Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Responsible Mining: Challenges, Perspectives and Approaches

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Sustainable Global Value Chains

Part of the book series: Natural Resource Management in Transition ((NRMT,volume 2))

  • 1424 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter provides an in-depth overview of the concept and objectives of responsible mining. The chapter offers a system of responsibility criteria for the strategic management of extractive companies and the formulation of crosscutting management policies which would consider the multifaceted interests of major stakeholders. Following the discussion in this chapter, the authors drew a number of conclusions regarding the outlook of responsible mining in countries with economies in transition.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 189.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 249.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    For the purpose of this chapter, we follow the definition of mining suggested by the United Nations, which characterised it as “the economic activity dedicated to the production of minerals and metals, including exploration, extraction and processing of the extracted minerals” (UN 2010b, p. 3).

  2. 2.

    The increase in demand for primary commodities has stimulated the unprecedented growth of both commodity prices and global extraction volumes. Accordingly, during the decade 2003–2012, extraction of thermal coal grew by 48%, and iron ore extraction by 168% (PwC 2013).

  3. 3.

    For example, intensive exploitation of iron ore deposits in the Karachay-Cherkessia (Russian Federation) has led to physical modification of large rivers, such as Kuban and Urup, and to complete destruction of small rivers with unique, clean waters (Bogusch et al. 2016). A boom of illegal gold mining in Ghana, known as galamsey, has changed the biosphere of impoverished rural areas, and has resulted in a loss of productive farmland, in particular cocoa farms. One of the rivers most affected has been the Offin River, which is contaminated by the chemicals and heavy metals that are used in the mining process (Stanger 2015; Taylor 2018).

  4. 4.

    In May 2015, the BHP Billiton, a leading global resources company, reported a two-week-long strike at Cerro Matoso Nickel Mine (Colombia). The workers were protesting against a change to longer work shifts, leading to an increase in uninterrupted exposure to toxic substances (Jamasmie 2015).

  5. 5.

    For instance, in April 2013 inhabitants of 15 nearby villages protested against the decision to expand the ilmenite (titanium-iron oxide mineral) production by the Irshansk State Ore Mining (Ukraine), which was made without consultations with the local communities (Konev 2013).

  6. 6.

    In October 2015, the UNCTAD minerals, ores and metals price index averaged 206 points, half of the peak level of February 2011 (418 points). In particular, iron ore prices at the Chinese port of Tianjin averaged US$53/t, less than a third of its peak of US$187/t in February 2011. The falling prices of minerals, ores and metals can be attributed to a number of factors, including among others growth deceleration in China and emerging economies; high production capacity resulting from large investments made during the last decade-long commodity boom; low-cost mining, partly supported by low energy prices; etc. (UNCTAD 2016).

  7. 7.

    Adopted by the Conference of the Parties to the UNFCCC on 12 December 2015 by decision 1/CP.21, in force 4 November 2016, U.N. Doc. FCCC/CP/2015/10/Add.1; reprinted in 55 ILM 743 (2016).

  8. 8.

    For example, in November 2004, Sierra Leone started a ‘proof of concept’ pilot project for an electronic mining cadastre system in the Kono District, which by late 2005 had a functional licensing system for artisanal mining operations. Building upon experience of the pilot project, the Ministry of Mining and Mineral Resources launched a new project to implement a nation-wide mineral rights administration system in May 2009. Already in 2010, the Mining Cadastre and Administration System (MCAS) was running in regional offices that administer artisanal mining. In late 2010, the MCAS was expanded to include exporter’s and dealer’s licenses. Introduction of the MCAS has made mineral rights processing and management, including revenue recording and reporting, transparent and predictable, allowing for a global access to data stored in the electronic mining cadastre MCAS almost in real time (Kråkenes 2015).

    The Canadian Extractive Sector Transparency Measures Act was enacted in 2014 (S.C. 2014, c. 39, s. 376, in force 1 June 2015) for the purpose of implementing Canada’s international commitments to contribute to global efforts to increase transparency and deter corruption in the extractive sector. The Act requires extractive entities active in Canada to publicly disclose, on an annual basis, specific payments made to all governments in Canada and abroad (NRCan 2018). Furthermore, it requires entities engaged in the exploration or production of oil, gas or other minerals to report all payments made to Aboriginal governments and/or Aboriginal government officials in an attempt to enhance transparency and prevent corruption in these transactions (Goldman et al. 2017).

  9. 9.

    Certification system developed and run by the German Sustainable Building Council (Deutsche Gesellschaft für Nachhaltiges Bauen or DGNB) for the certification of sustainable buildings and urban districts. Refer to Lemaitre (2014) for an in-depth overview of the DGNB System.

  10. 10.

    The list of EITI member countries and the results of Validation are available at: https://eiti.org/countries, last accessed 31 January 2019. As of January 2019, out of all validated countries, the following five countries have met all the EITI requirements at ‘Satisfactory’ level or beyond: Colombia, Mongolia, Philippines, Senegal, and Timor-Leste.

  11. 11.

    Directive 2013/34/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on the annual financial statements, consolidated financial statements and related reports of certain types of undertakings, amending Directive 2006/43/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Council Directives 78/660/EEC and 83/349/EEC, OJ L 182, pp. 19–76.

  12. 12.

    Directive 2014/56/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 April 2014 amending Directive 2006/43/EC on statutory audits of annual accounts and consolidated accounts, OJ L 158, pp. 196–226.

  13. 13.

    Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act. Pub. L. No. 111-203, 124 Stat. 1376, July 21, 2010.

  14. 14.

    For example, by 2020, every EITI country must ensure that all companies operating in their jurisdiction (i.e. also including companies that are not registered there) publicly disclose the identity of their beneficial owners when applying for, or when holding a participating interest in, a domestic oil, gas or mining license or contract (EITI 2018a, p. 10).

  15. 15.

    For example, the tax payments to the State Mineral Resource Reserves Commission of Ukraine in 2014 disclosed by Ukrgazvydobutok, a subsidiary of Naftogaz, amounted to 1,761,544 UAH, while the authority reported the receipt of 797,501, i.e. the discrepancy in data of 55%; the tax payments to the State Mineral Resource Reserves Commission of Ukraine in 2015 by the Northern Ore Mining and Concentrating Company (Severniy GOK) amounted to 739,074 UAH, while the reported amount was 413,882 UAH—a discrepancy of 44% (EY 2017).

  16. 16.

    Law of Ukraine “On ensuring transparency in extractive industries” No. 2545-VIII of 18.09.2018, entered into force on 16.11.2018; for an infographics about the Law, please visit: http://eiti.org.ua/en/documents/infographic-about-law-on-ensuring-transparency-in-extractive-industires/, last accessed 31 January 2019.

  17. 17.

    An up-to-date list of members can be found online at: www.oecd.org/tax/beps/inclusive-framework-on-beps-composition.pdf, last accessed 31 January 2019.

  18. 18.

    For additional information about the Responsible Mining Map, please visit: https://responsiblemining.net/what-we-do/responsible-mining-map/; the Map itself is available at: https://map.responsiblemining.net, last accessed 31 January 2019.

  19. 19.

    The IRMA Standard will not certify energy fuels, e.g. uranium, thermal coal, oil or gas.

  20. 20.

    Following the Version 1.0 release in June 2018, IRMA started the ‘Launch Phase’ that was scheduled to run for one year—until 30 June 2019. The Launch Phase was designed as a deliberate process of testing requirements and engaging stakeholders, through which IRMA aimed to identify gaps and oversights, clarify conflicting or confusing directions, refine requirements and the means of their verification. Taking into consideration the feedback received during the Launch Phase, a multi-sector committee of technical experts engaged by IRMA will create the next version of the Standard. Third-party, independent certification of mine sites against the IRMA Standard v.2.0 will not be available until late 2019. During the Launch Phase, IRMA made available for participating mine sites a number of specific offerings, including: ‘Mine Measure’, an online self-assessment tool allowing to analyse how the practices of a mine site compare with the standard; auditor-verified scoring of mine site performance; public recognition and supply chain connections through online Responsible Mining Map (IRMA 2018).

References

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Environmental Planning, Brandenburg University of Technology Cottbus-Senftenberg (BTU), Cottbus, Germany

    Dmitry Palekhov

  2. Institute of Economics, National Technical University “Dnipro Polytechnic”, Dnipro, Ukraine

    Ludmila Palekhova

Authors
  1. Dmitry Palekhov
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ludmila Palekhova
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dmitry Palekhov .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Environmental Planning, Brandenburg University of Technology Cottbus-Senftenberg (BTU), Cottbus, Germany

    Michael Schmidt  & Dmitry Palekhov  & 

  2. The Committee on Sustainability Assessment (COSA), Philadelphia, PA, USA

    Daniele Giovannucci

  3. Division Climate Change, Rural Development, Infrastructure, Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH, Eschborn, Germany

    Berthold Hansmann

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Palekhov, D., Palekhova, L. (2019). Responsible Mining: Challenges, Perspectives and Approaches. In: Schmidt, M., Giovannucci, D., Palekhov, D., Hansmann, B. (eds) Sustainable Global Value Chains. Natural Resource Management in Transition, vol 2. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-14877-9_28

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-14877-9_28

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-14876-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-14877-9

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation