Who takes responsibility for the informal settlements?

This chapter presents a case that analyses some of the developments that led to the intractable situation in the study area and some of the efforts the various stakeholders made to respond to it. Among the mining companies in the case study area, corporate social responsibility traditionally manifested itself as philanthropic initiatives premised on competitive efforts at gaining improved image and reputation. Mining company leadership's commitment to cross-sector collaboration at the local level has been limited. The companies considered the informal settlements — also known as slums or squatter camps—to be the responsibility of local government, disregarding the linkages between their own core business practices and the growth of these settlements. Improved communication structures between companies, government and community groups would allow for a more efficient and context-dependent delimitation of development roles and responsibilities. The local government's policy framework has been set up so as to play a facilitative role in regional coordination.