Socioeconomic reconversion of post-mining territories: stakeholder engagement in mine closure processes

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.20435/inter.v26i1.4458

Keywords:

mining, social impacts, engagement, mine clousure

Abstract

Mining activity, especially in vulnerable contexts, fails to convert economic gains into sustainable development for post-mining, intensifying social impacts upon mine closure. This research argues that an integrative approach involving stakeholders through engagement and social dialogue appears as an alternative in understanding the territory's trajectory and establishing governance that is sustainable in the long term. The main aim of this work is to systematize a set of analytical categories aimed at strengthening engagement processes applied to the mine closure process. The chosen research strategy was indirect documentary research, which seeks articles and academic productions that support the exposed content. The academic literature is still relatively incipient when studying the themes related to social issues in mine closure and post-closure processes. It is also highlighted that effective participation will only occur when the impacted communities participate in the discussions and decision-making processes related to the present and future use of the territories.

Author Biographies

Rodrigo Silva Barreto, Centro Universitário FEI

PhD in Business Administration from the Centro Universitário FEI. Master in
Business Economics and Finance from the Fundação Getúlio Vargas (EGPE/FGV/RJ) and Professor
at the Centro Universitário FEI, Business Administration.

Jacques Demajorovic, Centro Universitário FEI

Post-doctorate from The University of Alicante (Spain) and Professor of the Postgraduate Program in Business Administration at Centro Universitário FEI.

Adriano Augusto França Pimenta, Centro Universitário FEI

PhD Candidate in Business Administration at Centro Universitário FEI. Master in Administration from Centro Universitário FEI.

References

AGÊNCIA NACIONAL DE MINERAÇÃO. Relatório Maiores Arrecadadores CFEM. Portal ANM, [s.l.], 2021. Available at: https://anm.gov.br. Accessed on: January 11, 2022.

AKBAR, D.; ROLFE, J.; LECHNER, A. M.; EVERINGHAM, J. A.; KINNEAR, S. Workshop processes to generate stakeholder consensus about post-mining land uses: an Australian case study. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, [s.l.], v. 64, n. 2, p. 334–58, 2020. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/09640568.2020.1764341

BABI, K.; ASSELIN, H.; BENZAAZOUA, M. Stakeholders’ perceptions of sustainable mining in Morocco: a case study of the abandoned Kettara mine. Extractive Industries and Society, [s.l.], v. 3, n. 1, p. 185–92, 2016. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.exis.2015.11.007

BAINTON, N.; HOLCOMBE, S. A critical review of the social aspects of mine closure. Resources Policy, [s.l.], v. 59, p. 468–78, Aug. 2018. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2018.08.020

BECKETT, C.; KEELING, A. Rethinking remediation: mine reclamation, environmental justice, and relations of care. Local Environment, [s.l.], v. 24, n. 3, p. 216–30, 2019.

BJELKEVIK, A. G.; BOHLIN, T. E. Mine closure – do we miss the opportunities? In: FOURIE, A., TIBBETT, M.; Sharkuu, A. (Org.). Mine Closure 2021: proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Mine Closure. Ulaanbaatar: QMC Group, 2021. p. 155–72. Doi: https://doi.org/10.36487/ACG_repo/2152_89

BOWLES, P.; MACPHAIL, F.; TETREAULT, D. Social licence versus procedural justice: Competing narratives of (Il)legitimacy at the San Xavier mine, Mexico. Resources Policy, [s.l.], v. 61, n. Feb., p. 157–65, 2019. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2019.02.005

CESARE, P.; MAXWELL, P. Mine closure legislation in Indonesia: the role of mineral industry involvement. Natural Resources Forum, Oxford, UK and Boston, USA, v. 27, n. 1, p. 42–52, 2003. Doi: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1477-8947.00039

CHUNG, K. L.; ZHONG, K. A Course in Probability Theory. [s.l.]: Academic Press, 2001.

DEMAJOROVIC, J.; LOPES, J. C.; SANTIAGO, A. L. F. The Samarco dam disaster: a grave challenge to social license to operate discourse. Resources Policy, [s.l.], v. 61, p. 273–82, 2019. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2019.01.017

EDGETT, R. Toward an ethical framework for advocacy in public relations. Journal of Public Relations Research, [s.l.], v. 14, p. 1–26, 2002.

EITER, S.; VIK, M. L. Public participation in landscape planning: effective methods for implementing the European Landscape Convention in Norway. Land Use Policy, [s.l.], v. 44, p. 44–53, 2015. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2014.11.012

EVERINGHAM, J. A.; ROLFE, J.; LECHNER, A. M.; KINNEAR, S.; AKBAR, D. A proposal for engaging a stakeholder panel in planning post-mining land uses in Australia’s coal-rich tropical savannahs. Land Use Policy, [s.l.], v. 79, 2017, p. 397–406, Dec. 2018. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2018.08.038

FRASER, J.; XAVIER, A. “Corporate Social Responsibility in the Mining Sector in Canada,” CSR, Sustainability, Ethics & Governance. In: PEREIRA, E. G.; SPENCER, R.; MOSES, J. W. (Org.). Sovereign Wealth Funds, Local Content Policies and CSR. [s.l.]: Springer, 2021. p. 579–600.

HOLLEY, E. A.; MITCHAM, C. The Pebble Mine Dialogue: a case study in public engagement and the social license to operate. Resources Policy, [s.l.], v. 47, p. 18–27, 2016. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2015.11.002

HURST, B.; JOHNSTON, K. A.; LANE, A. B. Engaging for a social licence to operate (SLO). Public Relations Review, [s.l.], v. 46, n. 4, p. 1–32, 2020.

JOHNSTON, K. A. Toward a theory of social engagement. In: JOHNSTON, K. A.; TAYLOR, M. (org.). The Handbook of Communication Engagement. [S.l.]: [s.n.], 2018. p. 19–32.

KIVINEN, S.; VARTIAINEN, K.; KUMPULA, T. People and post-mining environments: PPGIS mapping of landscape values, knowledge needs, and future perspectives in Northern Finland. Land, [s.l.], v. 7, n. 4, 151, 2018. Doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/land7040151

MANCINI, L.; SALA, S. Social impact assessment in the mining sector: review and comparison of indicators frameworks. Resources Policy, [s.l.], v. 57, p. 98–111, 2018.

MARCONI, M. de A.; LAKATOS, E. M. Fundamentos de metodologia científica. 5. ed. São Paulo: Atlas, 2003. ISSN 9788522457588.

MERCER-MAPSTONE, L.; RIFKIN, W.; LOUIS, W. R.; MOFFAT, K. Company-community dialogue builds relationships, fairness, and trust leading to social acceptance of Australian mining developments. Journal of Cleaner Production, [s.l.], v. 184, p. 671–77, 2018. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2018.02.291

MERCER-MAPSTONE, L.; RIFKIN, W.; MOFFAT, K.; LOUIS, W. Conceptualising the role of dialogue in social licence to operate. Resources Policy, [s.l.], v. 54, p. 137–46, 2017. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2017.09.007

MOFFAT, K.; ZHANG, A. The paths to social licence to operate: an integrative model explaining community acceptance of mining. Resources Policy, [s.l.], v. 39, n. 1, p. 61–70, 2014. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2013.11.003

ODELL, C. J.; SCOBLE, M.; BULLARD, J. R. Improving socio-environmental outcomes at Andean mines. International Journal of Mining, Reclamation and Environment, [s.l.], v. 25, n. 2, p. 133–51, 2011.

PIMENTA, A. A. F.; DEMAJOROVIC, J.; SARAIVA DE SOUZA, M. T.; DE CARVALHO PEDRO, S.; PISANO, V. Social licence to operate model: Critical factors of social acceptance of mining in the Brazilian Amazon. Resources Policy, [s.l.], v. 74, p. 102237, 2021. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/J.RESOURPOL.2021.102237

PRNO, J.; SCOTT SLOCOMBE, D. Exploring the origins of “social license to operate” in the mining sector: Perspectives from governance and sustainability theories. Resources Policy, [s.l.], v. 37, n. 3, p. 346–57, 2012. Doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2012.04.002

RAMAN, S.; MOHR, A. Biofuels and the role of space in sustainable innovation journeys. Journal of Cleaner Production, [s.l.], v. 65, p. 224–33, 2014.

RAUSCHMAYER, F.; RISSE, N. A framework for the selection of participatory approaches for SEA. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, [s.l.], v. 25, n. 6, p. 650–66, 2005.

RICHARDSON, R. J.; PERES, J. A.; WANDERLEY, J. C. V. Pesquisa Social – Métodos e Técnicas. São Paulo: Atlas, 1985.

ROWE, G.; FREWER, L. J. A typology of public engagement mechanisms. Science Technology and Human Values, [s.l.], v. 30, n. 2, p. 251–90, 2005.

VAN ECK, N. J.; WALTMAN, L. Manual for VOSviewer version 1.6.10. [S.l.]: [s.n.], 2019. Available at: https://www.vosviewer.com/download. Accessed on: Jan. 11, 2022.

VIVODA, V.; KEMP, D.; OWEN, J. Regulating the social aspects of mine closure in three Australian states. Journal of Energy and Natural Resources Law, [s.l.], v. 37, n. 4, p. 405–24, 2019. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/02646811.2019.1608030

XAVIER, A. M. Socio-Economic Mine Closure (SEMC) framework: a comprehensive approach for addressing the socio-economic challenges of mine closure. [s.l.]: The University of British Columbia, 2013.

XAVIER, A.; VEIGA, M.; ZYL, D. Introduction and Assessment of a Socio-Economic Mine Closure Framework. Journal of Management and Sustainability, [s.l.], v. 5, n. 1, p. p. 38, 2015. Available at: https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/jms/article/view/43788. Accessed on: 30 Set. 2021.

YIN, R. K. Estudo de caso: planejamento e métodos. 5. ed. [S.l.]: Bookman editora, 2015.

ZHAO, F.; MA, Y.; XI, F.; YANG, L.; SUN, J. Evaluating the sustainability of mine rehabilitation programs in China. Restoration Ecology, [s.l.], v. 28, n. 5, p. 1061–6, 2020. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/rec.13183

Downloads

Published

2025-02-28

How to Cite

Silva Barreto, R., Demajorovic, J., & França Pimenta, A. A. (2025). Socioeconomic reconversion of post-mining territories: stakeholder engagement in mine closure processes. Interações (Campo Grande), 26, e26034458. https://doi.org/10.20435/inter.v26i1.4458