TY - JOUR
T1 - Beyond closure
T2 - A literature review and research agenda for post-mining transitions
AU - Measham, Thomas
AU - Walker, Jim
AU - Haslam McKenzie, Fiona
AU - Kirby, Jason
AU - Williams, Caroline
AU - D'Urso, Jillian
AU - Littleboy, Anna
AU - Samper, Agnes
AU - Rey, Rebecca
AU - Maybee, Bryan
AU - Brereton, David
AU - Boggs, Guy
N1 - Funding Information:
The authors wish to thank Keryn Hassall, Ben Hamilton, Rae Young and Pat Tang for participating in conversations that have informed this paper. This research was supported by the Cooperative Research Centre for Transformations in Mining Economies. The support of the Australian Government through the CRC Program is acknowledged.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2024 The Authors
PY - 2024/3
Y1 - 2024/3
N2 - Post-mining transition is a growing area of interest in research, policy and practice. One of the key reasons for this growing attention is the increasing number of mines closing, and expected to close, in coming decades around the world. Another reason for the heightened focus on closure and transition stems from the poor track record of closure and relinquishment of mines. Thousands of mines sit in an idle state of ‘care and maintenance’ partly because of the difficulties involved in closing a mine and concerns about transfer of residual liability for sites. The growing importance of successful closure and post-mining transition can be conceptualised in relation to recent phenomena. These include the development of just transition narratives which are strongly tied to the de-carbonisation agenda. Another is the focus within industry on post-mining land use (PMLU). There are few examples of successful post-mining transition to learn from. One such example - the post-coal transition in Germany - offers some lessons however there are limits to the transferability of these lessons to other contexts. In response to these challenges, this paper puts forward a research agenda comprising four key areas. The first of these is the need for research and deliberation on what post-mining means in different contexts, as there is a lack of shared understanding of what post-mining is or should be. The second is the need to incorporate a wider range of values and perspectives into analysis, planning, decision-making and actions about closure and transitions. The third area is the need for greater attention to integration between the technical, biophysical and engineering dimensions of closure and transition, and how these intersect with cultural, social and economic dimensions. A fourth need is to elevate the scale at which research and decision-making about closure occurs, from the site to the regional scale and beyond. Collectively, these four areas underpin a shift in thinking beyond notions of returning to prior state and instead focus on the opportunities for post-mining communities and economies.
AB - Post-mining transition is a growing area of interest in research, policy and practice. One of the key reasons for this growing attention is the increasing number of mines closing, and expected to close, in coming decades around the world. Another reason for the heightened focus on closure and transition stems from the poor track record of closure and relinquishment of mines. Thousands of mines sit in an idle state of ‘care and maintenance’ partly because of the difficulties involved in closing a mine and concerns about transfer of residual liability for sites. The growing importance of successful closure and post-mining transition can be conceptualised in relation to recent phenomena. These include the development of just transition narratives which are strongly tied to the de-carbonisation agenda. Another is the focus within industry on post-mining land use (PMLU). There are few examples of successful post-mining transition to learn from. One such example - the post-coal transition in Germany - offers some lessons however there are limits to the transferability of these lessons to other contexts. In response to these challenges, this paper puts forward a research agenda comprising four key areas. The first of these is the need for research and deliberation on what post-mining means in different contexts, as there is a lack of shared understanding of what post-mining is or should be. The second is the need to incorporate a wider range of values and perspectives into analysis, planning, decision-making and actions about closure and transitions. The third area is the need for greater attention to integration between the technical, biophysical and engineering dimensions of closure and transition, and how these intersect with cultural, social and economic dimensions. A fourth need is to elevate the scale at which research and decision-making about closure occurs, from the site to the regional scale and beyond. Collectively, these four areas underpin a shift in thinking beyond notions of returning to prior state and instead focus on the opportunities for post-mining communities and economies.
KW - Indigenous
KW - Just transition
KW - Mine closure
KW - Post-mining land use
KW - Regional development
KW - Repurposing
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85186394701
U2 - 10.1016/j.resourpol.2024.104859
DO - 10.1016/j.resourpol.2024.104859
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85186394701
SN - 0301-4207
VL - 90
JO - Resources Policy
JF - Resources Policy
M1 - 104859
ER -