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

brought into the process and are involved in clari- fication of what level of risk are acceptable at the current time. Further, efforts should be made to project what levels of risk may be acceptable or un- acceptable within a reasonable future and ongoing dialogue throughout the mine life needs to be un- dertaken in order to update and adjust plans. Government needs to set a clear legislative and fiscal framework. The initial licensing procedures and requirements can be used to initiate the proc- ess of mine closure planning and community con- sultation. Local/provincial government should, where practi- cable, integrate mining projects into the regional development plan with goals to reduce the depend- ency of the region on the mine and can create a context for planning and delivering social services (e.g. health and education) by government rather than by the mine by actors other than the mine. Miners and provincial governments may seek to address community and social issues via the es- tablishment of foundations structured to exist for a period of time after mine life. An additional role that such bodies can serve is to work with the gov- ernment to develop governmental capacity where it is lacking. when should these actions be taken? The earlier the better! It is in the best interest of business, government and external stakeholders for such activities to take place at the right phase of mine life in order to minimise expenditures and minimise overall environmental and health related nuisances. Further, as mine decommission- ing usually occurs at a point in the life of an opera- tion where the economic recovery of minerals has ceased, and cash flows are minimal or non-existent, then this is not the time to be undertaking the bulk of rehabilitation operations. Similarly, social issues are best planned for early in a project lifetime. 6.3 new mining resources and new re-mining projects New mining projects and the conduct of re-mining offer a range of opportunities for environmental, social and economic improvement in SEE/TRB. If

subsidies for economically marginal re-mining operations where this would still be cheaper to the government than underwriting the costs of rehabilitation; redevelopment for and operation of post-min- ing sites as ‘biosphere reserves’ or equivalent to add to the national inventory of natural areas; redevelopment of sites that may also have tour- ism potential. Moreover, consultation with the government and community leaders will be necessary to identify how essential community services such as medical care, schools, and so forth can be continued after mine closure (particularly those sponsored by mining companies during operational life). Pathways can involve the establishment of foundations to provide long-term sustainability for such services or direct linking of them to economic activities in post-min- ing areas such as those listed above. A similar ap- proach is to establish a community trust fund that is protected against inflation. The income from the fund can allow the communities to take a long-term view of sustainability. Such a fund may also allow the communities to build their own capacity in or- der to manage the financial resources sustainable. who should act and where? • • • Government should bear the central accountability for social and community issues and for planning to ensure that communities are left in a self-sustaining condition post-closure, however mining companies can (and do in many jurisdictions) provide assistance or facilitate a consultative process with stakeholders. Mining companies should bear the responsibility for the technical and safety aspects of mine closure working to the regulatory requirements or within the frames of agreements of the government. Mining companies should also carry the responsibility for the identification and management of risks (both operational and residual). However, certainty in envi- ronmental issues is rare, andgovernmentsmust clearly define the level of risk that they are willing to accept at closure. Firm and fair agreements must be established between such parties as early as is practicable. In this case there are actions required of most ma- jor stakeholders in mining projects.

Miners and government should ensure that com- munities, NGOs and other social stakeholders are

70

MINING FOR CLOSURE