Regulatory Framework for Gold Mining in Ghana: An Analysis of Damongo’s Mining Sector
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study offers a comprehensive analysis of the regulatory framework governing gold mining in Ghana, with a specific focus on Damongo, a rapidly growing mining hub in the Northern Region. Ghana's gold mining sector, a major contributor to the nation's economy, faces significant challenges despite its economic benefits. These challenges include severe environmental degradation, mercury contamination, and social issues exacerbated by inadequate regulatory enforcement. This article examines the existing regulatory framework, which includes key legislative acts such as the Minerals and Mining Act, 2006, and the Environmental Protection Agency Act, 1994, alongside a network of regulatory institutions like the Ministry of Lands and Natural Resources and the Minerals Commission. Utilizing Damongo as a case study, this research reveals critical inefficiencies in the local regulatory system, particularly in combating illegal mining activities and managing environmental and social impacts. Findings indicate that while gold mining has stimulated economic growth and provided employment opportunities, it has also led to negative consequences such as increased health problems, social vices, and reduced agricultural productivity. The study underscores the need for more robust regulatory practices, improved institutional capacity, and enhanced community involvement in environmental governance. Comparative insights from regulatory practices in other jurisdictions, such as Australia and Canada, highlight the potential benefits of adopting stricter environmental regulations, comprehensive impact assessments, and better coordination among regulatory agencies. The article concludes with recommendations for strengthening Ghana’s regulatory framework, including increased investment in regulatory institutions, improved enforcement mechanisms, and the promotion of sustainable mining practices. This study aims to contribute to the ongoing discourse on mining regulation and sustainability, providing actionable insights for policymakers and stakeholders involved in the governance of Ghana’s gold mining sector.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".