Publication Name

MINING FOR CLOSURE

mass movement of “solid” wastes (generally

tailings containing heavy metals and toxic

compounds);

mass movement of liquid, or semi-liquid

wastes (again, generally tailings containing

heavy metals and toxic compounds);

waterborne transport of wastes as suspended

solids and as dissolved materials.

Such physical risks occur in many jurisdictions

around the globe, but the mining countries of this

part of Europe share a geographical location and

historical pathway that combines with their geo-

logical resources in a unique manner. Some of the

parameters shared by most or all countries in the

region are that:

the mining sector is a very important contribu-

tor to local and national economies and that on-

going and newmining activities will be required

to underpin the economies in the future;

the countries are (relatively) rich in mineral re-

sources and have a long – or very long – history

of mineral resource extraction activities;

there already exists a serious history of min-

ing accidents, due in part to the widespread

neglect of environmental safety and human

security issues combined with sub-standard

extraction and waste management activities,

particularly in the post 1945 era;

transboundary pollution risks associated with

mining and mineral processing activities and

the legacies of such past activities are many

and marked;

nation states have been subject to marked

changes in economic and political circum-

stances, conflict, and socio-economic hardship

during the 1990s that have exacerbated the

problems associated with some sites;

accession to the European Union is imminent

or foreseeable and compliance with a range of

EU environmental and safety regulations is re-

quired for that process to proceed;

legislative frameworks addressing mining and

minerals processing activities, extractive in-

dustry legacies as well as accountability (and

jurisdictional remit) for the environmental

aspects of these activities are still in a state of

development or flux;

capacity within institutions supporting the

extractive industries as well as those guiding

transboundary risk management and/or disas-

ter response are currently insufficient to deal

with the task at hand;

in economies in transition, national fiscal re-

serves available for the financing of site recla-

mation work, and/or social welfare “nets” for

the support of communities affected by the

environmental impacts of the extractive indus-

tries, or the closure of mining operations, may

be minimal or non-existent.

This confluence of conditions suggests some ur-

gency in the matter – particularly in issues sur-

rounding abandoned and orphaned sites (legacies).

In addition, there seems to be a clear and unequivo-

cal

interest

from within the subject states in the pro-

motion of flexible solutions to find other economic

uses or value in abandoned or orphaned mine sites

as well as in removing their hazard vectors.

Against this background, it is held that it is necessary

to support the ongoing assessment of transbound-

ary environmental and human safety risks posed

by sub-standard mining operations – both active

and abandoned; implementation of risk reduction

measures through demonstration at selected sites,

evaluation and testing of possible policy changes

and transboundary cooperation mechanisms.

an agenda for the

mining for closure

report

At the outset it is reiterated that a fundamental point

of departure is the view that ongoing mining activi-

ties are vital to sustainable development and envi-

ronmental protection in the SEE/TRB in general.

This is a view shared in varying degrees by develop-

ment agencies such as the World Bank Group (Ono-

rato, Fox, & Strongman, 1997; Strongman, 2000)

and federations of environmental groups such as

the European Environmental Bureau (2000).

Further, the report addresses key need areas sup-

porting the “next steps forward” at both local (na-

tional) scale and in a transboundary and regional

perspective that were presented within the Desk-

assessment study for the Environment and Se-

curity Initiative Project generated in 2004 (Peck,

4. Countries are the producers or receivers of chronic and (po-

tentially) acute pollution from their neighbours that can include:

airborne transport of pollutants such as dust, smelter emissions,

gases, vapours; mass movement of “solid” wastes (generally tail-

ings containing heavy metals and toxic compounds); mass move-

ment of liquid, or semi-liquid wastes (again, generally tailings

containing heavy metals and toxic compounds); waterborne trans-

port of wastes as suspended solids and as dissolved materials.

•