Mining-induced changes in ecosystem services value and implications of their economic and relational cost in a mining landscape, Ghana

Samuel Kumi; Patrick Addo-Fordjour; Bernard Fei-Baffoe

doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e21156

Mining-induced changes in ecosystem services value and implications of their economic and relational cost in a mining landscape, Ghana

Heliyon. 2023 Oct 18;9(10):e21156. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e21156. eCollection 2023 Oct.

Authors

Samuel Kumi¹, Patrick Addo-Fordjour², Bernard Fei-Baffoe³

Affiliations

¹ Department of Environmental Management, University of Energy and Natural Resources, Sunyani, Ghana.
² Department of Theoretical and Applied Biology - Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology, Kumasi, Ghana.
³ Department of Environmental Science - Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology, Kumasi, Ghana.

Abstract

The surge in mining operations to meet the global demand for mineral resources adversely impacts ecosystem services and dependent households, but the issue barely attracts attention. This study evaluated the dynamics of mining-induced changes in the value of ecosystem services (ES) and the consequent economic and relational cost to rural households in the Ahafo region of Ghana. Face-to-face structured interviews with 200 householders were conducted in three mining communities. We determined relational values in the landscape through focus group discussion and the economic cost of the ecosystem services lost by applying replacement and contingency cost estimations. Old-growth forests, degraded forests, teak plantations, cultivated land, wetlands, and grassland were ecosystems identified in the mining landscape. The most valued ecosystem was old-growth forest, while the least was grassland. Provisioning service was the most valued ES, while supporting service was the least. Provisioning ES was rated the most impacted by the mine, whereas cultural services were the least affected. Mining activities caused a significant loss of 14 ecosystem services (including crops, livestock, capture fisheries, wild food, bush meat, biomass fuel, and freshwater) that were of priority to the communities. The affected households experienced relatively high monthly economic costs, approximating $300 per household, from the loss of priority ecosystem services. Canonical correspondence analysis revealed connections between ecosystem services valuation and the socio-demographic characteristics of the respondents. There was a perceived mine-adverse effect on the relational values of the people relating to cultural identity, sovereignty, symbolic value, security, subsistence and livelihood, sense of place, social cohesion, social memory, female emotional/mental health, and womanhood training opportunities. Actors in the mining industry should consider policies and management interventions that will limit ecosystem services loss, widely ascertain ecosystem benefits, and comprehensively mitigate the impact of their loss on households.

Keywords: Economic value; Ecosystem service; Mining; Relational value; Rural household.