Mining operations are often presented to society as comprehensive megaprojects for development. But is that truly the case? How are their environmental impacts anticipated and regulated? Located in the impoverished southern Andes of Peru, the Las Bambas mine accounts for about 2% of global copper production. In contrast to Albert Hirschman’s classic theory of the Hiding Hand in economic development, this mine represents a project where initial ignorance of risks is not necessarily counterbalanced by creative solutions from state officials later on. We examine the processes of environmental regulation and assess the creativity in public policy. The significant alterations to the project and its Environmental Impact Assessment, made without mandatory citizen participation, have contributed to growing social discontent. An Extractivist Hiding Hand ensures the development of resources but little else. In this context, creativity and state capacity are deployed to conceal environmental injustices.
BarandiaránJ. (2015). Chile’s environmental assessments: Contested knowledge in an emerging democracy. Science as Culture, 24(3), 251–275. https://doi.org/10.1080/09505431.2014.992332
3.
BarandiaránJ. (2020). Documenting rubble to shift baselines: Environmental assessments and damaged glaciers in Chile. Environment and Planning E: Nature and Space, 3(1), 58–75. https://doi.org/10.1177/2514848619873317
4.
BebbingtonA.CoxshallW.ConnartyM.O'ShaughnessyH.WilliamsM. (2007). Mining and development in Peru with special reference to the Rio Blanco project, Piura. Peru Support Group.
5.
BebbingtonA. J.BuryJ. T. (2009). Institutional challenges for mining and sustainability in Peru. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 106(41), 17296–17301. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0906057106
6.
BehnC.BakkerK. (2019). Rendering technical, rendering sacred: The politics of hydroelectric development on British Columbia’s Saaghii Naachii/Peace River. Global Environmental Politics, 19(3), 98–119. https://doi.org/10.1162/glep_a_00518
7.
BeteyC. B.GodfredE. (2013). Environmental impact assessment and sustainable development in Africa: A critical review. Environment and Natural Resources Research, 3(2), 5–37. https://doi.org/10.5539/enrr.v3n2p37
8.
BöhlingK.MurguíaD. I.GodfridJ. (2019). Sustainability reporting in the mining sector: Exploring its symbolic nature. Business & Society, 58(1), 191–225. https://doi.org/10.1177/0007650317703658
9.
BradyH. E.CollierD. (Eds.), (2010). Rethinking social inquiry: Diverse tools, shared standards. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
10.
CamperoC.HarrisL. M.KunzN. C. (2021). De-politicising seawater desalination: Environmental impact assessments in the Atacama mining region, Chile. Environmental Science & Policy, 120(1), 187–194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2021.03.004
11.
CarpenterD. (2001). The forging of bureaucratic autonomy: Reputations, networks, and policy innovation in executive agencies, 1862-1928. Princeton University Press. https://doi.org/10.1515/9780691214078
12.
CastroM.Sánchez-TrianaE.LoayzaF.Albarracin-JordanJ.LimaA. L. (2014). Environmental impact assessment reform in Peru. In 34th annual conference of the international association for impact assessment.
13.
CBC. (2019). Derechos humanos y dinámicas socio ambientales en contextos mineros en las regiones de Cusco y Apurímac. Centro Bartolomé de las Casas.
14.
ClarkM. R.DurdenJ. M.ChristiansenS. (2020). Environmental impact assessments for deep-sea mining: Can we improve their future effectiveness?Marine Policy, 114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2018.11.026
DargentE.OrihuelaJ. C.ParedesM.UlfeM. E. (2017). Resource booms and institutional pathways: The case of the extractive industry in Peru. Palgrave.
19.
DAR Perú. (2016). Informes técnicos sustentatorios ponen en riesgo el medio ambiente y alientan la conflictividad social. https://dar.org.pe/np_110216_its/
20.
De EchaveJ. (2009). Minería y conflicto social. IEP.
21.
De EchaveJ. (2012). Apurímac: La gestión del territorio y minería. Centro de Estudios Regionales Andinos Bartolomé de Las Casas.
DiezA. (2009). Disputas por la legalidad, los derechos de propiedad y el futuro agrícola o minero de la sierra de Piura: El caso Majaz. In De EchaveJ.DiezA.HuberL.TanakaM.ReveszB. (Eds.), Minería y conflicto social (pp. 45–72). IEP.
24.
DryzekJ. S.DownesD.HunoldC.SchlosbergD.HernesH. K. (2003). Green states and social movements: Environmentalism in the United States, United Kingdom, Germany, and Norway. OUP Oxford.
25.
DurandF. (2016). Cuando el poder extractivo captura al Estado: Lobbies, puertas giratorias y paquetazo ambiental en Perú. Oxfam.
26.
Earth Rights International, IDL & CNDDHH. (2019). Informe: Convenios entre la Policía Nacional y las empresas extractivas en el Perú.
27.
EvansP. B.RueschemeyerD.SkocpolT. (Eds.), (1985). Bringing the state back in. Cambridge University Press.
28.
FergusonJ. (1994). The anti-politics machine: ‘Development,’ depoliticization, and bureaucratic power in Lesotho. University of Minnesota Press.
29.
FloresC. (2016). Conviviendo con la minería en el sur andino: Experiencias de las Mesas de Diálogo y Desarrollo de Espinar, Cotabambas y Chamaca. Oxfam Perú.
30.
FlyvbjergB.SunsteinC. R. (2016). The principle of the malevolent hiding hand; or, the planning fallacy writ large. Social Research: International Quarterly, 83(4), 979–1004. https://doi.org/10.1353/sor.2016.0063
31.
GonzálezL. I.SnyderR.OrihuelaJ. C. (2025). Developmental extraction and the global energy transition: Lessons from South America’s lithium triangle. Journal of Globalization and Development.
32.
GouleyC. (2005). Conflictos mineros, interculturalidad y políticas públicas: el caso de Las Bambas, provincias de Cotabambas y Grau, departamento de Apurímac. CIES.
GustafssonM. T.Schilling-VacaflorA. (2022). Indigenous Peoples and multiscalar environmental governance: The opening and closure of participatory spaces. Global Environmental Politics, 22(2), 70–94. https://doi.org/10.1162/glep_a_00642
35.
GustafssonM. T.Schilling-VacaflorA.LenschowA. (2023). The politics of supply chain regulations: Towards foreign corporate accountability in the area of human rights and the environment?Regulation & Governance, 17(4), 853–869. https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12526
36.
HayterR.BarnesT. J.BradshawM. J. (2003). Relocating resource peripheries to the core of economic geography's theorizing: Rationale and agenda. Area, 35(1), 15–23. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-4762.00106
37.
HironakaA. (2002). The globalization of environmental protection: The case of environmental impact assessment. International Journal of Comparative Sociology, 43(1), 65–78. https://doi.org/10.1177/002071520204300104
38.
HirschmanA. O. (1958). The strategy of economic development. Yale University Press.
39.
HirschmanA. O. (1967). The principle of the hiding hand. Brookings Institution.
InnisH. (1933). The problem of staple production in Canada. Ryerson Press.
43.
IrarrázavalF.Arias-LoyolaM. (2021). Resource peripheries in the global economy. Springer.
44.
JackaJ. K. (2018). The anthropology of mining: The social and environmental impacts of resource extraction in the mineral age. Annual Review of Anthropology, 47(1), 61–77. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-anthro-102317-050156
45.
KirschS. (2014). Mining capitalism: The relationship between corporations and their critics. University of California Press.
46.
LeyvaA. (2018). Las Bambas: La carretera que nadie aprobó. Cooperacción.
47.
LiF. (2009). Documenting accountability: Environmental impact assessment in a Peruvian mining project. PoLAR: Political and Legal Anthropology Review, 32(2), 218–236. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1555-2934.2009.01042.x
48.
LiF. (2011). Engineering responsibility: Environmental mitigation and the limits of commensuration in a Chilean mining project. Focaal, 2011(60), 61–73. https://doi.org/10.3167/fcl.2011.600106
49.
LiT. M. (2007). The will to improve: Governmentality, development, and the practice of politics. Duke University Press.
MaquetP.NiederbergerT.YauriJ. (2024). Transición justa: El cobre para la transición energética y el corredor del sur andino. Cooperacción.
52.
MendozaA.FranckeF.CruzadoE. (2008). Análisis, críticas y recomendaciones para mejorar el funcionamiento de los fondos sociales/fideicomisos mineros. Cooperacción.
53.
MerinoR. (2018). Re-Politicizing participation or reframing environmental governance? Beyond indigenous’ prior consultation and citizen participation. World Development, 111(1), 75–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2018.06.025
54.
MerinoR. (2020). The cynical state: Forging extractivism, neoliberalism and development in governmental spaces. Third World Quarterly, 41(1), 58–76. https://doi.org/10.1080/01436597.2019.1668264
Morrison-SaundersA.ArtsJ.BondA.PopeJ.RetiefF. (2021). Reflecting on, and revising, international best practice principles for EIA follow-up. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 89(1), Article 106596. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2021.106596
64.
MubangaR. O.KwartengK. (2020). A comparative evaluation of the environmental impact assessment legislation of South Africa and Zambia. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 83(1), Article 106401. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2020.106401
65.
NaveaA.OyarzúnR. (2024). Environmental impact assessment and sustainable development: When reality departs theory; insights and lessons from the “sacrifice zone” of Quintero–Puchuncaví, Chile. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-023-04417-0
66.
OrihuelaJ. C. (2014a). Converging divergence: The diffusion of the green state in Latin America. Studies in Comparative International Development, 49(2), 242–265. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12116-013-9147-6
67.
OrihuelaJ. C. (2014b). The environmental rules of economic development: Governing air pollution from smelters in Chuquicamata and La Oroya. Journal of Latin American Studies, 46(1), 151–183. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022216X13001545
68.
OrihuelaJ. C. (2021). The environmentalization of mining in Colombia, Chile, and Peru: A comparative analysis of green state formation. The Extractive Industries and Society, 8(4), Article 100829. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.exis.2020.10.012
69.
OrihuelaJ. C.CaveroC. P.ContrerasC. (2022). Extractivism of the poor: Natural resource commodification and its discontents. The Extractive Industries and Society, 9(1), Article 100986. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.exis.2021.100986
70.
OrihuelaJ. C.MendietaA.PérezC.RamírezT. (2021). From paper institutions to bureaucratic autonomy: Institutional change as a resource curse remedy. World Development, 143(1), Article 105463. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2021.105463
71.
OrihuelaJ. C.ParedesM. (2017). Fragmented layering: Building a green state for mining in Peru. In DargentE.OrihuelaJ. C.ParedesM.UlfeM. E. (Eds.), Resource booms and institutional pathways: The case of the extractive industry in Peru (pp. 97–117). Springer.
72.
ParedesM. (2008). El caso de Tambogrande. In ScurrahM. J.ArocaJ. (Eds.), Defendiendo derechos y promoviendo cambios: El Estado, las empresas extractivas y las comunidades locales en el Perú (pp. 269–300). OXFAM Internacional.
73.
ParedesM. (2016). The glocalization of mining conflict: Cases from Peru. The Extractive Industries and Society, 3(4), 1046–1057. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.exis.2016.08.007
74.
ParedesM.AvilesK. (2024). Opposition tactics on the implementation of advocacy-driven institutional reforms: A study of mining environmental assesment in Peru. The Extractive Industries and Society, 17(1), Article 101355. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.exis.2023.101355
75.
ParedesM.FigueroaL. (2021). New institutions, old practices: The weakening of new environmental control institutions in Peru. In DamonteG.SchorrB. (Eds.), Andean states and the resource curse (pp. 198–217). Routledge.
76.
PintoH.LuyoA. (2018). Las Bambas: Conflicto social 2015.
PopeJ.BondA.Morrison-SaundersA.RetiefF. (2013). Advancing the theory and practice of impact assessment: Setting the research agenda. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 41(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2013.01.008
79.
PrebischR. (1949). Introduction: The economic development of Latin America and its principal problems, Economic Survey of Latin America 1948. ECLAC.
80.
Proinversión (2003). Bases del Concurso Público Internacional N° PRI-80-2003: Promoción de la inversión privada en el proyecto Las Bambas - Departamento de Apurímac.
81.
Proinversión (2005). Las Bambas: Un modelo de desarrollo sostenible.
82.
RetiefF.BondA.PopeJ.Morrison-SaundersA.KingN. (2016). Global megatrends and their implications for environmental assessment practice. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 61(1), 52–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2016.07.002
83.
ReveszB. (2009). Tambogrande: De la defensa del agro a la defensa del derecho a decidir. In De EchaveJ.DiezA.HuberL.TanakaM.ReveszB. (Eds.), Minería y conflicto social (pp. 149–175). IEP.
84.
Rodríguez-LunaD.VelaN.AlcaláF. J.Encina-MontoyaF. (2021). The environmental impact assessment in Chile: Overview, improvements, and comparisons. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 86(1), Article 106502. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2020.106502
85.
Schilling-VacaflorA.FlemmerR. (2015). Conflict transformation through prior consultation? Lessons from Peru. Journal of Latin American Studies, 47(4), 811–839. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022216X15000826
SilvaE. (2023). The politics of policy implementation and reform: Chile’s environmental impact assessment system. The Extractive Industries and Society, 15(1), Article 101321. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.exis.2023.101321
88.
TorresJ. (2015). La minería no puede ser una historieta. Revista Poder.
89.
Van AlstineJ. (2017). Critical reflections on 15 years of the extractive industries transparency initiative (EITI). The Extractive Industries and Society, 4(4), 766–770. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.exis.2017.10.010
90.
VásquezL. L. (2004). Waqamuwanku haykumuyku: Nos llaman y entramos. Los modos de participación en el espacio rural: Cusco y Apurímac. Instituto de Estudios Peruanos.
91.
WeberM. (1978). Economy and society: An outline of interpretive sociology. University of California Press.
92.
WienerL. (2018). Gobernanza y gobernabilidad: El caso Las Bambas. CooperAcción.
93.
WienerL. (2022). Debida diligencia y minería: Las Bambas. Cooperacción.
94.
World Bank. (2005). Riqueza y sostenibilidad: Dimensiones sociales y ambientales de la minería en el Perú. World Bank.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
