Social audits is a programme that was implemented by ActionAid South Africa between 2016 and 2019 in 10 communities across seven provinces of Limpopo, North West, Free State, Mpumalanga, KwaZulu Natal, Northern Cape and Gauteng. This was the first time the methodology was carried out in mining affected communities in Africa.

The methods and principles of social auditing that have been adopted in South Africa follow the traditions established by the Mazdoor Kishan Shakti Sangathan (Association for the Empowerment of Workers and Peasants, or MKSS). MKSS was established in Rajasthan, India in 1990 with the objective of strengthening participatory democratic practices. It is one of the most effective social movements in India, best known for successfully achieving the enactment of the Right to Information Act. The demand for this act grew out of the struggle of workers in the Rajasthani state public works programme for a minimum wage.

The Social Audit Baseline report (2017), which was conducted in 10 mining affected communities across South Africa, as part of the ActionAid South Africa’s Social Audit Project, was conceptualised as part of our ongoing work with MACUA and WAMUA and premised on the understanding that the social, economic and political challenges faced by communities affected by mining can only fully be addressed when communities have organised themselves into active collectives who are able to hold duty bearers and other mining stakeholders to account. Our work with affected communities has highlighted the systemic manner in which the agency of individuals and collectives within communities have been eroded and how, through a systemic programme of legislative prescriptions, power within communities to decide on their wellbeing, governance and developmental paths has been stripped away.

The Social Audit methodology was particularly important for us, as it allowed communities to engage in the hard work of rebuilding activism and agency in ways that did not reduce communities to passive recipients of handouts. The project itself has maintained strict parameters in terms of accountability of all participants, both vertically and horizontally, based on the understanding that it is through our individual and collective actions that we learn how “to become”. What we do, matters, and through building accountability into our projects, we not only hold duty bearers to account, but also ourselves and the activists we work with are able to hold us and themselves to higher standards. This baseline report only includes the outcomes of the surveys from 8 communities in Mpumalanga, Gauteng, North West, Limpopo, Northern Cape, the Free State and KwaZulu Natal.

The findings from the report has broadly confirmed our initial hypothesis that mining affected
communities are disproportionately affected by mining, not only because of their proximity to the mines, but also because of the political, economic and social structural impediments they face in holding corporations and state parties to account. Among the structural political impediments faced by communities, are the lack of adequate legislative protection and a distinct lack of policy and legislation which fosters and encourages active participation by communities in their own governance.

In the report we unpack how the reality of the mining legislative regime often runs counter to the constitutional imperative of active citizen participation in affairs of governance as well a distinct dissonance between the rhetoric used by government and politicians with regard to the constitutional and political imperative for communities to not only participate in their own governance but also their right to benefit from the activities on and around their land. At the very least, this report highlights the deep divide between political, legislative and constitutional prescriptions and the lived reality of communities living in constant distress and experienced as a type of structural violence against their person. Among the key findings and statistics of the baseline surveys are that:

1. 64% of the respondents surveyed were women and 36% men.
2. 62% indicated they were single and 26% married.
3. 64% had education up to a secondary level and 13% indicated a tertiary level or higher.
4. 44% of respondents indicated that their main source of income was from social grants with Phola in Mpumalanga and Somkele in KwaZulu Natal indicating a 59% and 53% reliance on social grants respectively.
5. 24% indicated they survived on petty trading or self employment.
6. Only 30% indicated some type of formal or informal employment.
7. 73% of respondents indicated that no individuals in their households were either currently employed or previously employed by the mine.
8. Of the 27% who indicated that someone in their household was employed at a mine, 41% indicated that they were casual or manual jobs.

The statistics collected in the survey indicate deep levels of unemployment with significant reliance on social grants to survive and very little opportunity to find employment opportunities at or through the mines. In the 3rd quarter of 2019, Statistics South Africa, an agency for government released statics stating that 29,1% languish in unemployment and women being the hardest hit. With regards to the social responsibility of the mines and the Department of Mineral Resources, the following picture emerged:
1. 91% of respondents did not know what a Social Labour Plan (SLP) was.
2. 85% did not know of any structures in their community who engaged with the mine on
SLPs.
3. 95% had never seen an SLP.

Social Labour Plans are meant to be the main drivers of corporate social responsibility programmes which are mandated by the Constitution and the Mineral Resources Development Act (MPRDA), yet the beneficiaries of the programmes appear not to be aware of the programmes and of how they are supposed to benefit from it. Three clear core themes emerged from the surveys with regards to the challenges faced by communities affected by mines.

These are:
1. Environmental issues such as air, land and water pollution which impacts on human and livestock health, soil and water quality.
2. Living in an Unsafe environment, relating to blasting close to houses and the tremors experienced as a result of blasting, as well as concern about the rising crime levels within communities.
3. The constant threat to health ranging from TB and HIV to skin rashes and infections, asthma, silicosis and chest and lung problems.
In terms of community benefit from having Mines close to or around the community the following & emerged:
1. 79% indicated that there was no benefit from the mines at all.
2. 8% felt that the mine only brought negative benefits such as sickness, dispossessions and damages.
3. 13% felt there were positive benefits such as clinics, roads and employment.

When the respondents were asked about what they would want to change in the relationship between the mine and the community, four clear themes were highlighted:
1. 39% wanted more employment, skills development and livelihood options.
2. 35% wanted more accountability, consultation and communication by the mine.
3. 20% wanted more basic services and infrastructure.
4. 6% wanted some form of compensation.

Read through the lens of agency and structural exclusion, the outcomes of this portion of the
survey suggest that the communities surveyed have consistently preferred outcomes that allow them to develop and act on their own agency through either gainful employment or through access to other livelihood options.

The significant amount of respondents who indicated that they wanted more participatory
processes such as consultation and communication also support the suggestion that community agency, even in dire situations, is preferred to being agentless recipients of philanthropy.

In terms of the gendered impacts of mining, the survey found that the women not only have to bear the severe impacts on health, and social and personal violence against their bodies, they also have to contend with structural impediments to their wellbeing. Among the key findings in this regard is:
1. 40% of women indicated that jobs are only accessible through sexual favours.
2. 14% of women indicated that some sort of payment, fee or bribe was needed in order to
secure a job.
3. 73% of women indicated that they have received no benefit from the mine.
4. 25% of the women indicated that the community experiences substantial amounts of
violence such as rape, murder, abuse and protests.
5. 85% of women linked the increase in violence to the development of the mine.