Abstract

This article identifies the two dominant discourses that attempt to explain socioenvironmental change from bauxite mining in Eastern India and compares them to empirical material from three proposed mining locations. The anti-mining "life-giving hills" discourse understands the bauxite-bearing hills as an essential part of a wider ecosystem that supports sustainable, indigenous communities. The pro-mining "treasure chest" discourse, on the other hand, sees barren, uninhabited hilltops with rich ore deposits possible to extract for the benefit of the nation without harming nearby forests or communities. It is found that both discourses hold universalizing aspirations not backed up by available evidence. The technical rationality of mining proponents create sweeping generalizations resulting in unmitigated socio-environmental change, while the eco-romanticist opposition fails to see how communities and environments are differentially affected by mining. Two untenable discourses at present underpin seemingly intractable conflict without addressing wider resource politics dominated by political and business elites.

Keywords

Bauxite mining; discourse; India; indigenous people; resource conflict

Published in

Society and Natural Resources
2017, Volume: 30, number: 8, pages: 994-1008
Publisher: TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC

SLU Authors

• Oskarsson, Patrik

  • Department of Urban and Rural Development, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences
    

UKÄ Subject classification

Social Sciences Interdisciplinary


Publication identifier

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920.2017.1295496

Permanent link to this page (URI)

https://res.slu.se/id/publ/85205