Planning for social and community-engaged closure: A comparison of mine closure plans from Canada's territorial and provincial North

Abstract

The inevitable closure and remediation phase of a mine's lifecycle routinely causes negative socioeconomic and environmental impacts for nearby communities. While closure planning is meant to ensure post-closure human and environmental safety, it tends to favour short-term technical fixes over longer-term socioeconomic , cultural, and ecological considerations. For mines operating on Indigenous territories, where communities have complex and nuanced connections to land and varying levels of jurisdiction, these issues are further exacerbated by the exclusion of Indigenous voices from planning and decision-making. This research employed a qualitative document analysis of ten mine closure plans for mines in Northern Canada that are still operational to understand how the industry is actively planning for the closure and remediation of their sites. In particular, this work asks whether or not mine companies are incorporating Indigenous Knowledge into their mine closure plans, and how they are addressing the complex socioeconomic aspects of closure. This analysis showed that mine closure plans across Northern Canada inconsistently apply Indigenous Knowledge and expertise, and the methods used for community consultation in mine closure planning are left vague. While differences in policy between Northern territories and regions account for some of these inconsistencies, a company's willingness to work beyond baseline requirements imposed by governments is also an important factor. Additionally, these closure plans further demonstrate that the industry prioritizes technical aspects of mine closure over the social, cultural, economic, and ecological. For mine closure to be successful in a Northern context it must incorporate community expertise, emerge from the values and priorities of the Indigenous peoples whose lands mines are operating on, and account for a wider scope of social, economic, and cultural impacts.

Futuristic restoration as a policy tool for environmental justice objectives

“…While there is substantial research on the technical strategies for mine remediation (Lottermoser 2010;Rasafi et al 2017;Moodley et al 2018), studies focused on public participation and community values regarding how to restore/rehab/reclaim an area where a mine was once located are also valuable (Banfield & Jardine 2013;Rixan & Blangy 2016;Beckett & Keeling 2019). Research has shown that the mining "industry prioritizes technical aspects of mine closure over the social, cultural, economic, and ecological" (Monosky & Keeling 2021); hence, restoration strategies must be envisioned by all stakeholders if diverse goals are to be achieved. Employing futuristic restoration as a policy guiding framework when mine remediation is considered offers a number of benefits such as sharpening the financial feasibility of certain restoration techniques, integrating public health benefits into the plans, and encouraging transparency in the values that will dictate the future of the restored land.…”

A Quantitative Sustainability Assessment for Mine Closure and Repurposing Alternatives in Colorado, USA

“…The mining industry has the potential to significantly contribute to sustainable development and has been making efforts to engage in more responsible practices [4,24]. Mine closure is rated among mining's top operating risks [25], and its importance has been increasingly acknowledged in best-practice guidelines and more stringent mine closure regulations that have been put in place since the 1990s [5]. Mine closure can cause negative impacts, including losses of employment, tax revenues, infrastructure, and services, as well as a decrease in the demand for local goods and services [5,26].…”

“…Mine closure is rated among mining's top operating risks [25], and its importance has been increasingly acknowledged in best-practice guidelines and more stringent mine closure regulations that have been put in place since the 1990s [5]. Mine closure can cause negative impacts, including losses of employment, tax revenues, infrastructure, and services, as well as a decrease in the demand for local goods and services [5,26]. The development opportunities that mines can offer to the local community during operation must continue after closure [27].…”

“…To achieve these goals, early definition of the closure vision (i.e., "closure planning") is crucial [5,28,29]. According to the recent guide by the International Council for Mining and Metals (ICMM) on integrated mine closure, a closure vision should be informed by the mine's area of influence, the socioeconomic and environmental context, stakeholder input, country-specific requirements, and the SDGs [10].…”

“…However, mineral resources are not renewable, and the operational stage comes to an end when the ore has been depleted or when mining is no longer economically or socially feasible. In many cases, the departure of a mining company may have adverse impacts on local economies through employment losses, declines in local cash flow and tax revenues, an inability to maintain infrastructure, and a decline in services (i.e., "bust") [3,5]. A poorly managed closure may worsen these impacts, and stakeholders increasingly expect mining companies to proactively manage the impacts of closure [6].…”