Intersection between ecological destruction and human rights: study of illegal mining activities in Ghana
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis explores the intricate relationship between ecological destruction and human rights abuses, specifically focusing on illegal mining activities in Ghana, commonly known as galamsey. Drawing on green criminology theory and human rights framework, this research aims to unravel how criminogenic conditions influence people to engage in illegal mining activities in Ghana and how the failure to regulate illegal mining, which causes environmental degradation, affects the fundamental human rights of those living around such mining areas. In doing so, an autoethnographic recounting of my experiences as a Community Development Officer at AngloGold Ashanti Obuasi and Iduapriem Mines and a community member in a mining town Obuasi-Tutuka since childhood is used as the primary source of data to address the research questions. Secondary data sources, including news publications, scholarly articles, the internet, and electronic media, complement the primary data source. This thesis addresses these overarching questions: (1) What criminogenic (or crime-producing) conditions influence people to mine illegally in Ghana? (2) How does the failure to regulate illegal mining in Ghana violate the human rights of those living near the mines? The study indicates that galamsey mining in Ghana causes environmental degradation, thereby affecting the right to a quality life for those living around such mining areas. Several diseases and ailments, including birth defects in pregnant women, have been linked to the release of toxic substances into the environment as a result of galamsey mining in Ghana. The study also reveals the criminogenic conditions that encourage galamsey mining in Ghana and the interventions to mitigate the environmental harm and human rights abuses driven by illegal mining. The research underscores the importance of ensuring adequate employment opportunities, community engagement on the health impacts of galamsey, financial literacy programmes, and alternative sources of livelihood for mining communities, institutional and legal reforms, and sustained political will to protect the environment for future generations.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".