Mining for Closure: Policies, practises and guidelines for sustainable mining and closure of mines

6.

improving mining frameworks in see/trb

capacity, a culture of risk control, and markedly improved operational procedures throughout the region to create a norm of mine planning that encompasses mine closure plans as an in- tegral part of a project life cycle; fostering of institutional frameworks for aban- doned or orphaned site management and sustainable mining and minerals processing practice – further development of legislative frameworks addressing mining and minerals processing legacies; clear accountability (and jurisdictional remit) for the environmental aspects of mining and minerals processing ac- tivities in the region; and the further develop- ment of institutions supporting transboundary risk management and/or disaster response. Section 2 then outlined why a range of stakehold- ers consider Mining for Closure and the issue of abandoned or orphaned sites to be so important to sustainable development around the world. Section 3 examined how these actors can work to- gether; how the relative importance of stakehold- ers can change over time and when they form dif- fering constellations. Pursuant to that, Section 4 provided a précis of why mines close – and more importantly in the context of this document, why so many have been abandoned without adequate works to ensure that they do not pose risks to the environment and to society. Section 5 then speci- fied the somewhat unique needs of the SEE/TRB states and has provided some examples in order to provide “substance” to so many of the arguments presented earlier. As such, the material provided conclusively demonstrates that Mining for Closure makes the first three key areas for action possible, while the fourth area is vital for progress towards such objectives. Thus a point has been reached in this report where the actions deemed to be required after earlier studies can be confirmed and where more specific items identified as a result of the content of this document can be summarised. Each of the four ac- tion areas identified at the outset of this document will be examined in turn, then some additional notes will be supplied regarding some general is- sues enfolding mine closure policy formulation. •

In Sections 1.3 to 1.5 the objectives for this docu- ment were outlined. Much of the ensuing content has sought to “make the case” for Mining for Clo- sure – and to provide some examples of what this can mean. In those introductory sections, referenc- es were made to previous studies that focused upon aspects of mining and mining legacies in SEE/TRB (Burnod-Requia, 2004; Peck, 2004). Among other things, these studies concluded that input was re- quired in order to start the process of generating legal and/or regulatory frameworks for key mining actors. Further, that utilitarian measures needed to be designed to provide material incentives that could improve performance in problem areas – however, it was stressed that this process must likely be two-way. That Government must seek to “give” as well as “demand”. Further, it was indicated that measures intended to supply or enhance capacity within the mining sector – and the regulatory frameworks that enfold it – were required. Also that the prevalent norms among industrial, regulatory and social actors needed to be shifted in order to promote (and al- low) improved mining performance. Pursuant to that earlier work, four key areas for ac- tion among regional decision-makers, policy mak- ers, and leading industrial actors were listed: risk reduction at abandoned or orphaned sites – actions among regional actors that can facili- tate the reduction of the very significant risks associated with non-operational, abandoned and/or orphaned sites where large quantities of physically and chemically unstable, and/or poorly contained mine wastes are stored; risk reduction at operational sites – actions that can facilitate the reduction of the very significant risks associated at sites of mining or minerals processing that are operational via enablement of the existing economic actors and industrial activities with a key part of this being the devel- opment of an effective and efficient approach to the funding of closure that enables mine reha- bilitation; development of new resources and re-mining aligned with sustainable development – actions that can stimulate development of institutional • • •

63

MINING FOR CLOSURE