Participatory Environmental Monitoring in Mining Contexts: A Practitioner Checklist to Start PEM
Step 3: Monitor and communicate the results
Step overview:
The first table gives a summary of issues and challenges present during this step. Below the table more detail can be found.
| Pillar | Key tasks | Key questions to discuss |
|---|---|---|
| Governance | Promote participation during a monitoring campaign |
|
| Finance PEM initiatives |
|
|
| Environment | Select tools and equipment for monitoring |
|
| Implement the monitoring plan |
|
|
| Handle and store monitoring data |
|
|
| Learning | Train participants to monitor |
|
| Communicate the monitoring process and results |
|
|
| Gender | Promote women’s participation during and after the monitoring |
|
| Governance | ||
| Key tasks | Key questions to discuss | |
| Promote participation during a monitoring campaign |
|
|
| Finance PEM initiatives |
|
|
| Environment | ||
| Key tasks | Key questions to discuss | |
| Select tools and equipment for monitoring |
|
|
| Implement the monitoring plan |
|
|
| Handle and store monitoring data |
|
|
| Learning | ||
| Key tasks | Key questions to discuss | |
| Train participants to monitor |
|
|
| Communicate the monitoring process and results |
|
|
| Gender | ||
| Key tasks | Key questions to discuss | |
| Promote women’s participation during and after the monitoring |
|
|
You can download a worksheet and use it to write down your thoughts about the proposed tasks and discussion questions as part of the planning.
Governance
Promote participation during a
monitoring campaign
It is important to understand the external and personal factors that motivate or deter people from participating. An example of an internal motivator is an innate inclination to participate in public affairs. An example of an external motivator is recognition or payment.
Suggestions when PEM is:
Executed by community members
In bottom-up PEM, there is a tendency to assume everyone is already represented. Yet, efforts can still be made to increase participation. Reaching out to peers in religious institutions, schools or other community places can be an effective way to increase community participation.
Executed in partnership
A partnership may take a long time to accomplish outcomes, so all involved parties must prepare for the long run. This is particularly true in contexts where distrust and previous conflicts exist. Consistency in meetings, monitoring frequency, and follow-up actions can signal to community members that improvements are underway. This, in turn, may encourage them to participate more.
Supervised by community members
The restricted role of community members in this type of PEM makes it harder to sustain their participation. A roster of possible participants may be useful, providing some level of continuity while accounting for participants’ rotation.
Finance PEM initiatives
Financing can be managed by reaching out to different partners for support. It is crucial to decide which costs will be covered (e.g., transportation, community members' non-worked days, laboratory analysis, and equipment).
Suggestions when PEM is:
Executed by community members
There may be State grants that can be repurposed to finance community-led PEM initiatives. For example, community development or community participation grants have a direct link to PEM’s aims. In locations where the community is participating in results-based payments systems (for example REDD+), the PEM team could use this type of funding approach as well.
Executed in partnership
In this scenario, external parties are likely to finance PEM. Mining companies can incorporate PEM costs into their existing environmental or corporate social responsibility budgets. State agencies can also include these costs within their environmental management or community outreach budgets.
The mining company implementing a PEM initiative in Donoso lets a third-party NGO administrate monitoring-related funds. While it is true that the NGO is funded by the company, this way of management has proven helpful in increasing transparency (Panama).
In PEM initiatives, such as the one in Quellaveco, where different State institutions participate, all participating agencies bear transportation costs (Peru).
Supervised by community members
State agencies that want to implement PEM but lack the resources could establish a financing plan beforehand, so that monitoring work does not stall. In some countries, a part of mining taxes is set aside for financing the supervising agencies, or mining companies are obligated to cover the costs. Although these are not perfect solutions, they can be a good starting point to secure funding. Some international conventions like Escazú or Aarhus may have allocated funding for each country that could be used for PEM.
Environment
Select tools and equipment for monitoring
Many tools and methods can be used, based on funding and participants' abilities. Equipment can be chosen depending on whether the obtained data needs to be highly precise (e.g., if the data will be legally used) or less precise (e.g., if the data will be used as a starter point for further study).
Suggestions when PEM is:
Executed by community members
While this type of initiative has the strongest focus on the community, the data gathered during monitoring must make sense to the mining producers and State agencies in order to influence change. Even if the equipment is simple, using it systematically to obtain reliable data is key. There could be available kits from national or international initiatives to use in community water monitoring.
Executed in partnership
Dedicated time must be set aside for collaboratively selecting the equipment through a partnership. Different tools can be chosen to balance the accuracy of professional monitoring and keeping the initiative open to the participation of community members.
Supervised by community members
Professional equipment may be preferred in this case. However, equipment solely used and understood by mining companies may feed distrust with the community who do not understand its application. The use of trusted third parties, like NGOs or universities, or using a mix of methods can help build trust.
Implement the monitoring plan
This task deals with implementing the monitoring plan defined in Step 2, and it works in tandem with the other tasks of Step 3. Proper advance preparation will ensure that field visits provide the expected quality and quantity of information. For example, a checklist of necessary items can be created to ensure everything is brought to the field, and that everyone has clarity about the schedule and the activities to be carried out.
Suggestions when PEM is:
Executed by community members
The community’s lack of experience may translate into small mistakes that hamper field trips. To avoid this, creating checklists for participants, equipment and protocols and reviewing these lists before going on the field trip may help.
Executed in partnership
In a partnership, roles will be divided among all the participating parties. It is essential to double-check that everyone clearly understands their roles and responsibilities to prevent misunderstandings during the field trip (e.g., nobody remembers to bring a particular tool).
Supervised by community members
In this scenario, most responsibilities for field visits will rely on the external convener. Logistical problems should be avoided, as participating community members may mistake them for a lack of interest from the convener or an excuse to avoid the monitoring.
In Camp Alpha, a major difficulty was the lack of proper identification for participating members. This logistical challenge emerged during the monitoring campaigns and resulted in unfortunate outcomes, in that community members participating in PEM were not recognized or taken seriously (Liberia).
As of 2024, the second version of the Mongolian Guide for PEM includes a series of practical templates for their national context. For example, it helps in the logistics of finding the relevant environmental documents associated with mining companies and registering data during field trips (Mongolia).
Handle and store monitoring data
This is a crucial task as it will help compare data in the long run. Simple ways to ensure quality include comparing all site names and checking that values are within the expected range. Different media can be used to store the data, from paper to cloud-based technologies. The choice depends on the parties with whom data will be shared.
Suggestions when PEM is:
Executed by community members
For community-led initiatives, data management should involve multiple people. This means that the data obtained through monitoring should be available even if participants rotate or change.
Executed in partnership
As a measure to back up data, it can be helpful in a partnership for an external party to be in charge of data storage and for a community member to have access to the same information. This arrangement would be beneficial for both data safety and communication with the community.
Supervised by community members
In this scenario, an external party will probably register and store the data. It then becomes essential to educate community members on how they can access and obtain copies of that information.
Learning
Train participants to monitor
Training usually covers five topics: PEM implementation, environmental legislation, environmental sciences, leadership, and gender equity. Further, it can include five types of activities: field visits, internships, formal certified training, workshops, and networking.
Suggestions when PEM is:
Executed by community members
In addition to trainings from external parties, there may be knowledge holders within the community who can share their experience with participants. Traditional or Indigenous knowledge can benefit PEM and can be effectively delivered through self-organized training programs.
Executed in partnership
Establishing a partnership is a learning experience for everyone involved. Sharing experiences and opinions and seeking solutions together enhances everyone’s knowledge. Seeing the process this way may help one party accept personal gaps in expertise and be open to others’ opinions.
In Ancash, the EGP revived the network of PEM committees, bringing together seven committees and approximately 30 environmental monitors. As part of these efforts, the Huarmey Committee visited the committees of San Marcos, Carhuayoc, Jangas, Tampa, Huallanca, and Aquia to jointly gather information about the committees’ work and existing challenges (Peru).
Supervised by community members
Centralizing everything with the State or the mining companies at the top may hamper participation in PEM. To address this, it is useful to reach out to respected third parties that may provide training to both community members and to the external convener in subjects like citizen participation or co-production of public services.
Communicate the monitoring process
and results
Communication should be continuous, starting with the first PEM preparations. It should be accessible to the community. Different types of media, like photos and oral presentations, can be used across a variety of channels, from web-hosted videos to local radio stations.
Suggestions when PEM is:
Executed by community members
Word-of-mouth can be enough if the PEM team has good relationships within the community. Yet, calling for a community meeting to discuss the results openly could be more helpful to resolve suspicion or mistrust.
Executed in partnership
One of the strengths of a partnership model is that all the parties have a space to share their thoughts about conveying monitoring results. The participating parties should strike a balance between formal events, which are more common for external parties, and relaxed conversations, which may be more suitable for the community.
In Quellaveco, the PEM team has a dedicated Facebook profile where they share news and results. This complements the open talks that community members can attend to learn more about monitoring results (Peru).
Supervised by community members
When an external convener leads PEM, communicating the monitoring results is as essential as obtaining them. If community members do not trust or understand the results, PEM would be just another externally imposed initiative where community does not have a voice. If a conflict has existed before, the convener should be prepared for a long-term effort that proves commitment to the community. For example, in some committees, once the monitoring points are agreed in advance, members can use their phones to report socio environmental concerns that can trigger monitoring at those sites by the company or state agency. An agreed upon approach to communicate monitoring results back to the wider community is also important, this can be done through pre planned community meetings, assemblies of particular community groups, community radio or online communication channels depending on what the community agrees is useful in that setting.
Gender
Usual factors that hamper women’s participation are customs where only men participate in public affairs or mining, lower literacy rates or gender norms for women’s roles, care-work responsibilities, and limits on women’s freedom of movement. By understanding which factor is more important, actions can be taken accordingly.
Suggestions when PEM is:
Executed by community members
If women are not already participating in the initiative, it can be a sign that barriers to female participation exist in the community and must be addressed. Reaching out to external parties, like NGOs or specialized State offices, may provide support to lower these barriers.
Executed in partnership
External parties working with communities could send their female representatives or employees to make the group less intimidating for women from the communities.
Supervised by community members
A simple action that an external convener can take is to explicitly include women in their invitations to community members. This is even more important in places where the language assigns genders to specific words, for example, “miembros de la comunidad” (Spanish).