A thesis submitted in patial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Natural Resources Management

Thesis (M. Sc.) - Asian Institute of Technology, 2026

The global expansion of gold mining has heightened socio-environmental concerns; yet research has predominantly emphasized economic benefits rather than community perspectives. Although the impacts of mining have been documented, it remains unclear how affected populations perceive and experience these consequences, particularly in the context of artisanal and small-scale gold mining (ASGM). This research gap is especially evident in Southeast Asia, where Myanmar has witnessed a rapid proliferation of ASGM, raising acute concerns about ecological degradation and social disruption. Despite these challenges, systematic evidence on local perceptions remains scarce. This study examines community perspectives on the socio environmental impacts of ASGM along U-Yu River, Myanmar by addressing three objectives: analyzing perceived environmental and livelihood changes, comparing perceptions and satisfaction across hill, river, and mixed mining villages and assessing coping strategies, community responses and attitudes toward governance. A household survey (n = 102) was conducted across hill, river, and mixed mining villages. Descriptive results show that while 76.5% of households reported income gains, severe and uneven environmental damage was evident. All river and mixed mining households changed their drinking water sources due to pollution, and 42.9% of hill households abandoned land. A 2coping paradox3 emerged, with households facing the greatest impacts adopting fewer coping strategies (water pollution: Ý = -0.47, p < 0.001; land degradation: Ý = -0.46, p < 0.001). Satisfaction levels diverged sharply, reflecting unequal benefit distribution. Governance analysis highlighted information asymmetries and weak grievance mechanisms. Logistic regression showed households with reporting knowledge were five times more likely to file complaints (OR = 5.01, p < 0.001). Key governance failures included lack of trust, inadequate information, and fear of retaliation. Findings underscore the need for targeted information campaigns, fair compensation, and stronger accountability mechanisms to promote equitable and sustainable resource management.