Corporate reporting on conflict: A struggle over land

Abstract

• The paper draws attention to corporate use of discourse of physical conflict for the legitimisation of violence. • The paper suggests that discourse of conflict can be used to create inequality. • The paper suggests that conflict over land is rooted in colonial legacies. • The paper suggests that the language of corporate reports lend support to post-colonial ideologies. This paper explores how discourse is used as a strategic resource in boundary work to confront conflict between large scale mining companies and artisanal small-scale miners for legitimacy management. This research process involves relying on a case study of corporate reporting by AngloGold Ashanti and interviews with mainly managers working in large-scale mining companies in Ghana. This study is positioned within a post-colonial context which enables us to explain how colonial legacies in Ghana have created conditions that generate conflict over land between large-scale mining companies and artisanal small-scale miners. This paper utilises the theory of discourse, boundary work, and legitimacy. First, this paper draws attention to corporate use of discourse of physical conflict as opposed to legal conflict in the creation of distinction for the legitimisation of violence against artisanal small-scale miners in reporting. Second, this paper suggests that the language of corporate reports lend support to post-colonial ideologies. Specifically, it suggests that corporate discourse of conflict enables post-colonialism to thrive in Ghana by contributing to the erasure of the historical rights of indigenes to land ownership. It also conceals the negatives consequences of State adoption of colonial legacies that benefit large-scale mining companies. Third, this paper suggests that conflict over land is rooted in colonial legacies.