This document summarizes the key steps in conducting a listening study to understand community perceptions of mining activities. It discusses challenges in managing social issues, how listening studies identify perceptions of risks and impacts, and important steps like data review, scope definition, and selecting participants. It then provides an example of a study conducted in Cajamarca, Peru, which found tensions due to economic inequalities from the mine's presence and recommendations to improve the company's community engagement.

1. LISTENING TO THE COMMUNITY
Perceptions studies regarding mining activities
Miguel Cervantes Rodríguez

2. Content
• Challenges in the management of social issues
• What is a listening study?
• Key steps
• Limitations
• Listening to the city of Cajamarca
• Final considerations

3. Challenges in the management
of social issues
• Social issues are seen as externalities
• Social issues are not integrated into core
business
• Perceived as subjective and no measurable
– Difficult to manage them within a system
• Slow learning process to manage them

4. What is a listening study?
• Study of perceptions, opinions, fears and
expectations
• Reading of the social context and the type of
relationships that are being built
• Identification of population’s perceptions regarding
risks and impacts (not always coincide with actual
impacts)
• Identification of problems and good practices

5. Key steps
INFORMATION CONFIDENTIALITY POLICY
INFORMATION CONFIDENTIALITY POLICY

6. Key steps
• Data review
– Social context: sensitive issues and local context
– Company: standards and policies, project status, activities
(relationships and risks)
– Relationships’ history based on distinct stakeholders’ views
– Preliminary identification of key issues
• Scope definition
– Information provided, diagnoses, social audits, programs’
description and evaluation among others
– Geographical scope
– Times and resources

7. Key steps
• Communication protocol
– Information to participants: research objectives and activities
• Selection of participants
– External stakeholders: population, authorities and experts
• Representation criteria
• Different perceptions on company’s impacts and the efficiency of
management measures
– Internal stakeholders: company’ staff and managers
• Depending on company size and the complexity of the project
• Allow a better understanding of the engagement process and the
generation of social risks and impacts

8. Key steps
• Periodic review of the main
findings
– Identification of common topics
and trends
– Qualitative methodology
• Final report
– Presentation of the findings
including participants’ quotes

9. Limitations
• Sensitive to social
political situation
and
• Exploratory research
– Key issues in their relationship
with
the
company
are
identified with the participants
• Some stakeholders feel that
qualitative studies are not
reliable enough

10. Listening to the city of Cajamarca

11. Objective of the study
• Cajamarca population’s
perspectives regarding its
relation with the company
• Exploring sources of tensions
and conflicts
• Identifying reconnection’s
opportunities and strategies

12. Implementation of the study
• Nearly 60 persons interviewed in Lima and Cajamarca
– Diversity criteria
• Conflict factors mentioned
– Displacement and social transformation of the agricultural
economy
– Large scale land acquisitions
– Presence of a major company in a region previously neglected
– Economic transformations: urban economy, monetarization
– Work immigration
– New class of mining workers

13. Feedback process
• To company’s officers in
Cajamarca, Lima and Denver
– Permit a good understanding of the
findings presented in the study
• To participants
– Draft report socialized in December
2012
– Meetings and feedback with
participants in Cajamarca and Lima

14. Study findings
• The company’s entry, presence and interaction with the people
of Cajamarca have contributed to economic inequalities and a
deep negative emotional legacy
• Company’s decisions and practices are perceived as short-term
ones
• Structural and systemic factors within the organization have
diminished the company’s capacity to build and maintain local
level relationships
• Development and social exclusion are significant factors in the
conflict

15. Study findings
• The company suffers from an inability to listen effectively
to the community
• There are clear links between the "Conga Crisis" and
Yanacocha’s legacy
• Quilish is a
present factor in
relationship
dynamics and in
the current
conflict

16. Recommendations

17. Company´s answer
• Draft report (company website):
December 2012
• LATAM Senior management letter
– Company’s apologies
– Commitment to implement changes
• Final report (company website):
September 2013
• Publication of “A Legitimate Path
Forward: Yanacocha’s Community
Engagement Progress”

18. Final considerations
Internal communication
•Study objectives
•Importance
•Activities
•Areas involved
Will for change and alignment
•Senior management involved from the start
•Company’s will to improve internal processes
In case of very deep state of disconnection
•Consider modifying social strategy / business strategy
•Reform and organizational change