contaminated identities: mercury and marginalization in ghana’s … · 2019-08-31 ·...

www.elsevier.com/locate/geoforum

Geoforum 38 (2007) 1304–1321

Contaminated identities: Mercury and marginalizationin Ghana’s artisanal mining sector

Petra Tschakert a,*, Kamini Singha b

a Department of Geography/Alliance for Earth Sciences, Engineering, and Development in Africa (AESEDA),

Pennsylvania State University, 315 Walker Building, University Park, PA 16802-5011, USAb Department of Geosciences, Pennsylvania State University, 311 Deike Building, University Park, PA 16802, USA

Received 14 January 2007; received in revised form 24 April 2007

Abstract

This article provides a counter-narrative to the dominant discourse of marginalization and criminalization of Ghana’s illegal gold min-ers (galamsey) by focusing on the contested mercury debate. We first examine the complex and multifaceted policy problem that underliesthe current conflictual aspects in the small-scale mining sector, arguing that mercury use and contamination are key elements in the antiga-lamsey rhetoric. Second, we describe an interdisciplinary pilot study on human and environmental health that involved health personneland illegal miners from two sites. Through participatory ranking and mapping activities, we explored participants’ understanding of mer-cury and other life hazards as well as causes and consequences of mercury contamination. We used chemical indicator strips to samplecontaminated areas in collaboration with the miners. By drawing upon novel concepts from the environmental justice and ecohealthliterature, we propose a political ecology of human and environmental health that advocates recognition of galamsey operators and theirparticipation in learning opportunities as a first step out of the current impasse in the Ghanaian small-scale mining sector.� 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Mercury; Marginalization; Illegal mining; Political ecology; Ecohealth; Environmental justice; Ghana

1. Introduction

Artisanal and small-scale mining (ASM) in developingcountries is a largely poverty-driven activity. ASM is apractice that involves rudimentary techniques of mineralextraction, highly manual processes, hazardous workingconditions, and frequently negative human and environ-mental health impacts (Hilson, 2002). An estimated80–100 million people worldwide are currently engaged inthis industry and directly or indirectly depend on it fortheir livelihood (Veiga and Baker, 2004). While ASM hasthe potential to contribute to poverty reduction, it oftenperpetuates poverty through high sensitivity to physical

0016-7185/$ - see front matter � 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

doi:10.1016/j.geoforum.2007.05.002

* Corresponding author.E-mail addresses: [email protected] (P. Tschakert), ksingha@geosc.

psu.edu (K. Singha).

hazards, illness, and accidents, and lack of knowledgeabout more efficient, safer, and environmentally friendlytechniques. These factors tend to keep miners trapped ina vicious cycle of poverty and vulnerability (Heemskerk,2005; Sinding, 2005).

In Ghana, ASM, mostly of gold, has expanded dramati-cally in recent years. The country is currently Africa’s sec-ond largest gold producer after South Africa, with goldexports accounting for >40% of total export earnings (Mate,1999, in Carson et al., 2005). Over the past ten decades, Gha-naian gold production from ASM activities has risen tenfoldand doubled since 1998 (Table 1), accounting for an esti-mated contribution of $461.1 million to the national econ-omy since 1989 (Carson et al., 2005). Between 300,000 and500,000 people are currently involved in small-scale goldextraction, which amounts to roughly two thirds of Ghana’stotal gold miners (Carson et al., 2005; Ryan, 2006). Hilsonand Potter (2003) estimate that half of those employed in

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:ksingha@geosc. psu.edu

mailto:ksingha@geosc. psu.edu

Table 1Small-scale mining, Ghana

Year Sales($ millions)

Ounces % Small-scalemining intotal Ghana

1989 3.4 9272 2.21990 6.3 17,233 3.21991 5.3 15,601 1.81992 6.1 17,297 1.71993 11.5 35,144 2.81994 34.7 89,520 6.21995 48.7 127,025 7.41996 36.0 112,349 7.11997 28.4 107,094 5.91998 36.6 128,334 5.41999 35.2 130,833 5.22000 40.9 145,662 6.22001 39.3 185,596 8.72002 48.9 160,879 7.22003 79.8 211,414 9.5

Total 461.1 1,593,253

Sources: Amankwah and Anim-Sackey (2004) and Yakubu (2002).

P. Tschakert, K. Singha / Geoforum 38 (2007) 1304–1321 1305

the sector are women, one of the highest rates in Africa.Women typically work as panners, carriers, and processorsas well as jewelry makers, cooks, and other service providers(including prostitutes) in and around mining sites.

As Ghana’s per capita income (GDP) is $434 and theunemployment rate for the 15–24 age group has reacheda national average of 30% (in mining areas 70–90%),ASM provides a vital source of income to tens of thou-sands of people who have few means for survival in the for-mal economy (Carson et al., 2005). Most men and womenengaged in the ASM sector are farmers and miners whohave lost land to large-scale, multinational mining corpora-tions. High unemployment rates in urban areas explain therising number of former professionals, semi-skilled labor-ers, and university graduates now found in the ASM min-ing sector (Hilson and Potter, 2005).

Despite the state’s official policy to promote small-scalemining as a catalyst for poverty reduction and sustainabledevelopment (Aryee, 2003) and various attempts to regu-larize the sector through a series of laws and enactments,illegal mining in Ghana continues to be widespread.According to Carson et al. (2005), roughly 85% of the totallabor force operate without an official license. Locally,these miners are referred to as galamsey, a term that orig-inated from the phrase ‘gather and sell’ (Rambaud et al.,2000). In practical terms, there are few differences organi-zationally or technologically between unregistered illegaland registered small-scale miners, with the exception thatthe latter have security of tenure, or legal entitlement towork a plot of land (Carson et al., 2005). Illegal small-scalemining is certainly not restricted to Ghana. According tothe International Labor Organization (ILO, 1999), up to80% of small-scale miners worldwide operate without for-mal authorization. The main reasons for the high numberof illegal operators are land scarcity for small-scale miningunder rapid demarcation of land for large-scale companies,

high transactions costs involved in obtaining a license, andthe non-transferability of mining rights (Sinding, 2005;Andrew, 2003; Hilson and Potter, 2003).

The livelihood opportunities in ASM notwithstanding,galamsey activities in Ghana have become increasinglycontested. As in many resource-rich developing countries,land use disputes are pervasive, although rarely the onlytrigger for conflict (Andrew, 2003). In their study on con-flict mitigation in Ghana’s gold mining, Carson et al.(2005) outline conflictual dimensions of galamsey opera-tions around four axes: (1) encroachment on companies’concessions and pilfering of gold ore and equipment; (2)environmental degradation from the use of mercury inthe gold extraction process and lack of rehabilitation ofdisturbed land surfaces; (3) social disruption due to thetemporary and migratory nature of their work, includingincreased drug use, alcohol abuse, prostitution, communi-cable diseases (e.g., HIV/AIDS), school drop-outs, andrivalries and conflicts; and (4) the militarization of somegalamsey groups due to a growing inflow of firearms.

In public and governmental discourse and the Ghanaianmedia, galamsey miners have been portrayed as a ‘head-ache’, ‘challenge’, ‘problem’, ‘menace’, and ‘threat’, whosepresence necessitates the implementation of a ‘lasting solu-tion’ (Ghana Web, 2004; Reuters, 2006; Mining News,2006; General News, 2006; Regional News, 2006). Non-miners in mining towns perceive the galamsey as criminalsand reckless polluters of drinking water and other naturalresources, the latter mainly because of the use of mercuryin the gold amalgamation process. In the environmentalnarrative of small-scale gold mining in Ghana, illegal min-ers have become the ‘villains’ in the cast of actors (Roe,1991; Adger et al., 2001). Concession holders stripped oftheir entitled minerals and profits and farmers who havelost their productive land are seen as ‘victims’ while gov-ernmental agencies, mainly police and military forcescracking down on illicit activities, stage as ‘heroes’ in thisincreasingly heated debate.

The main purpose of this article is to challenge the dom-inant anti-galamsey discourse by reassessing the mercurydebate from a miner’s perspective. This is a novel approachas public, scientific, and governmental discourses alikehave denied the galamsey a ‘place at the table’ to addresscontamination and injustice. The article is divided intotwo parts. First, we use a political ecology framework toassess the complex and multifaceted policy problem thatunderlies the current conflictual aspects of the ASM sector,with particular focus on mercury pollution. We argue thatmercury use and contamination are key elements in theanti-galamsey rhetoric of marginalization and criminaliza-tion in Ghana. We contend that inadequate governmentalpolicies, technological failures, and an ignorance of com-munity dynamics in the ASM sector have all contributedto a unique case of environmental injustice that has pre-vented miners from participating in educational activitiesthat explore and promote more environmentally friendlytechniques.

1306 P. Tschakert, K. Singha / Geoforum 38 (2007) 1304–1321

Second, we describe an interdisciplinary pilot study con-ducted in August 2006 that sought to include galamsey inthe assessment of mercury and other life hazards, drawingupon the ecosystem approach to health, known as eco-health (Lebel, 2003). Research was carried out at two siteslocated in the heart of the Ghanaian gold belt in the south-western part of the country. By using a mixed and partici-patory methods approach, we assessed the daily hazards ofmen and women miners, explored participants’ under-standing of the causes and consequences of mercury con-tamination for human and environmental health, andidentified and measured mercury contamination in drink-ing water in collaboration with the miners. Finally, we pro-pose to extend the theoretical boundaries of politicalecology by integrating novel ideas from the environmentaljustice debate and the ecohealth approach. We concludewith recommendations for more community involvementto build local capacity for enhanced human and environ-mental health in the ASM sector.

2. Marginalization and contamination in Ghana’s artisanal

gold mining

2.1. The political ecology of galamsey marginalization

Political ecology typically addresses unequal power rela-tions regarding access to and control over resources, thereflection of such power relations in discourses and knowl-edge claims about the environment and development, andresistance and opposition to unequal social–environmentaldynamics. The dominant environmental discourse of mer-cury contamination, as outlined for small-scale gold miningin Ghana, invokes growing numbers of illegal miners whoirresponsibly use mercury to extract gold, thereby wreckingthe environment and endangering their own and other peo-ple’s health. This section discusses the socio-politicaldimensions of the dominant anti-galamsey discourse andassesses how condemning, marginalizing, and criminalizingthese unregistered miners shapes environmental injustice inthe ASM sector.

With the 1989 Small-Scale Gold Mining Law (PNDCL1

218), the Mercury Law (PNDCL 217)2 and the PNDCLLaw 219,3 the government of Ghana has legalized small-scale gold mining and provided a broad regulatory frame-work for gold processing and marketing. Yet, manygovernmental officials continue to regard the ASM sectorin general and illegal mining in particular as ‘a majorimpediment to the development and financing of large-scale mines’ (Hilson and Potter, 2005, p. 114). The statepursues various modes of marginalization that are in starkcontrast to the official rhetoric of poverty reduction.

1 PNDCL: Provisional National Defense Council.2 PNDCL 217 allows small-scale operators to purchase mercury from

licensed mercury dealers.3 PNDCL 219 regulates purchasing services for small-scale gold (and

diamond) miners through the Precious Minerals Marketing Corporation.

Inadequate governmental policies toward the ASM sec-tor and weak structures of governance, as outlined by Car-son et al. (2005), constitute the principal form ofmarginalization. In essence, the state has turned traditionalASM into an illicit activity by leasing large areas of land tolarge-scale corporations and requiring small-scale opera-tors to undergo a lengthy registration process for the fewremaining suitable areas, a trend also observed in otherdeveloping countries (Andrew, 2003). Through insufficientinstitutional, technical, and educational support, accred-ited governmental agencies proliferate the mercury pollu-tion problem in the ASM sector, which then serves asadditional evidence of miners as reckless environmentalstewards, further reinforcing social and political subjuga-tion. Other forms of marginalization include dispossessionof lands, relocation of communities, inadequate compensa-tion, exclusion from decision-making processes and fairprices from mining activities, and lack of support for alter-native job opportunities, especially for women (Ballard andBanks, 2003). We now briefly discuss the main elements ofmarginalization that shape the character of the galamsey

industry in Ghana.First, the Ghanaian Minerals and Mining Law (PNDCL

153) originated in the mid-1980s during the period of theEconomic Recovery Plan whose main goal was to revitalizethe country’s stagnating economy through private invest-ment (Hilson, 2001). Large areas of land in the mineral-richsouthwestern part of the country were demarcated forlarge-scale gold mining companies. Indigenous landown-ers, whose lands were leased out by the government, gener-ally did not receive alternative lands to farm or mine whenthey were resettled (Carson et al., 2005). In areas wherecorporations clash with local communities, walking to farmlands has become dangerous, as reported by participants inthis study.

Second, those miners who seek official registrationencounter a series of bureaucratic and procedural hurdles.Registration can take 6–8 months (Hilson and Potter,2003) or, as claimed by miners in this study, up to 1 year.In addition to the required paperwork and fees with theEnvironmental Protection Agency, the District Assemblyrequests 20 million Cedi4 as a flat rate for the first yearand 5 million Cedi for each subsequent year. Given thefew unoccupied areas, inadequate geo-prospecting, andno guarantee for long-term exploitation, many small-scaleoperators forgo seeking a formal title and instead workwithout it, illegally. A further disincentive for registrationis the fact that illegal miners can openly sell their gold tobuying agents licensed through the Precious Mineral Mar-keting Corporation (Hilson and Potter, 2003).

Third, recent attempts of cooperative large-scale compa-nies to cede parcels of unexploited land to artisanal minersare now undermined by the Minerals Commission (MC)

4 In August 2006, 20 million cedi equaled $2240 (exchange rate$1 = 9424 Cedi).


(Carson et al., 2005). It is speculated that the MC prefersselling promising land to a well-paying investor rather thanmaking it available for licensing to ASM for an unattrac-tive fee.

Finally, institutional support for the ASM sector hasbeen gradually shrinking. The MC, the main regulatoryand promotional agency in Ghana’s mineral sector, isnow the only governmental institution working on small-scale mining. It lacks the necessary human and financialresources to service small-scale operators; its seven small-scale mining district support centers that register claims,provide technical advice, and organize training sessionsare under-funded, and access to finances to lend to minersis scarce (Hilson and Potter, 2005). This is coupled withinadequate understanding of local conditions and resourcesfor effective community partnerships (Carson et al., 2005).These institutional constraints not only provide insufficientincentives for miners to register and work legally, but alsopreclude the large majority of them from engaging in moreenvironmentally safe practices.

The galamsey struggle over access to and control overproductive land while their resistance to state marginaliza-tion is fueled by a sense of moral injustice and desperationto meet livelihood needs. Their ‘landed moral economy’(Neumann, 1998, p. 11) is interpreted as a perceivedinfringement upon traditional, long-established rights tothe land. Many galamsey, fully aware that their operationsare illegal, argue that, for them, mining is a traditional wayof life that predates gold extraction by large-scale and pre-dominantly foreign operators. Others claim endorsementby local chiefs to work on concession land (Hilson andYakovleva, 2006). As in several other developing countrieswith small-scale, illegal mining activities, conflicts overland, often violent, are the consequence (Andrew, 2003).

Regulation of natural resource management by thestate, be it in the context of forests, grazing lands, wilder-ness areas, or, in this case, precious minerals, often occursin the form of ‘criminalization’ (Peluso, 1992; Neumann,1998; Kull, 2002). Criminalization, as defined by Kull(2002, p. 928), is a ‘negative redefinition of a resource man-agement practice [� � �] in order to assert specific claims toresources’. Resistance is understood as ‘an attempt –through actions and words – to forestall or fight criminal-ization, to protect one’s rights and impede interference, inorder to assert alternative claims’ (Kull, 2002, p. 928).Criminalization (or domination in a wider sense) and resis-tance are a dialectical pair that reflect exercises of power(Kull, 2002, p. 929).

In Ghana, land use conflicts and environmental contam-ination serve as justification for criminalization throughrhetoric and fundamental human rights assaults. Infringingon concession land turns marginal miners into politicalcriminals. In its most extreme form, criminalization turnsinto repression. Some companies have a non-recognitionpolicy with galamsey miners. Evictions are not uncommon.At the local level, District Assembly members and chiefexecutives have tended to support companies in cracking

down on galamsey; in response, some groups of illegal min-ers are now armed (Carson et al., 2005). The most conten-tious and violent conflicts are reported from the concessionof Bogoso Gold Limited (Hilson and Yakovleva, 2006),now Golden Star Resources, with up to 20,000 illegallyoperating miners. In November 2006, the government con-ducted a country-wide operation named ‘Flush Out’ duringwhich hundreds of galamsey were removed from conces-sion land and their equipment was confiscated or destroyed(Codjoe, personal communication).

In the dominant discourse, the galamsey are also per-ceived as environmental criminals. To justify the recentforceful removal of illegal miners from concession land,galamsey were accused for deficient rules and regulations,irresponsible use of mercury, and lack of accountabilityfor environmental degradation (Ghana Web, 2006). Atthe same time, many non-miners in mining towns blamegalamsey for recklessly polluting drinking water and othernatural resources due to the widespread use of mercury inthe gold amalgamation process. Yet, for the galamsey, mer-cury amalgamation is not only simple and relatively inex-pensive, but is also the only currently available means ofextracting gold.

Despite marginalization and criminalization, states arerarely monolithic entities where domination and repressionoccur ubiquitously. As argued by Kull (2002), there is fre-quently room for opposition, negotiation, and arrange-ments, even bribes. Some administrators show theirhuman side, understand and adapt to local contexts, andspeak for moderation and collaboration. For example, apolice executive we spoke with in one of the major miningtowns said:

‘If you enforce rules and regulations strictly, peoplewill hate you. There are no jobs out there, so whatelse could they [the galamsey] do? It is the responsibil-ity of the government to find employment for ouryouth.’

One of the MC district officers shared his frustration aboutthe institutional directives to serve only registered minerswhen those without a license outweigh the former by 5:1.A narrow focus on legal operators with respect to mer-cury-awareness raising is counter-productive, said the offi-cer. Yet, engaging galamsey has become increasinglydifficult as MC officials are perceived as police rather thanrepresentatives of a support structure.

Despite recently emerging efforts to promote public–pri-vate partnerships, stakeholder capacity building, and com-munity collaboration (Carson et al., 2005), the majority ofstate officials, environmental bureaucrats, and representa-tives of civil society are slow in recognizing the legitimaterole of ASM as a livelihood. This persistent lack of willing-ness to reconsider the dominant narrative not only revealsan embedded discrimination against the predominantlypoverty-driven ASM sector but further perpetuates poorsocial and environmental conditions from which ASMcommunities attempt to escape.


More specifically, it exacerbates the mercury problem.The government essentially condemns small-scale minersfor mercury pollution without providing them with techni-cally and socio-culturally appropriate education on envi-ronmental and health impacts and offering adequatesolutions. Unlike most cases of environmental injustice(e.g., Agyeman, 2005) where hazardous or toxic materialis dumped on disadvantaged communities, the ASM sectorcreates its own contamination. The injustice lies in the factthat the criminalization of the ASM sector robs the minersof their agency to articulate and solve the environmentalproblem they cause and experience. Ostracizing these min-ers precludes any serious attempts for recognition and par-ticipation – two key notions of environmental justice(Schlosberg, 2004). It prevents them of their right to fairtreatment and collective decision-making.

We argue that dismantling the anti-galamsey discourseought to start with a reassessment of the mercury debate.By perpetuating the environmental narrative of recklessmercury contamination, governmental officials, consul-tants, and researchers alike reinforce their hegemony over,and within, these narratives, thereby undermining possibil-ities for self-determination among small-scale miners. Thefollowing section provides an overview of mercury use inthe ASM sector, evidence (and lack thereof) of environ-mental and human contamination, clinical symptoms,and possible solutions from retorts to community-basedrisk appraisals and communication.

2.2. Mercury usage and contamination

2.2.1. Description of mercury use in gold extraction

Mercury (Hg), the only liquid metal, has been used inthe mining industry to amalgamate and concentrate pre-cious metals since the Phoenicians and Carthaginiansapplied it around 2700 B.C. (Eisler, 2003). Today, it is usedby small-scale gold miners in more than 50 developingcountries (Veiga et al., 2006). In Ghana, the mercury lawfrom 1933 banned Hg in gold mining, although the practicecontinued and the government legalized it for the ASM sec-tor in 1989, triggering a sharp increase in consumption(Donkor et al., 2006a). While cyanide replaced mercury

Fig. 1. Process of gold extraction process from gri

in gold extraction processes in most large-scale operationsafter 1933, the galamsey started to rely on mercury onlyabout 30 years ago when gold extraction became more dif-ficult (Rambaud et al., 2000). Between 1994 and 1999,roughly 25,000 kg of mercury were imported to Ghana,mostly from Europe and Canada, 97% of which was des-tined for the ASM sector (Amegbey and Eshun, 2003).

In Ghana, panning with Hg is the predominant methodfor the recovery of gold from both alluvial and hard rockmining sites (Amegbey and Eshun, 2003). The latterinvolves the digging of shafts with picks, shovels, hammers,and chisels or blasting with dynamite, to be followed by thecrushing and grinding of ore rocks with mechanized metalmortars and pestles. The amalgamation process is identicalunder both methods. First, the gold-containing material iswashed on sluices where the heavier gold particles arecaught and concentrated on carpets or towels due to grav-ity. The concentrate from the sluice box is re-assembled inrubber dishes or wooden pans. Through panning, the unde-sirable sediments are separated from the gold particles untilthe latter clearly appear in the final concentrate.

Next, a carefully gauged quantity of mercury is pouredinto the miner’s palm and added to the concentrate in thepan. Mercury is usually mixed by hand with the concen-trate, forming a lump or ball of mercury–gold amalgam.Water is added several times to discard tailings and removelighter particles until only the amalgam remains. The amal-gam is then squeezed into a piece of cloth to recover excessmercury (often re-bottled and used again). Some miners putthe fabric with the amalgam into their mouth to suck outadditional mercury. Finally, the amalgam is placed into asmall can on a stove or coal pot to roast for 15–40 min,depending on size. Burning can also occur with a blow-torch. Mercury losses occur at various stages during goldproduction: (1) during amalgamation, where mercury maybe washed out during the gravity washing; and (2) duringburning, where mercury, with its high volatility, is releasedinto the atmosphere. After burning, a sponge-like gold dorestays behind in the can. When the gold has cooled, it isweighed and ultimately sold. Fig. 1 illustrates the varioussteps of the process. Due to impurities and trappedmercury, the gold often undergoes a refining process off site

nding to washing, amalgamation, and burning.

5 Dunkwa Continental Goldfields collapsed in 1999.


that involves additional heating steps and the use of acid,borax, and soda ash. It is estimated that one or two gramsof Hg is lost for every gram of gold produced in ASM (Vei-ga and Baker, 2004).

In Ghana, mercury is officially sold through licensed mer-cury dealers, as prescribed by the 1989 Mercury Law. Onevial, locally known as ‘poho’ (similar to an eye drop bottle),contains approximately 52.2 g of mercury. In the summer of2006, one poho was sold in the major ASM centers in theSouthwest for 80,000 Cedi (Amankwah, personal communi-cation; Hilson and Pardie, 2006). While the Mercury Lawstipulates good mining practices in the use of mercury, itdoes not include any guidelines in terms of handling and dis-posing of the chemical, which makes compliance and mon-itoring difficult (Amegbey and Eshun, 2003). According to asurvey by the same authors, mercury in ASM is most oftenstored on the site (70%), nearly always handled withoutgloves (91%), and typically heated in open air (98%).

2.2.2. Clinical symptoms of mercury intoxication from

small-scale mining

Through the ASM amalgamation process, minersrelease mercury in two forms: metallic mercury and mer-cury vapor. Metallic, elemental mercury (Hg0) is dis-charged into the environment through tailings andreleased during burning; mercury vapor is both inhaledand deposited back onto the soils. Elemental mercury canbe oxidized into soluble inorganic Hg2+, which can betransformed by naturally existing bacteria into toxicorganic forms, such as methylmercury (CH3Hg) (Beijerand Jernelov, 1979), a known neurotoxin. The CH3Hgincreases in concentration, or is biomagnified, up the aqua-tic food chain and can result in deleterious effects on biotaand ecosystem functions (Hinton and Beinhoff, 2005; Don-kor et al., 2006b). CH3Hg-contaminated fish and otherfood represent critical health risks to people.

Numerous health problems can result from exposure toHg vapor. Hinton et al. (2003) list the following, withincreasing exposure: kidney pain, respiratory problems,dizziness, gingivitis, and muscular tremors; psycho-patho-logical symptoms such as depression and exaggerated emo-tional responses, which can be mistaken for alcoholism,fever, or malaria; dysfunction of kidneys, vomiting, andpotentially death. Although anecdotal evidence of mercurycontamination exists from various sites around the world,only a limited number of studies actually detected clinicalevidence of mercury poisoning (Porcella et al., 1997; Eisler,2003). In Ghana, no official records exist of small-scaleminers having died through mercury intoxication (Adim-ado and Baah, 2002). Due to a lack of medical recordsand purposeful monitoring of exposed miners, moderateto severe mercury intoxication can be presumed, but notsubstantiated.

While occupational hazards associated with the han-dling and inhalation of mercury are of serious concern,especially as most miners do not wear protective glovesor masks, consumption of CH3Hg-contaminated food

and water are even more worrisome because the mode ofcontamination is indirect and less visible. Health problemsassociated with CH3Hg include, with increasing exposure:visual constriction, numbness of extremities, impairedhearing, speech and gait; muscular atrophy, seizures andmental disturbance; spontaneous abortion and sterility(Hinton et al., 2003).

2.2.3. Impact-based assessments of mercury contamination

Given the serious health risks associated with mercurycontamination, numerous studies have been undertakento quantify mercury levels in the environment (water, soils,sediments, fish, and crops) and in human blood, urine,hair, and nails. Unlike cyanide that can degrade within acouple of hours on exposure to light and oxygen (Aman-kwah, personal communication), mercury contaminationcan be detected many years after a spill.

Many of the existing studies reflect the narrative of reck-less galamsey Hg pollution and contamination even thoughthe results are mixed and the culprits unclear. Donkor et al.(2006a, p. 2–3) report the ‘use of enormous amount ofmetallic mercury’ in ASM, the discharging of mercury tothe environment being done in an ‘abusive manner’, and‘mass extinction of some biological species’ in the mainriver systems of the Ghanaian gold belt, including theOffin, Pra, and Ankobra Rivers. At the same time, theystate that ‘even though Hg levels in water, soil, and sedi-ments [in the Pra River] were below WHO [World HealthOrganization] safe guideline values, the current state ofaffairs poses a serious environmental threat’ (2006a, p. 2).Elsewhere, the authors report mercury levels below theWHO safe drinking water standard of 1 lg L�1, no markeddifferences in Hg in soil between mining and non-miningsites, and rather low levels of Hg in the top 0–10 cm sedi-ment layer, although unsafe levels of mercury in carnivo-rous fish (Donkor et al., 2006b).

A 2000 UNIDO study (Babut et al., 2001) from theDumasi area (Bogoso-Prestea road) showed no ground orsurface water above the WHO recommended mercurylimit, low concentrations in most vegetables, but high val-ues in sediments (>0.18 lg g�1) and most fish samples(0.5 lg g�1). Other studies (Golow and Adzei, 2002; Golowand Mingle, 2003) report high levels of mercury in soils andcassava leaves around Dunkwa-on-Offin, however from atime when Dunkwa Continental Goldfields, the only mer-cury-using large-scale dredge mining company, was stilloperational5. Bannerman et al. (2003) describe Hg concen-trations in surface water in Western Ghana generally belowthe WHO standards, excepting one sample (21 lg L�1). Astudy by Kuma (2004) shows high levels of mercury (80–97 lg L�1) in surface water and spoil heap water samplesin Tarkwa.

Existing studies on mercury in human tissue also revealmixed results. The UNIDO assessment in the mining town


of Dumasi showed Hg levels in both urine and hair belowsafe levels6 (mean values of 23.8 lg L�1 and 3.85 lg g�1,respectively) while mercury in blood exceeded the recom-mended maximum level (mean 24.4 lg L�1) (Rambaudet al., 2000). High concentrations were associated with highconsumption of mercury-contaminated fish. Adimado andBaah (2002) report elevated Hg levels in blood and hairamong Ghanaian children, also as a result of heavy con-sumption of contaminated fish. Amegbey and Eshun(2003) report 0.1–0.8 mg m�3 of mercury concentration inthe air of gold buyers’ refinement shops. Finally, Donkoret al. (2006b) conclude that samples along the main riversin the southwestern gold belt show mercury concentrationin human hair within safe levels, although the results variedaccording to seasons and the extent of fish consumption.

2.2.4. Solutions: retorts and community-based risk

appraisals and communication

The government has supported the use of retorts totackle the mercury pollution problem. Retorts are smallcontainers in which the gold–mercury amalgam is placedand heated. The volatile mercury travels through a tubeand condenses in an adjacent, cooler chamber (Hintonet al., 2003). The model that is currently promoted and dis-tributed to registered miners through the MC Small-ScaleMining District Offices is the ThermEx� retort, commis-sioned by UNIDO (Hilson and Pardie, 2006; Hilson,2006). It is made out of glass and transparent, which allowsminers to closely observe the condensation process (Veigaand Baker, 2004). While this retort therefore constitutesan improvement over earlier models, costs are high(500,000 Cedi7 for one subsidized retort), the holdingcapacity is low (<30 g of amalgam), and the device is easilybreakable (Hilson and Pardie, 2006; Hilson, 2006). More-over, as explained by one MC district officer, the separa-tion of gold and mercury inside the retort takes at leasttwice as long as on a stove; if a miner walks away duringthe process, somebody may steal his gold. If only one retortexists per site, no simultaneous burning can occur. Mostproblematically, the commissioned agents are allowed topromote and sell the retort to licensed operators only, leav-ing out the 85% of all small-scale miners that are most inneed of healthier and cleaner technologies. Alternativeretorts such as those proposed by Hinton et al. (2003b)and Crispin (2003), many designed with local materials

6 WHO levels for mercury in urine: 50 lg L�1 = maximum acceptableconcentration; 100 lg L�1 = minimum concentration before developingsymptoms of mercury poisoning (Eisler, 2003). Mercury in hair: safe levelof mercury concentration (in the form of methylmercury) = 4–7 mg kg�1;10–20 mg kg�1 = associated with abnormal infant development; 50–100 mg kg�1 associated with paraesthesia (De Lacerda and Salomons,1998; Eisler, 2003). Mercury in blood: recommended maximumlevel = 10 lg L�1 (Eisler, 2003). Inhalation of metallic mercury vapor:recommended exposure level of 50 lg m�3 at workplaces and gold dealershops (Eisler, 2003).

7 In August 2006, 500,000 Cedi were worth $56 (exchange rate $1 = 9424Cedi).

(e.g., scrap tin), or alternative devices that do not use mer-cury8 are not available in Ghana.

Despite over a decade of donor efforts to increase envi-ronmental awareness in mining communities, risk communi-cation campaigns have grossly ignored the socio-economicand cultural dynamics and educational needs of ASM pop-ulations and, hence, have been largely ineffective (Hilson,2006). The only risk communication material that theauthors encountered at the MC Small-Scale Mining DistrictOffices were brochures of the ThermEx retort, with picturesof Asian mercury-intoxicated patients to whom Africansmay or may not relate, and a portable video with dramatizedfootage of cases of contamination. Although registered min-ers are the official target audience for the educative video, aparticipant from one of the MC SSM Offices affirmed that heshowed it to entire communities as mercury was affectingeverybody. This reflects the recommendations by Hilsonand Pardie (2006) to not discriminate between legal and ille-gal miners when it comes to mercury risk communication.

Given the failure of the state, international donor organi-zations, technical agencies, and consultants alike to educateminers and solve the mercury problem in a cost-effectiveway, an integrated approach is needed that provides spaceand support for active community participation. It is notviable to promote safer and healthier mining practices ifthe target population is uninformed and profiled as crimi-nals (Heemskerk, 2004). What is needed is not anothereffects-based study, but an approach that allows us to tacklethe mercury problem as entwined with the multiple environ-mental, socio-economic, and health-related challenges inASM communities. There is currently no alternative to mer-cury amalgamation in Ghana. Urging miners to reduce mer-cury-related impacts on the basis of ambiguous lab resultsthat they have no access to is futile, if not counter-produc-tive. This is particularly true when these impacts appearminor compared to other risks in the sector and when imme-diate livelihood needs are more critical than potential long-term health risks (Spiegel and Veiga, 2005). We must elicitinformation from miners and other community members,both men and women, to better understand their knowledgebase and needs, and bring information to them, as suggestedby Heemskerk (2004) and Spiegel et al. (2006). The follow-ing sections are an attempt to contribute to this emergingintegrative and community-based approach.

3. Study area and research methodology

3.1. Description of the research sites

This pilot study was conducted in August 2006 andinvolved a research team of six people, including one geog-rapher, one hydrogeologist, and four masters studentsfrom the Regional Institute for Population Studies (RIPS)

8 Examples for technologies that do not use mercury are gravityseparation, improved sluicing, Gemini tables, and aluminum sluice boxeswith polymeric magnetic sheets (Vieira, 2004, 2006).


at the University of Ghana. Two galamsey sites wereselected with the help of officials from Small-Scale MiningDistrict Offices who were familiar with local artisanal oper-ations. Both sites are situated in the Kumasi Basin in thesouthwestern part of the country. The basin is largely com-posed of sedimentary and meta-sedimentary rocks, includ-ing sandstones, quartzites, conglomerates, and phyllites(Kuma, 2004). Gold is found in the Early Proterozoic Biri-mian greenstones, which are associated with various metalsulfides (Hammond and Tabata, 1997).

The first site (here referred to as Site #1) is a deep alluvialsite along the Offin River and next to Dunkwa-on-Offin(population of 45,000) in the Upper Denkyira District, Cen-tral Region. Officially, this site is located on the concessionof Dunkwa Continental Goldfields, a corporation that hasnot been operational for more than 5 years. While the cor-poration’s future is unknown, no other party can legallyacquire a license for this area and local miners are essen-tially forced into illegal operations. According to an esti-mate by the Dunkwa police, more than 2000 galamsey

mine along the river to both sides of the town. The otherstudy site (Site #2) is a hard rock area next to Bogoso (pop-ulation of 16,500) in the Wassa West District, WesternRegion. The site there is located on the 85 km-long conces-sion of Bogoso Gold Limited (now Golden Star Resources).The corporation is actively exploiting and exploring its landand, therefore, has become repeatedly in conflict withinfringing galamsey (Fig. 2).

The number of miners fluctuates between 50 and 200 onSite #1 and between 30 and 500 on Site #2, mainly depend-ing on the availability and functioning of equipment suchas excavators and water pumps. The socio-economic char-acteristics of the miners in the research sample (Table 2)reveal a broad spectrum of backgrounds. Ages ranged from15 to 42 years for women and 16 to 46 years for men.Among the men in the sample, time in mining varied from0.5 to 23 years while for women the range was 0.1–5 years.The majority of interviewed galamsey came from thearea and are ‘sons and daughters of the community’(F. Momade, personal communication). While men viewartisanal gold-mining as a longer-term employment,women tend to join galamsey camps on a temporary basisfor short-term income generation.

3.2. Description of research methods and analysis

The mixed methods used in this study were highly par-ticipatory and integrative. We drew upon the ecosystemapproach to human health (‘ecohealth’), for ASM commu-nities (Lebel, 2003; Spiegel and Veiga, 2005). It focuses onthe links between humans and their social and biophysicalenvironments and is based on transdisciplinarity, participa-tion, and equity (Lebel, 2003). We started with informalinterviews with seven group (‘gang’) leaders at the galamsey

sites to gain a basic understanding of the use of mercury,gloves, retorts, spillage, health effects, and access to infor-mation about mercury and alternative technologies. We

then used risk ranking and scoring, conceptual and hazardmapping, chemical indicator strips, and surface and groundwater sampling, as explained below. During mining workhours, participants were chosen with the help of gang lead-ers. Most of the research activities took place after the min-ing work and involved all those who volunteered to be partof the study.

Participatory risk ranking and scoring was used to elicitproblems and risks men and women miners had beenencountering on the sites. We wanted to understand howpivotal mercury-related contamination was compared toother livelihood hazards. We used the terms risks, prob-lems, and hazards interchangeably. A total of 16 womenand 30 men took part in this assessment. Among themen, we divided participants into a younger (18–25 years)and an older (>25 years) age group to capture short andlong-term experiences within the sector, amounting to 17and 13 participants, respectively. As there were only fewwomen at the sites, with roughly the same time spent inmining, no age differentiation was made. Participants wereasked to free-list problems they had experienced at theirsites and depict them on blank index cards. Next, theyranked these problems by order of importance, the mosttroublesome on top. Participants were asked to use pebblesto indicate the severity of each stressor, ranging from 1(barely noticeable) to 5 (life threatening). Finally, theydescribed strategies to reduce or solve each problem andtheir rate of success.

To analyze the responses from the ranking and scoringactivity, we followed Quinn et al. (2003) and Tschakert(2007). For each risk mentioned, an incidence index (I)was calculated. This index, ranging from 0 to 1, is a sim-ple measure of the proportion of participants identifyingeach particular problem. An importance index (P) wascalculated based on the order in which risks were rankedby each group. This index also ranges from 0 to 1, and isdefined as Pj = [(r � 1)/(n � 1)] · (�1) + 1 where r is therank and n is the total number of risks identified by thatparticipant group. The mean value for Pj was then calcu-lated for the subset of groups who identified the particularproblem. As a last step, a severity index (S) was calcu-lated based on the number of pebbles participant groupsassigned to each risk. This final index represents the totalnumber of pebbles for each risk per number of participantgroups mentioning this particular problem and rangesfrom 1 to 5.

Next, we used conceptual mapping (also known as men-tal models) to understand how miners and medical person-nel in Dunkwa and Bogoso think about mercurycontamination. Mental models are psychological represen-tations of real or hypothesized situations, generally in theform of individual conceptual maps of ideas (Bostromet al., 1994; Morgan et al., 2002). Six galamsey, three doc-tors, two nurses, and one health volunteer participated inthis activity. First, participants were asked to brainstormcauses of mercury contamination, list these on blank indexcards, and connect the cards with arrows to the ‘problem’,


depicted in the middle of a sheet of paper. Then, they dis-cussed consequences of mercury contamination for peopleand the environment, once again using index cards andarrows. This particular method was chosen to capture

Fig. 2. Maps of study areas and concession lands in Ghana: (a) Gold mininSources: (a) Hilson (2002); (b) and (c) Minerals Commission Ghana (2006).

potential differences in ‘social constructs’ of mercury pollu-tion between ‘expert’ (medical personnel) and ‘non-expert’(miners) participants and to identify knowledge gapsand information needs. The results from the individual

g belt in Ghana; (b) the Dunkwa area; and (c) the Bogoso-Prestea area.

Fig. 2 (continued)

Table 2Socio-demographic characteristics of miners in the study sample

Variable Men Women

N 47 18Age (SD) 28.3 (9.6) 26.1 (7.8)Single (%) 77 50Married (%) 20 44Other (%) 3 6No education (%) 6 22Primary education (%) 17 38JSS/middle school (%) 66 39Secondary/vocational/technical education (%) 11 0Years in mining (SD) 7.1 (6.2) 1.2 (1.3)Years at current mining site (SD) 3.1 (6.8) 0.3 (0.4)

9 At Site #2, ore containing rocks are transported to a processing site inBogoso where mercury is used during the panning process. The burningoccurs either at the processing site or in refining shops in town. Hence,indicator strips were not used at this second site.


concepts were aggregated into a final composite conceptualmap.

On Site #1, where mercury is used daily to extract gold,we relied on mercury indicator strips to test contaminationin surface water and discuss potential health impacts of Hguse in collaboration with 50 miners.9 We asked the partic-ipants to identify, on a locally drawn map, all safe and con-taminated water bodies and other spots on their site. Then,the indicator strips were explained and 15 men volunteeredto participate in a ‘competition’ and sampled the spots theyconsidered most contaminated. The strip results were

0.60

0.70

0.80

0.90

1.00

ex (

P)

Waste pain

Eye problems

Collapsing sedimentsOther body pains

Load hurting legs

Mercury in mouth

Mercuryin palm

Women

Young men

Women + men

Women, young men,and older men

Waist pain


compared and the participant with the highest contamina-tion strip was declared the ‘winner’.

Indicator strips are colorimetric methods designed todetect the presence of various materials in water samples.We used SenSafe mercury kits; in the presence of inorganicHg2+, these strips produce a purple tint. After 2 min, thecolor of the circle on the strip is visually compared to thegiven reference scale, ranging from 0 to 1000 lg L�1 Hg.While the results of the mercury test strips are impacted bythe presence of other heavy metals, they provide qualitativeinformation, and, more importantly, immediate results inthe field that are accessible to all participants. Research oncommercial indicator test kits for arsenic suggest that theyprovide a reasonable estimate of the presence or absenceof contamination (e.g., Kinniburgh and Kosmus, 2002;van Geen et al., 2004, 2005). No accuracy analyses werefound on commercial mercury test strips, albeit improvedindicator strips may be available (Shi and Jiang, 2002).

Finally, we collected water samples for lab analysis10 atboth sites to quantitatively estimate water quality in sur-face and groundwater bodies. We tested for total mercury,total arsenic (a known natural contaminant in the area),and basic anions and cations (indicators of water prove-nance). The samples come from four boreholes near Site#1 and three boreholes in towns adjacent to Site #2. Theboreholes were equipped with human-powered pumpsand nearly continuously in use, which reduces concernsof sampling water within the standpipe. Two surface watersites were also sampled, including the Offin River, whichminers at Site #1 use as a source of drinking water despiteproximity to their amalgamation activities.

0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50

0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20

5

3

1

SeverityIndex (S)

Impo

rtan

ce I

nd

Headache

Guinea worm

Smoke mercuryburning

Cuts (stones, shovels)

Stomach pain

Stuck in mud

Fighting

Heart problems (marijuana)

Rough palmsLoss body hair

4. Community understanding of mercury and other hazards

4.1. Results from risk ranking

The participatory risk ranking and scoring revealed atotal of 25 risks and hazards that men and women miners

10 Sampling procedures followed the U.S. Geological Survey NationalWater-Quality Assessment Program (NAWQA) protocol as best aspossible (Koterba et al., 1995). The sampling locations were georeferencedusing GPS. Conductivity, temperature, and pH were collected in the field.The analysis of cations Na+, K+, Mg2+, Ca2+, Fe2+, and NH4

þ andanions Cl�, SO4

2�, HCO3�, CO3

�, and NO3� were measured by ion

chromatograph in the Ecological Laboratory at the University of Ghana.Steps for total mercury and arsenic sampling were filtered with a 0.1 lmsyringe filter in the field and collected in acid-washed HDPE bottles.Approximately four drops of concentrated, trace metal grade HCl addedin the field per 30 mL of water so that the pH of the sample registered lessthan 2.0. All samples were immediately double-bagged, and kept as cool aspossible after collection. Total arsenic and total mercury were measuredby Graphite Furnace Atomic Absorption Spectrometry at the EcologicalLaboratory. Trip blanks were used to assess contamination introducedfrom the sample container and during sample transport. A trip blank isanalyte-free water collected in the appropriate sample container with theproper preservative, which is taken into the field and returned to thelaboratory without being opened. Trip blanks showed no concentration ofany of the tested materials except NO3

�.

face on a regular basis. The most common ones aredepicted in Figs. 3 and 4. Clearly, the most serious hazardon both sites is collapsing sediments, pits, or shafts, with aseverity of 5 (‘can kill’) and mentioned by women, youngermen, and older men. The other life-threatening risks,except for fighting among gang members, were all on thehard rock site; slipping and falling into pits was mentionedby all three groups. Women usually carry basins full of sed-iments on their heads while hastening from the excavationsite to the area where rocks are crushed and washed. Asshafts are largely open holes in the ground with minimalprotection around them, the risk of falling into any of themis high. Accidents happen frequently, and some are deadly.

Additional life-threatening risks were those related todynamite rock blasting and underground heat. The latterrefers to high temperature and reduced oxygen in shafts(up to 45 feet in depth). Other risks, albeit rarely fatal, wereeye problems resulting from muddy water on the alluvialsite and rock particles and smoke from crushing and grind-ing at the hard rock site. None of the miners had protectiveeye wear. All miners, including women, complained aboutwaist pain due to the continuous shoveling, lifting, and car-rying of sediments. In addition, all groups of miners on thealluvial site reported risks of guinea worm infections as aresult of standing in water-filled excavation pits all day

Incidence Index (I)

Fig. 3. Mining-related risks, Site #1 (deep alluvial mining site).

0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50

0.60

0.70

0.80

0.90

0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00 1.20

Collapsing pit/shaft

Slipping + fallinginto pit/shaft

Waste pain

Smoke from grinding machine

Smoke from blast

Hammer hitting hand

Dynamite rock blasting

Coughing (sometimes with blood)

HeadacheCuts (stones, shovel)

Other body pains

Underground heatEye

problem

5

3

1

SeverityIndex (S)

Young men

Women + men

Women, young men,and older men

Young + older men

Incidence Index (I)

Impo

rtan

ce I

ndex

(P)

Waist pain

Fig. 4. Mining-related risks, Site #2 (hard rock mining site).


long. Other issues include fractures, crushing injuries,respiratory tract infections, and death from collapsing pits,as reported for galamsey from a regional hospital (Ghana-ian Chronicle, 2005).

Risks related to mercury contamination were explicitlyaddressed on Site #1 only. This is not surprising as amal-gamation and burning occur directly on the site, eventhough in a restricted area. Mercury in one’s palm, one’smouth, and smoke from mercury burning were raised asconcerns by women and young men while older men, mostof whom had been on the site for several months and years,felt the problem was manageable. In fact, responses fromthe informal interviews suggest that much care is takenwhen handling mercury. A group leader explained:

‘Mercury is expensive, so we make sure we don’t spillit. If it happens, we collect the mercury droplets witha spoon or a shovel. Only gang leaders are allowed touse mercury. We collect excess mercury on thismound of sand so we can use it again later.’

This is in stark contrast to a recent news article that reports‘large pools of mercury lying untended’ at a site along theBogoso-Prestea road (Ghanaian Chronicle, 2005). Theleaders agreed, however, that mercury contact with a per-son’s mouth should be avoided. In Bogoso, amalgamationand burning occurr at grinding and washing locations and

soil contamination

water contamination

contaminated fish

cont

d

gets into blood stream

affects animal health

Mercury contamination

infertility in men and women

buruli ulcer

damage to eye lens

blindness

inflamintern

weakens immu

cont

c

gum/mouth inflammation

eye irritation

gold amalgamation

spillage

mercury left behind in soil

rain

mercury in water

mercury from large-scale operations

burning with mercury

mercury in air

mercury in mouth

mercury in soil

use bare hands when washing

eat with unwashed hands

mercury in body owners don’t

provide gloves

safety regulations not enforced

illegal status of ASM sites Minerals Commission not

allowed to work with illegal ASM

lack of education and awareness

reluctance to adopt new technologies Miners

Medical staff

Miners and medical staff

Fig. 5. Aggregate mental model of mercury contami

gold buyers’ shops. Hence, mercury did not feature in theminers’ risk assessment at Site #2.

Overall, the results suggest that men and women arti-sanal miners face more immediate life-threatening risksthan mercury intoxication on their sites. Several of theserisks can result in death. Although protective measure-ments are taken, such as using props for shafts and reduc-ing the distance between pits to avoid collapsing sediments,the environment remains highly risk-prone. First aid israrely provided on sites. Gloves, helmets, goggles, andboots – the elemental safety wear – are essentially non-exis-tent. While they were deemed efficient, only very few min-ers were able to afford them.

4.2. Results from conceptual mapping

This section presents the findings from the mental mod-els on mercury contamination. These models providedetails on how miners and medical personnel understandthe drivers and consequences of contamination and its spa-tial scales that go beyond the immediate working areas(Fig. 5). It is worth noting that all miners interviewedhad heard about the negative human and environmentalimpacts of mercury, either on the radio, through MC offi-cers, the Small-Scale Mining Association, or from otherminers.

death

cropamination

poor crop yields food shortage

drink water diarrhea

eat crops sickness hospitalization

on’t drink water financial burden of purchasing water

hardship hunger

become beggar

theft

get arrested and beaten

eat fish

don’t eat fish unbalanced diet

breaks blood/milk barrier

breaks blood/brain barrier

destroys blood cells

contamination of breast-fed babies

brain damage in babies

paralysis

bodily shakes

stroke pain all

over body numbness

severe headaches

mation of al organs

ne system

lung amination

hronic skin irritation

lips and mouth change color mouth cancer

skin peels off

skins changes color skin cancer

coughing

pneumonia

vomit blood

lung cancer

TB

intestines

liver cell disintegration

liver shrinks liver cancer

swollen legs

kidney

spleen

bloody stoles

diarrhea

vomiting

fluid accumulation

nation (combined miners and health personnel).

11 These factors including the acidity of the system (as defined by pH),reduction–oxidation state of the aquifer, and the availability of adsorbingsurfaces as defined by the geology.


As for the causes of mercury contamination, minersagreed that the three main channels were through the burn-ing of mercury after amalgamation, dispersal of mercury inwater bodies after spillage and rain, and contact with themouth through unwashed hands after amalgamation. Lackof education and awareness aggravate contamination. Thehealth personnel reinforced these points while adding other,more complex issues such as previous mercury pollutionfrom large-scale operations and sorption on soils. Moreimportantly, two doctors argued that the illegal status ofthe miners undermined awareness raising through the MCand prevented safety regulations from being enforced.

The mining participants raised many different conse-quences of Hg use: skin irritation, respiratory problems,muscular tremors, numbness of extremities and atrophy,vomiting, gastro-intestinal problems, and finally death wereall part of their mental models. As for effects on the environ-ment, there was consensus that mercury can affect animalsthrough contaminated water and enter the food chain, con-taminate fish, and cause sickness among humans. The con-cepts elicited by the interviewed health personnel wereexhaustive, including more details than those understoodby the miners, especially with respect to neurological symp-toms, including those in pregnant women and babies,inflammation of internal organs, eye irritations, and varioustypes of cancer. The carcinogenicity of Hg through miningexposure, though, is debated (IARC, 1993). As stressed byone doctor, mercury has not been observed as an immediatepoison but rather a trigger for gradual processes that maytake 10–15 years. However, not all the symptoms listed hereare necessarily associated with mercury contaminationwhen diagnosed at the hospital. As one professional nurseexplained after some joint fieldwork:

‘I had a patient from one of the mining communitieswho was suffering from acute psychosis. The diseasewas managed but one could not relate the psychosisof the young man to this unguided job. And so, nofollow up was done and the community was not edu-cated on how to minimize or avoid job related haz-ards by ensuring simple and affordable safetymeasures at work.’

On the environmental side, two doctors cited crop contam-ination through polluted soil resulting in sickness andpotentially death. One female health volunteer elaboratedon the complex socio-economic and health ramificationsof mercury contamination for people’s livelihoods thatclearly go beyond the narrow clinical analysis:

‘To avoid polluted drinking water and fish, peoplewould need to purchase water or stop eating fish; bothlead to hardship and hunger. People would becomebeggars or steal, some may get arrested or even die.’

These findings suggest two important axes for science andcommunity collaboration. First, common concepts andoverlaps in knowledge ought to be used as starting pointsfor in-depth awareness raising. The medical personnel have

a good understanding of human and environmental healthrisks associated with mercury contamination. What is lack-ing is an effective channel to make this information acces-sible to mining communities. Although one doctor hadonce been invited by the Small-Scale Mining Associationto educate miners about mercury, he deplored the lack offunds for more and more effective outreach. Second, link-ing toxicity of mercury, independent of its source, to liveli-hood risks in adjacent communities seems most tangiblethrough an explicit emphasis on potentially contaminatedfish and crops. As shown, concentration of mercury in fish,vegetables, and vegetable leaves, particularly cassava, tendsto be high. This requires an active participation of women.Yet, women have so far been largely excluded from existingmercury-awareness programs. Finally, none of the minersinterviewed had ever seen a retort, except for one leader.

4.3. Results from indicator strips and water samples

The indicator strips provided a tool to discuss watercontamination with the miners which would not have beenpossible by taking water samples for the laboratory alone.We found the miners to be highly interested in conductingreal-time water sampling and seeing the results, given theirconcern about the impacts of mercury on both the environ-ment and human health. The strips from the alluvial siteshowed higher mercury values than bottled water, whichwas used for comparison. The strips indicated values onthe order of 50–100 lg L�1. Given the lab results whichshow ng L�1 concentrations of Hg, the strips likely regis-tered the impact of iron concentrations (as high as3.3 mg L�1). Here, indicator strips were a poor representa-tion of mercury onsite (no demarcations between 0 and50 lg L�1). Potentially better quality mercury trips shouldbe developed and tested in this environment, particularlyfor educational purposes.

The lab sampling showed total Hg concentrations insurface water ranging from 0 to 67 ng L�1 and boreholesamples as high as 286 ng L�1 – below the WHO standardof 1 lg L�1(1000 ng L�1). These data match average Hgconcentrations around Dumasi of 165 ng L�1 and280 ng L�1in ground and surface water, respectively (Babutet al., 2001) and mean surface water concentrations of 144–205 ng L�1 in the Lower Pra and Offin River Basins (Don-kor et al., 2006a). The presence of metal-sorbing iron andmetal-complexing organic matter may keep aqueous mer-cury concentrations low. Other research in this area hasindicated the presence of mercury between 2 and 93 lg L�1,which is in excess of the WHO limits in surface waters(Bannerman et al., 2003; Bonzongo et al., 2003; Kuma,2004). High values are likely related to the physical systemand chemical factors that control the mobilization of met-als in groundwater.11 We note that while we have shown

12 The EU, the world’s largest mercury exporter, currently prepares alegislative instrument for a mercury export ban that is expected to beimplemented between 2008 and 2011. Most affected will be developingcountries (Hontelez et al., 2006).


low concentrations of total mercury in aqueous form, itstendency to bioaccumulate in fatty tissues still makes it acontaminant of concern, and studies assessing the concen-tration in sediment and fish should be continued.

5. Contaminated identities: discussion and conclusion

This study has attempted to set the stage for a counter-narrative to the dominant discourse of marginalization andcriminalization of galamsey miners in Ghana by reassessingthe mercury debate from the miners’ perspective. This is anovel approach as the mercury problem has so far beenpresented as a technical problem that requires a technicalsolution, ignoring broader socio-economic, cultural, andpolitical community issues. The galamsey are typically por-trayed as dire environmental stewards, recklessly degradingecosystems and endangering their own and other people’shealth through irresponsible use and handling of mercury.Due to their illegal status, these miners are officiallyexcluded from governmental programs that support mer-cury risk communication and loans to purchase safer tech-nologies such as retorts, as inapt as they may currently be.Also, most measurements and monitoring are undertakenwithout their active involvement, thus prohibiting a practi-cal learning experience. Being trapped in this vicious cycleof lack of access to information and alternative technolo-gies, the galamsey perpetuate the pollution for which theyare accused and marginalized. Hence, their identities areas much contaminated by the mercury in their immediateenvironment as by the ostracizing rhetoric that is propa-gated by the media, governmental officials, and large-scalecorporations.

While we do not suggest that galamsey miners have nopart in the mercury problem, we argue that many effect-based mercury contamination studies, through their notori-ous avoidance of community participation, have furtherwidened the gap between experts and potential clients.For instance, the 181 samples of blood, 120 samples ofurine, 167 samples of hair, and 179 samples of nails inthe 2000 UNIDO study were taken without any practicaleducational activities that could have involved minersand non-miners alike in understanding the effects of mer-cury as a toxic agent. The same is true for the 217 subjects,age 12–18, whose hair and blood samples were collected inthe Adimado and Baah (2002) study. Donkor et al. (2006b)even admit that collecting human hair samples in miningcommunities along the Offin River was extremely difficultdue to people’s superstition. What better reason, andopportunity, could there have been to offer practical ses-sions and engage concerned miners in discussions aboutmercury and possible health effects? Sadly, the researcherspreferred working with a statistically insufficient samplethan seeking community participation. The same authorsalso found that mercury concentration in cat fish (Synodon-

tis sp.), mud fish (Hepsetus odoe), and Kafue pike (Clariassp.), all carnivorous fish, exceed the WHO’s safe consump-tion limit of 0.5 mg kg�1 (Donkor et al., 2006b). Yet, no

community follow-up was undertaken. Similarly, Golowand Adzei (2002) report 35 lg kg�1 of mercury in cassavaleaves close to Dunkwa, most likely due to aerial sourcesthat go back to Continental Goldfields. The authors addthat ‘anybody who uses cassava leaves for preparing soupand stew . . .. could be easily poisoned’ (p. 235). However,no comprehensive awareness programs were put in place.More alarming still, recommendations from these variouseffect-based studies focus on more monitoring of groupsat risk, more sampling campaigns, and the distribution ofretorts, but not a single one addresses education and out-reach. While we don’t believe that the low concentrationsof Hg found in this study implicate or exonerate galamsey,we found that having the miners actively participate in datacollection provided a framework for discussing the envi-ronmental impacts of Hg, to which they were both recep-tive and inquisitive. The use of indicator strips, or similartechnologies, provide an education opportunity not seenin other sampling campaigns.

Galamsey miners are certainly not oblivious to humanand environmental health risks of mercury contamination.Most of them are aware of the relationship between touch-ing, burning, and spilling mercury and clinical symptomssuch as respiratory problems, muscular tremors, and skinirritations, even if they ignore the intricate ways of mercurytransportation from the bottle to the human body. Yet, itsimply cannot be assumed that the miners will easily acceptlab results of their hair or urine samples, if they have achance to see them, as sufficient evidence to justify theuse of retorts. This is particularly true if studies are pursuedwithout specifically targeted learning opportunities andretorts introduced by external consultants and agents fromthe MC who the galamsey meet with increasing distrust.

To date, few miners in Ghana know about retorts, otheralternative technologies, or treatments for mercury intoxi-cation. The available risk information is not tailored tothe 250,000 or more small-scale miners. If they had a voicein the design, building, and testing of retorts, they may alsobe more likely to try and use them (Heemskerk, 2004; Hilsonet al., 2007). With no alternative gold extraction technologyavailable or affordable, forgoing the use of mercury todaywould imperil their immediate economic well-being and thatof their dependants. Some speculate that the looming Euro-pean Union ban on mercury exports12 will radically changethe situation. Prices for mercury are expected to increaseand demand to decline, resulting in more efficient use andreduced releases (Hontelez et al., 2006). However, it can alsobe hypothesized that an official mercury ban would fuelblack market transactions and further criminalize minerswho rely on mercury for gold extraction.

On the theoretical front, this study illustrates so faroverlooked synergies between key notions in political


ecology, environmental justice, and ecohealth. While polit-ical ecology is ideally suited to relate the causality of dis-ease to politics and power (Mayer, 1996; Richmondet al., 2005), the field has essentially failed to addressunequal power relations, marginalization, and injustice inthe context of human-environmental health and well-being.In contrast, the environmental justice literature has increas-ingly argued for a need to recognize power inequalities andthe plurality of injustice concepts. Plurality in this contextmeans to include not only questions of distribution of envi-ronmental risks and injustices but also those of recognitionof the diversity of participants, their differential identitiesand experiences as well as participation of the most affectedin environmental decision-making and political processes(McDonald, 2002; Schlosberg, 2003, 2004; Walker andEames, 2006). Lack of recognition, often expressed as dis-respect, devaluation, disenfranchisement, and oppression,constrains and harms people and, most importantly, pre-vents them from participating, from having a ‘place atthe table’ and speaking for themselves (Young, 1990;Fraser, 1998, 2000; Schlosberg, 2004). A ‘science of envi-ronmental justice’, as advocated by Wing (2005, p. 61) con-stitutes ‘a science for the people, applied research thataddresses issues of concern to communities experiencingenvironmental injustice, poor public health conditions,and lack of political power.’ This notion of environmentaljustice stresses local knowledge as a complement to scien-tific methods of data collection (Lambert et al., 2006)and ‘fair treatment’, especially for those that are alreadymarginalized and disadvantaged (Walker and Bulkeley,2006). Schlosberg (2007) emphasizes capacity and engage-ment to remedy injustice and encourage human and eco-logical systems to flourish. Similarly, the ecosystemapproach to human health (ecohealth), stresses transdiscip-linarity, equity, and participation (Lebel, 2003). It calls fora holistic understanding of health by focusing on the inter-relationships among the various factors that cause ill healthand ecosystem degradation and those that prevent andcontrol these risks (Forget and Lebel, 2001; Rapport andMergler, 2004).

The importance of this study is straightforward: as longas galamsey are considered outlaws and used as test sub-jects for contamination studies, learning and changes inbehavior are unlikely to occur. By integrating concepts ofrecognition, participation, equity, and transdisciplinarity,we argue that a political ecology of human and environ-mental health can provide a powerful conceptual andpractical lens through which to address inequalities andinjustice in the small-scale mining sector. We witnessed agenuine interest and active participation in real-time mer-cury measurements and health-related discussions at ourtwo study sites. A day after the collective use of the mer-cury indicator strips, the owner ordered water to betrucked in for all workers to avoid drinking from thepotentially polluted pond. The miners understand thatinhalation of mercury vapors, consumption of contami-nated fish, and direct skin contact ultimately endanger their

health and that of their families, similar to Heemskerk’s(2004) findings for Suriname. Nevertheless, they face othermore immediate and life-threatening risks, such as collaps-ing pits and shafts, waist pains, eye problems, and dyna-mite blasting. Any initiative that aims to reduce thecomparatively invisible health impacts from Hg will belikely to fail if it does not also address broader communityissues, including women at and around mining sites.Women are largely responsible for the provision of drink-ing water and the preparation of food at their homes.Yet, they currently do not feature in the risk communica-tion efforts of the government or international fundingagencies. Linking risks of contamination to daily livelihooddecisions, such as cooking, would most certainly enhanceawareness. For instance, Hinton et al. (2003a) recommendtraining for women to differentiate safe and unsafe fish spe-cies, quantify safe fish consumption, and test recipes todilute fish with vegetables.

We advocate not only a more differentiated galamsey

discourse but also more practically oriented and inclusivescience and educational approaches that permit the minersto flourish. This study attempted to see the galamsey asresearch partners, not as criminals, with livelihood needsand opportunities, knowledge and knowledge gaps. Theparticipatory research methods allowed us to move awayfrom effect-based investigations toward a joint assessmentof human and environmental health. Although thisresearch phase was conducted as a pilot study, minersand health personnel alike requested a follow-up. As oneprofessional nurse put it: ‘I hope you will do the same inall mining communities in the area.’

How can we promote recognition, participation, andengagement? The main problem in Ghana, as stated by Hil-son and Potter (2005, p. 127), is that the government lacksgenuine interest in promoting the small-scale mining sectorby turning ‘a blind eye’ to the needs of small operatorswhile facilitating large-scale, multinational investments.Carson et al. (2005) recommend public–private partner-ships that build stakeholder capacity, address knowledgebarriers, support training of local environmental NGOsand community members, create participatory environ-mental monitoring systems, and include small-scale minersinto the policy agenda. Simplified registration processes,secured tenure, and access to cheap finance for healthiertechnologies would also be required. Drawing upon theecohealth approach, Spiegel and Veiga (2005) suggesttransportable demonstration units for the ASM sector tolink mercury pollution to intertwined health, environmen-tal, and socio-economic challenges.

What is most urgent is to raise the profile of Ghanaiansmall-scale mining by accepting it as a viable livelihoodoption for thousands and an economic sector to be nur-tured and engaged constructively. Currently, the discourseof marginalization and criminalization prevents any type offruitful collaborative and long-term action. We have shownthat the main predicament stems not so much from toxiccontamination with mercury but from exclusion of most


small-scale miners from educational, health, technological,and financial services. Active involvement of mining com-munities into capacity building for enhanced human andenvironmental health is the first step out of the currentimpasse.

Acknowledgements

The authors gratefully acknowledge a Faculty ResearchGrant from the Africa Research Center at the PennsylvaniaState University and invaluable contributions of teammembers Raymond Tutu, Jones Adjei, Doris Ottie-Boa-kye, and Iddrisu Mutaru Goro (Regional Institute for Pop-ulation Studies, University of Ghana). We also want tothank the men and women miners who granted us accessto their sites, participated in the study, and shared withus many constructive insights about the artisanal miningsector in Ghana. We are grateful to Colleen Hansel (Har-vard University) for suggestions on trace level metal sam-pling in the field. Finally, we would like to thankRichard Amankwah and Newton Amegbey (Universityof Mining and Technology, Tarkwa), Francis Momade(Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology,Kumasi), Seth Danso (Ecological Laboratory, Universityof Ghana, Legon), and Francis Dodoo and Nii Codjoe(Regional Institute for Population Studies, University ofGhana, Legon) for their institutional support, Mike Appi-ah and Clemence Adzormahe from the Minerals Commis-sion for practical guidance, and two anonymous reviewersfor comments and suggestions.

References

Adger, W.N., Benjaminsen, T.A., Brown, K., Svarstad, H., 2001.Advancing a political ecology of global environmental discourses.Development and Change 32 (4), 681–715.

Adimado, A.A., Baah, D.A., 2002. Mercury in human blood, urine, hair,nail, and fish from the Ankobra and Tano River Basins in Southwest-ern Ghana. Bull. Environ. Contam. Toxic. 68, 339–346.

Agyeman, J., 2005. Sustainable Communities and the Challenge ofEnvironmental Justice. New York University Press, New York andLondon.

Amankwah, R.K., Anim-Sackey, C., 2004. Promoting cooperationbetween small- and large-scale miners in Ghana. Mining Engineering56 (4), 36–39.

Amegbey, N.A., Eshun, P.A., 2003. Mercury use and occupationalexposure in the Ghanaian small-scale gold mining industry. GhanaMining Journal 7, 54–61.

Andrew, J.S., 2003. Potential application of mediation to land use conflictsin small-scale mining. Journal of Cleaner Production 11 (2), 117–130.

Aryee, B.N.A., 2003. Small-scale mining in Ghana as a sustainabledevelopment activity: its development and a review of the contempo-rary issues and challenges. In: Hilson, G.M. (Ed.), The Socio-Economic Impacts of Artisanal and Small-Scale Mining in DevelopingCountries. A.A. Balkema Publishers, Lisse, The Netherlands, pp. 379–418.

Babut, M., Sekyi, R., Potin-Gautier, M., Tellier, S., Bannerman, W.,Casellas, C., Rambaud, R., 2001. US/GHA/99/128 – Assistance inAssessing and Reducing Mercury Pollution Emanating from ArtisanalGold Mining in Ghana – Phase I: Part II –Conduct of Surveys onRiver Systems & Overall Conclusions. UNIDO.

Ballard, C., Banks, G., 2003. Resource wars: the anthropology of mining.Annual Review of Anthropology 52, 287–313.

Bannerman, W., Potin-Gautier, M., Amoureux, D., Tellier, S., Rambaud,A., Babut, M., Adimado, A., Beinhoff, C., 2003. Mercury and arsenicin the gold mining regions of the Ankobra River basin in Ghana. J.Phys. IV (France), 107. doi:10.1051/jp4:20030255.

Beijer, K., Jernelov, A., 1979. Methylation of Hg in aquatic environments.The Biogeochemistry of Mercury in the Environment. Elsevier/ North-Holland Biomedical Press, Netherlands.

Bonzongo, J.C., Donkor, A.K., Nartey, V.K., 2003. Environmentalimpacts of mercury related to artisanal gold mining in Ghana. Journalde Physique IV 107, 217–220.

Bostrom, A., Morgan, M., Fischhoff, B., Read, D., 1994. What do peopleknow about global climate change? 1. Mental models. Risk Analysis 6,959–970.

Carson, M., Cottrell, S., Dickman, J., Gummerson, E., Lee, T., Miao, Y.,Teranishi, N., Tully, C., Uregian, C., 2005. Managing MineralResources Through Public–Private Partnerships: Mitigating Conflictin Ghanaian Gold Mining. Woodrow Wilson School of Public andInternational Affairs, Princeton, NJ.

Crispin, G., 2003. Environmental management in small scale mining inPNG. Journal of Cleaner Production 11 (2), 175–183.

Donkor, A.K., Nartey, V.K., Bonzongo, J.C., Adotey, D.K., 2006a.Artisanal mining of gold with mercury in Ghana. West Africa Journalof Applied Ecology 9, 1–8 (Paper 2).

Donkor, A.K., Bonzongo, J.C., Nartey, V.K., Adothey, D.K., 2006b.Mercury in different environmental compartments of the Pra RiverBasin, Ghana. Science of the Total Environment 369, 164–176.

Eisler, R., 2003. Health risks of gold miners: a synoptic review.Environmental Geochemistry and Health 25, 325–345.

Forget, G., Lebel, J., 2001. An ecosystem approach to human health.International Journal of Occupational and Environmental Health 7 (2Suppl), S3–S36.

Fraser, N., 1998. Social justice in the age of identity politics: redistribu-tion, recognition and participation. In: The Tanner Lectures onHuman Values, vol. 19. University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City, UT.

Fraser, N., 2000. Rethinking recognition. New Left Review (May/June),107–120.

General News, 2006. ‘‘Galamsey’’ – Now a Major Challenge to MiningCompanies. September 14.

Ghana Web, 2004. Illegal Mining a Threat in Ghana. October 10.Ghana Web, 2006. Golden Star Reports Government Intervention to

Remove Illegal Miners from its Concessions in Ghana, November 2.Ghanaian Chronicle, 2005. Mining Cripples and Illegal Miners Resist

Relocation. May 7, 2005.Golow, A.A., Adzei, E.A., 2002. Mercury in surface soil and cassava crop

near an alluvial goldmine at Dunkwa-on-Offin, Ghana. Bull. Environ.Contam. Toxicol. 69, 228–235.

Golow, A.A., Mingle, L.C., 2003. Mercury in river water and sediments inSome Rivers near Dunkwa-on-Offin, and alluvial goldmine, Ghana.Bull. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 70, 379–384.

Hammond, N.Q., Tabata, H., 1997. Characteristics of ore mineralsassociated with gold at the Prestea mine, Ghana. MineralogicalMagazine 61, 879–894.

Heemskerk, M., 2004. Risk attitudes and mitigation among gold minersand others in the Suriname rainforest. Natural Resources Forum 27,1–12.

Heemskerk, M., 2005. Collecting data in artisanal and small-scale miningcommunities: measuring progress towards more sustainable liveli-hoods. Natural Resources Forum 29, 82–87.

Hilson, G., 2001. A Contextual Review of the Ghanaian Small-scaleMining Industry. International Institute for Environment and Devel-opment, London, England.

Hilson, G., 2002. Small-scale mining and its socio-economic impact indeveloping countries. Natural Resources Forum 26, 3–13.

Hilson, G., 2006. Abatement of mercury pollution in the small-scale goldmining industry: Restructuring the policy and research agendas. TheScience of the Total Environment 362 (1–3), 1–14.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1051/jp4:20030255


Hilson, G., Pardie, S., 2006. Mercury: an agent of poverty in Ghana’ssmall-scale gold-mining sector? Resources Policy 31, 106–116.

Hilson, G., Potter, C., 2003. Why is illegal gold mining activity soubiquitous throughout rural Ghana? African Development Revue 15(2), 237–270.

Hilson, G., Potter, C., 2005. Structural adjustment and subsistenceindustry: artisanal gold mining in Ghana. Development and Change 36(1), 103–131.

Hilson, G., Yakovleva, N., 2006. Strained relations: a critical analysis ofthe mining conflict in Prestea, Ghana. Political Geography, 1–22.

Hilson, G., Hilson, C.J., Pardie, S., 2007. Improving awareness of mercurypollution in small-scale gold mining communities: challenges and waysforward in rural Ghana. Environmental Research 103 (2), 275–287.

Hinton, J., Beinhoff, C., 2005. Report to the UNEP GC Meeting, Nairobi,February 2005, on Mercury and Artisanal Gold Mining. GlobalMercury Project.

Hinton, J.J., Veiga, M.M., Beinhoff, C., 2003a. Women, mercury andartisanal gold mining: risk communication and mitigation. J. Phys. IVFrance 107, 617–620.

Hinton, J.J., Veiga, M.M., Veiga, A.T.C., 2003b. Clean artisanal goldmining: a utopian approach? Journal of Cleaner Production 11, 99–115.

Hontelez, J., Bender, M.T., Jensen, G., Hrdinka, C., 2006. Environmentaland Health NGOs Call for Immediate Adoption of RegulationProposal on EU Mercury Export Ban and Storage of SurplusMercury. Brussels, 7 September 2006.

IARC, 1993. Mercury and mercury compounds. IARC Summary &Evaluations, vol. 58. International Agency for Research on Cancer.

ILO, 1999. Social and labor issues in small-scale mines. Report for theTripartite Meeting on Social and Labor Issues in Small-scale Mines,Geneva, 17–22 May 1999. International Labor Office.

Kinniburgh, D.G., Kosmus, W., 2002. Arsenic contamination in ground-water: some analytical considerations. Talanta 58 (1), 165–180.

Koterba, M.T., Wilde, F.D., Lapham, W.W., 1995. Ground-water data-collection protocols and procedures for the national water-qualityassessment program: collection and documentation of water-qualitysamples and related data. U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report95-399. Reston, 123 pp.

Kull, A.C., 2002. Madagascar aflame: landscape burning as a peasantprotest, resistance, or a resource management tool? Political Geogra-phy 21, 927–952.

Kuma, J.S., 2004. Is groundwater in the Tarkwa gold mining district ofGhana potable? Environmental Geology 45, 391–400.

Lacerda, L.D., Salomons, W., 1998. Mercury from Gold and SilverMining: A Chemical Time Bomb? Springer, New York.

Lambert, T.W., Guyn, L., Lane, S.E., 2006. Development of localknowledge of environmental contamination in Sydney, Nova Scotia:environmental health practice from an environmental justice perspec-tive. Science of the Total Environment 368, 471–484.

Lebel, J., 2003. Health: An Ecosystem Approach. Ottawa, Canada:International Development Research Centre. URL: www.idrc.ca/openbooks/012-8/.

Mate, K., 1999. Boom in Ghana’s golden enclave. UN Office ofCommunications and Public Information. <http://www.un.org/eco-socdev/geninfo/afrec/vol11no3/ghanagold.htm>.

Mayer, D.D., 1996. The political ecology of disease as one new focus formedical geography. Progress in Human Geography 20 (4), 441–456.

McDonald, D.A. (Ed.), 2002. Environmental Justice in South Africa.Ohio University Press, Athens, OH.

Mining News, 2006. Small-scale Mines. The Ghana Chamber of Mines2(2), June, p. 6.

Morgan, M.G., Fischhoff, B., Bostrom, A., Atman, C.J., 2002. RiskCommunication: A Mental Models Approach. Cambridge UniversityPress, Cambridge, UK.

Neumann, R.P., 1998. Imposing Wilderness. University of CaliforniaPress, Berkeley, CA.

Peluso, N.L., 1992. Rich Forests, Poor People. University of CaliformiaPress, Berkeley, CA.

Porcella, D.B., Ramel, C., Jernelow, A., 1997. Gold mercury pollution andthe role of gold mining: an overview. Water, Air and Soil Pollution 97,205–207.

Quinn, C.H., Huby, M., Kiwasila, H., Lovett, J.C., 2003. Localperceptions of risk to livelihood in semi-arid Tanzania. Journal ofEnvironmental Management 68, 111–119.

Rambaud, A., Casellas, C., Sackey, S.O., Ankrah, N.-A., Potin-Gautier,M., Tellier, S., Bannerman, W., Babut, M., 2000. US/GHA/99/128 – Assistance in Assessing and Reducing Mercury PollutionEmanating from Artisanal Gold Mining in Ghana – Phase I:Part I – General Introduction and Assessment of Human Health.UNIDO.

Rapport, D.J., Mergler, D., 2004. Expanding the practice of ecosystemhealth. EcoHealth 1 (Suppl 2), 4–7.

Regional News, 2006. Illegal mining destroying farmslands in Talensi-Nab-Dam District, Friday, November 10.

Reuters, 2006. Ghana gold diggers pose headache for mining firms, May20.

Richmond, C., Elliott, S.J., Matthews, R., Elliott, B., 2005. The politicalecology of health: perceptions of environment, health and well-beingamong ‘Namgis First Nation’. Health & Place 11, 349–365.

Roe, E., 1991. ‘‘Development narratives’’ or making the best of blueprintdevelopment. World Development 19 (4), 287–300.

Ryan, O., 2006. Ghana gold diggers pose headache for mining firms.Reuters, May 19, 2006.

Schlosberg, D., 2003. The justice of environmental justice: reconcilingequity, recognition, and participation in a political movement. In:Light, A., de-Shalit, A. (Eds.), Moral and Practical reasoning inEnvironmental Practices. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA/London,England, pp. 77–106.

Schlosberg, D., 2004. Reconceiving environmental justice: global move-ments and political theories. Environmental Politics 13 (3), 517–540.

Schlosberg, D., 2007. Defining environmental justice: theories, move-ments, and nature. In: Paper Presented at the Annual Meeting of theAssociation of the American Geographers, April 17–21, 2007, SanFrancisco, CA.

Shi, G., Jiang, G., 2002. A dip-and-read test strip for the determination ofmercury(II) ion in aqueous samples based on urease activity inhibition.Analytical Sciences, 1215–1219.

Sinding, K., 2005. The dynamics of artisanal and small-scale miningreform. Natural Resources Forum 29 (3), 243–252.

Spiegel, S.J., Veiga, M.M., 2005. Building capacity in small-scale goldmining communities: health, ecosystem sustainability, and the GlobalMercury Project. EcoHealth 2, 361–369.

Spiegel, S.J., Savornin, O., Shoko, D., Veiga, M.M., 2006. Mercuryreduction in Munhena, Mozambique: homemade solutions and thesocial context of change. International Journal of Occupational andEnvironmental health 12 (3), 215–221.

Tschakert, P., 2007. Views from the vulnerable: understanding climaticand other stressors in the Sahel. Global Environmental Change.doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2006.11.008.

van Geen, A., Protus, T., Cheng, Z., Horneman, A., Seddique, A.A.,Hoqueand, M.A., Ahmed, K.M., 2004. Testing groundwater forarsenic in Bangladesh before installing a well. Environ. Sci. Technol.38, 6783–6789.

van Geen, A., Cheng, Z., Seddique, A.A., Hoque, M.A., Gelman, A.,Graziano, J.H., Ahsan, H., Parvez, F., Ahmed, K.M., 2005. Reliabilityof a commercial kit to test groundwater for arsenic in Bangladesh.Environ. Sci. Technol. 39, 299–303.

Veiga, M.M., Baker, R., 2004. Protocols for Environmental and HealthAssessment of Mercury Released by Artisanal and Small Scale Miners,report to the Global Mercury project: removal of barriers tointroduction of cleaner artisanal gold mining and extraction technol-ogies. GEF/UNDP/UNIDO. 170 p. Available: http://www.globalmercury.org.

Veiga, M.M., Maxson, P.A., Hylander, L.D., 2006. Origin and consump-tion of mercury in small-scale gold mining. Journal of CleanerProduction 14, 436–447.

http://www.idrc.ca/openbooks/012-8/

http://www.idrc.ca/openbooks/012-8/

http://www.un.org/ecosocdev/geninfo/afrec/vol11no3/ghanagold.htm

http://www.un.org/ecosocdev/geninfo/afrec/vol11no3/ghanagold.htm

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2006.11.008

http://www.globalmercury.org

http://www.globalmercury.org


Vieira, R., 2004. Mercury-free gold mining technologies: possibilities foradoption in the Guianas. WWF Guianas Regional Program OfficeTechnical Paper Series #1, WWF Guianas, Suriname.

Vieira, R., 2006. Mercury-free gold mining technologies: possibilities foradoption in the Guianas. Journal of Cleaner Production 14 (3–4), 448–454.

Walker, G., Bulkeley, H., 2006. Geographies of environmental justice.Geoforum 37, 655–659 (Editorial).

Walker, G., Eames, M., 2006. Environmental inequalities: Cross-cuttingthemes for the ESRC/NERC transdisciplinary seminar series onenvironmental inequalities 2006, p. 8.

Wing, S., 2005. Environmental justice, science, and public health.Environmental Health Perspectives. Essays on the Future of Environ-mental Health Research, 54–62.

Yakubu, B.R., 2002. Towards sustainable small scale mining in Ghana. In:Barning, K., Dorgbetor, B. (Eds.), Proceedings of the National MiningConference on Mining, the Environment and Sustainable Develop-ment. Published by the MC, Accra.

Young, I.M., 1990. Justice and the Politics of Difference. PrincetonUniversity Press, Princeton, NJ.

contaminated identities: mercury and marginalization in ghana’s … · 2019-08-31 ·...

Documents