Only a decade ago, it would have been inconceivable that a grouping of mining companies adopt a policy on mining and biodiversity that included, among other commitments, a ‘no-go’ pledge. The mining industry has historically viewed protected areas as anathema to its business interest, as an unjustifiable limit on its need for access to as much land as possible to enable successful mineral exploration.
Shifting values In 2003, a tangible shift in industry values was made evident with the release, by the International Council on Mining and Metals (ICMM), of a groundbreaking Position Statement on Mining and Protected Areas (1). This statement followed the launch, in 2002, of an important dialogue between the World Conservation Union (IUCN) and ICMM that endures to this day (2). This year, members of the Mining Association of Canada (MAC) followed suit with the adoption of a Mining and Biodiversity Policy Framework (3).
The MAC framework was developed over 2006-2007, in consultation with the industry’s key communities of interest (or stakeholders) that included, among others, the Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity, the IUCN Canada Office, the Canadian Boreal Initiative and MAC’s own Community of Interest Advisory Panel. A workshop, held in Ottawa in October 2006, involved over forty participants in a review of a draft policy framework, a discussion of case studies and the development of recommendations for MAC on actions that would help support implementation of the framework. Additional consultations on the framework followed until its adoption by the MAC Board in June 2007.
Commitments on biodiversity In addition to the pledge to recognize World Heritage properties as ‘no-go’ areas, the framework includes several commitments regarding steps the industry will take to integrate biodiversity conservation considerations into all stages of the mining cycle, from exploration through to closure. The commitments include:
Integrating the importance of biodiversity conservation, including respect for critical habitat, into mining and land-use planning and management strategies, including considering the option of not proceeding with a project; Assessing and monitoring the state of biodiversity throughout the project cycle;
Avoiding, minimizing, mitigating and/or compensating for significant adverse biodiversity effects;
Complying with the requirements of legally-designated protected areas and working with key communities of interest to develop transparent, inclusive, informed and equitable decision-making processes for the establishment of protected areas; and
Establishing, financing and implementing comprehensive reclamation plans that, wherever practicable, return mine sites to viable and diverse ecosystems that will serve the needs of post-mining use, recognizing that mining can permanently alter landscapes and that other desirable land uses may be considered in reclamation plans when justified by site-specific circumstances.
Through the biodiversity lens Like the ‘no-go’ pledge, these commitments reflect a change in industry values and, more importantly, an improvement in industry practices. Biodiversity conservation in industry planning has evolved from an abstract concept to practical application with real business value. The Good Practice Guidance for Mining and Biodiversity, published by ICMM last year provides the mining sector with a practical, how-to manual for managing biodiversity conservation issues throughout the mining cycle.
A business case for biodiversity conservation in the mining industry has clearly emerged. This comprises the less direct but powerful ‘social license’: those companies that demonstrate leadership on biodiversity are less likely to face opposition. There are direct benefits as well. Managing for biodiversity means planning for less disturbance, i.e. having a smaller ‘footprint’, which translates into lower reclamation costs. Active monitoring programmes for biodiversity, including ecological effects monitoring, can also help companies anticipate and avoid potential negative, and costly, impacts. There are many examples where a biodiversity ‘lens’ focused on the management of mine site activities provides win-win opportunities that achieve biodiversity goals and meet local community needs in a cost-effective manner.
Facing the hard realities The change in industry thinking is essential, since we are faced with two hard realities on a potential collision course. The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment found that human actions are depleting the Earth’s natural capital, putting at risk the ability of the planet’s ecosystems to sustain future generations. At the same time, the demand for minerals and metals is surging, driven by the rapidly developing economies of China, India and Brazil, to name just three.
The Chinese economy, for example, has been growing at approximately 10 percent per year for the past quarter century, with no signs of slowing down. China is building 50 coal-fired plants per year, the equivalent of the entire Spanish grid. Its population of 1.3 billion has 3 cars per 100 people, compared to 90 in the United States of America. Clearly, as China grows, the demand for mineral and metal products will intensify, as will the need for new mineral discoveries which, increasingly, are found in the more remote parts of the globe, where biodiversity is rich, and historically free from human development. The potential clash between humanity’s need for minerals and metals and its need for healthy ecosystems is clear.
Hence, it has become plain that for this clash to be avoided or minimized in the minerals and metals industry, good practices, and continual improvement, are essential. Increased and improved recycling — a rapidly growing business line for integrated metal producers in Canada and elsewhere — is also important. And lastly, so is the need to recognize that there are places of high conservation value that should be left undisturbed.
ICMM’s Statement on Protected Areas and MAC’s new framework are demonstrations that an increasing segment of the global mining industry recognizes its global responsibilities.
Pierre Gratton (
pgratton@mining.ca) is Vice President – Sustainable Development and Public Affairs,
The Mining Association of Canada.
(1)
ICCM (2)
http://www.iucn.org/themes/business/mining (3)
http://www.mining.ca/www/Towards_Sustaining_Mining (4)
http://www.icmm.com/library_publicat.php?rcd=256