| This dissertation examines response by local Peruvian communities to extraction pressures from international mining companies. The main comparison is between two cases in southern Peru, which responded differently to the possibility of mining during the years 2007 to 2012: one accepting, one rejecting. The Quellaveco project in Moquegua received authorization after a Roundtable negotiation, while intense protests halted Tia Maria in Arequipa. The specific question explored here is how neighboring Peruvian communities came to mobilize differently in response to mining pressure. More broadly, why do local populations organize high-magnitude mobilizations against corporate concerns in some cases, but not in others? The investigation analyzes how social movements theories, 1) interests, 2) resource mobilization (RM), and 3) political opportunity structures (POS) account for variation in magnitude of mobilization between the selected cases. Research consists of interviews with over 80 community leaders, government representatives, academics, and community members, in addition to in-depth review of newspaper articles and published secondary resources. In terms of theory, the investigation finds evidence for the importance of interests via socioeconomic effects and perceptions of risk in activating resources, and explaining variation between high and low-magnitude mobilization. At the same time, the combination of resource mobilization and political opportunity structures explain mobilizers' ability to protest. There is also learning, as previous mobilization experiences affect interests, RM and POS. Furthermore, varied positions of stakeholders influence each theory, and the magnitude of mobilization. Together, the cases confirm the significance of the synthetic approach in social movements theory, in which a combination of all three theories largely determines a community's level of response to extraction pressures. As for empirics, there is measurable difference in protest magnitude over time, with a rise in mobilization that peaks as mining operations near approval and initiation. Meanwhile, negotiation appears possible in each case, and is layered as a further option in addition to mobilization. Overall, the dissertation's findings are critical for shaping the priorities and strategies of development practitioners concerned with empowering local communities to defend themselves. |
