Welfare Logic: Government vs Community in Mining Development Conflict

Mining is often debated between stakeholders in the name of “welfare”. Different ideas have led to conflict in many cases, leads to what we called as “resources curse”, that instead of resulting in common good, mining is attributed with the source of common suffering. How is actually “welfare” idea developed differently by the government, known usually as the pro-mining, and community, known as the against mining? This article depicted differences in terms of conceptualization of welfare including understanding, orientation, and beneficiaries’ coverage that leads to tensions between different parties, especially between government and community. Applying literature reviews and a snapshot of case study, this article identifies that government understands welfare in mining as employment maker and local income source. Meanwhile, for community, despite creating few jobs, as many more others are not covered, mining is understood as destroying nature as source of their life. Welfare for community is a secured fishing and farming. Secondly, for the government, mining is oriented to solve current economic problem. For community, welfare is not for short-term. It is expected to sustain in the long term. Open unemployment and government income is not community’s current problem; it is the government’s problem. Problem for community is when they are unable to fish and go farming anymore. Finally, for government, mining is for the nation’s economic advancement.