Environmental Impact Assessment - Mining and the Environment: From Ore to Metal - page 70

for mining project developments. For a comprehensive directory of such guidelines
see Donnelly et al . (1998) and the many useful website links, some of which are listed in
the attachment to Chapter One.
Chapter Two poses and answers the following questions:

●

How does environmental assessment link with the mining cycle?

●

How should environmental impact assessment be managed?

●

What are common themes and principles in environmental impact assessment?

●

When is an environmental impact assessment required?

●

How is an environmental impact assessment done?

●

How is an environmental impact assessment documented and distributed?

●

How to obtain government approval?

●

What are the costs of delay?

●

How to incorporate mine closure into an environmental impact assessment?

●

What mistakes are commonly made?

Subsequent chapters address these subjects in greater detail.
EIA has now been in use for nearly 40 years, which is sufi cient time to appreciate the
weaknesses and strengths associated with the process. Experience demonstrates that the
role of EIA is more restricted than many environmental practitioners seem willing to
admit. There is some resistance to change, on the perfectly rational grounds that it has
taken many years for environmentalists to persuade both governments and companies
alike to embrace EIA as a planning tool. But to continue with a focus on a limited method,
even for good reasons, when there are better ways to do things, seems to be somewhat
ostrich-like and, in the long run, counter-productive. The expectation is that the 2006
IFC Performance Standard 1 will change the common approach to environmental assess-
ment. The fundamental question is now: what are the best ways of managing environ-
mental quality throughout the mine life while at the same time encouraging sustainable
development of natural resources? This question eventually leads to the conclusion that
environmental protection needs to be integrated with regional land-use and development
planning, one of the subjects addressed in the concluding chapter of this topic.

What are the best ways of
managing environmental quality
throughout the mine life while
at the same time encouraging
sustainable development of
natural resources?

2.1 MINING COMPANIES ARE NOT GOVERNMENTS

In principle, the responsibilities of mining companies towards the major stakeholders in
a mining project are relatively clear. Companies are required to (1) maximize shareholder
value; (2) respect human rights and the rights of host communities; (3) conform with all legal
requirements stipulated in contractual agreements with government such as those between the
mining company and the host country; and (4) obey all other applicable laws and regulations.
In many developing countries the contractual agreement between the mining company
and the host country assigns signii cant responsibilities to the investor including responsibil-
ity for capacity building of host communities. This is because mining investment policies try
to merge the apparently diverging interests of the various stakeholders (mining company,
communities, and government) into one interest: sustainable social transformation as the
goal of sustainable human development. It is common that a set of mining policies are in
place to support this objective. These mining policies may include policies to address min-
erals conservation, economic feasibility, employment, community development, taxes and
royalties, and industrial development. It follows that the responsibilities of mining compa-
nies are multiple, complex and varied; maximizing shareholder value is only one, and this
is more than just a technical challenge.