• Franco OboniEmail author
  • Cesar Oboni


The future success of the mining industry is dependent on its ability to gain the trust of a wide range of stakeholders in order to obtain its social license to develop and operate (Social License to Operate (SLO)) mines while remaining competitive, profitable and fostering Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR). Our discussion of twenty-first-century tailings dams management starts with a dispassionate look at four major recent failures, revealing the gaps that will make it possible to develop twenty-first-century tailings dams management programs that are sustainable, reasonable, rational and add value to mining project and the industry as a whole.


  1. Aven T (2012) The risk concept - historical and recent development trends. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 99: 33–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. [BC AG 2016] Auditor General of British Columbia (2016) An Audit of Compliance and Enforcement of the Mining Sector
  3. Brehaut H (2017) Catastrophic dam failures path forward, Keynote lecture, Tailings and Mine Waste 2017, Banff, Nov 5–9, 2017Google Scholar
  4. Caldwell J (2011) Slimes dam - aka tailings storage facility - failure and what it meant to my mining mindset, cited in Chambers & Higman (2011), p. 18, n. 24Google Scholar
  5. [CDA 2014] Canadian Dam Association (2014) Technical Bulletin, Application of dam safety guidelines to mining damsGoogle Scholar
  6. Chapman C, Ward S (2011) The Probability-impact grid - a tool that needs scrapping, in: How to manage Project Opportunity and Risk, 3rd ed., ch. 2, pp 49–51, Chichester, GB, John Wiley & SonsGoogle Scholar
  7. Cox, LA Jr (2008) What’s Wrong with Risk Matrices? Risk Analysis 28(2): 497–512CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cox LA Jr, Babayev D, Huber W (2005) Some limitations of qualitative risk rating systems, Risk Analysis 25(3): 651–662CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cresswell S (nd) Qualitative Risk & Probability Impact Graphs: Time For A Rethink?
  10. Haimes YY (2009) On the Complex Definition of Risk: A Systems-Based Approach. Risk Analysis 29: 1647–1654CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hamel G, Prahalad CK (2005) Strategic Intent, Harvard Business Review, Jul-Aug 2005,
  12. Hubbard D (2009) Worse than Useless. The most popular risk assessment method and Why it doesn’t work, in: The Failure of Risk Management. Ch. 7, pp. 117–144, Hoboken, Wiley & SonsGoogle Scholar
  13. Kaplan S, Garrick BJ (1981) On the quantitative definition of risk. Risk Analysis 1(1):11–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Lowrance W (1976) Of Acceptable Risk - Science and the Science and the Determination of Safety, Technical report, Los Altos, CA, William Kaufmann Inc.Google Scholar
  15. [MAC OMS Guide 2019] Mining Association of Canada (2019) Developing an Operation, Maintenance, and Surveillance Manual for Tailings and Water Management Facilities SECOND EDITION, Feb. 2019Google Scholar
  16. Morgenstern NR (2010) Improving the safety of mine waste impoundments. In: Tailings and Mine Waste ’10, Vail, CO. October 17–20, 2010, Boca Raton: CRC PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Morgenstern NR (2018) Geotechnical Risk, Regulation, And Public Policy, The Sixth Victor de Mello Lecture, 2018, SOILS and ROCKS An International Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering I, 41(2): 107–129Google Scholar
  18. [NRC US 2009] National Research Council (US) Committee on Improving Risk Analysis Approaches Used by the U.S. Science and Decisions. Advancing Risk Assessment, EPA, Washington (DC), National Academies Press (US) (
  19. Oboni C, Oboni F (2012) Is it true that PIGs Fly when Evaluating Risks of Tailings Management Systems? Mining 2012, Keystone COGoogle Scholar
  20. [Oboni et al. 2013] Oboni F, Oboni C, Zabolotniuk S (2013) Can We Stop Misrepresenting Reality to the Public?, CIM 2013, Toronto.
  21. Roche, C., Thygesen, K., Baker, E. (eds). (2017). Mine Tailings Storage: Safety Is No Accident. A UNEP Rapid Response Assessment. United Nations Environment Programme and GRID-Arendal, Nairobi and Arendal, ISBN: 978-82-7701-170-7
  22. Thomas P, Bratvold RB, Bickel JE (2014) The Risk of Using Risk Matrices, SPE, Economics & Management 6(2): 56–66Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Oboni Riskope Associates Inc.RiskopeVancouverCanada

Personalised recommendations