Publication Name

MINING FOR CLOSURE

VII

rationale for the

mining for closure

report

In 1999, a representative of the European Bank for

Reconstruction and Development (Nazari) wrote

the following:

The mining sector is a very important contribu-

tor to local and national economies, including in

central and eastern Europe (CEE) and the former

Soviet Union (FSU). However, in parts of CEE

and the FSU, the mining sector has often been

characterised by inappropriate planning, opera-

tional and post-operational practices, including

a lack of an adequate regulatory framework and

inadequate implementation of mine rehabilita-

tion and closure activities. In some of the regions

associated with significant mining activities, this

has resulted and continues to result in significant

adverse environmental and health and safety im-

pacts and related liabilities. As a result, donors

and international organisations and agencies are

frequently requested to provide financial assistance

to alleviate the most heavily impacted areas.

A programme to develop a policy and regulatory

framework for financial provisioning related to

mine rehabilitation and closure should be initi-

ated. This programme would be able to assist par-

ticipating countries in developing the required pol-

icy and regulatory framework to further promote

and implement long term environmentally sound

and sustainable development in the mining sector.

The programme would also contribute to reducing

the uncertainties associated with post-operational

practices, and potentially related adverse environ-

mental impacts and costs. It would also facilitate

the introduction of a standardised approach to

this issue, establishing a ‘level playing field with

fixed goal posts’ for regulators, investors, mining

companies, and operators ...

Despite efforts, the progress of work tomeet such calls

has not been rapid. There remains much to be done.

Indeed, it is perceived by,

inter alia

, the ENVSEC Ini-

tiative partners (OSCE, UNDP, UNEP, in association

with NATO) that the efforts by international bodies to

address this issue and provide guidance to national

and international institutions in their role as stake-

holders in mining activities remain insufficient. This

important deficiency in international action has seri-

ous implications for the SEE/TRB region.

general background

Increasing expectations for environmental protec-

tion, desires for reduced human health risks, compe-

tition for land, and the increasing value of the natural

environment as recreational space have led tomarked

improvements in regulatory requirements and min-

ing practice in a number of countries. Many miners

have introduced management policies, practices and

technologies that markedly reduce the environmen-

tal harm caused by mining (Environment Australia,

2002b; Gammon, 2002; Miller, 2005). When viewed

in combination with growing desires to preserve land

areas as a repository for valuable biological assets, for

natural environmental services, and for aesthetic ap-

peal, these developments appear likely continue to

drive continued improvement in mining practice.

As a part of this positive trend, mine planning,

mine closure practices and the conduct of mine op-

erations to facilitate environmentally and socially

acceptable closure have also evolved significantly in

recent years. While in the past communities often

saw that the only choice available was whether a

deposit should be mined or not, it has been clearly

shown that the manner in which a mine is planned

can have major positive influences on the magni-

tude and duration of impacts over the life of the

development and following its closure (Environ-

mental Protection Agency, 1995a, p.2).

In this context, the title

Mining for Closure

chosen for

this document is

not

intended to indicate that existing

mining activities should be bought to closure, and fu-

ture mining activities curtailed significantly. To the

contrary, the mining sector is a very important con-

tributor to local and national economies and it must

be recognised that in the past, authorities did gener-

ally not require the “closing” of mines in the manner

described throughout this report. Further, the extrac-

tive industries will continue to underpin the econo-

mies of many countries in the future. As such, ongo-

ing and new developments to process and mine the

mineral resources of “mining nations” will be vital for

many of them to pursue sustainable development. In

recognition of this importance, this document is in-

tended to help facilitate mining policy development,

capacity development and institutional development

so that they can yield a sustainable mix of social, eco-

nomic, and environmental outcomes from mining.

The key focus of this document is upon countries in

SEE/TRB, however much of the material and ideas

presented here are intended to be generic.