Ghana: Poverty and Social Impact Analysis
of the Artisanal and Small Scale Mining Sector
Kristina Svensson
World Bank Sustainable Energy Division - Oil, Gas, and Mining Department
PSIA Learning Days, March 14, 2013
Why artisanal and small scale mining?

Large-scale mining company influx
during 1990-2000s;

500,000 to 1 million miners, majority
illegal on large scale concessions;

Today small-scale mining is 28% of total
Ghana gold production;

Negative social and environmental
impacts, land conflicts;

Increasingly mechanized and with
foreign investments (Chinese).
PSIA Objectives
Inform Government of Ghana (GoG) policies
and practices related to ASM by producing new data
on the sector, and new analysis;
2. Inform the preparation of the next phase of
Bank support for NREG, specially with regards
to mining sector activities;
3. To facilitate the creation of a platform for
dialogue and consultations among a range of
ASM stakeholders
1.
To assess the poverty, welfare, and social impact of the
Small-Scale Gold Mining Law (1989) ex-post, and do
an ex-ante assessment of the revised Draft Mining
Policy
Methodology
Limited primary data: Desk- and  Transmission channels for tracing
field study (Japa in Wassa Amenfi
impact of policy reforms:
East District)
◦ Employment
 Limited use of “counter-factual”
◦ Prices

◦ Lack of comparable countries
◦ Problem with national data
Participatory space and dialogue
 Political economy

◦
◦
◦
◦
Access
Assets
Transfers
Taxes and authority
Key PSIA findings
1.
2.
3.
Artisanal and small scale mining today in Ghana can be a
wealth creating sector - not necessarily “poverty driven” or
“get-rich-quick” phenomena;
Current licensing and access to land regimes are not
working for majority of artisanal and small-scale miners, and
leads to illegality, conflicts, and human rights abuses;
There are important regional differences within Ghana in
terms of how well existing ASM policies work.
Livelihood matrix for typical smallscale gold “pit” (Japa, 2012)
Productive chain
activity
Excavating
Shovelling/
feeding grinder
Washing on site
Transport
concentrate off
site in cars
Second round
processing of
concentrate off
site
Fetching and
reprocessing
“tailings”
Off site cooking
and delivery of
“chop” on site
On site cleaning
of grinders with
knives
On site Ata Buata
maintenance
work (cleaning
the washboards)
Number of
workers
1
21
Gender (adult
unless stated)
Male
Male
Average Income
(Cedis)
1,000/month
200/week*
Hours worked
7
1
Male
Male
300/week**
100/week**
Varies
Varies
1
N/K
4 hours/week
14
Female (teenage
women and older
rather than young
girls)
Male (boys)
Varies
2
Female
?
Female
Independent
operators
[55 per ‘blade’(0.8
grammes)]
Independent
service provider
(Approx 30/week)
N/K
?
Female
N/K
Varies
8 hours/day
90 hours/week
Varies
Varies
Distribution of wealth in small-scale
mining community of Japa
Social mobility
Very Rich
(12 households)
Characteristics
Luxurious cars
Own excavators
Mansions
Lots of money
Landowner
Rich
(50-60 households)
Own prosperous small business (e.g. beer bar)
Some buy cocoa farms (up to 10 acres)
Considerable amount of cash flow
Own land and have their own plots (although not as rich as other land)
Rent an excavator
They have sponsors
Semi-rich
(500+ households)
Accumulate money and keep it in the bank
Buy water pumps + tube for hiring
Work in the pits
Young men/’youth’
Different types of houses
Public standpipe and filtered water
Large cocoa farmers
Small shop owners
Poor
(500+ households)
No access to galamsey land
Nothing to do with galamsey
Salaried workers, civil servants
You can’t build your own house
Live in mud house
Small subsistence cocoa farms
Young girls (15-18) with babies but no father
Widows
Licensing and Access to Land
Policy focus to
attract large
scale mining
investments
Expensive and
complicated
licensing
procedure
Illegality
conflict
human
rights abuses
Lack of landuse planning
taking ASM
into account
Lack of
access to
geologically
suitable land
for ASM
Regional mining frontiers
Proposed policy approaches
PSIA Findings
Proposed policy approach
1. ASM can be a wealth-creating
sector, but currently treated as
poverty-driven.
-Fiscal policy/taxation of ASMs;
-Communication to change mind-set and
debate;
-Continued broader regular dialogues with
all stakeholders.
2. Regional differences in policy
effectiveness – Designated area
approach not working in regions
with LSM.
Dynamic approach to designated area
approach and adapting support services
3. Licensing and access to land not
working for majority of ASM leading to illegality and human
rights abuses.
-Categorization of miners in regulations;
-Licensing regime needs to be
decentralized and simplified;
-Access to productive land for ASM
prioritized;
-Dialogue with large scale mining
companies, and other institutions
What worked?
Despite initial weak
government participation, the
PSIA helped to open up policy
space;
 “Social inclusion” on agenda,
but more focus on sector
reforms;
 Strong engagement with other
stakeholders (miners, NGOs,
large scale companies);
 Part of series of programs and
activities – would not have
worked as a one-off activity.

Lessons learned
Difficult policy environment – strong political
preference to focus on continuing to attract
and retain large scale mining;
 More primary data needed to show economic
impact of ASM in communities;
 Stakeholder engagement useful, but more
needed with NGOs and communities and
chiefs/stools needed;
 Political economy analysis useful in showing
political power of ASM.

Thanks for your attention!