Qualitative case study reveals mining legitimacy issues in Panama, highlighting transparency and governance needs.
This study examines Panama’s 2023 mining restrictions to illuminate persistent legitimacy crises in extractive governance. Employing a qualitative case study, it draws on 25 semi-structured interviews with government officials, industry representatives, Indigenous leaders, local communities, mining critics and other civil society actors, alongside policy and document analysis. Findings suggest that legitimacy reconstruction relies on four interdependent conditions: procedural justice, institutional trust, epistemic legitimacy, and relational governance. Stakeholders consistently emphasized transparency, capacity building, and inclusive engagement as essential for future mining activity, under-scoring that technical standards alone are insufficient without credible institutions. Building on—but extending beyond—frameworks such as Social License to Operate (SLO) and Free, Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC), this paper offers Social Legitimacy for Mining (SLM) as a provisional, co-produced framework. Developed through literature synthesis and refined by diverse stakeholder perspectives, SLM is applied in Panama as an illustrative proof of concept that may inform further research and practice, while recognizing the need for additional adaptation across jurisdictions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chafika Eddine (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: