2395 Chalcobamba, and Sulfobamba open pits in the Apurímac region. The peasant community of Fuerabamba, situated directly above the main pit, was resettled to an entirely new town—Nueva Fuerabamba—designed to replicate and surpass modern urban services, including 441 housing units, a complete educational system, a health centre, and comprehensive sanitation infrastructure. However, this deployment of first-rate infrastructure generated a profound symbolic and cultural disconnection. The change of operator (from Xstrata to Glencore and subsequently to MMG in 2014) and the critical modification of the mineral transport system—replacing the originally planned slurry pipeline with overland concentrate haulage—eroded the initial trust and expectations established during the physical resettlement, generating near-permanent social conflict since the commencement of the exploitation phase in 2016 (Salas, 2019). Both cases reveal a common pattern: the insufficiency of material capital to substitute for the reconstruction of social networks and cultural identity. At Yanacancha, the loss of puna grasslands displaced families towards the services sector; at Fuerabamba, urbanisation created new forms of dependency. The difference in models—dispersion and integration into existing urban centres (Antamina) versus urban nucleation in an ad hoc settlement (Las Bambas)—demonstrates that models integrating resettled populations into pre-existing local economies tend to be more socially resilient than those creating new and exclusive enclaves. The additional time invested in ethnographic assessment and tenure analysis would have cost months but would have prevented years of conflict and millions in lost production value. 2.2 Free, Prior And Informed Consent And Indigenous Peoples Peru lacks specific legislation regulating resettlement in mining projects, unlike the transport sector which benefits from PACRI directives. This regulatory gap means that mining projects must rely on international standards, particularly IFC Performance Standards 5 and 7. Simultaneously, the Peruvian Constitution (Articles 2.19 and 89) recognises indigenous peoples' rights to ethnic and cultural identity, organisational autonomy, and free disposition of their lands. ILO Convention 169 (ratified by Peru) and the Prior Consultation Law (Law 29785) establish the framework for prior consultation with indigenous peoples. Peru has more than five million self-identified indigenous persons (2017 Census), with 9,235 localities belonging to indigenous peoples. Collective rights encompass self-determination and autonomy, cultural identity, territory and land, natural resources, the right to determine development priorities, and the preservation of customs and institutions. The territorial dimension is particularly relevant: traditional possession is equivalent to full title according to established jurisprudence (Constitutional Tribunal, Case No. 00024-2009-PI). IFC Performance Standard 7 requires Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) when projects affect indigenous territories, going beyond mere consultation. FPIC must be free from coercion, prior to decisions, informed through culturally appropriate information, and granted through legitimate procedures. In complex rural contexts characterised by fragmented social structures, multiple forms of tenure, and diverse organisational representations, implementation requires structured dialogue mechanisms. Best practices include: community support committees with community representation, bilingual communication (Quechua–Spanish), differentiated mechanisms for non-participating organisations, participatory validation of lists of affected persons, and culturally appropriate grievance mechanisms. The challenge is particularly acute in contexts of undivided landholdings with hundreds of co-owners distributed across multiple generations. The regulatory gap and the complexity of indigenous rights underscore the necessity of the integrated methodology proposed in this paper. Ethnographic assessment and kinship network analysis are essential not only for understanding territorial impacts but also for identifying all rights-holders who must participate in FPIC processes. Without a comprehensive understanding of multilocal territorial systems and kinship networks, FPIC processes risk excluding affected populations whose connections to the territory are invisible to conventional census methods. 3. MULTILOCALITY, KINSHIP NETWORKS, AND TERRITORIAL RESILIENCE The concept of multilocality—the practice of maintaining multiple residences and productive activities across dispersed territories—is the defining characteristic of Andean adaptation to the geography of the Andes. From the perspective of conventional census-based assessment, multilocality is a “problem”—
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTM0Mzk2