Within Andean territorial rationality, multilocality emerges as a sophisticated asset management and risk reduction strategy for indigenous families. This model enables them to articulate a translocal production system spanning diverse ecological tiers: from high Andean grasslands for camelid herding and intermediate lands for tuber and grain cultivation, to temperate valleys for irrigated agriculture and communal forests for medicine and fuel, ultimately consolidating this network through insertion into urban dynamics (Altamirano, 1984; Golte & Adams, 1987; Murra, 1975). Standard census methodologies capture perhaps 30–40% of this territorial system. The remaining 60–70%—seasonal grazing routes, reciprocal labour networks, ceremonial sites, water sources accessed through kinship agreements—remains invisible to the baseline yet is fundamental to household resilience. When resettlement compensates only the visible fraction, families discover years later that access to critical resources has been severed without recognition or remedy. 2.1 Evidence from Peruvian Operations The case of Antamina at Yanacancha (1998–1999) is instructive. An accelerated resettlement action plan (RAP) relocated 53 families in merely two months, prioritising monetary compensation over land-for-land exchanges due to construction schedule pressures. Critical errors included: (1) only individuals present during the census were deemed affected, ignoring seasonal residence patterns typical of high-altitude pastoral families; (2) within extended families, only the nuclear family unit in effective possession received compensation, disregarding co-ownership rights of other relatives in undivided landholdings; and (3) the absence of adequate baseline studies rendered proper assessment of socioeconomic conditions and impacts impossible. The complexity of social systems, land disputes, and family tensions created unforeseen obstacles whose implications emerged only years later (Salas, 2008, 2019; Gil, 2009). Las Bambas represents the second major milestone in the history of Peruvian mining resettlements. With an investment exceeding US$4.2 billion, the project envisaged the exploitation of the Ferrobamba, 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 67
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTM0Mzk2