
Tanzania took a proud leap in 2017, ratifying the Minamata Convention to curb mercury’s toxic stranglehold on humanity and nature (UNEP, 2017). By 2019, its National Action Plan for Artisanal and Small-Scale Gold Mining (NAP-ASGM) promised a roadmap to tame this poison in a sector employing over 1.5 million people (URT, 2020). These milestones gleam on paper – a nation poised for change. Yet, beneath the surface, Tanzania lags, its goldfields awash in mercury, its people blind to the peril, and its fish-laden lakes – like Victoria and Rukwa – silently turning toxic. Why, despite these commitments, is Tanzania failing its promise, and how does it stack up against others wrestling the same demon?
In Geita, Shinyanga, and Mbeya, mercury is the lifeblood of Tanzania’s 1.5 million ASGM workers, with 10–15 tonnes burned or dumped yearly into rivers (Mwamba Mining, 2020). The NAP aimed to halve this by 2024, pushing gravimetric alternatives, but as 2025 dawns, little has shifted (URT, 2020). Mercury flows cheap at $50 per kilogram, peddled by brokers tied to shadowy prefinancing schemes (Reuters, 2019). Compare this to Ghana, where a 2017 ban slashed ASGM mercury use by 30% in two years, or Zimbabwe, where partial bans nudge miners toward cleaner tech (Pact, 2023). Across the Atlantic, Peru’s ASGM sector – Latin America’s mercury hotspot – cut usage by 40% since 2015 with mandatory retorts and enforcement, while Bolivia struggles, its 20 tonnes annually rivalling Tanzania’s unchecked flood (Spiegel et al., 2018; UNEP, 2019). Tanzania’s stagnation isn’t just slow – it’s a continental and global outlier.
The fallout is dire. Mercury poisons rivers feeding Lake Victoria and Lake Rukwa, tainting fish – eaten by millions – with methylmercury levels exceeding WHO limits (Campbell et al., 2014). Mwanza’s 70% fish-eating population and Rukwa’s rural villages ingest this silent killer, yet the NAP’s 2022 monitoring pledge remains a ghost (Mwamba Mining, 2020). Ghana tests its fish; Peru tracks its rivers. Tanzania? It signs treaties but skips the follow-through.
Ignorance pulls the trigger on mercury’s bullet. Miners – 20% women – handle it bare-handed, breathe its fumes, and sleep beside tailings, clueless to its toll (Mutagwaba et al., 2018). The NAP vowed to reach 500,000 with awareness campaigns by 2020, yet a 2023 Geita survey found 80% didn’t know it causes tremors or birth defects (URT, 2020; Maganga et al., 2023). Sierra Leone’s grassroots education trimmed mercury use by 20% in three years; Ghana’s radio waves hum with warnings (Hunter et al., 2017; Hilson et al., 2014). In Latin America, Colombia’s miner cooperatives train thousands, cutting exposure by 25% since 2018, while Bolivia’s efforts flounder, mirroring Tanzania’s silence (UNEP, 2019; Spiegel et al., 2018).
Communities fare worse. Lake Victoria’s 3 million shoreline dwellers and Rukwa’s villagers feed kids fish laced with poison, unaware (Campbell et al., 2014). The NAP’s public health outreach – budgeted at a measly $1.5 million against a $10 million need – never took flight, paling next to Ghana’s $20 million push (URT, 2020; Pact, 2023). Peru floods its airwaves with alerts; Tanzania’s megaphone stays mute. Awareness isn’t a luxury – it’s survival, and Tanzania’s vacuum is a death sentence.
The human toll chills the spine. Women processors face 50% higher miscarriage rates; children near pits lag developmentally (Mwamba Mining, 2020; Maganga et al., 2023). Lake Victoria’s infants absorb methylmercury via breast milk, a tragedy Ghana mitigates with testing but Tanzania ignores (Campbell et al., 2014). A 2021 study pegs ASGM’s health cost at $100 million yearly – six times the $15.4 million in royalties bragged about in 2019 (Tanzania Mining Digest, 2024; Reuters, 2019). Bolivia’s mercury-sick miners echo this, but Peru’s clinics cut cases by 30% with action (Spiegel et al., 2018).
Ecologically, the ripple is devastating. Lake Victoria’s 200,000-tonne fish haul and Rukwa’s wetlands face collapse as mercury poisons their chains (UNEP, 2017). The NAP’s pilot plants – like Chunya’s – sit idle, underfunded, while Zimbabwe’s green trials and Colombia’s bioremediation gain ground (URT, 2020; Pact, 2023; UNEP, 2019). Tanzania’s gold glitters, but its waters weep.
The reasons sting. Funding’s a farce – $1.5 million against $10 million needed, dwarfed by gold’s $2.95 billion export haul in 2023 (Tanzania Mining Digest, 2024). Enforcement is toothless; the Mining Commission, stretched across 29,000 PMLs, can’t touch mercury’s black market (Reuters, 2019). Corruption greases the wheels – brokers thrive, their trade an open secret (Kinyondo & Huggins, 2019). Political will fixates on gold revenue, not its toxic shadow, a myopia Magufuli baked in and Hassan hasn’t shaken (Jacob & Pedersen, 2018).
Compare this to peers. Ghana’s bans and Colombia’s enforcement show muscle Tanzania lacks; Sierra Leone and Peru educate where Tanzania stalls (Hilson et al., 2014; UNEP 2019). Zimbabwe’s half-steps and Bolivia’s chaos align closer to Tanzania’s drift, but even they hint at progress Tanzania can’t claim (Pact, 2023; Spiegel et al., 2018). Miners and fish-eaters – poor, rural, voiceless – aren’t priorities. Gold trumps lives.
Tanzania’s Minamata ratification and NAP were supposed to herald a new dawn – proof of a nation serious about its soul. Instead, they’re hollow shells in a mercury-soaked reality. Ghana, Peru, even Sierra Leone show the way: fund the fight – $10 million is nothing against gold’s billions. Enforce the law – crush the mercury trade, scale those pilots. Educate – flood the airwaves, train the miners, warn the fish-eaters. Bolivia’s mess proves delay’s cost; Colombia’s gains show action’s reward.
Lake Victoria’s tilapia shouldn’t kill. Geita’s kids deserve more than tremors. Tanzania can mine gold without poisoning its future – but only if promises turn to deeds. The clock ticks, and mercury waits for no one.
2 Comments
Such educative insights into the failures and successes that different countries experience on this journey. Zambia may yet be the next that needs to be intentional in this sector and I believe we do have an opportunity in that area as we review strategies in ASM and metal specific sectors.
The phenomenon of African countries, including Tanzania, signing and ratifying international conventions without fully implementing them, is disheartening. However this trend can be attributed to several factors. Firstly, there is often political pressure to enhance a country’s global image. By signing international agreements, nations can demonstrate their commitment to human rights, environmental protection, and other important issues, even if actual implementation lags behind. This can serve as a strategic move to gain favor with the international community.
Another significant factor is the lack of resources. Many African nations face considerable economic challenges, making it difficult to allocate the necessary financial, technical, and human resources required for effective implementation of international agreements. Moreover, weak governance structures and institutions can further hinder the enforcement of laws and policies that align with these commitments.
Competing domestic priorities also play a crucial role. Issues such as poverty, health crises, and political instability often take precedence over international commitments, leaving little room for the implementation of conventions. Additionally, the complexity of many international agreements can pose a daunting challenge for countries with limited capacities, as they require extensive legal and administrative frameworks to enact.
Furthermore, there can be a lack of awareness among policymakers and the public regarding the commitments made under international conventions and their significance. This lack of understanding may lead to insufficient political will to prioritize implementation, especially if certain conventions conflict with existing national interests or policies.
Lastly, external influences can also shape the landscape. Sometimes, pressures or incentives from international organizations lead to the signing of conventions without a genuine commitment to follow through. Overall, while signing and ratifying international conventions is often viewed as a positive step, the challenges of implementation necessitate concerted efforts across political, economic, and social dimensions.