106

1665

CHAPTER 16.2

Mining and SustainabilityR. Anthony Hodge

INTRODUCTIONThe 1987 publication of the report, Our Common Future by the United Nations (UN) World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED), brought the concept of sustainable development into the limelight. Chaired by the former Prime Minister of Norway, Gro Harlem Brundtland, and following hearings held across the world, the commission proposed an agenda for world development that would enhance security and reduce North–South disparities. It would be development “which meets the needs of the present without compromis-ing the ability of future generations to meet their own needs” (WCED 1987).

Since then, a rich debate has ensued about what this means in practical terms. Though many other sets of words have been suggested for defining the phrase sustainable devel-opment, the Brundtland Commission definition has stood the test of time and remains the anchor. For a rich discussion, see the “definitions” portal of the International Institute for Sustainable Development, or IISD (SD Gateway n.d.)

In recent years, the word sustainability has also found its way into common use. The idea is simple. Sustainability is the persistence over a long time—indefinitely—of certain neces-sary and/or desired characteristics of both human society and the enveloping ecosystem (Robinson et al. 1990). These char-acteristics range from primary needs such as air, water, food, clothing, shelter, and basic human rights to a host of condi-tions that would collectively be called quality of life, not only for people but for other life forms as well.

It is here that the definitional issue becomes difficult for some, because the choice of which characteristics are to be sustained and the degree to which they will be sustained depends on the particular values that are applied. In turn, these depend on who is doing the applying. In other words, it is not a closed definition. What a company CEO chooses as impor-tant may be different than a politician, doctor, or librarian; what a Mexican chooses may be different from, for example, a Tanzanian or Australian. Because of these potential differ-ences, a fair and effective process of interaction and seek-ing consensus is critical to the practical application of these ideas. Herein lies the rationale for why it is essential to always

address not only the what, or the substantive part of human action, but also the how, or the process part. In other words, in the practical application of sustainable development concepts, not only what we do is important but how we do it.

Thus, the ideas of sustainable development and sustain-ability are different but synchronous. Sustainability is a more general term that captures the idea that we need to maintain certain important aspects of the world over the long term. Sustainable development is the human or action part of this set of ideas: As a society, we want to make choices about our actions that allow us to provide for the present without under-mining the possibility for future generations to provide for themselves.

Together, these ideas are very appealing. However, their translation to practical action remains much debated. This is not surprising. Human society is complex. There are about 10,000 cells in the standard industrial classification—our way of classifying human activities within the market economy. This does not account for many more activities outside the market economy. There are about 200 countries across the world, and the global ecosystem is complex and not fully understood.

For its part, the mining, minerals, and metals industry has been a particularly active locus of sustainability-related policy and practice innovations because

• The potential implications—both positive and negative—of mining activities and the minerals and metals that result are significant;

• Many interests are touched by mining;• The role of many of these interests in decision making is

growing (e.g., communities and indigenous people);• The nature of contemporary communications systems has

brought the often dramatic nature of mining operations into the public eye; and

• Industry, governments, civil society organizations, and the public, in general, are all anxious to ensure mining makes a positive contribution that is fairly shared.

Importantly, the concept of sustainable development has not disappeared like so many “flavor of the month” ideas. Rather,

R. Anthony Hodge, President, International Council on Mining & Metals; Professor, Mining & Sustainability, Queen’s University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada

1666 SME Mining Engineering Handbook

it has grown in prominence and is now deeply entrenched in legislation, government, and corporate policy and practice. Sustainability is the subject of university curricula, given as a label to vice presidents and departments of mining companies, incorporated into the names of service providers, and included as an element of key performance indicators.

This chapter provides an overview that links the ideas of sustainable development and sustainability to the mining, minerals, and metals industry. To do so, a particular template is used for organizing the many interlinked bodies of knowl-edge that must be brought together: the Seven Questions to Sustainability (7QS) (MMSD North America 2002).

This template is pragmatic though much informed by the theoretical foundation of systems theory. It recognizes that to bring sustainability ideas into practice for the mining, min- sustainability ideas into practice for the mining, min-erals, and metals industry, the hard (well-defined) and the soft (ill-defined) systems of the real world must both be addressed, as well as the objective (independent of judgment) and the subjective (dependent on judgment). In doing so, all must be treated, if not exactly scientifically (which is not always pos-sible), at least in a way that is characterized by intellectual rigor (see discussion of systems theory and sustainability in Hodge 1995 and 1996). The 7QS template weaves together ideas from many disciplines but recognizes that deeper explo-ration is often warranted depending on site-specific condi-tions. In this context, the objective of this chapter is to open a door as a first step to practical application.

MINING AND METALS INDUSTRY RESPONSE TO SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENTThe 1970s and 1980s were a time of reaction to dramatic change for mining. Echoing increasing concern for the envi-ronment across society, the late 1980s saw a number of lead-ing mining companies publish “state-of-environment” reports related to their operations. Taking another important step, 30 leading mining and metals companies from across the world came together in 1991 to create the International Council on Metals and the Environment (ICME). ICME would give the industry an international voice on environmental matters.

Also in the early 1990s, many of these same companies joined with senior governments, labor unions, aboriginal peoples, and environmental nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) in a broad review of mining practices in Canada. The Whitehorse Mining Initiative turned out to be a precur-sor of a number of initiatives convened to bring sustainability ideas to practical application around the world. The resulting Leadership Accord (Whitehorse Mining Initiative Leadership Council Accord 1993) is a summons to change, framed within the context of a commitment to social and environmen-tal goals. It seeks a sustainable mining industry within the framework of an evolving and sustainable society. The ideas it champions and the multi-interest process it uses elegantly capture sustainable development in practice.

For the mining industry, the decade of the 1990s was a bleak period. Commodity prices dropped while public criticism skyrocketed, much driven by a civil society that was quick to take advantage of newly available and quickly evolving computer-based communications. As a whole, the industry found itself under attack and in a defensive pos-ture. Its social license to operate was threatened (though that particular label was to come later). In the late 1990s and faced with growing concern about access to capital, land, and human resources, the chief executive officers of nine

of the world’s largest mining companies took an unprec-edented step.

Working through the World Business Council for Sustainable Development, they initiated the Global Mining Initiative (GMI). As part of GMI, they commissioned the International Institute for Environment and Development (London) to undertake a global review that would lead to the identification of how mining and minerals can best contribute to the global transition to sustainable development. The result-ing project, Mining, Minerals, and Sustainable Development (MMSD), sparked a large and rich literature, including the project’s final report, Breaking New Ground: Mining, Minerals and Sustainable Development (MMSD 2002).

Before the GMI was completed, participants moved to create an organization that would carry the resulting rec-ommendations forward to implementation. Thus, in 2001 and building on the foundation established by ICME, the International Council on Mining and Metals (ICMM) was created. Many of the ideas summarized in this chapter have emerged from or been refined through subsequent work of ICMM.

Almost simultaneously with these events, NGO pressure on the World Bank Group led to the initiation in 2001 of a multi-interest review of the group’s involvement in extrac-tive industries. The Extractive Industries Review sought to test whether or not industry projects could be compatible with the World Bank Group’s goal of sustainable development and poverty reduction. In its final report, Striking a Better Balance (Salim 2003), the review concluded in the affirmative but only if three enabling conditions were in place:

1. Public and corporate governance advocacy for the poor, including proactive planning and management to maxi-mize poverty alleviation through sustainable development

2. Much more effective social and environmental policies3. Respect for human rights

The resulting refocused World Bank policy emphasizes strengthened governance and transparency, ensuring that ben-efits reach the poor, mitigating environmental and social risks, protecting human rights, and promoting renewable energy and efficiency to combat climate change. This refocusing has in turn influenced mining approaches to implementing sustain-able development on the ground. In sum, this process has served to elucidate and reinforce the concepts of sustainable development addressed in this discussion.

MINING’S CONTRIBUTION TO SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENTAt the base of the interlinked ideas of sustainability and sus-tainable development lies the simple idea that any human activity—including mining—should be undertaken in such a way that the activity itself and the products produced together provide a net contribution to human and ecosystem well-being over the long term.

From an engineering design perspective in general and a mine design perspective in particular, this simple idea gives rise to an overarching two-dimensional design criterion. That is, mining activity (or any human endeavour for that matter) should be designed to achieve (through the activity itself and the products that result) a net contribution to both human and ecosystem well-being over the long term. The achievement of design success should, in turn, be tested against this design criterion.

Mining and Sustainability 1667

Thus, the focus here is not on how mining can be sustainable—any mining project as a discrete activity cannot continue indefinitely—but on how mining, minerals, and met-als can contribute to sustainable development. This is a con-ceptual shift away from a singular analysis and mitigation of impacts to a more comprehensive analysis and encouragement of contribution.

The focus on contribution is a tougher but fairer approach. It demands consideration of both the good and the bad. (The idea that the mining and metals industry should be designed for and tested against its contribution to the well-being of peo-ple and the environment—to sustainable development—was first proposed by Professor Robert Gibson in 2000 and later taken up in development of the 7QS template [MMSD North America 2002; Hodge 2004].) That a mining activity might be challenged to make a positive contribution to the ecosys-tem over the long term may seem a tough, even impossible challenge to some. However, articulating explicit engineering design criteria in this way sets a design objective that is essen-tial if mining and metals-related activity and the resulting products are to achieve the sustainable development contribu-tion that is being demanded by society.

Application of these ideas is not simply a greening phe-nomenon; it is related as much to well-being and security of people as the environment. And, interestingly, the mining industry’s capacity to deal with the environmental aspects is currently stronger than its ability to address the full range of social aspects. This is likely because many environmental issues can be addressed through hard scientific and technical solutions, whereas social issues often require soft behavioral-type solutions, which can be much harder to design and imple-ment—and which often fall outside the engineer’s training.

These ideas also veer sharply away from thinking in terms of a trade-off between human and ecosystem well-being—it is not a balancing act that pits people against the environment. There are obviously many small trade-offs in any practical application: between interests, between compo-nents of the ecosystem, across time, and across space. This is particularly the case for mining and the related process of

concentrating and refining. However, in an overarching sense, the ideas of sustainability and sustainable development call for both human and ecosystem well-being to be maintained or improved over the long term. Doing one at the expense of the other is not acceptable because, either way, the foundation of life is undermined.

PRINCIPLES AND FRAMEWORKSThe nature of applied sustainability is evident from the many attempts to articulate sustainable development principles. For a listing of more than 100 such principles, see the the “prin-ciples” portal of the IISD (n.d.). In short, there is no one-size-fits-all approach to defining, framing, and characterizing the ideas of sustainable development and sustainability. One set of principles of particular relevance to the mining industry is the 10-part set developed by the ICMM, along with its com-plementary set of position statements. ICMM brings together 19 of the largest mining companies of the world and, on an annual basis, member companies assess performance against these commitments using a procedure that includes third-party independent assurance (ICMM 2010a).

The ICMM principles and position statements as of 2010 are summarized in Figure 16.2-1. Just as many definitions and principles have been proposed, so too have many organizing frameworks been designed to bring theory to action. A com-parative analysis of about 30 such characterizations or frame-works is found in Hodge 1997.

Almost three decades before the popularization of sustain-able development ideas, geographer Walter Firey pointed out that three broad groupings of knowledge were pertinent to natu-ral resource use (Firey 1960; and see discussion in Hodge 1997):

1. Ecological (environmental)2. Ethnological (social/culture)3. Economic

In the late 1980s, Firey’s three-part model of natural resource use was adopted by a number of those attempting to opera-tionalize the concept of sustainable development (Mitchell 1991). Since then, the three-part environmental–social–

Seven Position StatementsTen Principles for Sustainable Development

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

Mining and protected areas

Mining partnerships for development

Climate change

Mining and indigenous peoples

Mercury risk management

Transparency of mineral revenues

Mineral resources and economic development

1.

2.

3.

4.

5. and 6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

Implement ethical business practices and apply good corporate governance.

Integrate sustainable development in corporate decision making.

Uphold fundamental human rights.

Manage risks based on sound science.

Improve environment, health, and safety performance continuously.

Conserve biodiversity and contribute to integrated land-use planning.

Encourage a life-cycle approach to materials management.

Contribute to community development.

Publicly report, independently assure, and engage openly and transparently.

Figure 16.2-1 Principles and position statements that comprise the sustainable development framework of ICMM


economic characterization of sustainable development has gained broad usage. A significant limitation of this approach, however, arises because of the lack of common treatment for the social element.

Many other frameworks have also emerged that make sense for the particular application: population health, healthy communities, sustainable communities, foreign aid, urban design, agriculture, forestry, fisheries, indigenous peoples’ needs, and so forth. From one particularly important perspec-tive, the World Bank Group has used the lens and insights of economics to offer a “capitals” model to apply sustainable development ideas: natural, built, human, knowledge, and institutional. Figure 16.2-2 is a synthesis that brings a number of the alternatives together.

Another perspective that offers practical insight comes from an analysis of mine closure options that was undertaken for the Faro mine project in the Yukon Territory, Canada (Hodge and Merkhofer 2008). In this case, a sophisticated multi-attribute utility analysis—driven by a multistakeholder process—was used to assess the alternatives. Multi-attribute utility analysis is a form of decision analysis in which a set of objectives is articulated and each alternative’s performance is assessed against those objectives. The underlying principle is that the alternative that best performs against the objectives is the best one. The foundation of this kind of analysis is the articulation of objectives that can be translated to a scale, which can be assessed in terms of a direction (e.g., more is better, less is worse) and magnitude (e.g., how much better or worse).

The rigorous scaling and multi-interest process of assess-ing and judging are complex. In the Faro analysis, two time horizons were used in the assessment: (1) short, 15–40 years; and (2) long, 500–1,000 years. Of relevance to this discus-sion is the framework of closure objectives, because it was set to reflect an overarching government policy of sustainable development. Eight objectives were used for assessing closure alternative at the Faro mine (Yukon Territory, Canada):

1. Maximize public health and safety2. Maximize worker health and safety3. Maximize restoration, protection and enhancement of the

environment4. Maximize local socioeconomic benefits5. Maximize Yukon socioeconomic benefits6. Minimize cost7. Minimize restrictions on traditional land use8. Minimize restrictions on local land use

As with all sustainable development frameworks, a broad range of topics is captured. However, this example is particu-larly useful for another reason. It is clear that the simultaneous treatment of all objectives sets up tensions that must ulti-mately be resolved: In a comparative analysis of alternatives, different value sets might well judge performance differently and, at the same time, place greater weight on certain objec-tives. This is a poignant example of applied sustainability in practice. Here again the process of finding common ground can be seen as critical to practical implementation of sustain-able development ideas.

From a different but important perspective, as part of the World Bank Group response to the Extractive Industries Review, the International Finance Corporation (IFC) prepared and adopted a sustainability framework that consists of (1) the Policy on Social and Environmental Sustainability, (2) the Policy on Disclosure of Information; and (3) a set of perfor-mance standards on social and environmental sustainability.

In its performance standards, the IFC addresses eight topics:

1. Social and environmental assessment and management systems

2. Labor and working conditions3. Pollution prevention and abatement4. Community health, safety, and security5. Land acquisition and involuntary resettlement6. Biodiversity conservation and sustainable natural

resource management7. Indigenous peoples8. Cultural heritage

Here again is another definition of what is appropriate to include in addressing application of sustainability concepts to mining. The IFC sustainability framework is currently under review with the expectation that a revised package is targeted for release in 2011. The IFC has also published a number of Good Practice Notes/Handbooks (IFC 2006) relevant to the practical issues of sustainability. Most importantly, the per-formance standards along with the World Bank Group’s Environmental, Health, and Safety Guidelines form the basis of the Equator Principles, which have been adopted by 67 lending institutions worldwide (the Equator Principles lend-ing institutions), many of whom provide financing for min-ing activities. The Equator Principles are a voluntary set of standards for determining, assessing, and managing social and environmental risk in project financing. They are considered the financial industry gold standard for sustainable project finance.

Another important framework is the Global Compact, a principle-based framework for businesses, which was estab-lished by the United Nations in 2000. The Global Compact is the world’s largest voluntary corporate citizenship initiative and states 10 principles in the areas of human rights, labor, the environment, and anticorruption. Members are committed to aligning their operations and strategies with the 10 principles (United Nations Global Compact n.d.).

For their part, the Millennium Development Goals are eight international development goals that all 192 UN member states and at least 23 international organizations have agreed to achieve by the year 2015:

1. Eradicating extreme poverty and hunger2. Achieving universal primary education

ResultsComponents

— Institutional• Economic

— Cultural— Political— Health

• Social

• Environmental

• Human Well-being

• Ecosystem Well-being

Capitals: Natural, Built, Human, Knowledge, Institutional

Figure 16.2-2 Different characterizations of sustainable development


3. Promoting gender equity and empowering women4. Reducing child mortality5. Improving maternal health6. Combating HIV/AIDS, malaria, and other diseases7. Ensuring environmental sustainability8. Developing a global partnership for development

Each of the approaches to capturing what sustainability means in terms of principles and frameworks is useful for the relevant driving application. There is no single panacea that applies in all cases. However, taken together they capture the breadth of issues and topics that must be considered.

NONRENEWABLE NATURE OF MINING, MINERALS, AND METALSMuch of the literature through the 1980s and 1990s focused on renewable resource management and the idea of living off the interest of a continuing core stock. For some, nonrenew-able resource-related activities such as mining simply did not fit into the sustainability concept, although the hat might be tipped toward recycling and reuse of nonrenewable materials as helpful strategies.

One result of this early emphasis was the marginaliza-tion, to a great extent, of concerns and perspectives about non-renewable resources. Interestingly, the fact that minerals are nonrenewable (or stock) resources and, in some sense, fixed in absolute quantity turns out to be relatively unimportant from a sustainability perspective—at least at the macro scale (MMSD North America 2002). The nonrenewable character of minerals received a great deal of attention in the literature from 1950 into the 1970s. However, the long statistical record of continued output at relatively constant prices, together with growing understanding first of environmental issues and then of sustainability, has served to deemphasize this concern. At the same time, recognition is growing that the products of mining are needed both to provide for the world’s popula-tion and, even more so, to support approaches that will allow

society to walk more lightly on the earth. For example, all the strategies needed for development, transmission, and use of renewable energy sources depend on mined metals and miner-als. Similarly, strategies to move to a carbon-reduced econ-omy are only possible through creative uses of mined minerals and metals.

Thus, the sustainability-related focus is now appropriately on mining as an activity and its implications for the communi-ties and ecosystem within which minerals are embedded. At any given site, whether a mining, smelting, refining, primary metals manufacturing, or recycling operation, there is a begin-ning and end: No mining/mineral activity can be expected to have an indefinite life span. However, the implications of that activity (not only as a direct result of the activity but also through the product that is produced) go on indefinitely.

In that sense, mining/mineral activities serve as a bridge to the future. The sustainability challenge is to ensure that the implications of mining activities and the products that result are net positive for people and ecosystems over the long term: It is the well-being of human society and the enveloping eco-systems that need sustaining. Limited-term mining projects can serve sustainability objectives if they are designed and implemented in ways that ensure they meet that challenge.

BOUNDARY CONDITIONS FOR APPLYING SUSTAINABILITY TO MININGBringing sustainability ideas into mine design has a signifi-cant impact on mine design boundary conditions. Four aspects of boundary conditions apply in this case, each of which has implications for setting the time and space dimensions and helps to identify the system components that must be considered:

1. Mine project life cycle (Figure 16.2-3)2. Mineral life cycle (Figure 16.2-4)3. Time horizon (Table 16.2-1)4. Communities of interest

TemporaryClosure

4a

Postclosurein perpetuity

6

Final Closureand

Decommissioning1–5 years

5

Operation2–100 yearsprogressive

rehabilitation

4

Construction

3

Suspension orTermination

2a

Detailed SiteInvestigation,Design, andEstimating

Exploration1–10 years

Suspension orTermination

21

1a

Typically 1–3 years

Mine life cycle 1960sMine life cycle 1970s +Mine life cycle 2000

Source: Adapted from John Gadsby (personal communication) and MMSD North America 2002.Figure 16.2-3 Mine project life cycle


First, the mine design process must take into consider-ation the full life cycle of a mine project. Many of the greatest problems facing the mining industry today stem from the fact that this has not been done in the past. In the 1960s, the mine design process was limited to the end of operations. In the 1970s and driven by rising environmental consciousness, the need for mine reclamation gave rise to concerns about clo-sure, which at the time focused on cleaning and grooming a site, with revegetation being a key activity. It is only in the last decade that the realization has set in that a postclosure phase can in some cases extend indefinitely because of the geochemical processes at work in waste rock piles, tailings, and exposed workings. These give rise to potential liabilities that must be factored into annual financial statements and the calculation of share value.

Second, the mine design process must consider the min-eral life cycle. The mining industry has come to learn that it must not only consider the production of minerals and met-als but also their use. Too often in the past, the mine design process has limited its perspective in time and space to the immediate mine operation. In fact, many significant implica-tions extend across space and time in a kind of ripple effect (Figure 16.2-5). Some of these—both positive and negative—are significant. And all must be taken into consideration to ensure that the full contribution is accounted for.

Third, the time horizon to be used needs particular men-tion. Table 16.2-1 lists different perspectives on the time horizons relevant to applied sustainability. This element of the boundary conditions for the mine design, operation, and closure processes has changed dramatically in the last few decades. The mine project life cycle shown in Figure 16.2-3 illustrates how the time horizon evolved after the 1970s to eventually take into considerations the postclosure phase, which can sometimes stretch environmental and social obliga-tions of mining operations into perpetuity. This is new terrain for all interests—industry, government, host communities,

and civil society organizations—and is not yet fully under-stood or appreciated.

The fourth and final aspect of defining the boundary con-ditions for applying sustainability relates to identifying the communities of interest that must be considered in the mine design, operation, and closure process. In times past, a com-pany and government would simply come to a bilateral agree-ment on conditions that would govern mine activities. Today that is no longer the case. Many interests play active roles, and the definition of those roles itself requires great care and atten-tion. Interests important to mining are

• Industry (investors, employees, industry associations, other companies);

• Support services (financial, consultants, contractors, suppliers);

• Government (federal, state/provincial, county/regional district, local);

• Indigenous people and their organizations;• Organized labor;• Mining-affected communities (by economic, social, and/

or environmental [e.g., watershed] dependency);• NGOs or civil society organizations; and• Academic, learning, and research and development sup-

port (universities, technical schools, private and public research centers).

SEVEN QUESTIONS TO SUSTAINABILITYOne product of the mining industry’s MMSD project was a template aimed at assessing the compatibility between mining operations and sustainability criteria (MMSD North America 2002; Hodge 2004, 2006). The 7QS offers seven queries for consideration in the mine design and assessment process. Each question is the interrogative form of a goal statement. Seen in another light, these seven goals define the application of sus-tainability concepts. The technique of using the interrogative form in this way is drawn from the accounting profession’s approach to auditing and assuring the validity and accuracy of financial statements.

The focus on applying the 7QS approach is not on how a given mine can be sustainable—mining as a discrete activity cannot continue indefinitely—but on how the process of min-ing and the products it produces can best contribute to sus-tainable development. Thus it enshrines the conceptual shift away from analysis and mitigation of impacts to analysis and encouragement of contribution.

The seven questions are summarized in Figure 16.2-6. In this section, the 7QS template is used to systematically orga-nize the parts of applied sustainability, rendering their applica-tion more practical. (The material presented in this section is modified from MMSD North America 2002.) In applying this

Recy

cle

Was

te, E

nviro

nmen

tal,

and

Soci

al S

tress

and

Res

tora

tion

Exploration

Reserves

Mining and Milling

Concentrate

Final Products:End Uses

Primary Smeltingand Refining

Secondary Smeltingand Refining

First Products

Manufacturing

Figure 16.2-4 Mineral life cycle

Table 16.2-1 Perspectives on the time horizons for applied sustainability

Perspective Typical Time Horizon

Financial/tax cycle Annual or quarterlyElection cycle 2, 4, or 5 yearsStandard engineering design life Up to 50 yearsSocial time horizon (seven generations) Up to 200 yearsEnvironmental time horizon 200 to 10,000+ years

Source: Adapted from Freeze 1987.


template, attention must be paid to the compilation and analy-sis of both quantitative and qualitative insights. Ultimately in assessing effectiveness, efficiency, and progress, four distinct steps are essential (Hodge 2007):

1. Drawing the qualitative insight that comes through under-standing the story that is relevant to the object(s) of the assessment

2. Undertaking and compiling the relevant quantitative measurement

3. Applying a systemic approach to synthesizing, setting criteria, and judging significance

4. Effectively communicating the results to different key interests

The 7QS approach encompasses four categories of insight:

1. Relationships. Question 1 in Figure 16.2-6 (engagement) deals with the state of relationships that are important to any given project or within any region that is being assessed (see Thomson and Joyce 2000 for a succinct dis-cussion of this topic). A key issue facing many projects is the sense that the distribution of costs, benefits, and risk is unfair. This sense can cause stakeholder reactions that range from feelings of discontent to outright civil disobe-dience and damage to persons and property. Although detailed procedures will vary from site to site, the 7QS approach calls for addressing this issue early and in a way that facilitates constructive relationships achieved over the full project life cycle.

2. Ends. Questions 2 (people) and 3 (environment) focus on the end results that must be achieved and against which the success of any project must be tested—human and ecosystem well-being over the long term.

3. Means to achieving ends. Questions 4 (economy), 5 (tra-ditional and nonmarket activities), and 6 (governance and institutions) cover the various means of achieving human and ecosystem well-being.

4. Feedback. Lastly, Question 7 (synthesis and continuous learning) provides the feedback mechanism that allows managers and others to ensure accountability and to learn from the inevitable mistakes, adapt and improve designs as necessary, and celebrate the successes, giving credit where due.

Effective EngagementIf relationships with those important to a mining/minerals/metals project are unhealthy, the chance of achieving a suc-cessful project—one that contributes to sustainability—is greatly reduced. Although this is a simple idea and one that is key to many successful nonmining businesses around the world, application of this idea is only now gaining momentum across the industry.

At any point in time, mining activities must align with the norms and values of society as a whole. When it does, a social license to operate is the result—an unwritten approval. If that alignment is not apparent, the social license will be challenged. Within the mining industry, elucidation of this concept has been led by Ian Thomson and Susan Joyce (2008).

Metals and MineralsIndustry

Metals, Minerals,and Related

Products

Benefits andCosts to theEnvironment

(Environmental stressand restoration,

chemical, physical,biological)

Benefits andCosts to People

(Employees and theirfamilies, shareholders

and investors,subcontractors, suppliers,community, region, nation,

future generations)

Direct Outputs

Indirect Outputs

(Benefits and costs todownstream consumers,operations, communities,and ecosystems becauseof enhanced supply of

metal- and mineral-linked commodities and products)

Direct Inputs

(Stakeholderengagement, labor,land, water, energy,feedstocks, reagents,

and supplies)

Indirect Inputs

(Benefits and coststo upstream

consumers, operations,communities, and

ecosystems because ofdemand for inputs)

Figure 16.2-5 Ripple effect


Thomson and Joyce (2006) have also played a lead role in recognizing the central role of the explorationist and junior companies (that are the first to enter an area) in either creating lasting positive relationships or a climate of long-term tension. Working to entrench such acceptance is an insurance policy that includes both the ability to recognize meaningful change and the ability to consider accommodating these changes.

Building a constructive engagement with the local com-munity involves a series of challenging steps to (1) identify key interests, (2) learn how to listen to each interest’s concerns amid all the noise of existing pressures, and (3) develop a way for-ward for mining and metals operations based on mutual respect, trust, and integrity. It requires effort and resources, sometimes just as much as many technical aspects of a project. And today, with the changing and growing role of many interests in society, if care is not taken to build the needed relationships, implica-tions for proceeding effectively and efficiently on a project can be seriously undermined. At worst, physical conflict can occur.

A leading example of addressing community relationship issues has been completed by Newmont Gold Corporation (2009). In this case, concerns over conflict led an ethical investor to ask for a complete review of the relationships between Newmont operations and its host communities. The initial work, completed over 2 years, included an independent review panel. Building on existing and past attempts to build effective relationships, it led to a series of company–host com-munity interactions that, in turn, changed Newmont’s own internal management system. One result was that, in 2010, Newmont was ranked 16th in Corporate Responsibility mag-azine’s 11th Annual List of 100 Best Corporate Citizens in the United States (Corporate Responsibility 2010), the only mining company in the top 20 and joining such businesses as Hewlett-Packard, Intel, Gap, IBM, and Microsoft.

A particularly important issue for the mining industry is building effective relationships with indigenous people. A useful overview of issues relevant to this topic can be found in Render 2006. A current perspective on how to best achieve effective working relationships with indigenous people is pro-vided in ICMM 2010b. This is especially relevant for countries where the legal system does not provide strong protections for indigenous peoples. In the last decade, indigenous peoples’ concerns have led to the emergence of special impact benefit agreements that formally entrench special arrangements for participation. A current tool kit addressing such agreements is now available (Gibson and O’Faircheallaigh 2010).

Considerations important to building effective relation-ships are shown in Figure 16.2-7. Table 16.2-2 is modified from the 7QS work and lists the ideal answer to the question,“Are engagement processes in place and working effectively?,”and offers example indicators that can be considered for compila-tion in order to assess how close a given mining or metals

4. EconomyIs the economic viability of the project oroperation assured, and will the economyof the community and beyond bebetter off as a result?

3. EnvironmentIs the integrity of the environmentassured over the long term?

2. PeopleWill people’s well-beingbe maintained or improved?

1. EngagementAre engagement processesin place and working effectively?

5. Traditional and Nonmarket ActivitiesAre traditional and nonmarket activities inthe community and surrounding area accounted forin a way that is acceptable to the local people?

6. Institutional Arrangementsand Governance

Are rules, incentives, programs, andcapacities in place to address project

or operational consequences?

7. Synthyesis andContinuous Learning

Does a full synthesis show that thenet result will be positive or negative in

the long term, and will there beperiodic reassessments?

Assessing forSustainability

Courtesy of the International Institute for Sustainable Development.Figure 16.2-6 Seven Questions to Sustainability

InformedVoluntaryConsent

AdequateResources

EngagementProcesses

DisputeResolutionMechanism

Reportingand

Verification

Engagement

Courtesy of the International Institute for Sustainable Development.Figure 16.2-7 Assessing the effectiveness of relationships between operations and other interests


operation is to achieving the ideal answer. In turn, the breadth of knowledge that Table 16.2-2 spans provides an indica-tion of what any mining operation might be expected to take into consideration when addressing this aspect of sustainable development.

Contributing to Human Well-BeingMost inside the mining industry take it for granted that min-ing activities contribute to society in general, to investors that risk their capital, to management and workers who are gain-fully employed as a result, and to the many host communi-ties who experience the secondary and tertiary benefits that ripple out from any mining activity. However, following hard on the heels of the rise of the contemporary environmental

movement came close examination of the social and economic implications of mining activities, particularly in emerging nations. One observation that emerged was that examples of developing economies suggested a link between mining activ-ity and ongoing poverty. In these instances, was the presence of natural resources in fact a “resource curse” resulting from a combination of poor governance, corruption, and civil war? There is a large amount of literature on this subject (e.g., see Davis 2009, Crowson 2009, Auty 1993, and Sachs and Warner 1995).

More recently, work completed by the ICMM (McPhail 2008) has demonstrated that the resource curse needn’t occur if appropriate collaborative action is taken. The ICMM work has identified six key areas of focus: (1) poverty reduction,

Table 16.2-2 Engagement: Are engagement processes in place and working effectively?

Question (Goal) Ideal Answer (Objectives) Example Indicators

Are processes of engagement committed to, designed, and implemented that

• Ensure all affected communities of interest (including vulnerable or disadvantaged subpopulations due to, for example, minority status, gender, ethnicity, or poverty) are well informed and have the opportunity to participate in decisions that influence their own future;

• Are understood and agreed upon by implicated communities of interest; and

• Are consistent with the legal, institu-tional, and cultural characteristics of the community and country where the project is located?

Satisfactory processes of engagement have been designed and implemented that

• Ensure all affected communities of interest (including vulnerable or disadvantaged subpopulations due to, for example, gender, ethnicity, or poverty) are well informed and have the opportunity to participate in the decisions that influence their own future; and

• Are understood, agreed upon, and consistent with the legal, institutional, and cultural characteristics of the community and country where the project is located.

As indicated by:

Input⇓

Output⇓

Result

Engagement processes. Engagement processes are in place for all phases of the project/operation life cycle to serve as a mechanism for

• Collaboratively identifying desired objectives, best approaches for gathering evidence in support of achieving objectives (quantitative and qualitative), assessment criteria, trade-offs and the bases for judging trade-offs; and

• Overseeing the application of the approach to assessing the contribution to sustainability articulated here.

• Comprehensive mapping of interests completed.

• Design of engagement strategy completed, including guidelines that are agreed upon by all interests

• Full and satisfactory disclosure of project-related information

• Effective implementation as signaled by participant satisfaction

Dispute resolution mechanism. An agreed upon, affordable dispute resolution mechanism (or set) exists and is understood by and accessible to all communities of interest.

• Dispute resolution mechanism(s)• Effective mechanisms as signaled by

participant satisfaction

Reporting and verification. Appropriate systems of reporting and verification are in place.

• Systems in place• Systems working effectively from

perspective of various interests

Adequate resources. Adequate resources have been made available to ensure that all communities of interest can effectively participate as needed.

Note: Responsibility for ensuring that this capacity is in place rests with a mix of government, company, and the local community itself. The exact distribution of this responsibility should be worked out collaboratively.

• Adequate resources available• Satisfaction with level of support• Effective participation achieved as

assessed by company, community, indigenous peoples, and government

Informed and voluntary consent. The informed and voluntary consent of those affected by the project or operation has been given.

Note: Inclusion of this factor does not imply that consent be given as a requirement for a project to proceed. The responsibility for approval lies with the relevant regulatory agency that is mandated by the laws of the country. Rather, this factor is included as a means to assess the extent of concurrence of those affected by a project. If that concurrence is high, the potential for achieving a net positive contribution to sustainability is greatly enhanced. In contrast, if negative feeling toward a project or operation is extensive, that potential is greatly reduced.

• Broad community support

Source: Adapted from MMSD North America 2002.


(2) revenue management, (3) regional development, (4) local content (the use of local labor and locally derived services and supplies), (5) social investment, and (6) dispute resolu-tion. The key to success is the use of collaborative approaches involving host governments, companies, civil society, and donor agencies.

One spin-off of the emergence of sustainability ideas starting in the mid-1980s, the resource curse debate of the 1990s and 2000s, and the ongoing challenging of the mining industry by NGOs and in some cases host governments is a realization that much greater effort is required to understand, capture, and share the nature and extent of mining and metal’s contribution to human well-being. No longer can it simply be taken for granted.

A key issue requiring attention in emerging economies is a documented gender bias in mining whereby benefits (such as employment, income, training, education, and health care) accrue largely to men and the local elite while most risks (such as family and social disruption, domestic violence, alcohol-ism, HIV/AIDS, increased prostitution, loss of gardens for subsistence agriculture, pollution, and water losses) fall on the poorer women, the less advantaged, and the families they care for (see Eftimie et al. 2009a and 2009b). A company purchas-ing the bulk or all of its produce needs locally can be benefi-cial for local farmers and landowners who see prices increase for their produce, but this can also have the unintended effect of worsening the situation for the poor community women who may be unable to afford the higher food prices. These are complex issues that require careful management approaches for any mining company.

Figure 16.2-8 offers example factors to be considered in answering the question—“Will people’s well-being be main-tained or improved” by a given mining, minerals or metals

operation? These factors draw on the foundation provided by socioeconomic impact analysis but use the lens of contribu-tion. Table 16.2-3 then provides both the ideal answer as well as examples of the kind of indicators that might be consid-ered in assessing how close a given operation is to meeting the ideal answer. As in the previous section, the range of topics provides a sense of what sustainable development means to mining from this particular perspective.

Contributing to Ecosystem Well-BeingThe relationship between a mining operation and its host envi-ronment is the focus of the environmental impact assessment and the resulting environmental management plan and related environmental management systems. The approach used here builds on this foundation.

Figure 16.2-9 shows one way of conceptualizing the environmental implications of a mining operation. It looks at chemical, physical, and biological implications from both the generation of environmental stress and the linked potential for ecosystem restoration. The concept of restoration that is used here is not the idea that everything needs to be returned to a chemical, physical, and biological premining state. Rather, a robust ecosystem is sought that is naturally reproducing and sus-tainable. This is the domain of the emerging science and art of restoration ecology.

A chemical, physical, and biological characterization of environmental implications is traditional and helpful from several perspectives, including (1) often regulatory require-ments are organized in this manner; (2) the professional expertise that must be drawn on is often organized in this way; and (3) traditional education is offered in this way and therefore management’s understanding is often aided by this approach.

Communities

Worker healthand safety are

assured

Full social andcultural costs,

benefits, and riskshave beenconsidered

Community,organization,

capacity,infrastructure,resiliency, anddependency

Responsibilitiesand sureties areassigned and

adequate

Distribution ofcosts, benefits,

risks, andresponsibilities

is fair

Social andcultural integrity

are assured

Population health,safety, and

well-being areassured

Individuals

People

Courtesy of the International Institute for Sustainable Development.Figure 16.2-8 Example factors to consider in assessing the contributions of mining and/or metals operations to human well-being


Table 16.2-3 People: Will people’s well-being be maintained or improved?


Will the project/operation lead directly or indirectly to maintenance of people’s well-being, preferably an improvement

• During the life of the project or operation, or

• In postclosure?

The project or operation will lead directly or indirectly to the maintenance or improvement of people’s well-being

• During the life of the project or operation or• In postclosure

As indicated by:

Input⇓

Output⇓

Result

Community organization and capacity. Effective and representative community organization and capacity (knowledge, skills, and resources) are in place in the local community, including representation of women and the disadvantaged in community leadership and decision making.

Note: Responsibility for ensuring this capacity is in place rests with a mix of government, company, and the local community itself. The exact distribution of this responsibility should be worked out collaboratively.

• Presence of an organizational structure that links and represents the community in project-related decision-making processes

• Training facilities in place• Local education/skills level to serve project

needs and provide basis for postclosure activities

• Community access to the information and expertise needed to ensure that properly informed decisions are made

Social/cultural integrity. All communities of interest have a reasonable degree of confidence that social and cultural integrity will be maintained or preferably improved in a way that is consistent with the vision and aspirations of the community.

Involuntary resettlement and other interventions will be undertaken in such as way as to maintain or preferably improve social and cultural integrity.

Note: This category is particularly dynamic and will change as a project proceeds.

• Existence of community and regional visions expressed explicitly in development and land-use plans

• Presence of key indicative social structures and their states

• Sense of satisfaction signaled by all interests that social and cultural integrity will be maintained or improved (including separate consultations with community women and representatives of disadvantaged groups in the community)

• Social and cultural indicators identified as significant by the community

• Preparation and implementation of community- supported and project-induced migration management plans to help manage the impacts of the inflow of outsiders that occurs when a mining development is expected or announced

Worker and population health, safety, and well-being. Improvement of indicators of worker and population health, safety, and well-being are maintained or improved.

Note: Responsibility for gathering this data and information lies with a mix of company (in terms of workers), community, and government. However, statistics on population health, training and education, jobs, income, poverty, debt, community resiliency, and community dependency typically fall to government.

• Baseline studies completed that include basic demographics to track population change (birth rate, infant mortality, morbidity rates, in/out-migration), household incomes, and so forth, including gender disaggregated data

• Worker health and safety• Population health• Training and education• Jobs, income, poverty, debt• Crime and security• Community resiliency• Community dependency

Availability of basic infrastructure. The infrastructure to meet basic needs is available to workers and residents.

• Water supply, sewage and wastewater treat-ment, power, communications, transportation, education, health services

Consideration of all direct, indirect, and induced or diffuse effects. All communities of interest have a reasonable degree of confidence that all direct, indirect, and induced or diffuse effects have been considered and addressed.

Note: Requirements will change through the project.

• Direct, indirect, and induced or diffuse eco-nomic, social, and cultural effects of project

• Changes in social behavior as a result of the project

Full social/cultural costs, benefits, and risks. All communities of interest have a reasonable degree of confidence that the full costs, benefits, and risks to people have been identified and factored into project or operation-related decision making (as it applies throughout the full project or operation life cycle).

• Satisfaction that all social/cultural costs, benefits, and risks found across the full life cycle from exploration through postclosure have been identified and addressed



However, the ecological system does not function in such a compartmentalized way, and those expert in ecology in general and ecological restoration in particular have offered alternative ways of addressing this challenge. Figure 16.2-10 offers such an approach, and Table 16.2-4 addresses the question—“Is the integrity of the environment assured over the long term?”—and provides both an ideal answer to this question as well as an example set of indicators that, if com-piled, would serve to facilitate an assessment of how com-patible a mining/metals operation would be with sustainable development An increasingly important emerging issue is understanding the full life-cycle environmental contribution of the metals. Much remains to be learned about the technique of life-cycle analysis.

Economic Viability: Project, Community, NationUnderstanding the economics of a project lies at the heart of successful mining from a management and investment per-spective. Two key factors govern project economic stability: (1) the licensing and fiscal regimes under which mining takes place—that they are efficient, noncorrupt, and result in secu-rity of tenure; and (2) an equitable sharing of costs, benefits, risks, and responsibilities between the host country and the investor.

For any project to be successful, the deposit, the com-pany, and industry must all be economically viable. The

typical economics of a mine is such that the first few years (generally, years 1 to 5) are usually very profitable, which is necessary to serve investors who require a return on invested capital. Middle years are moderately profitable (generally, years 6 to 15), and older mines are usually marginally viable. Company managers strategize from this perspective because it is their legal responsibility to protect the investors. If a large number of operating mines within their system are in the older phase, a company can be vulnerable. However, from the perspective of an employee or service provider, the mine is meaningful as long as it operates and provides employ-ment. And the concern from the local, regional, or national government is that the mine leads to a lasting contribution—however that is achieved. These different perspectives all fac-tor into the sustainable development equation.

However, they do not imply that a project/company should be assuming responsibility for the local, regional, or national economy. Rather, it is often possible that by working in col-laboration with in-country partners, benefits can be achieved for the host community, region, or country that involve little cost to the company but have significant benefits for the host. Further, if unintended economic consequences related to this broader perspective arise and are not recognized, they may result in a liability to the company over the long term that can have grave consequences, including the possibility of the national/local business environment deteriorating to the point

EnvironmentalImplicationsof Mining

Chemical Physical Biological

Stress RestorationStress RestorationStress Restoration

Closure of facilities to ensure human safety and ecosystem integrity including revegetation of disturbed areas

Restoration/improvement of wildlife habitat in adjacent areas

Enhancement of human–wildlife interaction

•

•

•Introduction of exotic species

Wildlife mortality: contaminant ingestion and/or roadkill

Alteration of habitat

Provision of access leading to increased harvesting

•

•

•

•Closure of facilities to ensure human safety and ecosystem integrity

Restoration of topography and landscapes

Increased stability of slopes and watercourses

Restoration of surface and groundwater flow systems

•

•

•

•Alteration of surface water or ground-water flow systems

Restructuring of land, alteration of topography and landscapes

Instability leading to failure (slope, dam, tunnel, stream crossing, foundation)

Noise generation•

•

•

•Closure of facilities to ensure human safety and ecosystem integrity

Cleanup of previously contaminated sites, natural or human-made

•

•Discharge of contaminants to surface water in operational effluent and runoff

Discharge of contaminants to groundwater in seepage

Discharge of contaminants to air in operational emissions and dust

Discharge of contaminants in accidental spills to waterways and land

Transfer of solid waste to landfills and hazardous waste to treatment or storage facilities

•

•

•

•

•

Figure 16.2-9 Chemical, physical, and biological implications of mining/metals operations


ClosurePlanning

Capabilities,Responsibilities,

and Sureties

Full EcosystemCosts, Benefits,

and Risks

EcologicalEntitlement

Ecosystem Function,Resilience, andSelf-Organizing

Capacity

EnvironmentalStress and Action

to Ensure EcosystemIntegrity

Environment

Courtesy of the International Institute for Sustainable Development.Figure 16.2-10 Elements for assessing the contribution of mining/metals operations to the environment over the long term

Table 16.2-4 Environment: Is the integrity of the environment assured over the long term?


Will the project or operation lead directly or indirectly to the maintenance or strengthening of the integrity of biophysical systems so that they can continue in postclosure to provide the needed support for the well-being of people and other life forms?

The project or operation will lead directly or indirectly to the maintenance or strengthening of the integrity of biophysical systems, as indicated by:

Input⇓

Output⇓

Result

Ecosystem function, resilience, and self-organizing capacity. All communities of interest hold a reasonable degree of confidence that ecosystem function, resilience, and self-organizing capacity will be maintained or improved over the long term.

• Baseline studies completed• Monitoring systems in place• Projected effects of project on indicator species

of aquatic and terrestrial flora and fauna (iden-tified through both scientific assessment and traditional ecological knowledge studies)

• Projected long-term well-being of water systems and renewable resources in the area of the mine/mineral project

• Tracking rapid geological change

Ecological entitlement. All communities of interest have a reasonable degree of confidence that the capacity of project-affected renewable and nonrenewable resources will be maintained or improved such that the needs of both present and future generations will be met.

• Degree of confidence

Full ecosystem costs, benefits, and risks. All communities of interest have a reasonable degree of confidence that the full costs, benefits, and risks to the ecosystem have been identified and factored into project/operation-related decision making (as it applies throughout the full project/operation life cycle).

• Full or total cost-accounting tools to assess the implications of the project

• Satisfaction that all social/cultural costs, ben-efits, and risks related to the full life cycle from exploration to postclosure have been identified and addressed

Capabilities, responsibilities, and sureties. All communities of interest have a reasonable degree of confidence that the responsibilities and sureties for ensuring both short- and long-term ecosystem well-being have been fully and fairly assigned and accepted and that those responsible have the capacity and willingness to fulfill their roles (including responsibilities attached to company, community, government, or NGO).

• Financial sureties and mechanisms to address potential present and future environmental liabilities and effort required to ensure the continuing integrity of biophysical systems

• Satisfaction that sureties and mechanisms will provide adequate bridging to postclosure state.

Closure planning. All communities of interest are satisfied that closure plans meeting best industry practice have been completed; mine design and implementation are driven by closure requirements to ensure that long-term financial, environmental, and social costs are minimized.

• Closure plans to best industry practice are in place and fully integrated into mine design and implementation

(continues)


where the company can no longer operate efficiently or, in the worst case, not at all. These are significant risks.

Figure 16.2-11 is a simple characterization of the eco-nomic aspects that require consideration. Table 16.2-5 responds to the question—“Is the economic viability of the project assured; will the community and broader economy be better off as a result?” It then offers an ideal answer to that question and a set of example indicators that can be compiled to assess how close a given operation is to the ideal condition.

Traditional and Nonmarket ActivitiesSince the 1980s, recognition has been growing of the signifi-cance of traditional and nonmarket activities—human activi-ties that are not part of the market economy and therefore not captured in the accounting systems that underlie our systems of taxation or the national accounts.

National accounts are used to track the flow of goods and services in the economy. Contributing data are organized in an indtustry classification system, which provides a use-ful indication of human activity. The compiled data are used to calculate such indicators as national income and gross domestic product or gross national product. However, many activities important from a sustainability perspective lie out-side the formal market economy. One way of getting a sense of these is to consider the vast array of organizations of civil society, those engaged in not-for-profit work. Table 16.2-6 is

a listing of the general categories of a classification of non-profit institutions, which was developed at Johns Hopkins University and subsequently adopted by the United Nations (2003).

Often, reacting to public criticism, mining companies focus on environmental or social advocacy groups. A more strategic approach would be to consider all aspects of civil society that are important in a given community, ensuring that the contribution of the mining/metals activity to nonmar-ket and traditional activities is as efficiently and effectively pursued as possible. Traditional culture-based activities of indigenous people lie within this aspect of the sustainability equation and are of particular importance to mining/metals operations in many parts of the world.

Figure 16.2-12 is a simple characterization of the tra-ditional and nonmarket aspects that require consideration. Table 16.2-7 responds to the question—“Are traditional and nonmarket activities in the community and surrounding area accounted for in a way that is acceptable to the local people?” It then offers an ideal answer to that question and a set of example indicators that can be compiled to assess how close a given operation is to the ideal condition.

Institutional Arrangements and GovernanceThis category addresses the effectiveness of the formal and informal rules that society creates to govern activities such

Table 16.2-4 Environment: Is the integrity of the environment assured over the long term? (continued)Question (Goal) Ideal Answer (Objectives) Example Indicators

Will the project or operation lead directly or indirectly to the maintenance or strengthening of the integrity of biophysical systems so that they can continue in postclosure to provide the needed support for the well-being of people and other life forms?

Environmental stress and action to ensure ecosystem integrity. Physical, chemical, and biological stress imposed on the ecosystem by the project or operation does not threaten the function, resilience, and self-organizing capacity of the biophysical system; and appropriate actions are taken to ensure the continuing integrity of biophysical systems.

• Material inputs/flows—water (surface, ground), energy (by form and source), reagents (e.g., cyanide), fuels, solvents, lubricants, other supplies

• Recycling – Material recovery, oil, solvents, lubricants, batteries, tires, etc.

– Waste – Hazardous and solid waste generated and discharged

• Water quality – Surface water: effluent chemistry, ambient water quality downstream, stream sediment storage and load

– Groundwater: contaminant plume, plume chemistry, ambient quality downstream

• Water quantity—maintenance of surface and groundwater supplies

• Acid rock drainage and metal leaching— tailings, waste rock, workings; short- and long-term treatment required

• Soils – Chemical, biological, and physical change – Erosion

• Rapid and long-term landscape change – Deep open pits, mountaintop removal – Landslides and avalanches

• Air quality – Emissions chemistry – Indoor air quality – Greenhouse gas emissions

• Noise, on- and off-site• Environmental incidents, on- and off-site• Reclamation and restoration, on- and off-site• Environmental effects monitoring system in

place



as mining/mineral projects and operations. This is a complex area that includes internal corporate management systems as well those found in broader society. Although some rules are written, others are unwritten and simply accepted as part of culture—internal corporate culture and culture of the host community and country.

Internal Management SystemsAdaptation of internal management systems to sustainabil-ity is well under way. A useful overview of many related issues is provided by Botvin 2009. An early foundation was provided by the work of the International Organization for

Standardization (ISO), which has developed widely accepted quality management systems (ISO 9001), environmental man-agement systems (ISO 14001), and risk management princi-ples and guidelines (ISO 31001).

Reporting and AssuranceSince the mid-1990s, there have been a number of significant developments regarding how a mining/metals company pub-licly reports its sustainability-related performance and how that reported progress is assured using independent third-party assurance. Three initiatives are particularly relevant to the mining industry:

Community/RegionalEconomics

EconomicContributions

OperationalEfficiencies

Project orOperationEconomics

Government andBroader Society

Economics

Economy

Courtesy of the International Institute for Sustainable Development.Figure 16.2-11 Elements for assessing the economic viability of mining/metals operations over the long term

Table 16.2-5 Economy: Is the economic viability of the project assured?


Is the financial health of the project/company assured and will the project or operation contribute (through planning, evaluations, decision making, and action) to the long-term viability of the local and regional economy in ways that will help ensure sufficiency for all and provide specific opportunities for the less advantaged?

The financial health of the project/company is assured and the project or operation will contribute (through planning, evaluations, decision making, and action) to the long-term viability of the local, regional, and global economy, as indicated by:

Input⇓

Output⇓

Result

Project or operation economics. Project or operation economic success targets are achieved.

• Demonstrated positive project economics as calcu-lated in the feasibility study; economic targets met as the project proceeds

Operational efficiencies • Mining efficiency• Processing efficiency• Refining efficiency

Economic contributions: annual/total Contributions• To the local economy• To the regional economy• To the national economy• To the global economy• Total

Community/regional economics. Community and adjacent regional economic success targets are met, including direct employment, indirect employment, and small and medium business development.

• Demonstrated positive project economics as calcu-lated in the feasibility study; economic targets met as project proceeds

• Distribution of economic benefits resulting from the project between the company, government, and local community, and within the local community between men and women and between the wealthy and the disadvantaged

Government/broader society economics. A net economic contribution to governments and broader society is achieved.

• Net financial gain for government as the project proceeds and meets economic targets, which contributes to economic growth and increased standards of living



1. Mining and Metals Sector Supplement (MMSS) of the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI)

2. ICMM Reporting and Assurance System3. Towards Sustainable Mining (TSM) system of the Mining

Association of Canada (MAC)

All of these initiatives recognize that for the industry to improve its reputation and credibility, improved performance linked to an alignment with public values is essential. From a company perspective, there is a close link to risk manage-ment. All three of these initiatives are cognizant of the need to synchronize.

GRI MMSS. The GRI is a network-based organization that over the past decade has pioneered the development of the world’s most widely used sustainability reporting framework. The GRI framework sets out principles and indicators that organizations can use to measure and report their economic, environmental, and social performances. At its heart sits the generic 2006 G3 Guidelines that refer to all applications. In addition, sector supplements and national annexes are being developed over time. As of 2010, 15 sector supplements have been developed, one of which is focused on mining.

Following 6 years of intense multistakeholder develop-ment, the GRI MMSS was released in March 2010 (ICMM 2010c). MMSS addresses the following nine main sector topics:

1. Biodiversity2. Emissions, effluents, and waste3. Labor4. Indigenous rights5. Community6. Artisanal and small-scale mining7. Resettlement8. Closure planning9. Materials stewardship

ICMM’s reporting and assurance system. ICMM’s system serves as a means to demonstrate that members have delivered on the commitments contained in the 10 ICMM principles and the related position statements (Figure 16.2-1). Members must meet GRI reporting requirements, and inde-pendent third-party assurance is required on an overall com-pany system basis.

MAC’s TSM initiative. MAC describes TSM as “a strat-egy for improving the mining industry’s performance by align-ing its actions with the priorities and values of Canadians; and

a process for finding common ground with our communities of interest, to build a better mining industry today and in the future” (MAC 2010). TSM focuses on company management systems and provides a means of evaluating their quality, comprehensiveness, and robustness. As of 2010, four per-formance elements were finalized: (1) tailings management, (2) energy use and greenhouse gas emission management, (3) external outreach, and (4) crisis management planning. In addition, work on aboriginal relations, biodiversity conserva-tion, safety and health, and mine closure is in varying states of implementation.

Nation-Based Mining LawIn all cases, host countries own the natural resources. Thus complex systems of laws and regulations are put in place to guide exploration, production, closure, use, reuse and recy-cling. Every company is responsible for developing an under-standing of the particular regulatory regime that is in place where it is active.

Important International AgreementsA large number of international agreements have significant implications for the mining, minerals, and metals industry. These range from the transport of hazardous materials to human rights and chemicals management. Here, too, it is the responsibility of companies to understand this complex part of the operating environment.

Activity/UseLevels

TraditionalCultural

Attributes

Traditionaland Nonmarket

Activities

Courtesy of the International Institute for Sustainable Development.Figure 16.2-12 Elements for considering implications of mining/ metals operation on traditional and nonmarket activity

Table 16.2-6 United Nations classification of nonprofit institutions

Group Subgroups

1. Culture and Recreation Culture and Arts, Sports, Other 2. Education and Research Primary and Secondary, Higher, Other, Research 3. Health Hospitals and Rehabilitation Nursing Homes, Mental Health and Crisis Intervention, Other 4. Social Services Social Services, Emergency Relief, Income Support and Maintenance 5. Environment Environment, Animal Protection 6. Development and Housing Economic, Social and Community Development, Housing, Employment and Training 7. Law, Advocacy, and Politics Civic and Advocacy Organizations, Law and Legal Services, Political Organizations 8. Philanthropic Intermediaries and Volunteerism Promotion Grant-Making Foundations, Other 9. International International Activities10. Religion Religious Congregations and Associations11. Business and Professional Associations, Unions Business Associations, Professional Associations, Unions12. Not elsewhere classified Not elsewhere classified

Source: United Nations 2003.


Assessing the Effectiveness of Institutional Arrangements and GovernanceElements that could contribute to an assessment of the effective-ness of institutional arrangements and governance are shown in Figure 16.2-13 and are described in greater detail in Table 16.2-8.

Synthesis and Continuous LearningMany companies employ an internal system of planning, deci-sion making, implementation, performance assessment, and adjustment as a matter of course. This element of the 7QS framework calls for the same kind of approach to be taken but using the lens of sustainability as the driver. Example elements that could contribute to an assessment of the effectiveness of an overall integrated evaluation and capacity for continuous learning and improvement are summarized in Figure 16.2-14 and described in greater detail in Table 16.2-9.

PERSPECTIVES BY PROJECT LIFE-CYCLE PHASESApplication of sustainability concepts to the mining, minerals, and metals industry requires attention paid to the full project and mineral life cycles (see earlier discussion in the “Boundary Conditions for Applying Sustainability Ideas to Mining” sec-tion). A cursory summary of phase-by-phase observations fol-lows. (This discussion is modified from MMSD 2002.)

ExplorationExploration is the starting point of the entire mineral project life cycle. However, only 1 out of 1,000 exploration projects ever evolves to the next level of activity (often more explora-tion). Explorationists generally have the objective of getting into and out of areas quickly and moving on to the next evalu-ation. Exploration is highly competitive and therefore secre-tive by design. Without positive relationships with the local community, serious tensions can occur. For their part, local residents want to know what is happening and how their lives might be affected. Left to ferment, anger and/or unintended expectations can grow—either of which can subsequently cause difficulty. Although the extent of the human and envi-ronmental implications is less than in later phases of activity, they can be profound. Oftentimes concerns center on access routes, which can open up large areas of untouched territory.

Exploration is the first time that the desirability or appro-priateness of mining in a particular area is considered. Because

exploration sets the stage for all that follows, the nature of the relationship established between the exploration team and affected communities of interest sets the tone going forward. Only in the last few years have models for appropriate engage-ment during exploration begun to emerge (e.g., see Thomson and Joyce 2006 and 2008).

The leading node of guidance on exploration and sus-tainability comes from the Prospectors and Developers Association of Canada (PDAC) and its e3 Plus Framework for Responsible Exploration (PDAC 2010). The program is aimed at helping exploration companies continuously improve their social, environmental, and health and safety performances and to comprehensively integrate these three aspects into all their exploration programs. It includes a set of overarching princi-ples and explanatory guidance notes; and three comprehensive tool kits addressing social responsibility, environmental stew-ardship, and health and safety. For their part, the principles deal with

• Responsible governance and management,• Ethical business practices,• Human rights,• Project due diligence and risk assessment,• Engagement with host communities and other affected

and interested parties,• Contributing to community development and social

well-being• Protecting the environment, and• Safeguarding the health and safety of workers and the

local population.

The e3 Plus program is currently examining options for reporting and assurance that will echo those described. A significant driver is the demand by senior firms that the con-ditions they might inherit through acquisition of advanced exploration projects take into consideration the full range of sustainability components, in particular the need for effective engagement with host communities.

Design and ConstructionRelative to other phases of activity, the design and construc-tion phase is short. However, this intense pulse of activities and related social and environmental implications can be destructive if not carefully managed. This phase of activity

Table 16.2-7 Traditional and nonmarket activities: Are traditional and nonmarket activities accounted for in a way that is acceptable to the local people?


Will the project/operation contribute to the long-term viability of traditional and nonmarket activities in the implicated community and region?

The project/operation will contribute to the long-term viability of traditional and nonmarket activities in the implicated community and region, as indicated by:

Input⇓

Output⇓

Result

Activity/use levels. Maintenance of activity/use levels is designated by the community in question.

• Baseline study of traditional and nonmarket activities completed

• Dependency levels on traditional and nonmarket activities

Traditional cultural attributes. Maintenance of traditional cultural attributes is designated by the community in question.

• Use of indigenous language• See also Table 16.2-3



also marks the time that formal approvals are sought and received. During approvals processes, key opportunities exist for engagement with communities of interest (see pre-vious discussion of effective engagement in the “Effective Engagement” section).

The influx of outsiders seeking employment and new opportunities can create significant changes within the community—often for the worse—and preparation and imple-mentation of a project-induced migration management plan that is acceptable to the established community population can help manage the impacts. Many of the activities are under-taken by subcontractors who may or may not follow the same

practices as the project owner or manager. Effective systems (policy, management, oversight, incentives) for ensuring good practices are essential.

OperationThe operation phase typically receives the greatest amount of attention. When the general public conjures an image of a mining/mineral project or operation, it is the operation phase that is imagined, whether the activity be mining, smelting, refining, metals manufacturing, or recycling. Economic, social, cultural, and environmental implications are relatively well understood, although their treatment is uneven in practice.

Table 16.2-8 Institutional arrangements and governance: Are capacities in place to address project or operational consequences?


Are the institutional arrangements and systems of governance in place to provide a reasonable degree of confidence that the capacity to address project or operation consequences will continue to exist through the full life cycle, including postclosure?

Satisfactory institutional arrangements and governance mechanisms are in place, as indicated by: Input

⇓Output

⇓Result

Mix of rules, market incentives, voluntary programs, and cultural norms. An effective mix of legislated rules, market incentives, voluntary programs, and cultural norms is in place for governing project activities.

• Satisfaction with mix from the perspective of the various communities of interest, including company, community, indigenous peoples, NGOs, government

Capacity. A reasonable degree of confidence is held by all communities of interest that the capacity to address project or operation consequences is in place now and will continue to exist throughout the full project/operation life cycle, including postclosure.

• Capacity of community support infrastructure to meet the needs of residents and workers of the region

• Monitoring and enforcement programs in place with adequate resources committed for the full project life cycle

Bridging. A reasonable degree of confidence is held by all communities of interest that sufficient local capacity and commitment will be developed and an adequate level of resources will be accumulated and set aside throughout the life of the project/operation to ensure a smooth transition to an acceptable postclosure condition (ecological, social, cultural, economic) for the community that remains.

• Existence of community-based nonmining economic and social development initiatives

Confidence that commitments made will be fulfilled. A reasonable degree of confidence is held by all communities of interest that commitments that have been made will be fulfilled.

• System of publicly reported reporting and assurance in place

• Level of funding to cover rehabilitation/recla-mation costs during operations and at closure


Bridging toPostclosure Conditions

Capacity to AddressOperational Consequences

Efficiency and Effectivenessof the Mix of Legislated

Rules, Voluntary Programs, Market Incentives, and

Unspoken Cultural Norms

Overall Confidence ThatCommitments Made Will

Be Fulfilled

Institutional Arrangementsand Governance

Courtesy of the International Institute for Sustainable Development.Figure 16.2-13 Example elements for assessing the effectiveness of institutional arrangements and governance


Closure: Temporary, Final, PostTemporary closure (due to changing metal prices, accident, disaster, or labor strife) rarely receives the pre-event planning and consideration that it should. Though often a temporary closure can run a few short days or weeks, sometimes so-called temporary closures can stretch into many years’ duration.

While concepts of design-for-closure date from the 1970s (J. Gadsby, personal communication), concepts of sustain-ability now demand design-for-postclosure. Huge benefits can be realized by ensuring that closure and postclosure activi-ties are conceived of and implementation is begun during the design and construction and operational phases of activity.

Today, design-for-closure includes (1) physical environmen-tal aspects, (2) social and community sustainability aspects, and, importantly, (3) financial assurance that resources will be available for needed closure and postclosure activities.

Design-for-postclosure involves a significant increase in the time horizon governing project design criteria, whether the focus be social or environmental in nature. Furthermore, suc-cessful design-for-postclosure identifies a need for involve-ment of those affected by postclosure conditions from the earliest phases of any project. Fortunately, in the case of clo-sure and postclosure, research and experience have produced a number of successful models. One thing emerges from all

Overall SynthesisStretegic-LevelAlternatives

Project-LevelAlternatives

Continuous Learningand Improvement

Overall IntegratedAssessment and

Continuous Learning

Courtesy of the International Institute for Sustainable Development.Figure 16.2-14 Synthesis and continuous learning—elements to consider

Table 16.2-9 Synthesis and continuous learning: Does synthesis show that the net result will be positive or negative?


Has an overall evaluation been made and is a system in place for periodic revaluation based on

• At the project level, consideration of all reasonable alternative configurations and designs (including the no-go option in the initial evaluation);

• At the overarching strategic level, con-sideration of all reasonable alternatives for supplying the commodity and the services it provides for meeting society’s needs; and

• A synthesis of all the factors raised in this list of questions, leading to an overall judgment that the contribution to people and ecosystems will be net positive in the long term?

An overall evaluation been made and a system is in place for periodic revaluation based on consideration of

• At the project level, consideration of all reasonable alternative configurations including the no-go option;

• At the overarching strategic level, consideration of all reasonable alternatives for supplying the commodity and the services it provides for meeting society’s needs; and

• Synthesis of all the factors raised in this list of questions, leading to an overall judgment that the contribution to people and ecosystems will be net positive in the long term;

As indicated by:

Input⇓

Output⇓

Result

Project-level alternatives. All reasonable project alternatives have been considered.

• All key alternatives considered, for example: – Access – Transportation – Energy supply – Water supply – Local infrastructure – Tailings and effluent management – Mineral processing options

Strategic-level alternatives • Strategic level review that confirms project need

Overall synthesis. A synthesis has been completed, and the system is in place to for periodic reassessment.

• Synthesis undertaken

Continuous learning and improvement. A commitment to continuous learning and improvement is held by all interests, including company, community, government, and others.

• Mechanism(s) and resources in place to periodically repeat the overall sustainability assessment and report the results publicly



of them: succeeding custodians, the people who will remain nearby long after mining operations cease, need to be at the table. It is only with their presence that their values can be factored into project implementation and the bridging role of a mine/mineral project or operation can be realized.

One delicate issue that the industry is now examining, which emerges because of the longer time horizons now being considered combined with the societal demand for greater transparency, is the whole question of estimating long-term closure liability and related financial assurance.

CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITYApplication of sustainability concepts to the mining, miner-als and metals industry evokes yet another perspective that is growing in importance—the issue of corporate social respon-sibility (CSR). Establishing the nature and extent of a com-pany’s social responsibility is of deep importance in today’s world. CSR provides a critical and natural overarching sup-plement to sustainable development and sustainability ideas and provides another direct connection to values through the addition of an ethical lens. At the same time, contemporary ideas of applied sustainability provide a foundation for CSR; they are closely linked but not the same.

Values are “something which is prized as of great worth and desirability: that which is respected and which motivates action...concepts which motivate actors in a general way to more specific goals” (Chadwick 1978). The described treat-(Chadwick 1978). The described treat-ment of applied sustainability starts with a values-based proposition, one that says that we care for both people and the environment. In contrast, ethics is the science of right or wrong. It provides rules of behavior that signal what is con-sidered decent and honest as opposed to misleading, dishon-est, or unscrupulous.

Values and ethics combine to establish the boundaries of appropriate CSR. Over the last decade, there has been growing emphasis on CSR. The events in the financial services industry that sparked the 2008 recession have added fuel to the debate. Carroll (1991) offers an interesting and helpful pyramid of corporate responsibility and performance (Figure 16.2-15)

and serves to illustrate a kind of hierarchy that applies to cor-porate responsibility.

Revenue Transparency and the Extractive Industries Transparency InitiativeOne dimension of CSR that has been in the limelight has been the question of the revenues that flow from an active operation to the government. Concerns that these revenues were being intercepted for personal gain led to the creation of the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI). Launched at the World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg, South Africa, in September 2002, EITI has grown to become a broad coalition of governments, major organizations of civil society, institutional investors, interna-tional organizations, international financial institutions, and companies (oil and gas, mining). EITI is active in 47 countries in which mining plays a significant role in the economy.

EITI represents a global standard for (1) extractive companies to publish the revenues they pay to governments in implementing countries (taxes, royalties, licenses, fees); (2) national governments to disclose what they receive; and (3) the payments and receipts to be reconciled in a third-party assured process. Each national application is overseen by an in-country tripartite multistakeholder committee consisting of representatives of industry, government, and civil society.

Bridging Issue of Human RightsRespecting human rights is clearly part of corporate respon-sibility. For the 19 corporate members of ICMM and the 30 affiliated mining associations that, in turn, link to another 1,500 companies, respect for human rights is a key aspect of sustainable development.

In 2005, the UN secretary-general appointed John Ruggie, Berthold Beitz professor in human rights and inter-national affairs at the Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, as his special representative on busi-ness and human rights. Five thousand companies are now engaged worldwide in this initiative (Business and Human Rights Resource Centre n.d.). Ruggie played a central role

Economic Responsibility

Legal Responsibility

Ethical Responsibility

Philanthropic Responsibility

Growing expectation that corporations willdemonstrate good citizenship; is veryculture specific

Foundation of business; acceptable rate ofreturn or growth rate may vary

Social contract varies by country but legalresponsibility always exists

Governs reputation that is critical to the sociallicense to operate; is very culture specific; includeshost country and more fundamental aspects

Do what is desired by the community

Do what is required by the economic system

Do what is required by the community

Do what is expected by the community

Be a goodcorporate citizen

Be profitable

Obey the law

Be ethical

Source: Carroll 1991.Figure 16.2-15 Carroll’s pyramid of corporate responsibility and performance


in preparing the UN Millennium Summit in 2000, including drafting the summit’s final “Declaration,” which adopted the Millennium Development Goals that have brought renewed energy and focus to the fight against global poverty. In 2008, Ruggie produced the now well-accepted “Protect, Respect, and Remedy” framework for corporate responsibility, which outlined in clear terms the distinctive but complementary roles of government and corporations regarding human rights: While governments have the primary responsibility for the protection of human rights, companies have a responsibil-ity for respecting them. The reporting and assurance systems described previously include treatment of company respect for human rights.

Toward an Ethical Lens for MiningIt is inevitable that the material described in this chapter, taken together, signals that the world is moving toward developing a kind of ethical lens for assessing the mining, minerals, and metals industry. During the period 2002–2005, a Canadian ini-tiative undertook a comprehensive review of alternatives for managing used nuclear fuel over the long term. Figure 16.2-16 shows the results of an extensive discussion with Canadians about the values (Watling et al. 2004), ethical principles (NWMO 2005), and related objectives that were used to assess options for long-term management of used nuclear fuel (NWMO 2004). Together they serve as an innovative ethical lens that is as applicable to mining in general as it is to the management of nuclear waste.

LOOKING FORWARDOngoing IssuesA number of issues remain to be fully addressed (modified from MMSD North America 2002 and Hodge 2004):

• Fair distribution: Detailed site-specific procedures for describing and addressing the distribution of costs,

benefits, risks, and responsibilities among governments, men and women, rich and poor, and present and future generations.

• Decision making, trade-offs: Designing and implement-ing optimum decision making systems and approaches that effectively and fairly address trade-offs in any given site application.

• Need and alternatives: Effectively and fairly assessing the need for a given project and/or commodity in light of considerations and alternatives that span local to global implications.

• Achieving a whole system perspective: Seeing, under-standing, and factoring in a sense of the whole system, not just the small component parts.

• Uncertainty, precaution, and adaptive management: Dealing with uncertainty using an appropriate level of precaution and an adaptive management approach.

• Attribution problem and dealing with cumulative impacts: Effectively addressing the common situation where a project is one of a number of contributors to social, cultural, economic, and environmental change or stress—establishing the cumulative implications, appor-tioning responsibility, and deciding who should take responsibility for the analysis.

These issues are not new. Together, they are a testament to some of the complexities that must be faced in bringing the ideas of sustainability from theory to practice. In addition to the previous list, the following practical issues remain to be resolved to improve the contribution of the mining industry to sustainability:

• Capacity building: Creating the necessary national and local governance systems that can facilitate effective and principled engagement among industry, government, and civil society.

• Voluntary codes of conduct: Increasing participation in and enhancement of values-based, principled codes of conduct that lift broad industry performance above legis-lated minimums.

• Climate change: Establishing how the mining industry can most effectively contribute to addressing the issue of global warming.

• Artisanal and small-scale mining: Establishing how such mining can be best managed in various countries and within the context of sustainable development, tak-ing into account environmental and social implications as well as links to large-scale mining (for a comprehensive treatment of these issues, see CASM n.d.).

• Consistent application of performance standards: Achieving consistency in the application of sustainable development ideas within countries, between countries, and across the industry from juniors to majors.

• Effective human resource management: Effectively creating the foundation of education, training, and sup-port that is required to ensure the needed flow of skilled personnel (see Freemen and Miller 2009).

All the issues listed are critical to effective application of sustainable development concepts to the mining and metals industry.

New PerspectivesIn current public debate, many challenge the consumptive nature of modern society. Professor Saleem Ali has offered an

Safety from HarmResponsibilityAdaptability

Accountability and TransparencyInclusion

StewardshipKnowledge

Citizen Values

Sensitivity to Value DifferencesRespect for Future GenerationsRespect for People and Cultures

Respect for LifeJustice

Fairness

Ehtical Principles

FairnessPublic Health and Safety

Worker Health and SafetyCommunity Well-Being

SecurityEnvironmental Integrity

Economic ViabilityAdaptability

Objectives

Source: Data from Joanna Facella, Nuclear Waste Management Organiza-tion, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.Figure 16.2-16 Toward an ethical lens for mining


alternative perspective on this divisive topic that has signifi-cant implications for the mining, minerals, and metals industry (Ali 2009). He argues that simply disavowing consumption of materials is not likely to help in planning for a resource-scarce future, given the extent of inequity in today’s world, devel-opment imperatives, and our goals for a democratic global society. Rather than suppress the creativity and desire to dis-cover—which he calls “the treasure impulse”—Ali proposes a new environmental paradigm, one that accepts our need to consume “treasure” for cultural and developmental reasons but warns of our concomitant need to conserve.

In evaluating the impact of treasure consumption on resource-rich countries, he argues that a way exists to consume responsibly and alleviate global poverty. Ali’s thesis brings a much needed additional perspective relevant to applying sus-tainability ideas to the mining industry.

Change and Change ManagementThe role of metals and minerals in providing for both human and ecosystem well-being is critical, and the mining and met-als industry enjoys a deep and rich heritage. However, this same heritage brings with it an innate resistance to change that can impede needed change. There are many contributing factors to this resistance, including

• Tradition: “We’ve always done it this way and it has worked, why change now?” or “If it’s not broken, why fix it?”;

• A number of economic factors that tend to favor risk-averse behaviors, including the volatility and uncertainty inher-ent in commodities markets, the scale and complexity of operations, the highly competitive nature of the business, and the resulting thin margins (Peterson et al. 2001); and

• A range of factors that can come into play at a personal level and apply not only in mining but in any industry. Examples include uncertainty, lack of training, lack of understanding about how change might affect a given job or activity, loss of job status, loss of security, and timing (summarized from Stanislao and Stanislao 1983).

To overcome this resistance requires well-thought-out and appropriate change strategies. Sometimes this calls for a cata-lytic role, sometimes a role in bringing people together, some-times the provision of resources, and sometimes the design of a new and innovative solution. The key is to be strategic.

Since the 1980s, a number of factors have emerged to provide a vital and exciting climate of change in the mining industry. These factors include

• Increased public scrutiny of mining activities and the rise in the activity level, sophistication, and significance of civil society organizations;

• Public recognition of the significance of environmental and social risks and liabilities associated with mining practices and, in both regulatory and financial services industry practices, a shift that clearly assigns those liabil-ities to project owners and proponents;

• Changing practices in the financial services industry that are increasingly linking access to capital to a demonstra-tion of corporate responsibility using sustainability crite-ria in the assessment process—a factor much reinforced by the 2008–2009 financial crisis;

• Consolidation among both operating firms and technol-ogy suppliers in response to commodity-price pressures and the desire to achieve economies of scale;

• Globalization of mining activities and the increased role of developing regions in mineral production and of min-ing in the developing countries’ economies;

• Conflict in weak governance zones;• Increasing worldwide consumption of key mined com-

modities with increasing demand in emerging economies;• Increased dependence on metals to support a shift to a

green economy; and• Growing formal recognition that no one party can do it

alone.

These drivers of change are not going to disappear; if anything, their significance will increase. The result is that the mining industry is embracing change in an unprecedented manner, and the concepts that have emerged to guide that change in a strategic and systematic way are those of sustain-ability and sustainable development.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTSThis chapter greatly benefited from reviews by Laeeque Daneshmend, head of the Department of Mining Engineering, Queen’s University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada; Dirk van Zyl, professor of mining, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada; Leigh Freeman, principal, Downing Teal, Denver, Colorado, United States; and John Strongman and col-leagues in the Mining Group at the World Bank, Washington, D.C., United States. Peter Darling provided ongoing useful guidance throughout. Gemma Lee proofread and caught the many inevitable small mistakes. All of these inputs are greatly appreciated. However, while the comments received added much richness, responsibility for the substance as it stands and, in particular, any remaining errors rest with the author.

REFERENCESAli, S. 2009. Treasures of the Earth Need, Greed, and a

Sustainable Future. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Auty, R.M. 1993. Sustaining Development in Mineral Economies: The Resource Curse Thesis. London: Routledge.

Botvin, J.A., ed. 2009. Sustainable Management of Mining Operations. Littleton, CO: SME.

Business and Human Rights Resource Centre. n.d. www .business-humanrights.org. Accessed July 2010.

Carroll, A.B. 1991. The pyramid of corporate social respon-sibility: Toward the moral management of organizational stakeholders. Bus. Horiz. 34(4):39–48.

CASM (Communities and Small Scale Mining). n.d. Web site hosted by the World Bank at www.artisanalmining.org/index.cfm. Accessed July 2010.

Chadwick, G. 1978. A Systems View of Planning—Towards a Theory of the Urban and Regional Planning Process, 2nd ed. Vol. 1, Urban and Regional Planning Series. Oxford, England: Pergamon Press. p. 125.

Corporate Responsibility. 2010. Corporate Responsibility magazine releases 11th annual 100 best corpo-rate citizens list. www.docstoc.com/docs/27223712/Corporate-Responsibility-Magazine-Releases-11th -Annual-100-Best-Corporate-Citizens-List. Accessed July 2010.


Crowson, P. 2009. The resource curse: A modern myth? In Mining, Society and a Sustainable World. Edited by J.P. Richards. Berlin: Springer. pp. 3–36.

Davis, G.A. 2009. Extractive economies, growth and the poor. In Mining, Society and a Sustainable World. Edited by J.P. Richards. Berlin: Springer. pp. 37–60.

Eftimie, A., Heller, C., and Strongman, J. 2009a. Gender Dimensions of the Extractive Industries. Washington, DC: World Bank.

Eftimie, A., Heller, C., and Strongman, J. 2009b. Mainstreaming Gender into Extractive Industries Projects. Washington, DC: World Bank.

Firey, W. 1960. Man, Mind and Land—A Theory of Resource Use. Glencoe, IL: Free Press. p. 20.

Freeman, L.W., and Miller, H.B. 2009. Human resource management. In Sustainable Management of Mining Operations. Littleton, CO: SME. pp. 133–176.

Freeze, R.A. 1987. Technical Analysis and Social Decision-Making: The 1987 Hagey Lecture. Waterloo, ON: University of Waterloo Press. p. 34.

Gibson, G., and O’Faircheallaigh, C. 2010. IBA Community Toolkit—Negotiation and Implementation of Impact and Benefit Agreements. www.ibacommunitytoolkit.ca/pdf/IBA_toolkit_March_2010_high_resolution.pdf. Accessed July 2010.

Gibson, R.B. 2000. Favouring the higher test: Contribution to sustainability as the central criterion for reviews and decisions under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act. J. Environ. Law Pract. 10(1):39–54.

Hodge, R.A. 1995. Assessing progress toward sustainability: Development of a systemic framework and reporting structure. Ph.D. dissertation, School of Urban Planning, Faculty of Engineering, McGill University, Montreal, QC.

Hodge, R.A. 1996. A systemic approach to assessing prog-ress toward sustainability. In Achieving Sustainable Development. Edited by A. Dale and J.B. Robinson. Vancouver, BC: University of British Columbia Press.

Hodge, R.A. 1997. Toward a conceptual framework for assess-ing progress toward sustainability. In Social Indicators Research, Vol. 40. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Press. pp. 5–98.

Hodge, R.A. 2004. Mining’s seven questions to sustainabil-ity: From mitigating impacts to encouraging contribution. Episodes 27(3):177–185.

Hodge, R.A. 2006. Mining, minerals and sustainability. In Linking Industry and Ecology—A Question of Design. Edited by R. Cote, J. Tansey, and A. Dale. Vancouver, BC: University of British Columbia Press. pp. 151–175.

Hodge, R.A. 2007. Tracking progress toward sustainability: Linking the power of measurement and story. In Mining Engineering. Littleton, CO: SME.

Hodge, R.A., and Merkhofer, M.W. 2008. Faro Mine Closure, Assessing the Alternatives: An Application of Multi-Attribute Utility Analysis. Final Report of the Faro Closure Assessment Team. Whitehorse, YT: Assessment and Abandoned Mines Branch, Department of Energy Mines and Resources, Government of Yukon.

ICMM (International Council on Mining and Metals). 2010a. Making a Difference: Annual Review of the International Council on Mining and Metals. London: ICMM.

ICMM (International Council on Mining and Metals). 2010b. Good Practice Guide: Indigenous People and Mining. London: ICMM.

ICMM (International Council on Mining and Metals). 2010c. Sustainability Reporting Guidelines and Mining and Metals Sector Supplement. London: ICMM.

IFC (International Finance Corporation). 2006. IFC Sustain-ability Framework: Policy on Social and Environmental Sustainability, Policy on Disclosure, and Performance Standards on Social and Environmental Sustainability. www.ifc.org/ifcext/sustainability.nsf/AttachmentsByTitle/pol _SocEnvSustainability2006/$FILE/SustainabilityPolicy .pdf. Accessed July 2010.

IISD (International Institute for Sustainable Development). n.d. Sustainable development principles. www.iisd.org/sd/principle.aspx. Accessed October 2010.

ISO 9001. 2008. Quality Management Systems. Available from www.iso.org/iso/iso_catalogue/catalogue_tc/catalogue _detail.htm?csnumber=46486.

ISO 14001. 2004/2009. Environmental Management Systems. Available from www.iso.org/iso/iso_catalogue/ catalogue_ics/catalogue_detail_ics.htm?ics1=13&ics2= 20&ics3=10&csnumber=54536.

ISO 31001. 2009. Risk Management. Available from www .iso.org/iso/iso_catalogue/catalogue_tc/catalogue_detail .htm?csnumber=43170.

MAC (Mining Association of Canada). 2010. Towards Sustainable Mining 101: A Primer. www.mining.ca/www/media_lib/TSM_101/MAC_TSM_101_Primer _February_2010_FINAL.pdf. Accessed July 2010.

McPhail, K. 2008. Sustainable development in the mining and metals sector: The case for partnership at local, national and global levels. Essay prepared for the ICMM, London.

Mitchell, B. 1991. “Beating” conflict and uncertainty in resource management and development. In Resource Management and Development. Edited by B. Mitchell. Toronto, ON: Oxford University Press. pp. 268–285.

MMSD (Mining Minerals and Sustainable Development). 2002. Breaking New Ground: Mining, Minerals and Sustainable Development. London: International Institute for Environment and Development.

MMSD North America. 2002. Seven Questions to Sustainability—Assessing How a Mine/Mineral Project or Operation Contributes to Sustainability. Winnipeg, MB: International Institute for Sustainable Development.

Newmont Gold Corporation. 2009. Community Relationships Review. www.beyondthemine.com/2008/?pid=470. Accessed July 2010.

NWMO (Nuclear Waste Management Organization). 2004. Assessing the Options—Future Management of Used Nuclear Fuel in Canada. NWMO Assessment Team Report. www.nwmo.ca/uploads_managed/MediaFiles/1092_9-1assessingtheoptions_nwmoass .pdf. Accessed July 2010.

NWMO (Nuclear Waste Management Organization). 2005. Ethical and Social Framework. Roundtable on Ethics, Nuclear Waste Management Organization. www.nwmo.ca/ethicalandsocialframework. Accessed July 2010.

PDAC (Prospectors and Developers Association of Canada). 2010. e3 Plus, a framework for responsible exploration. www.pdac.ca/e3plus/index.aspx. Accessed July 2010.

Peterson, D.J., LaTourrettte, T., and Bartis, J.T. 2001. New Forces at Work in Mining—Industry Views of Critical Technology. Santa Monica, CA; Arlington, VA: RAND Science and Technology Policy Institute. p. 11.


Render, J.M. 2006. Mining and Indigenous Peoples’ Issue Review. London: International Council on Mining and Metals.

Robinson, J.G., Francis, G., Legge, R., and Lerner, S. 1990. Defining a sustainable society: values, principles, and definitions. Alternatives 17(2):36–46.

Sachs, J.D., and Warner, A.M. 1995. Natural resource abun-dance and economic growth. Working paper, Cambridge, MA: Center for International Development and Harvard Institute for International Development Harvard University.

Salim, E. 2003. Striking a Better Balance—The Final Report of the Extractive Industries Review. Washington, DC: Extractive Industries Review. www.eireview.org. Accessed July 2010.

SD Gateway. n.d. Introduction to sustainable development: Definitions. http://sdgateway.net/introsd/definitions.htm. Accessed July 2010.

Stanislao, J., and Stanislao, B.C. 1983. Dealing with resis-tance to change. Bus. Horiz. July-August.

Thomson, I., and Joyce, S.A. 2000. Changing expectations: Future social and economic realities for mineral explora-tion. In Proceedings: Mining Millennium 2000. Toronto, ON: Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum; Montreal, QC: Prospectors and Developers Association of Canada.

Thomson, I., and Joyce, S.A. 2006. Changing mineral explo-ration industry approaches to sustainability. In Wealth Creation in the Minerals Industry: Integrating Science, Business and Education. Edited by M.E. Doggett and J.R. Parry. Special Publication No. 12. Littleton, CO: Society of Economic Geologists.

Thomson, I., and Joyce, S.A. 2008. The social licence to operate: What it is and why it seems so hard to obtain. In Proceedings, PDAC Convention. Toronto, ON: Prospectors and Developers Association of Canada.

United Nations. 2003. Handbook on Non-profit Institutions in the System of National Accounts. www.jhu.edu/~ccss/publications/pdf/icnpo.pdf. Accessed July 2010.

United Nations Global Compact. n.d. Corporate Citizenship in the World Economy. www.unglobalcompact.org/docs/news_events/8.1/GC_brochure_FINAL.pdf. Accessed July 2010.

Watling, J., Maxwell, J., Saxena, N., and Taschereau, S. 2004. Responsible Action—Citizens’ Dialogue on the Long-Term Management of Used Nuclear Fuel. Toronto, ON: Nuclear Waste Management Organization. www .nwmo.ca/uploads_managed/MediaFiles/877_13-1 ResponsibleAction-Cit izensDialogueontheLong -termManagementofUsedNuclearFuel.pdf. Accessed July 2010.

WCED (UN World Commission on Environment and Development). 1987. Our Common Future—Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development. London: Oxford University Press. p. 8.

Whitehorse Mining Initiative Leadership Council Accord. 1993. www.nrcan-rncan.gc.ca/mms-smm/poli-poli/gov-gov/wmi-imw-eng.htm. Accessed July 2010.