Regulation of Resource-Based Development: Governance Challenges and Responses in Mining Regions of Australia (original) (raw)
Related papers
2012
Centre for Social Responsibility in Mining The Centre for Social Responsibility in Mining (CSRM) is a leading research centre, committed to improving the social performance of the resources industry globally. We are part of the Sustainable Minerals Institute (SMI) at the University of Queensland, one of Australia's premier universities. SMI has a long track record of working to understand and apply the principles of sustainable development within the global resources industry. At CSRM, our focus is on the social, economic and political challenges that occur when change is brought about by resource extraction and development. We work with companies, communities and governments in mining regions all over the world to improve social performance and deliver better outcomes for companies and communities. Since 2001, we've contributed significantly to industry change through our research, teaching and consulting. The bottom line: we help build capacity to manage change in more effective ways. This is our aim.
2012
Centre for Social Responsibility in Mining The Centre for Social Responsibility in Mining (CSRM) is a leading research centre, committed to improving the social performance of the resources industry globally. We are part of the Sustainable Minerals Institute (SMI) at the University of Queensland, one of Australia's premier universities. SMI has a long track record of working to understand and apply the principles of sustainable development within the global resources industry. At CSRM, our focus is on the social, economic and political challenges that occur when change is brought about by resource extraction and development. We work with companies, communities and governments in mining regions all over the world to improve social performance and deliver better outcomes for companies and communities. Since 2001, we've contributed significantly to industry change through our research, teaching and consulting. The bottom line: we help build capacity to manage change in more effective ways. This is our aim.
Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 2014
This paper examines the social licence to operate (SLO) of Western Australia's (WA's) mining industry in the context of the state's 'developmentalist' agenda. We draw on the findings of a multi-disciplinary body of new research on the risks and challenges posed byWA's mining industry for environmental, social and economic sustainability. We synthesise the findings of this work against the backdrop of the broader debates on corporate social responsibility (CSR) and resource governance. In light of the data presented, this paper takes issue with the mining sector's SLO and its assessment of social and environmental impacts in WA for three inter-related reasons. A state government ideologically wedded to resource-led growth is seen to offer the resource sector a political licence to operate and to give insufficient attention to its potential social and environmental impacts. As a result, the resource sector can adopt a self-serving CSR agenda built on a limited win -win logic and operate with a 'quasi social licence' that is restricted to mere economic legitimacy. Overall, this paper problematises the politicalcum-commercial construction and neoliberalisation of the SLO and raises questions about the impact of mining in WA.
Journal of Rural Studies, 2010
In some remote parts of Australia, mining companies have positioned themselves as central actors in governing nearby affected communities by espousing notions of 'voluntary partnerships for sustainability' between business, government and community. It is argued in this paper that the nature and extent of mining company interventions in nearby communities constitutes a new problematic for these corporate actors. Drawing on research conducted in two remote areas in Australia, this paper undertakes an analytics of government to ask how mining companies have become leading actors in determining the future of local, mine-affected communities. It is suggested that their interventions arise from two processes: industry priorities for securing a 'social license to operate' by making a positive contribution to affected communities; and the restructuring of the state which has created an institutional void in these remote localities. As a result, mining companies are 'filling the gaps' in local service delivery through a mode of governing that takes the form of patronage rather than partnership. This raises questions about the future viability of these communities once the mines eventually close, and new challenges of governing for corporate actors.
2021
Using the Carmichael coal mine as a case study, this paper explores and analyses the current challenges and potentials of the Australian regulatory framework in designing policies that balance the direct local economic benefits with global environmental concerns and a global common vision about how to manage mining development and energy security challenges. In this effort, it evaluates the current Australian regulatory framework for mining projects, based on two hypotheses: 1) the development of large-scale mining energy projects linked to fossil-fuel resources creates legal challenges; 2) these legal challenges should be analysed in an interdisciplinary approach from both local and global perspectives on law, economics and socio-politics.
Australasian Journal of Environmental Management, 2016
Development of public policy is a key role of government. While there is a framework for Australian governments to uphold when developing public policy, this alone will not guarantee good policy development. This research critically explores the policy development process of the Department of Mines and Petroleum in Western Australia for mine closure and rehabilitation securities reform, where significant costs for mining companies, and large environmental and community legacies were at stake. Fundamental change from use of individual bonds to a central Mining Rehabilitation Fund resulted; offering financial advantage for mining companies and government alike, and a mechanism for rehabilitation of legacy abandoned mines. Critical elements in the policy development process were: (1) openness in clearly articulating the policy problem at the outset, (2) retaining focus on the policy scope relevant to jurisdictional level, (3) use of trusted experts especially for contentious aspects of the reform agenda, (4) commitment to stakeholder engagement throughout, and (5) acknowledging and managing uncertainties through transparent and consultative data gathering processes. Attention to these matters enabled an innovative and effective mine closure and rehabilitation policy solution to be implemented by the Government of Western Australia that is unique in the Australia, and perhaps the world.
State Governance, Participation and Mining Development
Despite the advent of democracy witnessing government making considerable progress in developing the legal frameworks to manage mining development and include citizens in decision-making processes, this has largely been unsuccessful. Although it is known that the post-apartheid state may be ineffective in holding mining companies accountable for social and environmental abuse and engaging citizens in decision-making processes, it is unclear what may hamper effective governance and participation by the state. Since the popular tourist destination of Dullstroom, Mpumalanga has become under threat from an increasing number of mining applications for coal (and to a much more limited extend – diamonds), this paper presents viewpoints from key stakeholders to examine the effectiveness of the state to govern mining development and applications, including how the state (and industry) engages in participation with civil society surrounding mining development. Most participation literature have dealt with improving participatory processes rather than exploring the challenges towards successful participation. Investigations reveal a number of complex factors influencing governance and participation such as lack of government human resources, the ruling party promoting mining for social and economic upliftment, collusion between government and industry, and the Department of Mineral Resources domination of decision-making to promote mining limiting co-operative governance.
Regulating the social aspects of mine closure in three Australian states
Journal of Energy & Natural Resources Law , 2019
The absence of legal criteria to support the responsible closure of large-scale mines is a significant global issue. Mine closure regulation primarily focuses on the physical aspects of mining, with limited attention paid to social aspects of mine closure. This paper examines the extent to which regulatory instruments across three major Australian mining jurisdictions-New South Wales, Queensland and Western Australia-include provisions that require proponents to consider the social aspects of mine closure. We found that regulatory frameworks broadly cover social aspects, but often without explicit text in legislation or policy guidelines. We also found that regulators rely on front-end approval processes to account for and mitigate the social impacts of mining and that, following approval, regulators rely on stakeholder engagement, rather than also requiring evidence-based analysis and impact management. In the absence of restrictive regulatory elements in the latter stages of the project life cycle, we conclude that mining companies are relatively unhindered, free to enter into indefinite care and maintenance mode, or divest their assets. The current approach allows the costs of mine closure to sit 'outside' the life of mine planning processes.