Sustainable development, Part 1

In many countries, mining is no longer considered socially acceptable, and in order for companies to maintain shareholders and access to capital and land, the industry has to break with its reputation of “rape and run.” For this reason, the international mining community has been struggling to redefine its image and its relationship with society at large.

In part, the industry has addressed the challenge by embracing “sustainable development,” though the term means different things in different cultures. It is important that an understanding of sustainability be shared by all, and that this understanding be shared by civil society and those groups critical of mining.

The term sustainable development is not new; it was first coined in the late 1970s and came to prominence in 1987 following publication of Our Common Future, the report of the World Commission on Environment and Development. This study, also known as the Brundtland Report, provoked an ongoing debate as to how development and economic activity of all forms can change to meet the challenge of sustaining both a rising global population and the environment, on which life depends.

Part of the problem is that mining is clearly not based on the exploitation of a renewable resource: once the resource is extracted, it is gone. Many people therefore believe that mining, de facto, violates the concept of sustainable development, which they associate only with the use of renewable resources.

The Brundtland Commission describes sustainable development as “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own.” There are three components to this definition, namely that the environment is limited, that there are needs that have to be met, and that generational equity must prevail.

The environment has a limited capacity to sustain mining in two respects: the depletion of a finite resource, and the effect of that depletion on the biophysical and social environment.

In terms of biophysical impact, land is disturbed, and plants, animals and water resources may be dislocated or destroyed. However, the international mining industry has had to manage environmental issues for many years now, and consequently laws and guidelines are well-established. Most mining companies have made environmental management part of their policy, as illustrated by external audits, ISO certification, collaboration with environmental groups, and awards for excellence. Companies generally assume responsibility for use of the land, minimize the impact of their activities, and restore the landscape once mining is over.

In terms of the impact of mining on the social environment, there is considerable room for progress. Companies rarely make a point of managing the social impact of their activities, and there is essentially no regulatory or legal framework in place.

The two remaining aspects of sustainability, needs and generation equity, are intimately connected.

The view in the developed world is that mining is an undesirable activity incompatible with sustainable development. The citizens of these developed countries are preoccupied with the need to preserve resources for future generations, their mantra being reduce, reuse and recycle. However, the view in developing nations, including Latin America, where the mining industry is particularly active, is markedly different. There, mining is frequently regarded as an essential industry. Developing countries are generally poor, have limited wealth-generating capacity, and find mining to be an important engine for national economic development, certainly in terms of balance of payments, foreign investment, and revenue generation for government.

We do not wish to suggest that people in the developing world are not concerned about the environment but rather that their needs are overwhelmingly social and economic, and of the here and now — that is, how to get today’s generation out of poverty and build strong sustainable communities. Their imperatives are about production and employment and the distribution of the wealth that is generated.

The dilemma for mining is how to balance the environmental and social requirements and become socially acceptable in both worlds — the developed world, where there are head offices with shareholders and financial institutions looking on, and the developing world, where more and more mines and exploration projects are situated.

Certainly, a large part of the challenge of sustainable development is met through environmental management. Although mining is still largely compliance-driven as a result of legal and financial regulations, it is also true that the industry has internalized the need for environmental management, and this, in turn, is providing confidence that environmental protection, like health and safety, is a fundamental concern and will remain so.

— The preceding is an edited version of a paper published in Commminique, a news bulletin of the Prospectors & Developers Association of Canada. Susan Joyce is the senior social specialist at Golder Associates in Calgary, Alta., and Ian Thomson is the principal owner of On Common Ground, a Vancouver-based consulting firm.