The Cycle of Contamination: Environmental Justice and Corporate
Malfeasance in Resource Extraction
Mike Buchanan - 2025
Abstract
This paper explores the environmental and social consequences of resource
extraction by multinational corporations, with a particular focus on
developing regions. It examines the cycle of contamination resulting from
activities such as mining, which disproportionately affect marginalised
communities. Key issues include acid mine drainage (AMD), heavy metal
contamination and the degradation of karst environments. The study critiques
corporate malfeasance highlights the urgent need for more robust regulation,
community empowerment, and sustainable development. Case studies and scholarly
research are used to support calls for enhanced accountability and
environmental justice.
Introduction
The Cycle of Contamination Corporate Practices and Environmental Impact
Many multinational corporations prioritise profit over environmental
responsibility. In the mining sector, for example, the externalisation of
environmental costs is a common practice, where companies avoid bearing the
financial burden of remediation, leaving local communities and governments to
manage the consequences (Jones & Brown, 2019). Mining activities often
lead to the leaching of heavy metals into water systems, posing long-term
health risks (Smith et al., 2020). In Ghana, AngloGold Ashanti has faced
criticism for contaminating rivers with arsenic and mercury, endangering
agricultural and fishing livelihoods (Human Rights Watch, 2011).
Impact on Local Communities
Marginalised communities, particularly in rural and indigenous areas, bear the
brunt of contamination. These populations often rely on agriculture and local
water sources for survival. Contamination of these resources leads to chronic
health problems, reduced food security and economic instability. Karst
environments, with their porous geology and rapid water transmission,
exacerbate these issues by enabling widespread dispersion of pollutants (Ford
& Williams, 2007; Taylor, 2021). In the Niger Delta, oil extraction by
Shell has resulted in widespread ecological damage, with limited
accountability or remediation (UNEP, 2011).
The Challenge of Remediation Inadequate Cleanup Efforts
The responsibility for environmental remediation often falls on local
governments, which may lack the technical capacity, financial resources, or
political will to effectively manage these efforts (Williams, 2022). Karst
terrains complicate remediation because contaminants spread rapidly and
unpredictably through underground channels. The absence of corporate
accountability in such scenarios exemplifies systemic malfeasance and
disregard for geoethical obligations (Peppoloni & Di Capua, 2017).
Long-Term Consequences
The persistence of contaminants in soils, sediments, and biological systems
leads to bioaccumulation, which poses long-term risks to biodiversity and
human health (Green et al., 2023). For instance, in La Oroya, Peru, nearly all
children exhibited dangerously high blood lead levels due to nearby smelting
operations (WHO, 2007). The ecological consequences of such contamination
often span generations and can render ecosystems irreparably damaged.
Potential Pathways Forward Strengthening Regulations and Accountability
Robust regulatory frameworks are essential to ensure corporate accountability
in resource extraction. International legal instruments must be developed or
enforced to require corporations to remediate contaminated sites and report
environmental impacts transparently (Adams, 2020). Geoethical principles
should underpin environmental governance to balance economic development with
ecological integrity (Peppoloni & Di Capua, 2017).
Community Empowerment and Advocacy
Empowering local communities is critical for environmental justice. Grassroots
organisations play a vital role in monitoring environmental conditions and
advocating for rights. Legal empowerment and environmental education
initiatives can enable communities to resist exploitation. For example, the
Sarayaku people in Ecuador successfully halted oil drilling through litigation
in the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR, 2012).
Sustainable Development Practices
Developing alternative livelihoods and investing in sustainable agriculture
and infrastructure can reduce communities' dependency on environmentally
harmful industries. Climate-resilient technologies and practices can help
adapt to environmental changes and mitigate contamination impacts (Harris,
2022). Sustainable development must be localised, inclusive, and ecologically
informed.
International Support and Collaboration
Global cooperation is essential. International organisations, NGOs, and
national governments must provide technical support, funding, and policy
frameworks that assist affected communities. The role of the United Nations,
although often criticised for limited enforcement capabilities, remains
central to fostering accountability and environmental protection.
Conclusion
The cycle of contamination stemming from resource extraction underscores
deep-rooted injustices and ecological vulnerabilities, particularly in
marginalised communities. Addressing these challenges requires integrated
strategies encompassing stringent regulation, community empowerment,
sustainable development, and international collaboration. While systemic
barriers persist, a coordinated, geoethically grounded response can dismantle
the structural conditions that perpetuate environmental harm and promote
resilience and justice for future generations.
References
1.
Adams, R. (2020).
Corporate Responsibility in Resource Extraction: A Global Perspective.
London: Environmental Press.
2.
Ford, D. C., & Williams, P. W. (2007).
Karst Hydrogeology and Geomorphology. Chichester: Wiley.
3.
Green, T., Smith, J., & Taylor, L. (2023). The Long-Term
Effects of Heavy Metal Contamination on Biodiversity.
Journal of Environmental Science, 45(2), 123–135.
4.
Harris, P. (2022).
Sustainable Development in Marginalised Communities. Oxford: GreenWorld
Publications.
5.
Human Rights Watch. (2011).
Gold’s Costly Dividend: Human Rights Impacts of Gold Mining in Ghana.
Available at:
https://www.hrw.org/report/2011/02/01/golds-costly-dividend/human-rights-impacts-gold-mining-ghana
[Accessed 18 Jul. 2025].
6.
Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR). (2012).
Case of the Kichwa Indigenous People of Sarayaku v. Ecuador. Judgment
of 27 June 2012.
7.
Jones, M., & Brown, K. (2019). Environmental Externalities
and Corporate Evasion: An Analysis of Mining Practices.
Journal of Corporate Ethics, 14(3), 201–217.
8.
Peppoloni, S., & Di Capua, G. (2017). Geoethics: Ethical,
Social and Cultural Aspects in Geosciences.
Geological Society, London, Special Publications, 419(1), 17–28.
9.
Smith, A., Oduro, A., & Li, M. (2020). Mining and Water
Quality: A Global Perspective. Environmental Management Review, 33(4),
89–104.
10. Taylor, L. (2021). Pollution Pathways in Karst Systems.
Hydrogeology Today, 12(1), 56–72.
11. UNEP. (2011). Environmental Assessment of Ogoniland.
United Nations Environment Programme. Nairobi: UNEP.
class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle"
style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -18pt;"
>
12. Williams, C. (2022). The State of Environmental Remediation in
the Global South. Journal of Political Ecology, 29(1), 77–93.
13. World Health Organization (WHO). (2007).
Health Situation Analysis in La Oroya, Peru. Geneva: WHO.
Comments