[12] defined ASM formalisation as “a process that ensures that ASM actors are licensed and organised in representative entities that represent their needs; policies are implemented, monitored, and enforced; and ASM actors receive technical, administrative, and financial support that empowers them to adhere to requirements prescribed by national regulations”. Legalisation of ASM was defined as “a process that ensures that ASM actors possess the licenses and permits required by national law” ([12]). It can therefore be deduced from the definition that the formalisation process does not only entail the formulation of policies and regulations, but it also involves empowering the miners to adhere to the policies and implementation of the laws to integrate the ASM industry into the formal economy.

A body of literature on ASM formalisation are of the view that formalisation of the sector is a process rather than a product and as such revolves around a number of dimensions ([11]; [43]; [24]; [8]; [12]; [19]). [43] emphatically explained that formalisation goes beyond just policies formulation as even the most elaborate policies are likely to fail if there are no systematic governmental implementation plans which the miners will not find to be costly and a threat. Furthermore, [42] concluded that legalisation happens to be just one dimension of the formalisation process, as such formalisation can only be achieved if policies and implementation programs deal with the various dimensions of ASM operations concurrently and in an integrated manner. [12] gave the dimensions of ASM formalisation to be legal, institutional, financial, socio-economic and geo-environmental.

[44] explained that there is no simple answer to what policy is. The research disputed the claims that some people make that policy does not affect any aspect of their lives ([44]). [44] in evaluating the concept of policy from a general perspective established that in fact policies affect the quality of air people breath, the quality of water, agriculture, the supply chain, the transportation systems, it controls the tax regimes and all other aspects of human lives. Various researchers have come up with different definitions of policies. [16] simply defined policies as “general statements which guide managerial decision making and control the behaviour of employees in an organisation”. [27] defined policies as “actions which contain goal(s) and the means to achieve them, however well or poorly identified, justified, articulated and formulated”. [46] showed that there are different definitions of policy based on the complexity of management tasks.

ASM laws in Ghana were first promulgated in 1989 by the Small Scale Gold Mining Laws (PNDC Law) in attempts to formalise the sector following governments realization of the amount of gold smuggled out of the country by the illegal miners. The laws were annulled in 2006 by the Mining and Minerals Act 2006 (Act 703). Although the Minister of Lands and Natural Resources is in charge of granting an ASM licence, application is to be made through the Minerals Commission. The Minerals Commission, an institution which regulates the mining sector of Ghana, established Small Scale Mining District Offices in designated operational districts with the aim of decentralising the licencing process and promoting strict monitoring. ASM operations in the country are also regulated by the [34](L.I. 2182). ASM policies are documented in Sections 81 to 99 of the Act 2006 whereas Regulations 469 to 492 of the L.I. 2182 make provisions for small scale mining ([35]; [34]).

The Ghanaian ASM laws reserve ASM for only Ghanaians forbidding foreigners from partaking in ASM operations in the country. Application for ASM licence can be made for a maximum period of 5 years subject to renewal for further periods. Also, an ASM licence can only cover a maximum concession size of 25 acres of land. Licence application can only be made once an individual or a corporative has been registered by the District Office closer to the intended operation site. Upon registration, an application will be made to the District Office with the requisite requirements provided which will then be submitted to the Head Office of the Minerals Commission for subsequent reviewing. The Minister of Lands and Natural Resources then grants or disapproves the grant of a licence based on the recommendation of the Commission. The laws permit the use of explosives only under the approval of the Chief Inspector of Mines and also permits the use of mercury in the processing of the ore ([35]; [34]). In order to fastrack the registration and licencing procedure, the Mineral Commission has introduced the Mining Cadastre Administration System (MCAS) software, a digitalized licensing process to fastrack the registration process and reduce the human errors in the process. However, the final process of licencing is manually done by the Minister.

Geological information happens to be the bedrock information required to establish a mine as it forms the basis upon which the feasibility and the viability of a mining project is established. [12] stated explicitly that geological prospecting for viable ore deposits is the vital point to begin the ASM formalisation process. Formalisation is therefore required to incorporate the occurrence, distribution, quantity and availability of the ore deposits ([12]). Geological information required to establish the viability of a mineral project according to [36] include:

1) A map and good description of the regional and local geology.

2) Thickness of overburden.

3) A good description of the country rocks (hanging and footwalls).

4) Plans and sections and a good description of the mineable orebodies.

5) Size and orientation of orebody including the depth, dip, strike and thickness.

6) The continuity or discontinuity within the mineralized zones.

7) The distribution of various minerals in the mineable orebodies.

8) The sharpness between mineralized zones and waste material.

9) Presence of alteration zones in both mineralized and waste zones.

It has been observed that there is a lack of geological information or insufficient geological information to base the viability of the small scale mining projects in the country on ([11]; [25]; [12]). [25] explained that the unavailability of geological data and land for ASM is a major barrier to the formalisation process. Ideally, it is the responsibility of state institutions to carry out exploration and block out potential mining areas to be handed over to the miners. In Ghana, it is the responsibility of the Ghana Geological Survey Authority (GGSA) to carry out exploration for ore reserves and delineate the ore blocks to be given to the miners through the Minerals Commission. The Ghana Geological Survey Authority (GGSA) formerly the Geological Survey Department (GSD), was established in 1913 to carry out detailed exploration programme to block out mineable reserves and publicize the geological information. [10], quotes the Section 3(b) of the GGSA Act 928 which states that “the GGSA shall conduct geological, geochemical, geophysical, seismological, hydrogeological, geotechnical and geo-environmental surveys, mineral exploration, systematic mapping of rocks and other geological or geoscience materials including soil and clays of the Republic of Ghana, both onshore and offshore”. However, the GGSA lacks funding to carry out detailed exploration work. At best what the institution does is to undertake geological mapping, which only informs the presence of minerals but does not quantify the mineral value. Therefore, those mapped up areas which are awarded to the ASM miners does not give them enough information about the mineral quantity and in essence the establish the economic viability of the mining projects. And it is this practice that is leading to the “trial and error” mining where the miners invest in concessions where they do not know the revenue that will be generated from the concessions. If the miners run at losses, they eventually lose hope in the institutions and eventually prefer to operate anywhere at all since the assigned mining concessions from the state institutions did not yield profits.

In order to solve this problem, some countries hold the miners accountable to carry out their own exploration, in which cases they are required to secure exploration licenses to carry out such exploration works. It is only when the economic viability of the discovered deposits has been established that they are granted mining licenses. For instance in Tanzania, a primary licence is issued for prospecting and mining but mining can only proceed upon the provision of satisfactory evidence of availability of viable ore deposits. However, that is not the case in Ghana, rather the miners are given the licences without proving the mineral value of the concession. The Minerals Commission is of the view that the miners will use the initial years of the 5-year licence period to carry out exploration and use the remaining years for the exploitation. This is definitely impossible as the miners lack the financial and technological resources to carry out exploration. Unable to assess geological information, majority of the miners are forced to mine illegally. This is because the illegality gives them freedom to exploit concessions upon concessions without being restricted to stay on invaluable registered concession.

[13] stated that an unformalized mining industry has the potential to result in social conflicts which will consequently result in misuse of land and land degradation. This is unfortunately the clear situation in the ASM sector. Whereas most governments seem to be working at achieving formalisation of the sector, the same governments are actually fueling the informality of the sector with their biasness in concession awarding. Most of these governments favour the foreign LSM companies over the ASM companies in terms of concession awarding. Even though, it is obvious that ASM licences can only be granted over concessions which may prove to be economically inviable to mine using LSM methods, however, in certain cases concessions which are suitable for ASM operations are still awarded to LSGM companies. A clear case is that of the Upper East region of Ghana, where all the ASM concessions have been taken over by a LSM company.

[12] observed that the preference for foreign multinational LSM companies over ASM companies is a global issue. This preference according to the study has resulted in demarcation of vast lands which contain deposits suitable for ASM operations to LSM companies. On the other hand, ASM companies are being awarded with concessions whose deposits are not viable economically to mine ([12]). [41] give account of the Zambian government awarding concessions with little or no mineral value to the ASM miners. [22] explains that governments in Sub-Saharan Africa tend to favour LSM operations over ASM operations in terms of mining policies, concessions awarding and all other terms related to mining operations. According to [22] governments are biased because of the huge revenue (which come in the forms of different taxes, royalties, various permitting fees) which are collected with ease from the LSM companies even though the sector had failed to become the “growth-poles” in the subregion as initially predicted by the World Bank. Table 3 below shows the vast land sizes demarcated for LSM operations within the subregion.

Table 3. Land sizes demarcated for LSM operations within Sub-Saharan Africa.

Sources: [45].

Furthermore, the land tenure system in some of the countries are quite complex thereby inhibiting potential ASM miners from getting registered and acquiring licensed concessions to operate formerly. Whereas the Ghanaian government through the Ministry and the Minerals Commission has the mandate to award concessions, ownership over lands mostly belong to the chiefs, clans and families who present the miners with unrealistic land tenure agreements systems. This leaves the miners who would have most likely registered and acquired permits to mine on concessions with no option than to engage in illegal mining. This constraint contributes to illegal mining, environmental degradation and the conflicts that are generated from illegal miner’s encroachments on LSM companies’ concessions ([25]; [47]).

[19] analysed the licensing procedures for ASM and concluded that the processes in most countries are long, expensive, tedious and burdensome. According to the research, most governments operate a centralised licensing system, which requires applicants to travel long distances to the capital cities before their documents could be submitted and processed. The licensing procedure is associated with so much bureaucracy which sometimes leaves the applicants documents missing at one point in time. Others are faced with the issue of having to wait for several months to years before their applications are approved. According to [19], some miners have confirmed having made informal payments to agents and corrupt governments officials before their licenses were processed and issued. This becomes a huge barrier to the formalisation process as most miners get discouraged from obtaining licenses to mine legally ([19]).

[24] observed that governments in sub-Saharan Africa are creating bureaucracies including the licensing processes which are actually impeding the formalisation of the sector. [12] indicated that ASM licensing and regulations are the key factors required for the successful implementation of the formalisation process. It was further argued that there should be more than one mining license obtainable under the ASM umbrella for efficient formalisation. For instance, there should be different licences for mechanised and manual operations, underground and surface operations, hard rock, oxide and alluvial mining ([12]). The ASM miners in Ghana were engaged in a stakeholder meeting to ascertain the challenges they face within the sector and the way forward. The miners were quick to identify that the licensing procedure was clouded with too much bureaucracy and also the centralised system of licensing was not helpful. It was furthermore explained that the roles of the traditional leaders in the licensing process was also not clearly stated. It was suggested that for an efficient formalisation process, the licensing procedure should be decentralised, free from bureaucracy and the Small Scale Mining Associations should support in the licensing process ([30]).

It can be observed that many governments have made attempts to formalise ASM by first of all legalising the operations and formulating policies to regulate the sector ([39]). Unfortunately, the policies formulated have actually fostered informality within the sector as the concept behind the policies have mainly been focused on getting the miners registered to pay all the fees and taxes to the governments instead of ascertaining the problems inhibiting the miners from operating within the formal “spaces” and looking for sustainable solutions to them ([43]; [23]; [24]). Moreover, the policies have in many cases not taken into account the concerns of the miners, instead policies formulations have been construed in the top-down approach, that is based on governments visions of how the sector should look like. In evaluating the laws governing ASM in Ghana and the implementation of the process, [29] argued that the laws do not consider the set-up and the concerns of the miners. It is seen that majority of the miners about 80% globally according to ([19]) choose to remain illegal and operate in an informal manner because they see the policies as ways in which governments seek to exploit them, as a result getting one registered and regulated will compel one to fall into that bait of being exploited.

[18] emphasised that the lack of accessible and affordable funding for ASM operations has led to the underdevelopment and informality of the industry. The fact that the sector is mostly viewed as a poverty-driven venture does not make it credit credible in many countries. Besides, the many uncertainties coupled with the high risk, negative environmental impacts, health, safety and security hazards make it even more unattractive for investors who are looking out for promoting green production and the global Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) to invest in. Moreover, the lack of adequate geological information and the difficulty in accessing mineral-rich concessions make it even harder for the miners to establish the economic viability of their operations to access the needed financial support. It can be seen that the formalisation process itself is quite costly, considering the various fees to be paid for getting registered and licensed, concession acquisition as well as all the other fees and taxes to be paid in the course of operations. Also, efforts to reduce the environmental impacts, health, safety and security hazards as well as a good reclamation programme come at a cost which are usually too much for the miners to finance especially for the poor miners who may be only looking for a means of livelihood.

Occasionally, donor organisations such as the World Bank have provided funds for exploration programmes in some countries in a bid to give the miners the needed information to help secure funds for their operations. They have also provided funds to some government agencies in a bid to properly resource them to carry out proper monitoring and implementation. However, in many cases these programmes have failed to achieve their objectives due to lack of commitment on the part of governments and the lack of coordination between governmental institutions in charge of regularizing their operations ([23]).

[33] cleared the misconception that ASM formalisation is just about the legal, regulatory and policy frameworks guiding sustainable the operations. But explained that the formalisation process also involves the extent to which those laws and regulations are activated, implemented and enforced by the relevant authorities ([33]). [4] emphasised that policy implementation can be a painstaking and frustrating process because the process is often faced with enormous challenges ranging from inadequate resources and logistics to the conflict of interest of the authorities of the implementation process. Therefore, the objective of formalising ASM can only be achieved with robust implementation of laws and regulations by all stakeholders, as without effective implementation policies tend to lose their significance ([4]).

[18] pointed out the fact that formalisation of the sector has been stifled because the entire process has failed to address the challenges being faced by the miners such as availability of technology, proper land tenure system, financial support, market constraints and participatory economic development. [29] also indicated that the ASM laws and the implementation process do not consider the set-up and the concerns of the miners. The top-down approach of policy implementation has failed and will continue to fail because the process is usually coined to favour governments gain income with nothing motivating the miners to be formalised. The situation is worse in Ghana where military force is been used to get them formalised which usually results in abuse of human rights and all sorts of conflicts. It is therefore worth noting that the challenges hindering the formalisation can only be resolved and the sustainable development of the sector can only be achieved if the miners are actively involved in the governance of the sector ([18]). The process should be such that the miners will see formalisation as an opportunity instead of a burdensome process.

Moreover, the process has failed because governmental agencies especially those within the developing countries responsible for regulating the activities of the miners mostly lack the necessary resources to effectively carry out their operations. They usually lack the needed human resources, financial resources and the technological resources to actively carry out monitoring and provide the needed technical assistance to the miners. In Ghana, the ASM District offices were established to foster adequate monitoring and provide technological assistance for the mining operations ([7]). However, [7] state that the institution has not been able to provide the adequate technical support and monitoring of the miners citing the inadequate human and financial resources as the main challenges hindering the achievement of these mandates.

Mining is a capital intensive business irrespective of the scale of operations. The venture requires improved technology in order to optimise operations and reduce the associated environmental, health, safety and security. It is therefore paramount that an economically viable and environmentally sustainable operation should start with a detailed exploration programme, accurate ore block modelling, proper feasibility studies, an appropriate selection of mining method, a good mine design and schedule, appropriate equipment and labour selection and selection of the best processing method for optimal ore recovery. All the above listed processes require some form of technology to achieve the best results. In certain cases, more than one technology is applied to select the most cost effective and highly productive technology.

In LSM operations, various technologies have been developed and are being used to achieve the objectives of the operations. Apart from the already developed technologies, researchers, technological experts, engineers, mining workers, manufacturers and service providers continue to work round the clock to come up with technological innovations and solutions to industry’s challenges. For instance an exploration work involves the use of modern exploration drilling rigs such as the Diamond Drill rigs which is operated by an experienced operator for detailed exploration drilling. The drill cores and assay samples are then analysed by the exploration geologists and subsequently assayed at the Assay Laboratory to come up with accurate ore grade and tonnage prediction. The results are then used to design the block model which will be used for the feasibility study. The block model is done with the aid of computer-aided software such as Surpac, Hexagon MinePlan, Datamine, etc. The feasibility studies which is highly dependent on the exploration programme and block model is done by experts in mining experts, sometimes by independent consultants to come up with the best decision. This study is again done using modern cost analysis tools. The selection of the mining method is done by experts who use various technology available through to the processing stage.

However, the same cannot be said about the ASM sector which is seriously lacking in expertise and technology. It is observed that the ASM operations are not only neglected by governments, but also by researchers, mining experts and professionals, engineers, manufactures and service providers. There is a global skewed attention given to only LSM operations mainly due to the overall acceptance and the huge income generation capacity. It is very rare to see mining experts who have specialised in ASM, mining professionals mostly do not have any interest in working for ASM companies and there are very few researchers interested in ASM technology research and development of innovative technology. In addition, there is yet to be a mining software developed for ASM operations and majority of the mining service providers are solely for LSM operations. Most manufacturers have concentrated on LSM equipment and consumables manufacturing neglecting the ASM sector.

There is a clear indication that the sector has been neglected in terms of technological development even though majority of researchers and stakeholders have stated the economic contributions of the sector towards the development of different economies and have called for improved technology as a way of sustainable development ([7]). Policy makers, governments and implementers have failed to consider the technological needs of the sector in the formalisation process. In Ghana, there have been some conditions given in the mining laws geared towards compelling miners to use improved technology, there is still a gap as to the availability and accessibility of such technology. The issue of mining method selection is a huge problem as there are virtually minimal sustainable mining methods developed for the ASM terrain. Even though the Ghanaian policies require the miners to use the best mining methods, it is not enough considering that the sector lacks the professionals who would be able to ascertain the best mining methods. The mineral processing phase also requires more technological development. It is therefore needful that the formalisation process tackles the gaps in technology of the sector as a way of sustaining the industry.

The foregoing discussion demonstrates that the barriers to ASM formalisation in Ghana are highly interconnected and mutually reinforcing rather than occurring in isolation. Inadequate geological information increases uncertainty regarding the economic viability of mineral deposits, making it difficult for miners to secure finance, invest in appropriate technologies, or justify the costs associated with formalisation. At the same time, cumbersome licensing procedures and inequitable access to mineral-rich concessions discourage legal participation, further limiting miners’ access to formal financial services and government support. Weak institutional capacity, characterised by inadequate technical expertise, financial resources, and monitoring capability, undermines effective policy implementation and restricts the provision of extension services needed to improve mining practices. These institutional shortcomings, combined with limited access to finance, constrain the adoption of appropriate mining and mineral processing technologies, resulting in low productivity, poor environmental performance, and continued informality. Consequently, formalisation should not be viewed as a legal or administrative exercise alone, but as a systemic governance challenge requiring coordinated interventions that simultaneously address geological uncertainty, licensing reforms, institutional strengthening, financial inclusion, and technological development.

The active participation of ASM miners in the formulation, implementation, and evaluation of policies is critical to the success of formalisation initiatives. Adopting a participatory and inclusive governance approach ensures that policies are informed by the operational realities, socioeconomic conditions, and constraints experienced by ASM stakeholders. Such stakeholder engagement enhances the legitimacy, transparency, and contextual relevance of regulatory frameworks while fostering a sense of ownership among miners. Consequently, ASM miners are more likely to perceive the formalisation process as equitable and responsive to their needs, thereby increasing their willingness to comply with regulatory requirements and actively support policy implementation. Furthermore, meaningful stakeholder participation promotes trust between government institutions and mining communities, facilitates knowledge exchange, reduces resistance to regulatory interventions and strengthens the long-term effectiveness and sustainability of formalisation strategies.

Governmental institutions should ensure that non-confidential geological data generated through publicly funded exploration programs are systematically disseminated and made readily accessible to prospective and existing ASM miners. Improved access to geological information can enhance resource efficiency, reduce indiscriminate mining activities, and promote environmentally responsible extraction practices. Furthermore, there is a critical need for government agencies, particularly the national geological survey and related institutions, to undertake systematic exploration programs to delineate economically viable mineral deposits suitable for ASM. Such initiatives would facilitate the identification and demarcation of mineralised zones for legal ASM operations, thereby reducing encroachment into environmentally sensitive areas and minimising conflicts over mineral rights. Publicly funded exploration programs can also lower the financial and technical barriers that often prevent ASM operators from accessing geologically prospective concessions.

To maximize the effectiveness of these initiatives, robust governance, financial accountability, and institutional oversight mechanisms must be established to ensure that funds allocated for geological exploration are utilized exclusively for their intended purposes. Transparent procurement procedures, independent financial audits, periodic project evaluations, and public disclosure of exploration expenditures and outcomes are essential to prevent the misappropriation of resources and improve public confidence in government-led exploration programs. Such measures would help eliminate the recurring pattern of contracting substantial external loans for exploration activities without the successful execution or completion of the proposed projects.

In addition, the long-term financing of national geological exploration programs should prioritize the mobilization of domestic financial resources over excessive reliance on external borrowing. Sustainable financing mechanisms—including dedicated mineral development funds, mineral royalty allocations, public investment, and strategic public-private partnerships—can provide a more resilient and fiscally responsible approach to supporting exploration activities. Reducing dependence on external debt would not only minimise fiscal risks but also enhance the continuity of geological investigations and ensure the sustained availability of high-quality geoscientific information required to support evidence-based policymaking and the formalisation of the ASM sector.

A comprehensive review of the existing policy, regulatory, and institutional frameworks governing the formalization of the artisanal and small-scale mining ASM sector is essential to ensure that the formalisation process is accessible, efficient, and responsive to the socioeconomic realities of ASM operators. Given that a significant proportion of artisanal miners engage in mining primarily as a livelihood strategy due to limited alternative employment opportunities, formalisation policies should be designed to reduce barriers to legal participation rather than inadvertently excluding economically vulnerable groups. An enabling regulatory environment that balances effective governance with socioeconomic inclusiveness is therefore critical to increasing participation in the formal sector.

Particular attention should be directed toward revising licensing regimes that impose excessive financial and administrative burdens on prospective ASM operators. High licensing fees, complex application requirements, prolonged processing periods, and multiple layers of administrative approval often discourage miners from obtaining legal mining rights, thereby perpetuating informality and non-compliance. Simplifying licensing procedures through streamlined administrative processes, digital service delivery, decentralized application systems, and clearly defined approval timelines would significantly improve accessibility while reducing transaction costs for miners.

Furthermore, efforts should be made to depoliticize the allocation of mineral rights and licensing decisions by strengthening institutional independence, transparency, and accountability within the regulatory system. The influence of political parties, discretionary decision-making, and unequal access to mining concessions undermines confidence in the formalisation process and creates opportunities for corruption and regulatory capture. Establishing transparent, merit-based licensing procedures supported by objective eligibility criteria, public disclosure of licensing decisions, and independent oversight mechanisms would enhance fairness and improve stakeholder trust in regulatory institutions.

In addition, policy reforms should incorporate incentive-based approaches that encourage voluntary formalisation rather than relying predominantly on regulatory enforcement. Such incentives may include affordable and progressive licensing fees, simplified compliance requirements, access to geological information, technical assistance, financial services, equipment financing, and extension support for licensed ASM operations. By reducing the economic and institutional costs associated with formalisation while simultaneously increasing its perceived benefits, governments can create a more attractive and inclusive regulatory environment that encourages legal participation, improves regulatory compliance, and advances the long-term sustainability of the ASM sector.

Increased investment in research and development on ASM systems should be prioritized by governments, academic institutions, development partners, industry stakeholders, and international organizations to generate the scientific evidence required for effective policymaking and sustainable sector development. Comprehensive interdisciplinary research is essential for improving the understanding of the technical, environmental, socioeconomic, institutional, and governance dimensions of ASM, thereby providing an evidence base for the design of context-specific formalisation strategies and regulatory interventions. Research efforts should focus on critical areas including mineral resource characterization, appropriate mining and mineral processing methods, occupational health and safety, environmental management, mine rehabilitation, mercury-free and low-impact extraction techniques, socioeconomic impacts, value chain development, and institutional governance. In addition, continuous monitoring and evaluation studies are necessary to assess the effectiveness of existing policies and formalisation initiatives, identify implementation gaps, and inform adaptive policy reforms based on empirical evidence.

Adequate and sustained funding mechanisms should therefore be established to support collaborative research involving universities, geological survey organizations, government agencies, mining associations, local communities, and international research institutions. Such partnerships facilitate knowledge exchange, technology transfer, and the development of innovative solutions tailored towards the operational realities of ASM. Furthermore, the findings from publicly funded research should be effectively disseminated to policymakers, regulatory institutions, and ASM operators through extension services, technical training, and knowledge-sharing platforms to maximise their practical application. Strengthening the research ecosystem surrounding ASM will contribute significantly to improving resource efficiency, enhancing occupational health and safety, minimising environmental degradation, promoting responsible mineral extraction, and supporting evidence-based policymaking. Ultimately, sustained investment in scientific research and innovation will provide the technical foundation necessary for the successful formalisation and long-term sustainability of the artisanal and small-scale mining sector.