“Horizontal” and “vertical” diffusion: The cumulative influence of Impact and Benefit Agreements (IBAs) on mining policy-production in New Caledonia

The scale, duration and intensity of conflicts over mineral resources vary greatly. However, they always involve, in varying proportions, the triad stakeholder model—corporation, state, community—each element of which is internally heterogeneous. Increasingly, new players are entering the scene: international non-governmental organizations (NGOs), environmental grassroots groups, indigenous transnational networks, international aid and development agencies. Nevertheless, conflicts and arrangements around access to and control over mineral resources can take the apparent form of dyadic relationships between companies and local communities, resulting in negotiated company-community agreements, often called “Impact and Benefit Agreements” (IBAs). In our analysis, local agreements on mineral resource governance are seen as building blocks in the production of mining policy “from below”, even though they seem at first sight to exclude the state. This paper argues that these agreements, and the negotiations surrounding them, inform debates around mining through both “horizontal diffusion” (influence on other localities facing similar situations) and “vertical diffusion” (influence on policy design and implementation at upper political and administrative levels). This diffusion may occur in a “positive” sense, effecting further change in line with the intent of the original agreement, or in a “negative” one, actually making substantive change less likely, whether at a community or policy level. We build this argument through two case studies from New Caledonia, in the south-west Pacific, where mining has long been a key issue, especially in the current context of “negotiated decolonization” launched by the 1998 Nouméa Accord.