is the SLO achieved?
[5/2 20.25] +31 6 42051229: Very broadly speaking, what is very important for the SLO are the concepts of trust and legitimacy.
[5/2 20.26] +31 6 42051229: Concerning trust, what this means in practice is that (mining) project proponents will need to engage intensively with societal stakeholders. They will need to engage them in their project plans, but also really listen to them and consider their input in both the preparation and the operational phase of the project.
[5/2 20.28] +31 6 42051229: Concerning legitimacy, different types can be identified. In its core, however, it is concerned with how the actions of a project proponent are perceived to be beneficial for societal stakeholders and how they align with their cultural perspectives and norms (the ‘rightness’).
[5/2 20.33] +31 6 42051229: At a very basic level for the SLO, it is about the economic benefits brought to societal stakeholders in terms of employment and financial benefits (e.g. royalties, tax contributions). This is referred to as ‘economic output legitimacy’ and may lead to a level of acceptance. This is the most common level of the SLO. However, at this level the need for intensive stakeholder engagement is not high, meaning trust relationships are generally absent or weak. You can imagine that this can be a fragile balance and as soon as benefits decrease, or when people discover about negative impacts for instance, the SLO may be lost.
[5/2 20.37] +31 6 42051229: Without going very deep into detail on the higher levels, there are the levels of 'approval' and 'psychological identification'. As a general principle, reaching these levels requires more intensive and continuous stakeholder engagement and investing in projects that benefit the community at large (e.g. healthcare, education, …).
[5/2 20.40] +31 6 42051229: With this background in mind, it seems the SLO is the key for project proponents to start making their (mining) projects reality. However, the SLO is not an ‘official license’ as we know it…
[5/2 20.42] +31 6 42051229: Generally, project proponents will still need to do Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs) to obtain an environmental permit. And next to that, they often also have to apply for a separate mining permit. These licenses are known as Legal Licenses to Operate (LLO).
[5/2 20.47] +31 6 42051229: Next to the LLO, there is also the Political License to Operate (PLO). This refers to the political ‘climate’ so to speak and whether the right conditions are offered to move a project ahead. For instance, when a political coalition opposes the use of fossil fuels, projects in this sector may face more difficulties to move forward.
[5/2 20.50] +31 6 42051229: Different authors suggest some sort of interaction between the different licenses. For example, effective and clear legislation on environmental protection and requirements on EIA processes (e.g. on stakeholder engagement) are part of the LLO. When legal obligations are well defined and complied with, they can contribute to achieving the SLO as well.
[5/2 20.51] +31 6 42051229: So what can my thesis research contribute to further research on the SLO?
[5/2 20.52] +31 6 42051229: The main contribution I aimed for is to provide an integrated theoretical framework, including the SLO, LLO and PLO. This framework can be used for case analyses, like I did in Namibia.
[5/2 20.53] +31 6 42051229: For the SLO, the framework includes the fundamental factors of trust and legitimacy which are set out in indicators.
[5/2 20.54] +31 6 42051229: The LLO and PLO are part of the broader ‘context’ in which decision-making takes place.
[5/2 20.54] +31 6 42051229: Lastly, the framework includes ‘status’. This pyramid-shaped figure includes the different levels of the SLO that can be reached by a project proponent.
[5/2 20.57] +31 6 42051229: Now some lessons from Namibia:
[5/2 21.00] +31 6 42051229: I found that an important reason for the difference in societal acceptance between marine diamond mining and marine phosphate mining was the environmental legislation in place (LLO). To be more precise, the legislation in place when the initial environmental permit was granted. For marine diamond mining this was back in 1994 and there was hardly any legislation in place back at the time. Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs) were done voluntarily, stakeholder engagement was not required and societal awareness was also pretty low.
[5/2 21.03] +31 6 42051229: In 2012, this situation changed. New legislation was implemented, containing detailed rules on EIA’s and stakeholder engagement. It was at this moment as well that a new project was proposed (marine phosphate mining). Coupled to increased societal awareness, stakeholders were now better able to challenge the decision on granting an environmental permit. After all, they could now refer to official regulations on paper. In particular, the project proponent, ‘Namibian Marine Phosphate’, was criticised on the lack of stakeholder engagement and the quality of data used in the EIA.
[5/2 21.06] +31 6 42051229: You may see this has its repercussions on the fundamental factors of trust and legitimacy, thereby affecting the SLO and the level reached.
[5/2 21.08] +31 6 42051229: Next to these difficulties, also the PLO offered some important insights. Most importantly, I found that the Ministry of Environment and Tourism (MET) and the Ministry of Fisheries and Marine Resources (MFMR) were not on the same line.
[5/2 21.09] +31 6 42051229: While the MET has the responsibility to grant environmental permits for all projects (both onshore and offshore), the MFMR challenges this. In fact, the MFMR claims the MET lacks expertise on the marine environment and favours economic interests over environmental protection. The MFMR felt unheard and demands a stronger role in decision-making.
[5/2 21.11] +31 6 42051229: And apart from this disagreement and distrust at governmental level, what I found is that the MFMR joined the fisheries industry and several NGO’s in challenging the marine phosphate mining project. This is an important reason why the project has still not been able to secure an environmental permit (LLO), lacks political support (PLO) and has not convinced societal stakeholders as well (SLO).
[5/2 21.16] +31 6 42051229: But what then about marine diamond mining? Well, apart from the fact an environmental permit (LLO) is already in place, there are some additional points to consider:
[5/2 21.17] +31 6 42051229: Firstly, the Namibian government is a partner of De Beers, the diamond mining company. It has a 50% share and thus an interest in project continuation. Clearly, a PLO is in place here and the governments benefits from it.
[5/2 21.18] +31 6 42051229: Moreover, the company is an important employer for Namibians, a major tax payer and is investing in different societal projects. Generally speaking, (marine) diamond mining is seen as an economic lifeline for Namibia, with a proven track record.
[5/2 21.20] +31 6 42051229: You may recognize there the needed requirements to achieve 'economic output legitimacy', which results in the SLO level of acceptance.
[5/2 21.23] +31 6 42051229: And apart from having achieved acceptance, marine diamond mining already exists for a long time. At a small-scale already since the 1950's. This long history, added to its large economic importance, have resulted in 'cognitive legitimacy'. People do not see how Namibia would develop without this sector. And cognitive legitimacy can result in the SLO level of 'approval', which is one level higher again than acceptance.
[5/2 21.26] +31 6 42051229: Does this make them immune for public scrutiny? It is hard to look into the future. However, it seems that the societal discussion on the future for marine phosphate mining does indeed make societal stakeholders more critical on marine diamond mining as well.
[5/2 21.28] +31 6 42051229: Recently, the lack of transparency on environmental monitoring, as well as the lack of stakeholder engagement in EIA revisions have been criticized. Moreover, the range of societal benefits, compared to the potential risks of marine diamond mining, are more critically looked at now than before.
[5/2 21.29] +31 6 42051229: Consequently, it is not impossible that the status quo for marine diamond mining will change in the future. Although it is unlikely the SLO will be lost altogether, societal stakeholders may force the mining company to be more transparent and/or to invest more in the Namibian society.
[5/2 21.32] +31 6 42051229: This is it from my side. I would like to know if there are questions? After that I will still provide a short closure :)
[5/2 21.34] +62 856-3205-774: Thank you very much for your presentation including the explanation in details of the seabed mining and societal acceptance and case in Namibia.
Now is the time for discussion.
Anybody wants to ask or give opinion?