Social Considerations in Mine Closure: Exploring Policy and Practice in Nunavik, Quebec

Abstract

Northern Canada has a long history of poorly remediated and outright abandoned mines. These sites have caused long-term environmental hazards, socio-economic disruptions, and threats to Indigenous communities across the North. Given the potential legacy effects of improper mine closure, best practice guidelines now suggest that mine closures address not only environmental remediation, but also include robust plans for mitigating social and economic impacts, and that companies engage early and consistently with impacted communities. This research seeks to understand how social and economic planning and community engagement for closure are governed in Nunavik, Quebec. Through semi-structured interviews with government and industry actors and an analysis of regional and provincial mining policy, this research demonstrates that mine closure regulations remain vague when describing how companies should involve impacted communities in mine closure planning, and governments largely neglect to regulate the social aspects of mine closure. This article discusses why an overreliance on impact assessment and overconfi dence in closure regulations are creating risks for Nunavimmiut. Without regulatory change, future closures may continue to result in unemployment, social dislocation, costly abandoned sites, and continued distrust in the industry.

What is good mine closure?

“…This is reflected in closure research which has emphasised the environmental aspects of closure and generally been done by the mining companies themselves. Much less work has been done on the social aspects of closure (Roberts et al, 2000;Bainton & Holcombe, 2018;Monosky & Keeling, 2021) or on the perspectives of those who will remain "once mining leaves town." Calls for integrated mine closure planning that combines the environmental and social aspects are emerging.…”

Creating value in the post-closure period through collaborative closure planning

“…• Adherence to the closure and reclamation methods and outcomes outlined in the project environmental assessment, closure plan, or other initial authorizations: Regulatory requirements vary widely in their prescriptiveness, and miners and operators tend to treat approaches outlined in authorization documents as inflexible, despite often having been determined many years prior to closure. Yet an over-reliance on impact assessment and closure regulations can create both business and community risks (Monosky & Keeling, 2021) • Emphasis on technical components (particularly chemical and physical stability) as closure drivers: Ensuring safety and stability through key technical pieces is a priority in closure planning. Social or community considerations are often treated as an add-on, and most frequently through workforce support programs (which may be insufficient to offset expectations around job creation in early project development stages) or community investment programming that is entirely funded by the miner and largely unsustainable in the longer-term (Gregory, 2021;Bainton & Holcombe, 2018).…”