Project risks in mine closure planning such as time delays and community outrage can be minimized if social scientists with expertise in Social Impact Assessment (SIA) are engaged early in the project planning phase.
A review of the Social Impact Assessment of mining closure literature and SIA projects in Australia (including social profiles and social assessment), has shown significant variation in the approaches used, the objectives for undertaking SIA, the skill sets of the community engagement and SIA practitioners, and the outputs.
The review highlighted that risk management can be improved and sustainable outcomes facilitated by the following:
-
Being clear about the reasons for undertaking a SIA
-
Desired outcome should drive the methodology that is chosen
-
Affected communities and stakeholders knowing why there is an SIA and why a particular methodology is chosen
-
Understanding that community outrage, fear and political reverberations relating to SIA objectives and approaches early on in the project is generally preferable to such outrage later on in the project
-
Delaying community and stakeholder engagement can increase project risk
-
Social scientists should work closely with project managers and other team specialists to share understanding about the differences, benefits, disadvantages, and outputs of social impact assessment
-
There are differences between consultation, communication, marketing and community engagement. Marketing and communications skill sets will not necessarily facilitate the kind of community and stakeholder input required to undertake an SIA
Variations in SIA assessment reflect variations in the purpose for the SIA. If there is a lack of clarity about why an SIA is being undertaken, there will be consequential risks for project management and long term community stability and health.
One recent mining closure social assessment that was used to inform a mining closure plan only engaged a narrow selection of key stakeholders and the company project managers, at the request of the mining company. Broad community input was not sought at an early phase. There was a fear that openly discussing the option of town closure may stir community unrest. The resultant initial mine closure recommendations were hence based on the consultant’s experience and views of tangible factors such as infrastructure capacity, geomorphology, and population numbers. There could be little confidence that the consultant’s recommendations reflected a range of community views and knowledge base. It subsequently did not pass the project internal review phase. A number of reiterations of the draft closure plan followed.
On the third closure plan reiteration where the community was consulted more broadly to gain a broader appreciation of intended and unintended social impacts, the local political view was that the option of town closure had much merit. The earlier concern that this option would create widespread community or local political concern and jeopardize the smooth passage of the closure plan was unfounded. The consequences of the unequal balance between estimation and assessment as a result of an inappropriately timed and structured community engagement strategy was budget blow outs, community frustration, and obstacles impeding smooth project management.
This example, which demonstrates a concern of early and broad community engagement, illustrates that this fear is often unfounded. It highlights the importance of marrying the appropriate community engagement strategy and timing, with the objectives and purpose of an SIA, ensuring that there can be increased confidence in mining closure plans or other outputs if they reflect input from a broad and varied representation of communities and stakeholders.
The key message from this review of mining closure projects and relevant literature involving SIA’s, Social Profiling and Social Assessment is that project risk can be minimized if social scientists with expertise in SIA are engaged at an early phase of project planning.
© Sinclair Knight Merz
Requests to re-publish achieve articles should be made via information@globalskm.com
For copyright and disclaimer notices, see Terms of Use.
Who does this affect?
Anyone involved in utilising Social Impact Assessments of Mine Closure
What do I need to do?
Understand how to improve risk management and sustainable outcomes of mine closure by engaging social scientists in the early stages of mine closure planning.
Author: Kylie Fergusen
Kylie is a Senior Social Planner with SKM, based in Adelaide, Australia. Kylie has 20 years’ experience in planning, community engagement and training in industry, government, academia and the community in the UK, Indonesia, Malaysia and Australia.
© Sinclair Knight Merz
Requests to re-publish achieve articles should be made here