Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Socio-Economic Mine Closure (SEMC) framework : a comprehensive approach for addressing the socio-economic… Xavier, André Moura 2013

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
24-ubc_2014_spring_xavier_andre.pdf [ 23.25MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 24-1.0103387.json
JSON-LD: 24-1.0103387-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 24-1.0103387-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 24-1.0103387-rdf.json
Turtle: 24-1.0103387-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 24-1.0103387-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 24-1.0103387-source.json
Full Text
24-1.0103387-fulltext.txt
Citation
24-1.0103387.ris

Full Text

SOCIO-ECONOMIC MINE CLOSURE (SEMC) FRAMEWORK: A COMPREHENSIVE APPROACH FOR ADDRESSING THE SOCIO-ECONOMIC CHALLENGES OF MINE CLOSURE  by  Andr? Moura Xavier   B.S., Christus University, 2000 M.A.Sc., Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte, 2003   A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY  in  THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE AND POSTDOCTORAL STUDIES (Mining Engineering)    THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA (VANCOUVER)   December 2013  ? Andr? Moura Xavier, 2013  	 ?	 ? ii ABSTRACT   This thesis seeks to investigate the initiatives that address the socio-economic implications of mine closure that have been implemented by three mining companies which are located in Mongolia, Argentina and Canada. It further addresses the perceptions of stakeholders, specifically community members, local government representatives and mining company employees regarding the initiatives that have been implemented by three mining companies. Additionally, the research examines six mining industry-related frameworks/guidelines, and explores the ways in which these documents interpret the socio-economics of mine closure. Finally, this thesis introduces and evaluates the Socio-Economic Mine Closure (SEMC) Framework, which was originally developed as part of this PhD investigation. There are 10 elements in the Framework: Policy, Presence, Participation, Planning, Performance, Promotion, Perseverance, Patience, Passion, and Personality. The SEMC Framework is assessed in multiple ways: a) against the current literature on mine closure; b) through an online survey in which 151 experts were invited to provide feedback on the elements and sub-element constituents of the Framework and c) by its utility in constructing the fieldwork survey and the feedback of survey participants indicating the appropriateness of the framework. The study indicates that it would be relevant, timely and appropriate for the mining industry to introduce, discuss and adopt the proposed SEMC Framework. The case study analyses, all of which employed interviews, group sessions, and distribution of survey material as part of their methodological approaches, reveal that each case has unique characteristics and that all are context-based. The case studies also indicate that all three situations reveal the presence of some common issues. For instance, the results of the study suggest that, in all three cases, communication levels need to be improved and augmented. An important finding of the overall study concerns the element Personality within the SEMC Framework. Although in both the online survey and in the survey distributed to study participants, this element was ranked as one of low importance, through the interviews, group sessions and researcher observations it became clear that the Personality of the company community liaison does play a significant role in maintaining and fostering relationships between mining companies and local stakeholders.       	 ?	 ? iii PREFACE  As solo author of this study, I am responsible for the identification, design and fieldwork for this research. Furthermore, the study?s surveys, data gathering, and the compilation and interpretation of the collected data were also performed by me throughout all the different stages of the study. The basic statistical tests performed to analyze the data collected in the field surveys were outsourced and performed by the UBC Statistics Consulting and Research Laboratory (SCARL) under my supervision. Since design interviews and surveys were conducted over the course of the project, the study also complied with the requirements of the UBC Research Ethics Board and the H12-00505 Certificate of Approval Minimum Risk was issued.  	 ?  	 ?	 ? iv TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................................. ii	 ?PREFACE ................................................................................................................................... iii	 ?TABLE OF CONTENTS .............................................................................................................. iv	 ?LIST OF TABLES ..................................................................................................................... viii	 ?LIST OF FIGURES ...................................................................................................................... xi	 ?GLOSSARY .............................................................................................................................. xvi	 ?ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ....................................................................................................... xviii	 ?DEDICATION ............................................................................................................................. xx	 ?Chapter 1 ..................................................................................................................................... 1	 ?1.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 1	 ?1.2 Statement of the Problem ............................................................................................................... 2	 ?1.3 Justification of the Research .......................................................................................................... 3	 ?1.4 Case Study Approach ..................................................................................................................... 6	 ?1.5 Research Questions ........................................................................................................................ 7	 ?1.6 Research Objectives ....................................................................................................................... 7	 ?1.7 Contribution of the Research ......................................................................................................... 8	 ?1.7.1 Applied Contribution of Research ............................................................................................... 8	 ?1.7.2 Academic Contribution of Research ........................................................................................... 8	 ?1.8 Thesis Structure .............................................................................................................................. 8	 ?Chapter 2 ................................................................................................................................... 11	 ?2.1 Literature Review ........................................................................................................................... 11	 ?2.2 Community Development (CD) in Mining .................................................................................... 13	 ?2.3 Philanthropy ................................................................................................................................... 14	 ?2.4 Mine Closure Cases ....................................................................................................................... 16	 ?2.4.1 Sullivan Mine ? British Columbia ? Canada .............................................................................. 16	 ?2.4.2 Anaconda Copper Mine ? Butte, Montana ? United States ...................................................... 17	 ?2.4.3 Joban Coal Mine - Iwaki, Japan ................................................................................................ 19	 ?2.5 Industry Guidelines and Frameworks .......................................................................................... 20	 ?2.5.1 Seven Questions to Sustainability (7Qs) .................................................................................. 20	 ?2.5.2 ICMM 10 Principles ................................................................................................................... 21	 ?2.5.3 ICMM Community Development (CD) Toolkit ........................................................................... 22	 ?2.5.4 ICMM Planning for Integrated Mine Closure ............................................................................. 22	 ?2.5.5 Towards Sustainable Mining (TSM) .......................................................................................... 23	 ?2.5.6 The Equator Principles .............................................................................................................. 24	 ?2.6 Proposed Socio-Economic Mine Closure Framework ............................................................... 25	 ?2.6.1 Policy ........................................................................................................................................ 27	 ?2.6.1.1 Corporate Commitment ...................................................................................................... 27	 ?2.6.1.2 Governance ....................................................................................................................... 27	 ?2.6.2. Presence .................................................................................................................................. 28	 ?2.6.2.1 Presence in the Field ......................................................................................................... 28	 ?2.6.2.2 Stakeholder Mapping ......................................................................................................... 28	 ?2.6.3. Participation ............................................................................................................................. 29	 ?2.6.3.1 Mobilization ........................................................................................................................ 29	 ?2.6.3.2 Education / Capacity Building ............................................................................................ 29	 ?	 ?	 ? v 2.6.3.3 Empowerment .................................................................................................................... 30	 ?2.6.3.4 Community Engagement ................................................................................................... 30	 ?2.6.3.5 Partnerships ....................................................................................................................... 32	 ?2.6.4. Planning ................................................................................................................................... 33	 ?2.6.4.1 Asset Mapping ................................................................................................................... 33	 ?2.6.4.2 Socio Economic Impact Assessment ? SEIA ..................................................................... 34	 ?2.6.4.3 Vision ................................................................................................................................. 34	 ?2.6.4.4 Projects .............................................................................................................................. 34	 ?2.6.4.5 Indicators ........................................................................................................................... 35	 ?2.6.4.6 Resources .......................................................................................................................... 35	 ?2.6.5. Performance ............................................................................................................................ 36	 ?2.6.5.1 Implementation .................................................................................................................. 36	 ?2.6.5.2 Monitoring .......................................................................................................................... 36	 ?2.6.5.3 Evaluation Towards Continuous Improvement .................................................................. 37	 ?2.6.6. Promotion ................................................................................................................................. 37	 ?2.6.6.1 Sharing / Communication ................................................................................................... 37	 ?2.6.6.2 Consolidation ..................................................................................................................... 38	 ?2.6.7. Perseverance ........................................................................................................................... 38	 ?2.6.7.1 Overcoming Resistance and Inertia ................................................................................... 38	 ?2.6.7.2 Reinforcing Quality of Participation .................................................................................... 38	 ?2.6.8. Patience ................................................................................................................................... 38	 ?2.6.8.1 Allowing Time for Effective Change ................................................................................... 39	 ?2.6.9. Passion .................................................................................................................................... 39	 ?2.6.9.1 Individual Passion .............................................................................................................. 39	 ?2.6.10. Personality ............................................................................................................................. 40	 ?2.6.10.1 Trust, Respect and Empathy ........................................................................................... 40	 ?2.7 Justification of the Socio-Economic Mine Closure Framework ................................................ 41	 ?Chapter 3 ................................................................................................................................... 43	 ?3.1 The Research Process and Methodology ................................................................................... 43	 ?3.1.1 Phase I: Diagnostic ................................................................................................................... 44	 ?3.1.2 Phase II: Assessment, Refinement and Expert Feedback of the SEMC Framework ............... 44	 ?3.1.3 Phase III: Assessing Local Context, Local Perceptions and Further Assessment of the Framework ......................................................................................................................................... 45	 ?Chapter 4 ................................................................................................................................... 47	 ?4.1 Analyzing Industry Guidelines and Frameworks (Objectives 1 and 2) ..................................... 47	 ?Chapter 5 ................................................................................................................................... 52	 ?5.1 Assessing and Receiving Feedback on the SEMC Framework (Objective 2) .......................... 52	 ?5.1.1 Industry Category ...................................................................................................................... 54	 ?5.1.2 Education Category .................................................................................................................. 55	 ?5.1.3 NGO Category .......................................................................................................................... 55	 ?5.1.4 Consultant Category ................................................................................................................. 57	 ?5.1.5 Government Category ............................................................................................................... 58	 ?5.1.6 Online Survey Conclusion ......................................................................................................... 58	 ?Chapter 6 ................................................................................................................................... 60	 ?6.1 Case Study Analysis (Objectives 3 and 4) .................................................................................. 60	 ?6.1.1 Boroo Gold Company (BGC) ? Mongolia .................................................................................. 60	 ?6.1.1.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 60	 ?6.1.1.2 Case Study Methodology ................................................................................................... 65	 ?	 ?	 ? vi 6.1.1.3 General Results ................................................................................................................. 67	 ?6.1.1.4 Discussion of the Survey and Interviews ........................................................................... 71	 ?6.1.1.4.1 Policy .......................................................................................................................... 71	 ?6.1.1.4.2. Presence .................................................................................................................... 73	 ?6.1.1.4.3. Participation ............................................................................................................... 76	 ?6.1.1.4.4. Planning ..................................................................................................................... 81	 ?6.1.1.4.5. Performance .............................................................................................................. 90	 ?6.1.1.4.6. Promotion ................................................................................................................... 93	 ?6.1.1.4.7. Perseverance ............................................................................................................. 98	 ?6.1.1.4.8. Patience ..................................................................................................................... 99	 ?6.1.1.4.9. Passion .................................................................................................................... 100	 ?6.1.1.4.10. Personality ............................................................................................................. 102	 ?6.1.1.5. Mongolian Case Study Conclusions ............................................................................... 105	 ?6.1.2 Cerro Vanguardia SA ? Argentina .......................................................................................... 109	 ?6.1.2.1. Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 109	 ?6.1.2.2. Cerro Vanguardia S.A. (CVSA) Operations .................................................................... 114	 ?6.1.2.3. Case Study Methodology (Argentina) ............................................................................. 119	 ?6.1.2.4. General Results .............................................................................................................. 120	 ?6.1.2.5. Discussions of the Survey and Interviews ...................................................................... 124	 ?6.1.2.5.1 Policy ........................................................................................................................ 124	 ?6.1.2.5.2 Presence ................................................................................................................... 128	 ?6.1.2.5.3 Participation .............................................................................................................. 129	 ?6.1.2.5.4 Planning .................................................................................................................... 136	 ?6.1.2.5.5 Performance ............................................................................................................. 141	 ?6.1.2.5.6. Promotion ................................................................................................................. 144	 ?6.1.2.5.7. Perseverance ........................................................................................................... 146	 ?6.1.2.5.8. Patience ................................................................................................................... 147	 ?6.1.2.5.9. Passion .................................................................................................................... 149	 ?6.1.2.5.10. Personality ............................................................................................................. 150	 ?6.1.2.6. Argentinian Case Study Conclusions .............................................................................. 151	 ?6.1.3 Diavik Diamond Mine ? Canada (Northwest Territories) ......................................................... 155	 ?6.1.3.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 155	 ?6.1.3.1.1 European Explorers, Treaties, Residential Schools and Canada First Nations ........ 155	 ?6.1.3.1.2 Indian Residential Schools ........................................................................................ 159	 ?6.1.3.1.3 Socio-Economic Context of Aboriginal Communities in the NWT ............................. 160	 ?6.1.3.1.4 Federal and Territorial Governments ........................................................................ 164	 ?6.1.3.1.5 Exploration and Mining Activities in the NWT ........................................................... 167	 ?6.1.3.1.6 Pre-Diamond Mine Era ............................................................................................. 177	 ?6.1.3.1.7 Giant Mine ................................................................................................................. 177	 ?6.1.3.1.8 Diavik Diamond Mine Inc. (DDMI) ............................................................................. 179	 ?6.1.3.1.9 Participation Agreements .......................................................................................... 184	 ?6.1.3.2. Case Study Methodology ................................................................................................ 188	 ?6.1.3.3. Analysis of Surveys and Interviews ................................................................................ 192	 ?6.1.3.3.1. Policy ....................................................................................................................... 192	 ?6.1.3.3.2. Presence .................................................................................................................. 194	 ?6.1.3.3.3. Participation ............................................................................................................. 196	 ?6.1.3.3.4. Planning ................................................................................................................... 205	 ?6.1.3.3.5. Performance ............................................................................................................ 210	 ?6.1.3.4 Canadian Case Study Conclusions ................................................................................. 215	 ?Chapter 7 ................................................................................................................................. 220	 ?	 ?	 ? vii 7.1 General Discussion ..................................................................................................................... 220	 ?Chapter 8 ................................................................................................................................. 225	 ?8.1 Conclusion ................................................................................................................................... 225	 ?8.2 SEMC Framework Step-by-Step Implementation ..................................................................... 228	 ?Chapter 9 ................................................................................................................................. 229	 ?9.1 Claim of Original Contribution .................................................................................................... 229	 ?9.2 Original Contribution to Profession, Practice and Policy ........................................................ 229	 ?Chapter 10 ............................................................................................................................... 230	 ?10.1 Limitations of the Study ............................................................................................................ 230	 ?Chapter 11 ............................................................................................................................... 231	 ?11.1 Recommendations for Future Research ................................................................................. 231	 ?REFERENCES ......................................................................................................................... 233	 ?APPENDIX A ........................................................................................................................... 253	 ?Socio-Economic Mine Closure Framework (SEMC) ....................................................................... 253	 ?APPENDIX B ........................................................................................................................... 256	 ?10 P?s of Socio-Economic Mine Closure (SEMC) Framework vs. 7 Q?s to Sustainability ........... 256	 ?APPENDIX C ........................................................................................................................... 259	 ?10 P?s of Socio-Economic Mine Closure (SEMC) Framework vs. ICMM 10 Principles ............... 259	 ?APPENDIX D ........................................................................................................................... 261	 ?10 P?s of Socio-Economic Mine Closure (SEMC) Framework vs. ICMM ? Community Development (CD) Toolkit ................................................................................................................. 261	 ?APPENDIX E ............................................................................................................................ 264	 ?10 P?s of Socio-Economic Mine Closure (SEMC) Framework vs. ICMM Planning for Integrated Closure Toolkit ................................................................................................................................... 264	 ?APPENDIX F ............................................................................................................................ 267	 ?10 P?s of Socio-Economic Mine Closure (SEMC) Framework vs. TSM ? Performance Standard (PS): Aboriginal Relations and Community Outreach and Mine Closure Framework ................ 267	 ?APPENDIX G ........................................................................................................................... 269	 ?10 P?s of Socio-Economic Mine Closure (SEMC) Framework vs. The Equator Principles (And IFC Performance Standard (PS) 1) .......................................................................................................... 269	 ?APPENDIX H ........................................................................................................................... 272	 ?Field Survey ....................................................................................................................................... 272	 ?APPENDIX I ............................................................................................................................. 286	 ?Screen shot of the online survey ..................................................................................................... 286	 ?APPENDIX J ............................................................................................................................ 287	 ?Study Participants Mongolian Case Study ...................................................................................... 287	 ?APPENDIX K ........................................................................................................................... 288	 ?Study Participants Canadian Case Study ....................................................................................... 288	 ?APPENDIX L ............................................................................................................................ 289	 ?Study Participants Argentinean Case Study ................................................................................... 289	 ?  	 ?	 ? viii LIST OF TABLES Table 1 - Various Different Views of Development .................................................................................... 13	 ?Table 2 - Seven Questions to Sustainability Framework ........................................................................... 21	 ?Table 3 ? ICMM 10 Principles .................................................................................................................... 21	 ?Table 4 - ICMM Planning for Integrated Mine Closure Toolkit ................................................................... 23	 ?Table 5 - Socio-Economic Mine Closure Framework (The 10 Ps Framework) .......................................... 26	 ?Table 6 ? Crosswalk Matrix Comparing SEMC Framework to Industry Guidelines and Frameworks ....... 48	 ?Table 7 - Discussion of the Crosswalk Matrix Comparing the SEMC Framework Against Industry Guidelines / Frameworks ........................................................................................................................... 50	 ?Table 8 - Groups Invited to Respond to the Online Survey ....................................................................... 52	 ?Table 9 ? Summary of the Average Scores and Standard Deviation Responses Given by the Online Survey Participants .................................................................................................................................... 53	 ?Table 10 - Industry Group Average and Standard Deviation Scores to the Online Survey ....................... 54	 ?Table 11 - Education Group Average and Standard Deviation Scores to the Online Survey .................... 55	 ?Table 12 - NGO Group Average and Standard Deviation Scores to the Online Survey ............................ 55	 ?Table 13 - Consultant Group Average and Standard Deviation Scores to the Online Survey ................... 57	 ?Table 14 - Government Group Average and Standard Deviation Scores to the Online Survey ................ 58	 ?Table 15 - Survey Distributed to Bayangol Soum Asking Where the SDF Should Be Invested ................ 64	 ?Table 16 - Milestones DFAIT Project ......................................................................................................... 65	 ?Table 17 - Mongolia Research Participants ............................................................................................... 67	 ?Table 18 - Detailed Responses of the Mining Company Regarding the SEMC Online Survey ................. 68	 ?Table 19 - Detailed Responses of the Government Group Regarding the SEMC Online Survey ............. 69	 ?Table 20 - Detailed Responses of the Community Regarding the SEMC Online Survey .......................... 70	 ?Table 21 - Comparison Between Government and Community Responses for Question 1.3 ................... 72	 ?Table 22 - Comparison Between Bayangol, Mandal and UB Between the Responses for Question 2.1 .. 75	 ?Table 23 - Comparison Between Bayangol and Mandal Responses to Question 3.6 ............................... 77	 ?Table 24 - Comparison Between the Responses Given by Bayangol and Mandal to Question 3.14 ........ 78	 ?Table 25 - Comparison Between Community and Government Responses to Question 4.1 .................... 82	 ?Table 26 - Comparison Between the Responses of Community and Government from Bayangol and Mandal for Question 4.2 ............................................................................................................................ 84	 ?Table 27 - Comparison Between the Responses Given by C, G and MC from Bayangol and Mandal for Question 4.17 ............................................................................................................................................ 85	 ?Table 28 - Comparison Between the Responses Given by C, G and MC from Bayangol and Mandal for Question 4.18 ............................................................................................................................................ 85	 ?Table 29 - Comparison Between Community and Government Responses to Question 4.21 .................. 86	 ?Table 30 - Steering Committee Composition of Bayangol Soum .............................................................. 88	 ?Table 31 - Joint Working Group Composition of Mandal Soum ................................................................. 88	 ?Table 32  -  Comparison Between Community,  Government and Company Responses for Question 5.4 ................................................................................................................................................................... 91	 ?	 ?	 ? ix Table 33  -  Comparison Between Community,  Government and Company Responses for Question 5.6 ................................................................................................................................................................... 92	 ?Table 34  -  Comparison Between Community,  Government and Company Responses for Question 6.1 ................................................................................................................................................................... 93	 ?Table 35 - Comparison Between the Responses Given by C, G and MC from Bayangol and Mandal for Question 6.3 .............................................................................................................................................. 94	 ?Table 36 - Comparison Between the Responses Given by Community and Government from Bayangol and Mandal for Question 6.6 ..................................................................................................................... 97	 ?Table 37 - Comparison Between Community, Government and Company Responses for Questions 6.9 97	 ?Table 38 - Comparison Between Community, Government and Company from Bayangol, Mandal and UB Responses for Questions 8.2 .................................................................................................................... 99	 ?Table 39 - Comparison Between the Responses Given by Community and Government from Bayangol and Mandal for Question 9.2 ................................................................................................................... 101	 ?Table 40 - Comparison Between Community, Government and Company Responses for Questions 9.6 ................................................................................................................................................................. 102	 ?Table 41 - Comparison Between the Responses Given by Community and Government from Bayangol and Mandal for Question 10.1 ................................................................................................................. 103	 ?Table 42 - Comparison Between the Responses Given by Community and Government from Bayangol and Mandal for Question 10.8 ................................................................................................................. 105	 ?Table 43 - Key Findings of the Mongolian Case Study ............................................................................ 106	 ?Table 44 - Mining Activity in Argentina .................................................................................................... 111	 ?Table 45 - Mining Exploration and Operational Projects in Santa Cruz Province .................................... 114	 ?Table 46 - CVSA Gold and Silver Resources .......................................................................................... 116	 ?Table 47 - CVSA Gold and Silver Production Data ................................................................................. 116	 ?Table 48 - Direct and Indirect Investment Made by CVSA in 2012 and Accumulated. ............................ 117	 ?Table 49 - Puerto San Juli?n Diagnostic and Strategies ......................................................................... 118	 ?Table 50 - Argentina Research Participants ............................................................................................ 120	 ?Table 51 - Average Scores Given by Mining Company ........................................................................... 121	 ?Table 52 - Average Scores Given by Government .................................................................................. 122	 ?Table 53 - Average Scores Given by Mining Company Union ................................................................ 123	 ?Table 54 - Average Scores Given by Community .................................................................................... 124	 ?Table 55 - Comparison Between the Responses for Question 1.6 .......................................................... 127	 ?Table 56 - Comparison between the responses for Question 3.1 ........................................................... 130	 ?Table 57 - Comparison Between the Responses for Question 3.3 .......................................................... 132	 ?Table 58 - Comparison Between the Responses for Question 3.11 ........................................................ 133	 ?Table 59 - Comparison Between the Responses for Question 3.25 ........................................................ 135	 ?Table 60 - Comparison Between the Responses for Question 3.26 ........................................................ 136	 ?Table 61 - Comparison Between the Responses for Question 4.14 ........................................................ 138	 ?Table 62 - Comparison Between the Responses for Question 4.27 ........................................................ 139	 ?	 ?	 ? x Table 63 - Comparison Between Responses to Question 5.1 ................................................................. 143	 ?Table 64 - Comparison Between the Responses for Question 6.1 .......................................................... 144	 ?Table 65 - Comparison Between Responses to Question 7.6 ................................................................. 147	 ?Table 66 - Comparison Between the Responses to Question 8.1 ........................................................... 148	 ?Table 67 - Key Findings of the Argentinean Case Study ......................................................................... 152	 ?Table 68 - Benefits of Devolution to NWT ............................................................................................... 166	 ?Table 69 - NWT GDP by Industry (2007-2011) ....................................................................................... 168	 ?Table 70 - Negative Impacts of Mining Activities on Northern Aboriginal Communities .......................... 171	 ?Table 71 - Uncertainties and Mineral Potential in NWT (2011/12 - 2012/13) .......................................... 175	 ?Table 72- Potential Project Developments .............................................................................................. 176	 ?Table 73 - Diavik Mine Production 2003 - 2012 ....................................................................................... 180	 ?Table 74 - Mineral Reserves at Diavik - December 31, 2012 .................................................................. 180	 ?Table 75 - DDMI Socio-Economic Monitoring Agreement objectives ...................................................... 182	 ?Table 76 - Mining Royalty Rates Northwest Territories ........................................................................... 183	 ?Table 77 ? Mandate of the Advisory Board ............................................................................................. 185	 ?Table 78 - NWT Study Participants ......................................................................................................... 188	 ?Table 79 - Comparison Between the Responses to Question 1.6 ........................................................... 193	 ?Table 80 ? Comparison Between All Four Groups to the Question 2.1 ................................................... 194	 ?Table 81 - Comparison Between Responses for Question 2.4. ............................................................... 196	 ?Table 82 - Comparison Between Responses for Question 3.1. ............................................................... 197	 ?Table 83 - Comparison Between Responses for Question 3.4 ................................................................ 198	 ?Table 84 - Comparison Between the Responses for Question 3.11. ....................................................... 199	 ?Table 85 - Comparison Between the Responses for Questions 3.21 and 3.22. ...................................... 201	 ?Table 86 - Comparison between the responses for Questions 3.25 and 3.26. ........................................ 203	 ?Table 87 - Comparison Between Responses to Question 3.30 ............................................................... 204	 ?Table 88 - Comparison Between the Responses for Question 4.3 .......................................................... 206	 ?Table 89 - Comparison Between the Responses for Question 4.14 ........................................................ 207	 ?Table 90 - Comparison Between the Responses for Question 4.17 ........................................................ 208	 ?Table 91 - Comparison Between the Responses for Questions 4.28 and 4.30. ...................................... 210	 ?Table 92 - Comparison Between the Responses for Question 5.3 .......................................................... 211	 ?Table 93 - Key Findings of the Canadian Case Study ............................................................................. 215	 ?Table 94 - SEMC Framework Step-by-Step Implementation ................................................................... 228	 ?	 ?	 ? 	 ?	 ?	 ? xi LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 - Roadmap and Milestones of the Thesis .................................................................................... 10	 ?Figure 2 - Community Engagement Continuum ........................................................................................ 31	 ?Figure 3 - Plot Displaying the Average Responses Given by Group Participants on the Online Survey. .. 53	 ?Figure 4 ? Map of the Location of the Selenge Province in Mongolian (Image: Public Domain) ............... 61	 ?Figure 5 ? Map of Selenge Province (Image: Public Domain) ................................................................... 61	 ?Figure 6 - Survey Question Sample ........................................................................................................... 67	 ?Figure 7 - Plot Compilation of Mining Company Responses of the SEMC Online Survey ........................ 68	 ?Figure 8 - Plot Compilation of Government Responses to the SEMC Online Survey ............................... 69	 ?Figure 9 - Plot Compilation of Community Responses to the SEMC Online Survey ................................. 70	 ?Figure 10 - Boxplot of the Answer Scores for Question 1.3 for C, G and MC ? ?I trust that the local government is looking after the community?s interest.? .............................................................................. 72	 ?Figure 11 ? Boxplot of the Answers Scores for Question 2.1 for Groups C, G and MC -  "The mining company has enough people (company representatives) to adequately manage all community related matters." ..................................................................................................................................................... 75	 ?Figure 12 - Detailed Analysis of the Responses Provided by Mandal Residents to Questions 2.1 ........... 75	 ?Figure 13 - Boxplot of the Answers Scores for Question 3.6 for Community Group - "The mining company targeted minority or vulnerable groups such as elders, women and youth to participate in community meetings" ................................................................................................................................................... 77	 ?Figure 14 - Boxplot of the Answers Scores for Question 3.14 for Community Group - "I feel that my ideas and suggestions are taken into account by the mining company." ............................................................ 78	 ?Figure 15 - Detailed Analysis of the Responses Provided by Bayangol and Mandal Residents to Question 3.14 ............................................................................................................................................................ 79	 ?Figure 16 - Boxplot of the Answers Scores for Question 4.1 for C and G - "The mining company understands the community's most critical social issues" ......................................................................... 82	 ?Figure 17 - Boxplot of the Answers Scores for Question 4.2 for Community and Government - "The company knows the local leaders well." .................................................................................................... 83	 ?Figure 18 - Boxplot of the Answers Scores for Question 4.17 for C, G and MC -  "There are a representative number in terms of the overall community of youth people (age between 16 and 20 years old) involved in the design of community projects." ................................................................................... 84	 ?Figure 19 - Boxplot of the Answers Scores for Question 4.18 for C, G and MC -  "There are a representative number in terms of the overall community of older people (older than 60 years old) involved in the design of community projects." .......................................................................................... 85	 ?Figure 20 - Boxplot of the Answers Scores for Question 4.21 for C, G and MC - "The mining company has defined clear indicators to measure the results and progress of the projects they have implemented / sponsored. ................................................................................................................................................. 86	 ?Figure 21 - Boxplot of the Answers Scores for Question 5.4 for C, G and MC - "I think an appropriate number of older people are involved with the implementation of community projects." ............................ 91	 ?	 ?	 ? xii Figure 22 - Boxplot of the Answers Scores for Question 5.6 for C, G and MC -  "The mining company monitors the development and the results of the projects they sponsor." ................................................. 92	 ?Figure 23 - Boxplot of the Answers Scores for Question 6.1 for C, G and MC - "The mining company shares the results of community projects with local citizens." ................................................................... 93	 ?Figure 24 - Boxplot of the Answers Scores for Question 6.3 for C and G - "The mining company does a good job in sharing important information with the local community." ....................................................... 94	 ?Figure 25 - Boxplot of the Answers Scores for Question 6.6 for C and G  - "I believe that the mining company always asks for the opinion of the community regarding important matters that affect the community." ............................................................................................................................................... 96	 ?Figure 26 - Boxplot of the Answers Scores for Question 6.9 for C, G and MC - "Mining company projects designed for the benefit of the community have been successfully implemented for many years." .......... 97	 ?Figure 27 - Boxplot of the Answers Scores for Question 8.2 for C, G and MC -  "Mining company representatives understand that social projects take time to produce results." ......................................... 99	 ?Figure 28 - Boxplot of the Answers Scores for Question 9.2 for C and G - "I feel the mining company Community Relations Officers are motivated to do their work" ................................................................ 100	 ?Figure 29 - Boxplot of the Answers Scores for Question 9.6 for C, G and MC - "The company looks for opportunities within the community to help develop new businesses in the tow/region." ........................ 102	 ?Figure 30 - Boxplot of the Answers Scores for Question 10.1 for C and G - "I think the current mining company Community Relations Officer is the right person for the job." ................................................... 103	 ?Figure 31 - Boxplot of the Answers Scores for Question 10.8 for C and G -  "I feel that the mining company personnel who work in the Community Relations department really care about the well-being of the local community." ............................................................................................................................... 105	 ?Figure 32 ? Location Map of Santa Cruz Province (Image: Public Domain) ........................................... 112	 ?Figure 33 ? Map of Mining Exploration and Operational Projects in Santa Cruz Province (with permission from Mining Press) ................................................................................................................................... 113	 ?Figure 34 ?Cerro Vanguardia and Puerto San Juli?n Location Map (With Permission from Cerro Vanguardia) ............................................................................................................................................. 115	 ?Figure 35 - Plot of the Scores Given by Mining Company ....................................................................... 121	 ?Figure 36 - Plot of the Scores Given by Government .............................................................................. 122	 ?Figure 37 - Plot of the Scores Given by Mining Company Union ............................................................ 123	 ?Figure 38 - Plot of the Scores Given by Community ................................................................................ 124	 ?Figure 39 - Boxplot of the Answers Scores for Question 1.1 for Mining Company (MC) and Mining Company Union (MCU) ? ?The mining company has a clear corporate statement or mission statement describing its values with regard to the community, and posts them on its websites, annual reports and communication material.? ......................................................................................................................... 126	 ?Figure 40 ? Box plot of the Answers Scores for Question 1.6 for Groups C, G, MC and MCU -  ?The mining company always informs to the community regarding the amount of money it has invested in community projects.? ................................................................................................................................ 127	 ?	 ?	 ? xiii Figure 41 - Boxplot of the Answers Scores for Question 2.1 for C, G, MC and MCU ? ?The mining company has enough people (company representatives) to adequately manage all community- related matters.? ................................................................................................................................................... 128	 ?Figure 42 - Boxplot of the Answers Scores for Question 3.1 for C, G, MC and MCU ? ?I perceive that local citizens are motivated to participate in meetings which aim to discuss the improvement of the living conditions of the community and which have been organized by the mining company.? ........................ 130	 ?Figure 43 - Boxplot of the Answers Scores for Question 3.3 for C, G, MC and MCU ? ?I believe that the people who attended meetings organized by the mining company are representative of existing community groups. .................................................................................................................................. 132	 ?Figure 44 - Boxplot of the Answers Scores for Question 3.11 for C, G, MC and MCU ? ?The mining company displays a very good understanding of the social and economic impacts of mine closure on the community.? ............................................................................................................................................. 133	 ?Figure 45 - Boxplot of the Answers Scores for Question 3.13 for Community Group ? ?I believe that the participation of local citizens is important and can have a positive effect on changing the local reality.? 134	 ?Figure 46 - Boxplot of the Answers s ....................................................................................................... 134	 ?Figure 47 - Boxplot of the Answers Scores for Question 3.25 for C, G, MC and MCU ? ?I think local government representatives are doing their best to enhance the quality of life in the community.? ........ 135	 ?Figure 48 - Boxplot of the Answers Scores for Question 3.26 for C, G, MC, MCU ? ?I think local citizens are doing their best to make the community a better place to live.? ........................................................ 136	 ?Figure 49 - Boxplot of the Answers Scores for Question 4.5 for C, G, MC and MCU ? ?I have a clear image of how I would like the community to look after mine closure.? ..................................................... 137	 ?Figure 50 - Boxplot of the Answers Scores for Question 4.6 for C, G, MC and MCU ? ?I think my neighbours and friends have a clear idea of how the community should look like in the future. ............. 137	 ?Figure 51 - Boxplot of the Answers Scores for Question 4.14 for C, G, MC and MCU ? ?I believe the local socio-economic situation of the community will be better after the mine is closed.? ................................ 139	 ?Figure 52 - Boxplot of the Answers Scores for Question 4.27 for Community (C), Government (G), Mining Company (MC) and Mining Company Union (MCU) ? ?The community is aware of where the money allocated to fund community projects is spent.? ....................................................................................... 140	 ?Figure 53 - Boxplot of the Answers Scores for Question 4.28 for C, G, MC and MCU ? ?I think the local government has made proper use of the tax & royalty moneys paid by the mining company.? .............. 141	 ?Figure 54 - Boxplot of the Answers Scores for Question 5.1 for C, G, MC and MCU ? ?I think the right people are involved with the implementation of local community projects.? ............................................ 143	 ?Figure 55 - Boxplot of the Answers Scores for Question 6.1 for C, G, MC, MCU ? ?The mining company shares the results of community projects with local citizens.? ................................................................. 144	 ?Figure 56 - Boxplot of the Answers Scores for Question 6.2 for C, G, MC and MCU ? ?The mining company invites the whole community to learn more about community projects.? .................................. 146	 ?Figure 57 - Boxplot of the Answers Scores for Question 7.6 for C, G, MC and MCU ? ?I think the quality of local community participation is improving.? ............................................................................................ 147	 ?	 ?	 ? xiv Figure 58 - Boxplot of the Answers Scores for Question 8.1 for C, G, MC and MCU? ?I feel the mining company is patient enough to wait the results of community projects. .................................................... 148	 ?Figure 59 - Boxplot of the Answers Scores for Question 9.1 for C and G- ?I feel the mining company community manager is motivated to do his/her work.? ............................................................................ 149	 ?Figure 60 - Comparison Between the Responses for Question 9.1. ....................................................... 150	 ?Figure 61 - Boxplot of the Answers Scores for Question 10.1 for C and G ? ?I think the current mining company community relation manager is the right person for the job.? ................................................... 150	 ?Figure 62 - Distribution of Responses Given by the Community Participants to Question 10.1. ............. 151	 ?Figure 63 - NWT Population & Education Levels .................................................................................... 161	 ?Figure 64 - NWT Alcohol Consumption ................................................................................................... 162	 ?Figure 65 - Total Spent by Snap Lake, Ekati and Diavik Mines ? 1996 ? 2011 (With Permission from DDMI) ...................................................................................................................................................... 170	 ?Figure 66 - Diavik Cumulative and Annual Spending (With Permission from DDMI) .............................. 170	 ?Figure 67 - Advanced Exploration Projects (with permission from NWT & Nunavut Chamber of Mines) 172	 ?Figure 68 ? Mine Life in NWT (with permission from NWT & Nunavut Chamber of Mines) .................... 173	 ?Figure 69 - Exploration and Deposit Appraisal Expenditures (with permission from NWT & Nunavut Chamber of Mines) .................................................................................................................................. 174	 ?Figure 70 - Mining in the NWT and Cumulative Social Impact ................................................................ 187	 ?Figure 71 - Boxplot of the Answers Scores for Question 1.6 for Community (C), Government (G), Mining Company Site (MC) and Mining Company City (MCC) - ?The mining company always informs to the community regarding the amount of money it has invested in community projects.? .............................. 193	 ?Figure 72 - Boxplot of the Answers Scores for Question 1.7 for Mining Company Site (MC) and Mining Company City (MCC) - ?All mining company employees are aware of the social policies and actions of concern to the community that have been put in place by the company.? ............................................... 193	 ?Figure 73 - Boxplot of the Answers Scores for Question 2.1 for Community (C), Government (G), Mining Company Site (MC) and Mining Company City (MCC) - "The mining company has enough people (company representatives) to adequately manage all community related matters." ............................... 194	 ?Figure 74 - Distribution of Responses Given by DDMI Site Employees to Question 2.1 ......................... 195	 ?Figure 75 - Boxplot of the Answers Scores for Question 2.4 for C, MC and MCC - "The mining company community manager understands all the cultural elements of the community (i.e. religion, culture, etc)." ................................................................................................................................................................. 196	 ?Figure 76 - Boxplot of the Answers Scores for Question 3.1 for C, G, MC and MCC - "I perceive that local citizens are motivated to participate in meetings which aim to discuss the improvement of the living conditions of the community and which have been organized by the mining company." ........................ 197	 ?Figure 77 - Boxplot of the Answers Scores for Question 3.4 for C, G, MC and MCC - "I think some groups within the community have more privileges than others". ........................................................................ 198	 ?Figure 78 - Boxplot of the Answers Scores for Question 3.11 for C, G, MC and MCC - "The mining company displays a very good understanding of the social and economic impacts of mine closure on the community." ............................................................................................................................................. 199	 ?	 ?	 ? xv Figure 79 - Boxplot of the Answers Scores for Question 3.21 for C, G, MC and MCC - "People in the community work together to solve community problems." ....................................................................... 200	 ?Figure 80 - Boxplot of the Answers Scores for Question 3.22 for C, G, MC and MCC - "There is a lot of cooperation between neighbourhood groups." ........................................................................................ 200	 ?Figure 81 - Boxplot of the Answers Scores for Question 3.25 for C, G, MC and MCC - "I think local government representatives are doing their best to enhance the quality of life in the community." ........ 202	 ?Figure 82 - Boxplot of the Answers Scores for Question 3.26 for C, G, MC and MCC - "I think local citizens are doing their best to make the community a better place to live. ............................................. 202	 ?Figure 83 - Distribution of Responses Given by DDMI Site Employees to Questions 3.30 ..................... 203	 ?Figure 84 - Boxplot of the Answers Scores for Question 3.30 for C, G, MC and MCC- "I see the local government working hard to support the creation of small business in the community." ........................ 204	 ?Figure 85 - Boxplot of the Answers Scores for Question 4.3 for C, G, MC and MCC - "In my opinion, the mining company understands all the social consequences that its presence in the community has on the local people." ........................................................................................................................................... 205	 ?Figure 86 - Distribution of Responses Given by DDMI Site Employees to Question 4.14 ....................... 206	 ?Figure 87 - Boxplot of the Answers Scores for Question 4.14 for C, G, MC and MCC ? ?I believe the local socio-economic situation of the community will be better after the mine is closed.? ................................ 207	 ?Figure 88 - Boxplot of the Answers Scores for Question 4.17 for C, G, MC and MCC - "There are a representative number in terms of the overall community of youth people involved in the design of community projects." ................................................................................................................................ 208	 ?Figure 89 - Boxplot of the Answers Scores for Question 4.28 for C, G, MC and MCC - "I think the local government has made proper use of the tax & royalty moneys paid by the mining company.? .............. 209	 ?Figure 90 - Boxplot of the Answers Scores for Question 4.30 for C, MC and MCC - "The government is transparent with regard its use of royalty money." ................................................................................... 209	 ?Figure 91 - Boxplot of the Answers Scores for Question 5.3 for C, G, MC and MCC - "I think an appropriate number of youth people are involved with the implementation of community projects." ...... 211	 ?	 ?	 ? 	 ?	 ?	 ? xvi GLOSSARY 7Qs: Seven Questions to Sustainability AANDC: Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada AGA: AngloGold Ashanti AiP: Agreement in Principle ASM: Artisanal Mining BGC: Boroo Gold Company BGC: Boroo Gold Company BREB: Behavioral Research Ethics Board CAEM: Camara Argentina de Empresarios CBERN: Canadian Business Ethics Research Network CD: Community Development CEO: Chief Executive Officer COI: Community of Interest CRO: Community Relations Officer CRM: Community Relations Manager CSR: Corporate Social Responsibility CVSA: Cerro Vanguardia SA DA: Development Agency DDMI: Diavik Diamond Mines Inc. DFAIT: Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade EP: Equator Principles EPFI: Equator Principles Financial Institutions FOMICRUZ: Fomento Minero Santa Cruz GDP: Gross Domestic Product GNWT: Government of Northwest Territories HRSDC: Human Resources and Skill Development Canada IAPP: International Association of Public Participation IBA: Impact and Benefit Agreement 	 ?	 ? xvii ICMM: International Council on Minerals and Metals IFC: International Finance Corporation IIED: International Institute for Environment and Development INAC: Indian and Northern Affairs Canada IRS: Indian Residential School IRSSA: Indian Residential School Settlement Agreement JWG: Joint Working Group LED: Local Economic Development MITACS: Mathematics of Information Technology and Complex Systems MMSD: Mining, Minerals and Sustainable Development MNT: Mongolian Tugrik MTS: Mining Training Society NGO: Non-Governmental Organization NRCan: Natural Resources Canada NWT: Northwest Territories OECD: Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development PA: Participation Agreement PWNHC: Prince of Wales Northern Heritage Centre SDF: Soum Development Fund SEF: Sustainable Economic Futures SEIA: Socio-Economic Impact Assessment SEMA: Socio-Economic Monitoring Agreement SME: Society for Mining, Metallurgy and Exploration TFF: Territorial Formula Financing TIC: T??ch? International Corporation TSM: Towards Sustainable Mining TSX: Toronto Stock Exchange UNPA: Universidade National Patagonia Austral WCED: World Council for Economic Development 	 ?	 ? xviii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I experience a profound sentiment of gratitude towards all the men and women that I have interacted with during this long journey towards the completion of my degree. Concomitantly, I also experience some degree of frustration that I will not be able to fairly express my appreciation for each person individually in this section of acknowledgements. All the ?thank you?s? in the world would not be enough to express my gratitude to my supervisor, Marcello Veiga, whose support and friendship were paramount to my professional growth and academic development. It goes without saying that the musical encounters and social events were always fun, and also that they were vital in order for me to maintain a healthy balance between work and play. Dirk van Zyl, co-supervisor of this study, occupies a special place in my heart, as I deeply admire his wisdom, kindness and inquisitive approach. I feel privileged for the many opportunities that I have been given to work with, and learn from him.  I am thankful for the opportunity to have worked with Ben Bradshaw on the CSR Brazilian project. Many of the ideas present in this work came from the fieldwork conducted for the CSR Brazilian project. In addition, I feel fortunate to have him as a member in my PhD committee and I sincerely appreciate his contributions and support, especially during the process of completing my comprehensive examination. At one stage during my quest towards completing this degree, I had close involvement with CBERN, many of its members, and the PhD Cluster group. The connections I developed here were made possible by the financial support provided by CBERN to attend conferences and PhD Cluster Meetings. My grateful recognition to CBERN, as well as to my fellow colleagues, for such opportunity. Key people within the companies that agreed to take part in my research were fundamental to the success of the study. From Boroo Gold Company I am grateful for the support, comments and suggestions made by Rick Blake and Tuulaa. From Diavik, I feel indebted to Colleen English, whose hard work and support were critical to making this research possible. From Cerro Vanguardia SA, I thank you Jorge Palmes and Eduardo de las Longas. I also feel grateful for the support and time spent with Adolfo Valvano, whose passion and dedication to the community of Puerto San Julian can easily be felt. There are other significant individuals and organizations that have directly contributed to this study and I am sincerely appreciative of their help and partnership. Oba Harding from MITACS, Ernesto Sirolli from the Sirolli Institute and Suzette McFaul from SEF Canada, thank you! I offer my gratitude to the faculty, staff and students at UBC who have, in many different ways, inspired me to continue my journey. I feel fortunate for the many opportunities I have had to learn from and engage all the outstanding professors in the Mining Department. I particularly want to thank Bern Klein, John Meech and Michael Hitch. I also feel a profound gratitude to Maria Lui who is a very sharp lady, and who always senses the right moment, frequently delightfully surprising me, to pull out a joke.  	 ?	 ? xix I have an immense debt of gratitude to Leslie Nichols, from whom I learned immensely during the time we worked together closely.  Malcolm McLachlan (Mac) has played an important role throughout the entire process, and I also want to express my grateful thanks for his involvement. One of the many ironies of life is that, because of our geographic distance, I have developed a closer relationship with my family. Renato and Laura, each one in their own way, have shown their support while I pursued what to me, many years ago, seemed like something unimaginable.  I?ve heard somewhere that a friend is a brother or a sister who we get to choose. Abimael Carvalho is such a brother. I am not sure that I will ever be able to reciprocate - though I will certainly try - the level of generosity, companionship and unconditional support that I received from him.  I want to thank my wife Claudia for her support and encouragement, and as well, for her companionship and patience while I completed this thesis. Her presence was critical to getting me through this sometimes challenging process. My mother always believed that her role in raising her three children was to encourage us to develop the skills to provide us with the resilience to navigate and survive any situation of our own choosing or in which we found ourselves. The importance of respect, determination and hard work were core values within her teachings. I have an immense sentiment of gratitude, admiration and respect for my mother, and I feel blessed for being her son. This thesis is dedicated to my mother, F?tima.  Thank you! Merci! Bayarlaala! Gracias! Obrigado!  	 ?  	 ?	 ? xx  DEDICATION                         To Mom  	 ?	 ? 1 CHAPTER 1 1.1 Introduction Mines close either when resources become depleted or when it becomes unfeasible, from an economic standpoint, to keep mining. At the time of closure, it is typical that a well-deserved environmental concern develops to mitigate and reclaim the disturbed areas. However, very little attention is usually focused on the local and regional socio-economic impacts that the closure of a mine imposes on governments, and especially on communities (Cesare & Maxwell, 2003, Kemp et al., 2008, Veiga et.al., 2001, Chaloping-March, 2008). In cases in which the closure plan contemplates social dimensions, the approach is usually not well articulated, and does not consider the implementation of comprehensive and sustainable initiatives that would allow local communities to overcome the wide range of consequences brought on by the withdrawal of resources when a mine winds down or ceases its operations. Legal frameworks implemented worldwide for mine closures at the federal and provincial/state levels are limited, and address neither preventive nor mitigation strategies to avoid the socio-economic impacts of the closure. Furthermore, in many developing countries that are rich in mineral resources, the overall legal structure is weak, and in many places, corrupt. Due to several reasons (Warhurst, 2000; Jenkins and Obara, 2006), Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) initiatives have become a common practice in the mining industry, and CSR has become part of the business strategy for some companies, as can be seen on the Rio Tinto and Kinross Gold websites.1 CSR initiatives have claimed to support community development while at the same time, prepare the communities for closure. However, the approach undertaken has very often been focused on building infrastructure facilities which the communities are then not able to maintain subsequent to closure (Roberts and Veiga, 2000). As was the case in Serra do Navio mine in the northern part of Brazil, despite ?the excellent constructions for housing, club, urban infrastructure and hospital are very good, there was no alternative economic activity in the area? (Chaves, 2000). Furthermore, ?According to leaked independent audit of 2001 commissioned by Shell, less than one-third of Shell?s development projects in Nigeria were fully successful? (Frynas, 2005, p. 587). To Warhurst and Mitchell (2000), CSR implies an active commitment and responsibility to make a difference in one?s community, one?s society, and one?s country. They define CSR as ?the internalization by the company of the social and environmental effects of its operations through pro-active pollution prevention and social impact assessment so that harm is anticipated and avoided and benefits are optimized? (p.43). This research comprises of an exploratory multiple case study that focuses on the efforts undertaken by mining companies towards implementing initiatives to cope with the socio-economic impacts of mine closure. Based on these case studies, it is intended that a deliverable comprehensive framework will be 	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?1 Refer to Rio Tinto (http://www.riotinto.com/ourapproach/our_strategy.asp) and Kinross (http://kinross.com/about-	 ?	 ? 2 developed that may eventually be adopted by mining companies, local communities and government to address the consequences of mine closure. The case studies for this research took place in Mongolia, Argentina and Canada. It is believed that the geographical, cultural and socio-economic diversity of these countries have yielded a distinctive information that assists in making the Socio-Economic Mine Closure (SEMC) Framework more comprehensive, flexible and suitable for adoption in a wide range of distinct international settings.  The shortage of studies on the subject of minimizing the socio-economic impacts and implementing actions to deal with the consequences of the closure of a mine does not correspond to the actual importance of the topic. Currently it is estimated that there are 25,000 mines worldwide producing industrial minerals (Mining Journal Online, 2011). Depending on technical, economic and social factors, an average mine can operate from 8 to 30 years. Thus it can be anticipated that there will be extensive and continuous mining closure work for many years to come. This scenario reaffirms the importance of research of this nature.  From a more pragmatic point of view, a socially responsible and well-rounded mine closure can reduce costs, reduce liability to the shareholders, be profitable and also contribute to building the company?s reputation (Chaves, 2000), which can contribute to facilitate earning social license to operate in other regions where the same company or group have or begin new operations. 1.2 Statement of the Problem  Despite the efforts undertaken to promote integrated mine closure frameworks and guidelines (e.g. the ICMM Planning for Integrated Mine Closure Toolkit, and the MMSD Mine Closure Working Paper) by the resource extractive sector and international organizations, the existing approach still focuses heavily on environmental matters. When it considers the social dimensions, this approach is ?confined to the inclusion of ?stakeholder consultation?? (Chaloping-March, 2008). To Digby (2012, p. 34) in many cases ?Consultation is an exercise in marketing a fait accompli, rather than a genuine attempt to listen? and tends to lack initiatives to properly deal with the social and economic impacts that closing a mine imposes on local communities. Furthermore, from the academic point of view, few studies have been conducted on the topic, and those that do exist are missing comprehensive theoretical and practical examples of Socio-Economic Mine Closure (Kemp, 2009; Veiga et al., 2001; Chaloping-March, 2008). Paradoxically, government response to the social and economic problems brought on by mine closure has been passive. This approach is illogical because towards the end of a mine?s working life, the heavy burden of the closure will impact on governments from at least two fronts: a) by losing revenues generated from royalties and taxes which have been paid by the mining companies; b) by the growing demands on services, such as the health care system and unemployment insurance made by the local population (Chaloping-March, 2008, Roberts and Veiga, 2000). Lima (2002) calls to our attention that governments play an important role in sustainable development as ?they are challenged to develop 	 ?	 ? 3 policies, regulatory and fiscal frameworks to encourage innovation, increase productivity, trade and investment in an environmentally sound and socially responsible manner? (p. 23). In consideration of this state of affairs, mining companies need to implement new initiatives that go beyond the legal requirements. Taking part in such proactive initiatives would ensure that mining companies engage with employees, government, society in general, as well as community members, in a comprehensive fashion. Such an approach would safeguard that the relationships between the company and the communities would be more responsible and just, and ultimately, these initiatives would contribute to the sustainable development of communities after closure.  The originality of this research is that it brings together, into an integrated socio-economic mine closure framework, a comprehensive set of management as well as leadership aspects that are critical to leaving positive legacies and sustainable local post-mine communities. 1.3 Justification of the Research Mining companies have historically understood mine closure as the processes of mine site rehabilitation and decommissioning. Furthermore the general belief within the industry is that by being in compliance with the law, paying taxes, doing philanthropy and implementing social projects, companies are exempt from further responsibility in relation to the socio-economic impacts that the closure of the mine will have on local communities and governments. Additionally, the governance crisis within governments, corruption and mismanagement of the royalties and tax moneys paid by mining companies to local governments simply impose greater challenges and hardships on the communities (Enriquez, 2007), thus worsening the socio-economic impacts of the closure. There have been multiple international and industry-related initiatives such as the Equator Principles, Towards Sustainable Mining, ICMM Planning for Integrated Mine Closure Toolkit, and the MMSD Seven Questions to Sustainability, all of which (directly or indirectly) touch upon socio-economic aspects of mine closure. Nevertheless, gaps still remain and no comprehensive, integrated planning and implementation processes have yet been proposed. In fact, 10 years after the publication of MMSD reports, IIED call out for clearer guidance and implementation on environmental impact assessments and effective mine closure plans (Buxton, 2012). Moreover, these guidelines and frameworks do not seem to make leadership elements accountable, or even important components, in the socio-economic aspects of the closure. This is illustrated in the ICMM Planning for Integrated Mine Closure Toolkit (ICMM, 2008, p.49) which states that: ?closure today is less of a technical challenge and more of a management challenge?. One of the focal arguments in this research is that a refined and integrated management process, as well as appropriate leadership skills and a compatible philosophical understanding all need to be developed for a comprehensive socio-economic mine closure to take place. 	 ?	 ? 4 The consequences of a shortsighted approach to the socio-economic implications of mine closure can have a wide range of impacts including cultural, social, physical, psychological and economic impacts.  The impact on employment, for instance, is one of the first, most serious and long-lasting consequences of mine closure. Haney & Shkaratan (2003) found that even 5 years after the closure of mines in Romania, Russia and the Ukraine, communities were still dealing with the difficult effects of the closure. The consequences were not only related to the number of existing positions but also to the lower quality of the job available after closure. The lack of, and low quality of jobs available was directly related to the emergence of informal markets, low wages and insecure forms of employment (Kemp et al., 2008, Haney & Shkaratan, 2003). When the closure of a mine is imminent, governments and companies tend to focus on mitigation mechanisms. The most common strategy is to counter-attack economic and job shortage issues through the implementation of economic diversification initiatives through retraining, reemployment and the creation of incentives for entrepreneurship programs. However, even after these initiatives have been put in place, it takes a long time to start producing meaningful results (Haney & Shkaratan, 2003). In addition to that in the typical approach to entrepreneurship the failure rate for new business is of 50-70% in the first five years (Small Business Trends, 2013). Furthermore, entrepreneurships programs are often created with a top-down approach ? a strategy which has not been shown to be successful in the long-run since it does not take into account the needs and wishes of community members and results in a low level or a superficial engagement of people (Sirolli, 1999; Roberts & Veiga, 2000; Cohen and Easterly, 2009; McFaul et al., 2013). Mining activities very often account for a significant portion of the local GDP. For instance, in the 1980s, the Bougainville mine located in Papua New Guinea represented around 20% of the national budget (Thompson, 1991), while Paracatu, a gold mine in Brazil in 2010 was responsible for 15% of the municipal budget, Diamond Industry in the Canadian North West Territories account for 16% of the GDP (GNWT Bureau of Statistics, 2013) and it is expected that the Oyu Tolgoi mine in Mongolia will account for over 30% of the national GDP when the mine will be in full operation in 2020 (Hutchinson, 2012). Understandably, the loss and/or significant reduction of taxes and royalties generated by mining activities will have direct consequences on the public services offered to the local people since the quality, variety and amount of services available will also be impacted. Furthermore public expenditure obligations inevitably expand as people need more support to cope with the wide-range of consequences that a mine closure imposes on a community (Haney & Shkaratan, 2003, Kemp et al., 2008). It is noteworthy to mention the impacts that mine closure can have on the overall physical and/or psychological health of individuals (Warhust, 2000). The psychological impact of losing one?s job can result in physical effects such as increases in blood pressure and cholesterol levels, and psychological implications such as increased levels of substance abuse, as well as family violence and divorce are also commonly seen (Warhust, 2000).  	 ?	 ? 5 Shandro et al. (2011) investigating health issues in Canadian mining communities found that family was rated as a ?key to the health of the overall community and individuals? (p.181). Gibson and Klinck (2005) found that ?long hours and roster patterns characteristic of shift work have been identified by workers as among the most stressful of all working conditions? (p. 120), the authors continue saying that ?mining poses potential risks to the health of northern communities in terms of behavioral changes, as facilitated by increasing incomes. The most obvious of these is alcoholism or drug abuse? (p. 122). Separados de Chile, an organization for support and research on divorces in Chile found out that 40% of the marriage breakups were due to economic reasons (Munoz, 2011). In this regard, Shandro et al (2011) also identified that the ?stress during bust times were reported to be key factors affecting the family and were attributed to divorce, violence and stress? (p.181). In their paper entitled Socially Responsible Plant Closing, Kinicki et al. (1987, p. 124) indicate that ?for every 1% rise in unemployment, a community experiences similar increases in the rates of suicides (4.1%), homicides (5.7%), stress-related illnesses (1.9%) and admissions to mental institutions (4.3%)?. Community cohesion can also be impacted as a result of tensions between those who still have job, and the workers who have been laid off as a result of the downsizing prior to closure of the mine (Chaloping-March, 2008, Roberts & Veiga, 2000). Migration is another issue that can have both social and economic consequences. The emigration of young and skilled workers seeking better wages and living conditions have direct impact on the quality of the professionals available in town. Emigration can also have deleterious impacts on the cohesion of families, local culture and traditions (Chaves, 2000; House of Commons, 2003; Roberts and Veiga, 2000; Starke, 2002). Despite the fact that some areas have mine closure laws (e.g. the United Kingdom, the Province of Ontario, the State of Nevada, Romania and Nigeria) (Clark & Clark, 1999), with exception of Romania and Nigeria there is no existing level of law enforcement that specifically addresses the social aspects of mine closure.   In the Romanian Mining Law # 85/18.03.2003, enforced in 2003 its article 52, establishes that companies are required to develop a social protection program where, besides community consultation, it requires:  social protection program, through reemployment and/or professional reconversion; financial compensation and/or regional development measures by creating new work places, prepared in accordance with the law, upon consultation with affected groups of people and approved by the Competent Authority in the field of social protection; in the case of national companies and societies, such program shall also be approved by the line Ministry (Romanian Mining Law # 85/18.03.2003, article 52 c. p. 20). In Nigeria, although not explicitly referring to mining closure, the Minerals and Mining Act 2007 determines that:  The holder of a mining lease, small scale mining lease or quarry lease shall prior to the commencement of any development activity within the lease area, conclude with the host 	 ?	 ? 6 community where the operations are to be conducted an agreement referred to as a Community Development Agreement or other such agreement that will ensure the transfer of social and economic benefits to the community. It continues, ? The Community Development Agreement shall contain undertakings with respect to the social and economic contributions that the project will make to the sustainability of such community (article 116 c. p. 1 and 2).  Several authors (Neil et al., 1992; Clark & Clark, 1999; Warhurst & Noronha, 1999; Veiga et al., 2001; Roberts & Veiga, 2000; Lima, 2002; Chaloping-March, 2008; Kemp et al., 2008; Kemp, 2009; Worrall et al., 2009; van Zyl, 2010) have pointed out the importance of a more comprehensive and holistic approach to mine closure.  To them, the manner of engaging with communities and coping with the social dimensions and the socio and economic impacts of a mine closure on individuals and communities needs to be properly taken into account. While some argue that the mineral resource sector should not be alone in bearing the responsibility for the socio-economic consequences of the closure, mining companies are instrumental players, holding significant power, influence and resources. At the end of the day, mining companies will be the ones who are held accountable. That been said, it is critical for a successful mine closure to engage appropriately with both local governments as well as local communities (Buxton, 2012). ?Reconciling the various rights and responsibilities in different governance environments to the satisfactions of those concerned is perhaps one of the most difficult challenges? (MMSD, 2002, p. 199). In this context ?Sustainability will begin to become real when the different stakeholders exercise their individual responsibilities? (Cooney, 2012). 1.4 Case Study Approach This research aimed to develop a comprehensive framework to address the socio-economic implications of mine closure. Through the literature review a framework was proposed, in a further assessment of the developed framework an online survey with experts, practitioners were conducted. Finally, as a means to assess the framework in a more practical manner a set of three case studies were adopted, where the Socio-Economic Mine Closure (SEMC) framework was the backbone of the case study investigation. To this end, this study adopts the case study approach, employing the SEMC Framework as a reference through which to analyze the initiatives that have been adopted by mining companies and which address the socio-economic implications of mine closure . Additionally, the study seeks to capture the perceptions of people in relation to these initiatives. In general, a case study approach allows for the development of an in-depth understanding of real life phenomena. In contrast to experimental research, case studies are considered to have a naturalistic design since investigators do not exert control or manipulate variables, and since case studies explore events / phenomena which occur within their natural context.  In this investigation three case studies were conducted where three distinct mining companies holding operations in Mongolia, Argentina and Canada agreed to participate in the study. Case study 1 - Boroo Gold Mine located in Mongolia, owned and operated by Centerra Gold Case study 2 - Cerro Vanguardia Mine located in the Patagonia Argentina, owned and operated by AngloGold Ashanti 	 ?	 ? 7 Case study 3 - Diavik Mine located in the Canadian Northwest Territories, owned and operated by Rio Tinto. These three companies are scheduled to have their operations ended within ten years and they agreed to participate in the study. The management of these companies identified that participating in the present research was an opportunity that could generate valuable information that could be adopted when designing, developing and implementing their mine closure strategies and plans. The criteria to select these companies to participate in the study considered their geographic location, since the researcher was looking for case studies from different continents. However the key factor was a company?s willingness in participating and collaborating with the research. A detailed profile of the country/region where the mine operations are taking place is presented in the analysis of the case studies where in addition to that a comprehensive view of the company and its operations are also provided. The following section introduces the research questions that guided the present study. 1.5 Research Questions What can be done to create a systematic and integrated approach for the mining companies to facilitate implementation of social and economic mine closure initiatives? What are the initiatives implemented by mining companies to promote the local economic development in the communities where operations take place and to what degree do these initiatives assist in addressing the socio-economic impacts of the closure of the mine? What are the perceptions of the community about the role of mining companies in implementing socio-economic mine closure initiatives? Considering these questions a set of four objectives are established: 1.6 Research Objectives Objective 1 ? To summarize and evaluate key mining industry related policies, obligations, guidelines and frameworks worldwide regarding socio-economic aspects of mine closure. Objective 2 ? To develop and evaluate a comprehensive framework for planning, developing and implementing initiatives, to be adopted by mining companies to create a practical approach to mitigate the socio-economic impacts of mine closure.  Objective 3 ? To summarize and evaluate through case studies analysis the initiatives taken by mining companies that seek to advance the community development (CD) of the locations where they operate as a means to assist in the socio economic impacts of site specific mine closure. Objective 4 ? To study the perceptions of the mining communities, government and mining companies towards the socio-economic mine closure initiatives proposed and implemented by the mining companies. 	 ?	 ? 8 1.7 Contribution of the Research 1.7.1 Applied Contribution of Research In order to make decisions regarding investments, shareholders and financial institutions consider environmental aspects, as well as the social risks associated with a mine project. An increasing focus is being placed on ensuring that mining communities remain viable after mining operations are concluded. In this regard, the SEMC Framework can function both as a guide to mining companies and as an assessment tool which allows for a better understanding of the perceptions of community members and other key stakeholders in relation to the social and economic aspects of mine closure. To secure a social license to operate and to earn respect and credibility, mining companies, now more than ever, need to adopt a transparent and effective approach to engaging with local communities. This process can be facilitated through further development and adoption of the Socio-Economic Mine Closure Framework. 1.7.2 Academic Contribution of Research This study will contribute to the literature of Sustainable Development, Community Development and Socio-Economic Development, as well as to other CSR and business areas as a result of the wide-range of disciplines that the Socio-Economic Mine Closure Framework encompasses. It further contributes to the development of a framework through which to assess sustainability policies and guidelines in the mining industry. This work contributes to sustainable development theory and practice since it discusses advancement in both policy and practices in the mining sector. This work also contributes to enhancing community participation both in terms of quantity and quality. As such, ?if mining operations are to help communities work towards sustainable development, the communities need to be able to participate effectively in the decision-making process for establishing and running the operations, in order to avoid or minimize potential problems? (Stake, 2002, p. 208). 1.8 Thesis Structure This thesis is organized into 11 chapters. The layout of the thesis is presented in the Roadmap which follows in Figure 1. Additionally, Figure 1 also provides practical research milestones. Chapter 1 ? Presents the introduction, statement of the problem, presentation of the research questions, the justifications of the study, and the expected contributions of the work.  Chapter 2 ? Provides a literature review, discusses the concept of community and community development, and offers a discussion regarding the Socio-Economic Mine Closure Framework. Chapter 3 ? Introduces the research process and methodology, and provides a detailed discussion regarding the methodological approaches used in the study.  	 ?	 ? 9 Chapter 4 ? Contains the Crosswalk Matrix which compares the existing industry guidelines to the SEMC Framework.  Chapter 5 ? Presents the development of, and discusses the online survey which assesses the SEMC Framework, thus addressing Objectives 1 and 2.  Chapter 6 ? In this chapter, the three case study analyses are presented, providing a detailed context for each of the case studies. Furthermore, each of the individual case studies is analyzed, and the results are discussed; thus addressing Objectives 3 and 4. Chapter 7 ? Provides a general discussion, summarizes the findings of each case study and discusses the common points found in all three case studies.  Chapter 8 - Delivers the conclusions of the study. Chapter 9 ?  Offers arguments regarding the original contributions of this study to both scientific knowledge and professional practice.   Chapter 10 ? Discusses some of the limitations of the study.   Chapter 11 - Provides suggestions for further studies to expand upon the information gathered in this study.	 ?	 ? 10 Thesis Roadmap   Practical Research Milestones  Figure 1 - Roadmap and Milestones of the Thesis                                  Industry frameworks / guidelines review (Objective 1) (Chapter 2) Development of the SEMC Framework (Objective 2) (Chapter 2) Crosswalk Matrix analysis (Objectives 1 & 2) (Chapter 4) SEMC Framework ONLINE survey (Objective 2) (Chapter 5) Case study Identification (Chapter 3) Research fieldwork design (Chapter 3) Development of fieldwork SEMC survey (Chapter 3) Fieldwork ? Mongolia	 ?? Canada	 ?? Argentina	 ?(Objectives 3 & 4) (Chapter 6, 7 and 8) Chapter 1 - Introduction 1.Introduction 2.Statement of the problem 3.Justification of the research 4.Case study approach 5.Research questions 6.Contribution of the research 7.Thesis structure Chapter 2 ? Literature Review & Approach 1.Community development in mining 2.Philanthropy 3.Industry guidelines / frameworks 4.Socio-Economic Mine Closure   Framework (SEMC). Chapter 3 ? Research Process & Methodology 1. Phase I     2.  Phase II          3. Phase III Chapter 4 ?Analyzing Industry Guidelines / Frameworks 1. Crosswalk matrix Chapter 8 ? Conclusion Chapter 10 ? Claim of originalityChapter 9 ?Study limitations Chapter 11 ?Recom-mendations for further study Chapter 5 ?Assessing and Receiving Feedback on the SEMC Framework 1. Online survey Chapter 6 ?Case Studies 1. Mongolia 2. Argentina 3. Canada Chapter 7 ? General Discussion  	 ? 11 CHAPTER 2 2.1 Literature Review This chapter presents a discussion regarding the concept of community within the context of mining. It then goes on to initiate a dialogue on the notion of community development. Furthermore, it touches upon the concept of philanthropy and some of its implications. Towards the end of the chapter, six industry-related frameworks and guidelines are introduced. Finally, this chapter defines socio-economic mine closure and introduces the proposed Socio-Economic Mine Closure Framework. Community development (CD) rhetoric and practice have become part of the strategy used by the mining industry while approaching communities and in their interactions with governments and society at large. Several initiatives which claim to promote CD have been implemented. Scholars and practitioners are however cautious, and at some level cynical, with respect to the amount of good that both CSR and CD initiatives yield (Jenkins and Obara, 2006; Frynas, 2005) since there exist a wide range of interpretations that can be made with regard to the terms which are used.  In this regard Frynas (2005) notes that: ?The effectiveness of CSR initiatives in the oil, gas and mining sectors has been increasingly questioned, and there is mounting evidence of a gap between the stated intentions of business leaders and their actual behavior and impact in the real world? (p.582) There has been extensive debate regarding the definitions of both the terms and concepts of ?community? and ?development,? and there exists an array of definitions for both terms. In 1955, Hillery (1955) found 94 different definitions for community. Referencing Young (1990), Kumar (2005) points out that ?there is no universally shared concept of community, only particular articulations that overlap, complement or sit at acute angles to one another? (p. 275).  To Kapelus, any definition of a community is always a construct and does not necessarily fit with the lived experience of the people involved. Therefore any attempt to define community will be subject to contestation, ?especially when excluded individuals feel they should be included? (2002 p. 281). Furthermore Cohen (1985) notes that the ?community exists in the minds of its members, and should not be confused with geographic or sociographic assertions of fact. By extension, the distinctiveness of communities and, thus, the reality of their boundaries, similarly lies in the mind, in the meanings which people attach to them, not in the structural forms? (p.98). In spite of the variety of definitions, there is some degree of agreement regarding what a community entails. As such, it is generally understood that a community is made up of a group of people who may or may not be in the same geographic area, who retain social interaction with one another, and who share one or more common interests.  In relation to the mining industry, notwithstanding the fact that the word ?community? is frequently mentioned on company websites and annual reports, no specific effort to define the term has been attempted. However, what can be concluded, based on the ways in which the term has been used is that a mining community consists of a group of people who are very often geographically located near where  	 ? 12 a mine operation takes place, and whose natural environment may or may not be affected by the mine, but who are clearly socially and economically impacted by its operation. Due to its subjectivity and based upon the interpreter?s social, political or cultural background, this understanding of mining community can result in distinct interpretations since terms such as ?near? and ?impact? can vary from person to person. An analogous exercise to that which has been used to define the term community can then be undertaken in order to gain a better understanding of the word ?development?. In the literature, it was found that ?development? has been closely connected to economic concerns such as growth, income and employment (Armstrong and Taylor, 2000 qtd. in Pike et al, 2007). For Pike et al. (2007) this perpetuates the myth ?that in order to foster economic development, a community must accept growth. In fact, growth must be distinguished from development: growth means to get bigger, development means to get better, increasing in quality and diversity? (p. 1254). There is a general belief that by increasing a nation?s wealth, economic growth also improves its potential for reducing poverty and solving other social problems (Pegg, 2006; Soubbotina & Sheran, 2000; Bhattacharyya, 2004). However, some studies have indicated that economic growth is not necessarily followed by similar progress in human development, and that attempts to positively tackle social problems during times of economic growth have been dismal (Pegg, 2006). Furthermore, ?Instead growth was achieved at the cost of greater inequity, higher unemployment, weakened democracy, loss of cultural identity, or overconsumption of resources needed by future generations? (Soubbotina & Sheran, 2000 p.7). Differentiating growth from development does not make the task of defining development an easy one since no homogeneous understanding of what development means has been arrived at. It can be said however that any kind of development encompasses an evolutionary process that necessarily involves the improvement of a particular state or condition over time. As such, ?human development can best be described as an evolutionary process toward human betterment? (Boulding, 1990 qtd. in Lawn, 2001, p. 13). As with the concept of ?community,? the fuzziness and subjectivity of the term ?development? opens up the opportunity for different interpretations. Furthermore, the definition of local development is necessarily site-specific and context-dependent (Pike et al., 2007,Canzanelli, 2001).  Particularly, ?notions of development are socially determined by particular groups and / or interests in specific places and time periods? (Pike et al., 2007, p. 1255). Canzanelli (2001) notes that within the context of sustainability, economic development is not per se an objective. Rather, it is a mean for achieving wellbeing according to the culture and the conditions of certain populations. Furthermore, the idea of wellbeing does not mean the same thing to everyone, and it varies depending on the context (Canzanelli 2001; Maser, 1997; Pike et al., 2007). Dodge et al. (2012) argue that in relation to wellbeing, ?many attempts at expressing its nature have focused purely on dimensions of wellbeing, rather than on definition? (p. 222). Shah and Marks (2004)  	 ? 13 contribute to the discussion stating that, ?Well-being is more than just happiness. As well as feeling satisfied and happy, well-being means developing as a person, being fulfilled, and making a contribution to the community? (p. 2).  At the end of their paper ?The Challenge of Defining Wellbeing,? Dodge et al. (2012), propose that wellbeing consists of an equilibrium between resources and challenges, where both resources and challenges are expressed by three constituents elements: psychological, social and physical. In summary, ?wellbeing is a balance point between an individual?s resource pool and challenges faced? (Dodge et al., 2012, p.229). Considering that resources and challenges are not necessarily uniformly available to every individual and that challenges are understood and perceived in different forms, the understanding of wellbeing is subject to individual interpretation. In this regard, Van Vlaender & Neves (2010) studied the perceptions of key people involved in a prospective African mining project and found that different stakeholders had distinct understandings of development. Thus Canzanelli (2001) has suggested that the concept, understanding, and consequently expectations and attitudes in relation to development can assume a variety of forms, as is depicted in the following table. Table 1 - Various Different Views of Development Stakeholder Views of ?development? Local communities Development as an opportunity for shared benefits  Local officials and Local interested groups Development as an opportunity for individual groups Community members Development as a potential negative impact on the status quo Consultants and mining company Development as an opportunity to make a positive contribution Mining company Development as a risk to goal achievement Consultants Development as a the application of a procedure Source: Vlaenderen & Neves, 2010 In the context of community development, development is considered to be an inclusive and complex phenomenon which looks further than a simplistic economical perspective. As well, it encourages a broader and more comprehensive understanding of wellbeing and quality of life (Lawn, 2001; Pike, 2010; Canzanelli, 2001), ?where the exploitation of resources, the directions of investments, the orientation of technological and institutional change are all in harmony and enhance both current and future potential to meet human needs and aspirations? (WCED, 1987, p.46). Development goes beyond the limited and narrow view of promoting development through only economic growth.  In this regard, community development in mining can be influenced by economic growth but certainly needs to have a positive impact on the quality of life of local residents and those who are directly affected both socially and economically by the mining operation. Furthermore, justice, participation and common goals will all play important roles in defining the future of the community.  2.2 Community Development (CD) in Mining Community Development (CD) consists of the (planned) evolution of several aspects of community wellbeing (economic, social, psychological, environmental, cultural and political).   	 ? 14 Borrowing from Dodge et al.?s (2012) definition of wellbeing, community wellbeing is achieved through reaching an equilibrium between accessible resources and the challenges faced by community members. As such, community development becomes a process whereby people come together to take collective action to successfully solve common problems as well as implement changes at the local level to enhance the quality of life of community members (Frank & Smith, 1999; Maser, 1997).  Community Development is based on a self-assessment to plan for the future. Central to this is the belief that members within the community have the primary responsibility for decision-making and action (Homan, 1999). Similar to the terms ?community? and ?development,? CD can mean different things to different people in different places. As a result, the methods, tools and techniques to approach CD can assume various forms (Frank & Smith, 1999; Bhattacharyya, 2004). In fact, ?how one interprets community development affects one?s orientation when initiating a development program? (Bhattacharyya, 2004 p. 7). In the context of the extractive sector, corporate philanthropy has been the traditional approach taken in the attempt to promote community development.  A common philanthropic tactic adopted by corporations attempts to enhance the quality of life in local communities through the provision of charitable donations which very often has immediate positive results, but are not sustainable in the long-term. The common approach of these corporations is to aid local organizations and to improve the community?s basic infra-structure through building or enhancing such necessary facilities as hospitals and schools, and through providing energy and clean water. One of the drivers for this approach is to obtain or to maintain their social license to operate (Starke, 2002). The challenge of this approach is that leads to ?dependence on the company and a situation in which benefits cannot be unstained when the mine closes? (Starke, 2002, p. 209). Some corporations have recently been adopting what seems to be a more structured and focused approach in relation to their voluntary social performance, and have also focused on directing their corporate philanthropic efforts to the promotion of local economic development (LED). LED, is becoming more popular within the mining sector and seeks to support the development of local businesses and entrepreneurship initiatives as a means of promoting enterprises that would be sustainable after the mine is gone. Despite this approach to corporate philanthropy in mining, the question whether philanthropic initiatives produce positive outcomes in the long run remains. In fact, if not planned and implemented properly, corporate philanthropy can produce detrimental results in the long-term (Starke, 2002; Kanitz, 2011).  2.3 Philanthropy Philanthropy is a double-edged sword, and for this reason not many people dare to raise discussions regarding some of its drawbacks and negative consequences. This is especially true within the context of local mining communities because people are rightfully afraid to raise discussions for fear that the  	 ? 15 available money would fall prey to funding cuts, thus resulting in the withdrawal of existing charitable initiatives. Philanthropy is necessary, and in critical situations such as earthquakes or hurricanes, serves the vital function of providing temporary relief and alleviating the suffering of the people affected.  In the realm of socio-economic development, philanthropy can help build infrastructure, finance capacity building, and enable educational, professional and technical training initiatives.  These programs can act as gateways to the betterment of people and local communities but only if the beneficiaries function as active participants who are aware of their role in the process and who understand that the charitable donations are there to provide stepping-stones to a succeeding level of local development (Kanitz, 2011). When philanthropy is intended to ameliorate people?s quality of life, as in the case of foreign aid or private social investment, the way in which the money is spent and the resources are provided can have either detrimental or enriching consequences on individuals and communities (Sirolli, 1999, 2008). In fact  too often, the structures that provide development assistance disempower rather than invigorate local organizations and communities. Too often local community initiative and individual enterprise are undercut rather than fostered by conventional development assistance and government development programs (Schearer, 1995, p. 23). One of the reasons for the attainment of undesirable results is that mining companies use corporate philanthropy to build infrastructure and deliver physical and tangible benefits instead of strengthening human values (Veiga, 2010). Furthermore, the approach is very often top-down, and only a small portion of the community is beneficially affected (Sirolli, 1999). To Veiga (2010; Veiga et al, 2001), most of the tangible benefits such as schools, hospitals and paved roads, which are proudly promoted by mining companies, are unsustainable by their very nature because they require that resources be maintained into the future, and such resources become scarce when the mine closes down. Instead, according to the author, the approach undertaken by companies should be educational, with a focus on strengthening human values such as solidarity, family, culture and respect.  Philanthropy and other approaches that focus more on providing benefits rather than on building empowerment and self-reliance produce dependency, lack of creativity, and diminished self-esteem. They also inhibit people?s passion to pursue their dreams of self-realization. Ultimately, philanthropy results in a relationship which has a patronizing and addictive quality, and which ultimately instills apathy and numbness in the community (Sirolli, 1999). In the context of the resource extractive sector, corporate philanthropy has historically been a significant approach for engaging with, and improving the quality of life of local communities. Many remote and underdeveloped communities that host mining operations lack basic amenities, and when a company builds a hospital, school, or provides a facility to supply clean water, the philanthropic initiatives are  	 ? 16 welcomed. The problems that result are usually due to lack of holistic approach and the dependence that these short-term solutions create. On the other hand, from a business point of view it is appealing to invest in short-term projects such as building schools, roads and hospitals, which deliver tangible benefits, because projects such as these have the potential to build the company?s reputation and are undeniably positive public relations strategies (Mescon & Tilson, 1987; Bekkers & Wiepking, 2006; Porter & Kramer, 2002). Their benefits for the company include that they are short term projects, it is easy to measure the results, they are visible to everyone in the community, and in most of the cases, are badly needed.  The risks inherent in such an approach involve the difficulty of maintaining the source and continuity of the resources needed to maintain the facilities after mine closure, and the dependence this creates for local communities (Jenkins and Obara, 2006). As mentioned previously, in the case of the Serra do Navio mine located in Amapa estate, in Brazil, when members of the local communities did not have alternative means to earn a living than from mining, the resources for maintaining the facilities dried up, and the social services and benefits that these facilities were able to provide also had to be withdrawn (Chaves, 2000). In the context of mine closure, the solution to turn an injurious and paternalistic form of corporate philanthropy that generates dependency into a beneficial form of philanthropy that opens doors to sustainable development is as complex as any other community development intervention; it demands planning, the commitment of donors and beneficiaries, and perseverance and time in order to produce visible and measurable results. However, it is the only way to create long-lasting positive results after the closure of a local mine. The next section provides an overview about the closure of Sullivan Mine and Anaconda Copper Mine. 2.4 Mine Closure Cases 2.4.1 Sullivan Mine ? British Columbia ? Canada Kimberley, British Columbia?s Sullivan Mine began its full operations in 1909. At the time, it was operated by the Consolidated Mining and Smelting Company of Canada, a conglomerate of several Canadian Pacific Railway companies. The Consolidated Mining and Smelting Company of Canada became Cominco in 1966. In 1986, TECK Resources Limited purchased a portion of Cominco from Canadian Pacific Limited, becoming Teck Cominco, and in 2001 it purchased the remaining shares.  The closure of the Sullivan Mine, which took place between 1991 and 2001, is an interesting example of the way in which a mining company, the government and the community have been able to create a social contract to the benefit of all parties. Working together, these stakeholders have been successful in creating a smooth transition from pre-closure to post-closure times (Ednie, 2006).  From 1909 to 2001, over the 92-year life span of the Sullivan Mine, the mine employed 60,000 employees, produced over 8.39 billion kg of lead, 7.39 billion kg of zinc and 297 million ounces of silver, and was the heart of the economy Kimberley, B.C. (Roberts, 2001). Cominco invested heavily both in the  	 ? 17 mine and in economic diversification at the community level, creating value-added industries such as steel, fertilizer and iron plants alongside the Sullivan Mine, thus further diversifying both the local Kimberley and the provincial economy (Crane, 2012).  In 1989, twelve years before the Sullivan Mine would be closed, Cominco submitted reclamation plans to the British Columbia Ministry of Mines and two years later, in 1991, publicly submitted plans for the mine?s closure (Ednie, 2006). Prior to this submission in the 1980?s, the community began engaging in talks about the future of Kimberley. The community actively participated in planning and, for over two decades, they consistently promoted their values and made their voices heard. The Sullivan Mine Public Liaison Committee (SMPLC) was formed in order to increase multi-stakeholder participation with respect to the closure of this, one of Canada?s largest mines. Consisting of individuals from among the public, environmental and government groups, the SMPLC oversaw closure plans, disseminated information, and created a dialogue through which all stakeholders could be heard (TECK, 2004).  Since the early 1980s, discussions regarding the mine?s closure had focused on the creation of new industries that could support the 6,000 permanent residents of Kimberley after Sullivan?s closure (Ednie, 2006). With the support of Teck Cominco and the SMPLC, the community of Kimberley has built a ski hill, golf course and large residential and industrial areas, thus becoming a top tourist destination in the interior of British Columbia (Ednie, 2006). These industries have offset the economic decline felt by the closure of the mine, and today the town is the same size as it was pre-closure (Ednie, 2006).  TECK Cominco also developed a union lead program to retrain its mine staff and/or provide them with opportunities to transfer to other mine sites (Ednie, 2006).   Today, over a decade after the closure of the Sullivan Mine, post-closure remediation projects continue to be developped. SunMine, a development strategy launched by TECK, the Kimberley residents and EcoSmart, is a two-megawatt solar power-generating facility that will be built on 3,000Ha of non-reclaimable ?brown-sites,? collecting approximately 2,200 hours of sunlight per year (SunMine, 2013). The solar ?mine? will be built using existing power lines and transmission stations, and it will use the existing infrastructure to supply the town of Kimberley with power, economic diversification and a new clean industry (TECK, 2010).  2.4.2 Anaconda Copper Mine ? Butte, Montana ? United States The city of Butte is situated in the southwestern portion of Montana with a current population of 342,000 residents (National Association of Counties, 2013). This historic mining town was built around a hill containing rich mineral deposits of copper, silver, gold, magnesium, zinc, lead and molybdenum, henceforth the town?s title, ?Richest Hill on Earth? (Czehura, 2006).  Towards the end of the 19th century when electricity became widespread and rail transportation connected Butte with the rest of the country and the world, the town?s industry expanded rapidly, and the Anaconda Copper Mine became the largest copper producer worldwide (M. P. Malone, 1983). The Anaconda Company further benefited from the First World War because copper was used in bullet shells, and at the time, Butte supplied the US with 30% of its copper demands as well as 15% of worldwide  	 ? 18 demands (Jenkins & Lorengo, 2002). Butte became the most ?prosperous town in the United States,? and Anaconda the 4th largest company in the world (?Guide to Butte, Montana | Butte Today,? 2011).  Anaconda became an international company in 1920, staking Chuquicamata, the largest copper deposit to date in Chile. However, production slowed as the 1930?s great economic depression reduced demands. The economic downturn in Butte was relieved briefly during Second World War, while Anaconda supplied the US with 51% of its copper needs (P. Malone, 1997). The industry continued to suffer after 1945, and new techniques were applied to ?improve efficiency? by reducing the need for labor-intensive underground mining, such as ?block-caving? and ?open-pit? mining. Even as the copper industry in Butte struggled to stay afloat, other factors pushed it into submission. The Chilean government nationalized the Chuquicamata Mine, crippling the Anaconda Company. At this time, fluctuating copper prices forced the closure of underground mining operations in Butte and Anaconda laid off over 3000 workers. The company was then bought by ARCO in 1976. Operations moved along slowly under ARCO, however piece-by-piece, the economic giant that had once existed in Butte kept disintegrating steadily.  To counteract the loss of the mining industry, Butte has worked to diversify its economy through tourism, the service sector and the expansion of their healthcare industry. Butte now hosts some large festivals such as the Montana Folk Fest, Evel Knievel Days, St. Patricks Day and the Largest 4th of July parade in the state (?Butte Montana: Richest Hill on Earth,? 2013). Unemployment is not the only problem for the residents of Butte; a century of industrial scale mining has left the city and surrounding areas incredibly polluted. Arsenic and heavy metals such as lead, cadmium, zinc and copper have leached from historic mine sites and polluted the water table and the surrounding ecosystem. After periods of precipitation it was common to see the ?river run red? (?Guide to Butte, Montana | Butte Today,? 2011). This toxic runoff has collected in the Berkley Pitt, creating one of the ?most poisonous lakes in North America? (Roberts, 2008). A couple years after closure, the area became a Superfund2 Site and remediation efforts funded by ARCO were initiated to rectify the damage done by over a hundred years of mining. The severity of the pollution became extraordinarily apparent when a flock of 342 migrating snow geese landed in the lake in 1994, and all of them perished (Roberts, 2008).   The Butte Superfund site includes the underground mine-shafts (3000 miles), 4 open pit mines and the surrounding watershed (26 miles of streams and wetlands). The heavy metals and toxic compounds leached from the mine sites have left the landscape with scarce biota. The contamination poses a major health risk to residents, as the ground water is unsafe for drinking and the soils, laden with arsenic and lead, are hazardous (United Sates Environmental Protection Agency, 2013).   	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?2 A Superfund is an American federal government program that identifies places in the United States as ?abandoned hazardous waste sites,?  identifies responsible parties, organizes remediation efforts, engages communities and insures their involvement, includes the state in the planning process, and establishes a long-term environmental protection plan (United Sates Environmental Protection Agency, 2013).    	 ? 19 From 1988-2001 remediation efforts have included 1) the removal or capping of contaminated soils from waste dumps; 2) residential homes with contaminated yards and dirt basement floors were identified and cleaned up; 3) smelters were moved to designated disposal areas; 4) a storm water containment system was built to direct ground water to three separate sedimentation ponds before entering natural streams; 5) lime was added to treatment systems upstream of ponds; 6) railroads were deconstructed and contaminated soils removed, and; 7) air-cannons were set up to prevent water flow from landing in Berkley lake (Atlantic Richfield Company, 2011). Over the course of 125 years, from 1880 to 2005, the Butte mineral deposits have produced 9.6 million metric tons of copper, and millions more metric tons of other valuable minerals (Czehura, 2006). This large-scale mining operation has run its course, however small-scale low-grade mining is still an option in the area. Butte is successfully diversifying its economy and using its rich history to build a platform for tourism, along with other strong economic plans such as healthcare provision.  The Superfund remediation efforts have shown positive results; water quality is improving and biota is being restored to healthy conditions. Heavy metals have been coming out of solution in water bodies and settling into sediments. The wild card remains arsenic, as it responds differently in different ecosystems. To date, the arsenic levels in the water have not been deemed as being safe enough for humans (drinking) consumption, however no negative effects have been monitored in aquatic organisms.  2.4.3 Joban Coal Mine - Iwaki, Japan The Joban Coal Mine was located in Iwaki city in the Fukushima area. The mine operated from 1870 to 1976. By 1944 it became the largest coal mine in Japan, employing 5,000 workers. Over time, the demand for coal as Japan?s main source of energy was replaced by foreign oil. As a consequence, in 1965, Joban Mine announced that it would reduce its workforce by 40%, which represented laying off over 2,000 employees. As coal consumption and production continued to decline, Joban Mine announced its ceasing of operations in 1971, and finally its closure in 1976.  Many initiatives were implemented by the company in order to address the socio-economic consequences of closing the mine. Among these was the creation, in partnership with the union, of a re-employment office. Additionally, the government decided to create an industrial center in Iwaki. To do this, fourteen cities and nearby villages were united to establish a new industrial city, creating Japan largest city (Shimbun, 2012). In this particular situation, the company was committed to finding alternatives through which to reduce the impacts of the closure, and Joban leadership evaluated the idea of taking advantage of local natural hot springs to open a resort with a Hawaiian theme. One of the resort?s most important features is its hula-dancing troupe.  With the company?s support, eighteen miners? wives and daughters were provided with dance training and by 1970, the resort was receiving 1.5 million visitors per year. By 2004 it was the tenth most popular theme park in Japan. Currently, 40 years after the inception of this project, 318 dancers have taken the  	 ? 20 stage (Ono, 2012). The 2006 film Hula Girls was based on the story of the founding of the resort, and portrays the initial challenges involved in its establishment (Shimbun, 2012). In 2011 the resort was damaged by an earthquake and was forced to close. During the time it was closed, its hula girl troupe toured Japan, performing at earthquake refugee shelters and other venues. The resort reopened in early 2012 ?with increased structural support and bigger stage for its hula girls show? (Kyodo, 2012, p 2). 2.5 Industry Guidelines and Frameworks The mining sector and other industry-related institutions such as the World Bank ? IFC have, in recent years, focused on developing ideas, approaches and tools to demonstrate their commitment (as well as the will to support and enforce the commitment of their affiliates). They have made this approach their focus in order to ensure that society at large, and in particular, local communities and governments affected by industry projects are properly considered when the development of mining projects take place. This section aims to summarize key voluntary and enforced industry guidelines and frameworks at the global level. In this regard, the following documents are presented and discussed: Seven Questions to Sustainability, ICMM 10 Principle, ICMM Community Development Toolkit, ICMM Planning for Integrated Mine Closure, Towards Sustainable Mining and Equator Principles. 2.5.1 Seven Questions to Sustainability (7Qs) Seven Questions to Sustainability (7QS) was developed with the goal of applying sustainability concepts and ideas in a practical fashion in consideration of the realities faced by mine managers, mill superintendents, community leaders and other individuals and groups of interest (IISD, 2002).  According to MMSD, Seven Questions to Sustainability can be adopted as a guideline for auditing any stage of mining operations and assessing the company?s compatibility with sustainability concepts. Its main goal is to assess the contributions of mining activities to sustainability over the long term; this involves developing an understanding of how current activities can be improved in order to align with sustainability concepts and facilitate continual learning and improvement. Two main objectives were outlined (IISD, 2002, p.1): 1) to develop a set of practical principles, criteria and/or indicators that could be used to guide or test the exploration design, operation, closure, post-closure and performance monitoring of individual operations, existing or proposed, in terms of their compatibility with concepts of sustainability; and 2) to suggest approaches or strategies for effectively implementing such a test/guideline. The initiative led to the design of a framework to guide the assessment of whether or not a project or operation?s net contribution to sustainability is positive over the long term. For each of seven components, a question is posed as a means of assessing whether the net contribution to sustainability over the long term of a mining/mineral project or operation will be positive or negative (IISD, 2002, p.1).   	 ? 21 Table 2 - Seven Questions to Sustainability Framework Seven Questions to Sustainability 1. Engagement: are engagement processes in place and working effectively? 2. People (employees and residents): Will the well-being of the people be maintained or improved? (Responsibility of various parties in this task) 3. Environment: is the integrity of the environment assured over the long term? (Based on traditional environmental impact assessment, ISO14000 reporting tools, etc.) 4. Economy: is the economic viability of the project assured; will the community and broader economy be better off as a result? (Addresses the economic conditions of the company, adjacent community and surrounding region). 5. Traditional and non-market activities: are traditional and non-market activities in the community and surrounding area accounted for in a way that is acceptable to the local population?  6. Institutional arrangements and governance: are the rules, incentives, programs and capacities in place to address project or operational consequences?  7. Overall integrated assessment and continuous learning:  Source: IISD, 2002, p.1 2.5.2 ICMM 10 Principles The ICMM established a set of 10 principles of sustainable development which all signatory companies and other ICMM members must voluntarily agree to implement and then measure their performance against. The commitments to the 10 principles that resulted from the identification of issues related to the industry at the Mining, Minerals and Sustainable Development Project therefore include the concepts of sustainability and address the necessity of including them at all levels of the organization and in all aspects of mining operations. ICMM 10 Principles are  based on the issues identified in the Mining, Minerals and Sustainable Development project and were benchmarked against leading international standards, including the Rio Declaration, the Global Reporting Initiative, the Global Compact, OECD Guidelines on Multinational Enterprises, World Bank Operational Guidelines, OECD Convention on Combating Bribery, ILO Conventions 98, 169, 176, and the Voluntary Principles on Security and Human Rights (ICMM, 2003). Table 3 that follows lists the ICMM 10 Principles.  Table 3 ? ICMM 10 Principles Principle 01 Implement and maintain ethical business practices and sound systems of corporate governance Principle 02 Integrate sustainable development considerations within the corporate decision-making process Principle 03 Uphold fundamental human rights and respect cultures, customs and values in dealings with employees and others who are affected by our activities Principle 04 Implement risk management strategies based on valid data and sound science Principle 05 Seek continual improvement of our health and safety performance Principle 06 Seek continual improvement of our environmental performance Principle 07 Contribute to conservation of biodiversity and integrated approaches to land use planning Principle 08 Facilitate and encourage responsible product design, use, re-use, recycling and disposal of our products Principle 09 Contribute to the social, economic and institutional development of the communities in which we operate Principle 10 Implement effective and transparent engagement, communication and independently verified reporting arrangements with our stakeholders Source: ICMM, 2003  	 ? 22 2.5.3 ICMM Community Development (CD) Toolkit The International Council on Minerals and Metals (ICMM) has several publications that address aspects related to sustainability issues in the mineral industry. The Community Development (CD) Toolkit was published in 2008 and updated in 2012.  The toolkit ?aims to improve opportunities for the sustainable development of communities around mining and metals operations and regions during all phases of the mining cycle? (ICMM Toolkit, 2012). It continues by saying that ?mining can be a catalyst for positive economic and social impacts in areas with limited opportunities? (ICMM Toolkit, 2012). Sustainability in community development means that actions must be ?community planned and driven, not imposed by donors or companies? (ICMM Toolkit, 2012). In the CD Toolkit, community development tools are classified in the following five categories (ICMM Toolkit, 2012, p. 38): Within each category a group of specific tools have then been developed. 1 Planning: Allow for planning of needed human and financial resources. CD Tools #: 6) Strategic Planning Framework; 7) Community Mapping; 8) Institutional Analysis; 9) Development Opportunity Ranking; 10) Financial Valuation.  2 Assessment: Develop understanding of potential risks and impacts. CD Tools #: 11) Social Baseline Study; 12) Social Impacts and Opportunities Assessment; 13) Competencies Assessment. 3 Management: Aim to mitigate negative impacts and maximize beneficial impacts. CD Tools #: 14) Community Development Agreements; 15) Management Systems; 16) Community Action Plans; 17) Local Economic Investment; 18) Resettlement Planning. 4 Monitoring and Evaluation: Aim to measure progress of applied tools. CD Tools #: 19) Indicator Development and 20) Goal Attaining Scaling. 5 Relationships: The relationship tools are key since the other activities and tools rest on them. CD Tools #: 1) Stakeholder Identification; 2) Stakeholder Analysis; 3) Consultation Matrix; 4) Partnership Assessment and 5) Grievance Mechanism. The role of the mining company is to facilitate and support the above processes. Sustainable community development is achieved when ?the community feels it can manage well? without the company. 2.5.4 ICMM Planning for Integrated Mine Closure This document aims to assist mining companies, specifically site practitioners and related groups to ?make sound decisions based on a consideration of closure aspects in a holistic manner? (ICMM, 2008, p.1). It highlights the importance of considering closure from as early on as during the exploration phase. In the Mine Closure Toolkit, effective closure planning involves: 1. Early incorporation of planning for closure 2. Incorporating the goals of different stakeholders 3. ?Acting to meet the goals? 4. Minimizing liability and maximizing benefits  	 ? 23 5. Ensuring that other risks are not created through the mitigation of original risks The Planning for Integrated Mine Closure Toolkit refers to distinct frameworks and guidelines such as the Environmental Excellence in Exploration (E3) and ICMM Community Development Toolkit. Table 4 - ICMM Planning for Integrated Mine Closure Toolkit MCT1: Stakeholder engagement ? Environmental Excellence in Exploration (E3), the Prospectors and Developers Association of Canada (2007) MCT2: Community Development Toolkit, ICMM 2006 MCT3: Company/community interactions to support integrated closure planning MCT4: Risk/opportunity assessment and planning MCT5: Knowledge platform mapping MCT6: Typical headings for contextual information in a conceptual closure plan MCT7: Goal setting MCT8: Brainstorming support table for social goal setting (Supports T7) MCT9: Brainstorming support table for environmental goal setting (Supports T7) MCT10: Cost risk assessment for closure MCT11: Change management worksheet MCT12: The domain model MCT13: Biodiversity management Source: ICMM, 2008 2.5.5 Towards Sustainable Mining (TSM) In 2004, the Mining Association of Canada (MAC) established a set of principles with the aim of enhancing the industry?s reputation by improving its performance. These principles are mandatory across the industry and all MAC members are expected to comply with them. TSM helps the industry sustain its position as a leading economic contributor in Canada while protecting the environment and remaining responsive to Canadians. It helps the industry maintain its social license to operate. It helps the industry improve its performance by aligning mining activity with the priorities and values of its communities of interest. In essence, it helps the industry operate in a proactive, socially responsible way (Mining Association Canada, 2013 p. 1).  TSM has established a set of Performance Measures and Protocols on Crisis Management, Energy and GHG Emissions Management, Tailings Management, Biodiversity Conservation Management and Health & Safety, Aboriginal Relations & Community Outreach, and Mine Closure. For this study, the Mine Closure Framework was analyzed. The Aboriginal Relations & Community Outreach protocol has established four performance indicators: PF 1. Community of Interest Identification  PF 2. Effective COI Engagement and Dialogue  PF 3. COI Response Mechanism  PF 4. Reporting  Although TSM has established a Mine Closure Framework, the performance indicators are still under development.  	 ? 24 2.5.6 The Equator Principles The Equator Principles were established by the International Finance Corporation (IFC) to ensure that projects financed by institution were socially and environmentally responsible, and that negative impacts could be avoided, mitigated and compensated. Unlike other voluntary guidelines, the Equator Principles consist of a mandatory requirement that any project proponent which wants to access money (over $10 million) from financial institutions, is forced to comply with. The 10 Equator Principles are: Principle 1: Review and Categorization Principle 2: Social and Environmental Assessment  Principle 3: Applicable Social and Environmental Standards Principle 4: Action Plan and Management System  Principle 5: Consultation and Disclosure Principle 7: Independent Review Principle 8: Covenants Principle 9: Independent Monitoring and Reporting Principle 10: EPFI3 Reporting (Creating Public Report)  Additionally, in order to be more specific, the IFC has also published a total of eight performance standards where Performance Standard #1 refers to ?Assessment and Management of Environmental and Social Risks.? Both IFC principles and the content of Performance Standard #1 are analyzed. Performance Standard #1 establishes the importance of effective Environmental and Social Management Systems (ESMS) as a dynamic and continuous process that involves all stakeholders in the project. The approach is the one used in business management processes: ?plan, do, check and act.? The objectives of Performance Standard #1 are:  ? To identify and assess environmental and social risks/impacts ? To adopt mitigation activities such as prevention, minimizing, and compensation ? To promote improved environmental and social performance through the effective use of management systems ? To ensure that grievance mechanisms are in place ? To promote and provide engagement with affected communities in all stages of the project and to ensure access and disclosure of information  	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?	 ?3 Equator Principles Financial Institutions  	 ? 25 Some of the above-analyzed documents provide only general guidance and broad concepts, and thus readers/users must depend on their own interpretations to work out how these concepts could be translated into practice. Such a situation can lead to a short-sighted approach, or even misinterpretation. Despite the fact that each one of the industry guidelines and frameworks summarized above address elements regarding the challenges existing or emerging from industry-related projects, with the exception of the ICMM Planning for Integrated Closure toolkit, these documents were not designed to specifically tackle the implications of mine closure. With this in mind, developing a specific framework to address the socio-economic dimensions of mine closure becomes opportune and is deemed relevant. The review of these industry guidelines and frameworks has functioned to support the discussion on, and the development of, the Socio-Economic Mine Closure Framework presented in the next section. Furthermore, in Chapter 4 a lengthy analysis of each industry guideline as well as the proposed Socio-Economic Mine Closure Framework is made. 2.6 Proposed Socio-Economic Mine Closure Framework An ounce of prevention  is worth a pound of cure.  Benjamin Franklin   One of the deficiencies of industry-related guidelines in dealing with the socio-economic consequences of the mine closure, as stated earlier, relates to the importance of management and leadership. In fact ?closure today is less of a technical challenge and more of a management challenge? (ICMM, 2008, p.49).  Additionally, initiatives for building capacity lack integration and tend to be limited, as in the case of education, to an approach that focuses on the development of professional and technical skills instead of on the promotion of a well-rounded education. Aggravating the situation, short-sighted philanthropic initiatives and paternalistic attitudes seem to be ingrained in the cultures of both companies and communities. Such initiatives can have positive impacts over the short-term, but when not adequately planned for and implemented, can lead to a context that produces dependency and the lack of initiative and creativity - all of which impact negatively on the community, and all of which are aggravated when a mine ceases operations. With this context in mind, socio-economic mine closure refers to the process of planning and engaging key groups, namely local communities and governments, to develop a long term mine closure approach that would result in maintaining and improving the wellbeing of both individuals and the mining community. Acknowledging that mining projects vary in terms of the different phases in their mine lives, the above-mentioned definition might not be realistic since, in many cases, actions towards mitigation would need to take place. In this context, socio-economic mine closure involves planning and developing a mine closure approach to avoid and/or mitigate impacts brought on by mining operations with the pursuit of maintaining and improving the wellbeing of the mining community as well as the individuals living within it.    	 ? 26 To successfully implement Socio-Economic Mine Closure, more than good intentions are required. Such a closure demands refined management and leadership skills and needs to be implemented as an integrated, comprehensive and multidimensional process. Taking a rightful attitude towards the complexity of the closure is also essential for its success. Rather than choosing to perceive Socio-Economic Mine Closure as a deadline-driven problem that has to be solved, it should be approached as a matter that has to be continuously attended to, and the role and influence of the many sets of stakeholders affected by the mine closure has to be carefully taken into account.  The following section outlines a conceptual model of ten elements for Socio-Economic Mine Closure (herein known as 10 Ps Framework) that takes into account management and leadership tools and principles. Each one of the SEMC elements is in turn divided into different sub-elements. Element in this context, as found in the Oxford Dictionary, element is ?a component or constituent part of a whole? (Illustrated Oxford Dictionary, 2003, p. 263). Furthermore, element is also defined as ?an essential or characteristic part of something abstract? (Oxford Online Dictionary, 2013).  The proposed model is to be seen as a dynamic process and is not meant to be approached and implemented in a linear fashion, as many activities take place in parallel. In addition, there exists site specific aspects that will likely influence the order, pace and importance of the implementation of the elements constituents of the framework. Table 5 - Socio-Economic Mine Closure Framework (The 10 Ps Framework) Elements Sub-Elements Elements Sub-Elements 1. Policy Corporate Commitment 2. Presence Presence in the field  Governance Stakeholder Analysis 3. Participation Mobilization 4. Planning Asset Mapping Socio-Economic Impact Assessment Envisioning Education / Capacity Building  Project Design Empowerment Performance Indicators Community Engagement Resources Partnerships 5. Performance Implementation  6. Promotion Sharing / Communication Monitoring Evaluation Towards Continuous Improvement Consolidation 7. Perseverance Overcoming Resistance and Inertia 8. Patience Allowing Time for Effective Change Reinforcing Quality of Participation 9. Passion Individual Passion / Motivation 10. Personality Trust, Respect and Empathy  The idea for developing such Framework is a result of extensive literature review, attending classes and events in the UBC mining department and other departments such as Law and Anthropology. Participating in academic and industry related events and conferences were also relevant.  	 ? 27 In addition to that a 3-day visit to Puerto San Julian in Argentina in 2010, where meetings with Cerro Vanguardia representatives took place, also contributed in shaping the ideas to the development of the SEMC Framework.  However the most influential event that inspired the development of the 10 Ps Framework was the opportunity to participate in the ?The Multi-Perspective Collaborative Corporate Social Responsibility Pilot Case Study Project?, in which Guelph Professor Dr. Ben Bradshaw led the Brazilian portion of the study. In this study that aimed to map CSR initiatives implemented by a Canadian mining company the researcher has had a unique opportunity to see first hand some of the many challenges experienced by mining companies, local government and community. Issues such as meaningful community participation, the role of company community liaisons, the nature and breadth of company?s CSR initiatives and the role and expectation of local governments were some of the aspects that caught my attention while participating as a co-investigator in that project.  2.6.1 Policy 2.6.1.1 Corporate Commitment One of the most fundamental steps in establishing a framework for a successful social closure [or any other decision that leads to substantial organization change] is the commitment to the idea, at the corporate level, that the change is necessary. To this end, translating this commitment into organizational values or principles is key to ensuring these principles will be passed down through to the whole organization. Furthermore, strategies should be designed and implemented to support and pursue these new values or principles (Drucker, 2001). Considering the elements in the SEMC framework should be at the core of mine planning, operation and closure. 2.6.1.2 Governance  On the policy level, clear rules and procedures must be in place to provide guidance on how company representatives should behave and conduct business. This takes place through the implementation of a strong system of governance. Governance, in general, refers to a set of rules, commands and controlled decision-making procedures (Peters, 1996) that address possible conflicts of interest that can emerge within organizations (Daily et al., 2003). With this definition in mind, Chaloping-March (2008) suggests that mining closure should be adopted as a governance issue. Along the same lines, recent academic and empirical debate have taken place regarding the ways in which corporate governance can keep close ties with, and support community development (Benn & Dunphy, 2007; Roberts and Veiga, 2000; Veiga et. al., 2001). As such, governance needs to be restructured at the government, corporate and community levels if CSR and other initiatives are to be placed in alignment with sustainable development (Benn & Dunphy, 2007). Towards this end, some approaches have suggested that the traditional concept of the triple legged stool of sustainability should evolve to integrate governance as a forth leg (Schloss et.al, 2007; Teriman, 2009).   	 ? 28 As pointed out earlier, governance is also required at the government level to ensure a transparent and responsible environment. It is noteworthy to point out that some sort of governance principles are also fundamental at the community level, allowing for better communication, transparency and accountability, thus enabling communities to establish a ?framework of law and an organizational infrastructure through which representative bodies at the community level can inform themselves on issues of the day and then can transmit their views or decision both to other communities and to higher authorities? (Holmberg, 1992, p.52). 2.6.2. Presence 2.6.2.1 Presence in the Field In order to promote a successful social closure, mining companies need to have a team on the ground that is culturally and historically familiar with the local reality. The number of professionals from the company in a community is also very important. A shortage of people can slow the communication process, creating frustration that could, among other things, prevent participation and create misunderstandings. With regard to the professional capability of the people on the ground, it cannot be evaluated by the number of tasks checked off on a to-do list. Rather, quality needs to be evaluated based on the nature of relationships, established bonds, and how immersed company representatives are in the community. In order to build strong and trustful relationships with all key stakeholders, the education, training, experiences and background of the company?s representatives need to be taken into account. These factors can be decisive in facilitating or hampering dialogue as well as successful relationships with local community members.  Furthermore, the ideal person to be placed in the field, and who would hold the position of interacting with the community on behalf of the company would be someone who is familiar with the context, preferably a long-term local resident or native who existing has strong ties to the community. Besides holding a deep understanding of rooted social, cultural and historical characteristics, such a company representative would be able to build trust and give credibility to the company since they would be better able to properly understand, represent and translate the community?s need and aspirations. 2.6.2.2 Stakeholder Mapping Another sub-element of presence in the SEMC framework refers to Stakeholder Mapping - a well-known technique adopted by mining companies to understand the players, their interests and power of influence in the local context. This allows for a more holistic understanding of all stakeholders and their roles (ICMM, 2008). The nature, frequency and strength of the relationship between the local stakeholders can also be captured and monitored in a more detailed form of stakeholder mapping to ensure the mining company is aware of that which is taking place on the ground. Although apparently evident, when considering mapping stakeholders, it is of great value to understand the interests and clout of the key individuals  	 ? 29 within a community. It is important to take into consideration that stakeholder maps are more accurate with the input of those living in or close to the community members that are living in the communities. The local community is very often made up of several distinct groups, neighborhoods or associations, and despite the fact that this can play a significant role, the subtle differences between such groups are frequently overlooked.  2.6.3. Participation  The overall objective of participation is to create a healthy, democratic and welcoming environment where community members and other stakeholders are able to voice their ideas freely and take part in decision making. ?Participation refers to the extent to which stakeholders can influence development by contributing to project design, influencing public choices, and holding public [and private] institutions accountable for the goods and services they are bound to provide? (Dani, 2003, p.14). Key elements to enhancing participation include mobilization, empowerment, education and community engagement.  2.6.3.1 Mobilization  Mobilization of the community is significant throughout the life cycle of the mine and becomes particularly important if the mine is in operation and does not yet have a sound closure plan in place ? a common situation (ICMM, 2008) for companies, especially if they have been in operation for many years. Mobilization is fundamental for the pursuit of change, and in the context of community, can be understood as a way to ?organize and encourage a group of people to take collective action in pursuit of a particular objective? (Oxford, 2011).  Creating a clear understanding that the change is crucial and must take place is essential for mobilization. In his model for organizational change, Kotter (1996, 2002) places Sense of Urgency as the first step for mobilizing people and generating organizational change. This consists of a process of inviting and allowing people to understand that the current situation is threatening to the status quo and that the local quality of life could decrease if no action is taken. This sense of urgency raises the perception of a need for immediate change, energizing people and giving them hope that when objectives are reached, the organization and its members will be in a better position. The sense of urgency also sheds light on the tension between current discomfort with the present situation and attraction to the opportunity of a new environment, which in turn leads to a greater desire for change. Contrarily, complacency is seen as the antithesis to urgency. The greatest challenge for any type of organizational structure is to move people out from their comfort zone to a place where they can embrace change.  2.6.3.2 Education / Capacity Building In the context of a community, education goes beyond mastering a profession or becoming a skilled worker (Chouinard, 2009, Roberts and Veiga, 2000). Education, according to this broad perspective,  	 ? 30 involves a process of getting more knowledgeable about oneself and one?s immediate surroundings and gaining awareness of all the issues, challenges and opportunities that present at the micro and macro levels (Freire, 1987). This opens up opportunities for making knowledgeable decisions that can positively affect the development of individuals as well as the society in which they are embedded (Freire, 1968).  Mining companies and other organizations understand the relevance and the role of using education as a means to improve a community?s quality of life. However in many cases the approach is short-sighted and remains on the realm of developing technical skills, or learning a trade or an art form. Recognizably, technical learning and the development of a profession are important, however if it is the only form of learning employed, it can result in indoctrination and lead to dependence rather than free the individual to think for him/herself. In support of this argument, while working with Northern communities in British Columbia (Canada), Chouinard (2009) found that:  1. The objects of learning for education programs must be valuable, useful, and meaningful to the intended learners.  2. The process to develop programs should involve cycles of action and reflection, input from the intended learners.  3. Assimilation of information occurs through the experience of knowledge that is presented in culturally based frames informed by particular stories, experiences, teachers, places, values, histories, and materials (p. 106).  ?Community education is thus to be viewed as means of assisting communities by bringing matters to the community?s attention and preparing it for knowledgeable and empowered action? (Homan, 1999, p. 22). 2.6.3.3 Empowerment Working with communities involves creating a friendly and honest space in which people are able to voice their ideas and opinions and develop their potential (Homan, 1999). From an organizational point of view, companies should strive to assist local community members to develop ?stronger beliefs in their own personal power and the power of his/her group? (Homan, 1999, p. 9). Empowerment helps build confidence and makes people realize that their input and participation are vital, and that it contributes to a better future for their community. Empowerment is the process whereby individuals and groups acquire power to influence issues that affect them and their communities. In other words, it provides people with a ?greater sense of worth and personal control, they recognize that they can participate with others to influence conditions that affect them? (Homan, 1999, p. 9). 2.6.3.4 Community Engagement Education is the gateway to empowerment, which in turn leads to active and meaningful community engagement. Community engagement is defined by the International Association of Public Participation  	 ? 31 as ?any process that involves the public in problem-solving or decision making and uses the public input to make more informed decisions? (IAPP, 2011).  For community engagement to be truly meaningful, building trust, informing, consulting with, collaborating with, and empowering the community are vital (IAPP, 2011). The following Figure 2 introduces a community engagement continuum that outlines the roles of company and community and different levels of engagement. Figure 2 - Community Engagement Continuum COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT CONTINUUM Level of Engagement Inform Consult Participate Collaborate Empower Company?s Role To provide the local citizens (and local organizations) with clear information to assist them to understand and present the opportunities challenges  To ask and listen to the community on specific issues; obtain feedback on alternatives and solutions. To include the community in the planning and implementation of projects;   To ask the community opinion on how they would approach a project. To work together with the community to find solutions;   To partner with the public in the development of alternatives, implementation of projects and the identification of the preferred solutions. To support the development of skills of community members to enable them to play an active role in the decisions that affect their communities;   To co-authorize the final decisions with the local community members. Community?s Role Passive Reactive Participative Co-ownership Leadership  Source: Adapted from Infrastructure Planning and Natural Resources (IPlan) (www.iplan.nsw.gov.au) Lima (2002) calls attention that ? public involvement in mining-related decision-making and management processes is an important factor in enhancing the legitimacy of the industry, in developing public trust in the ability and desire of mining companies to conduct their business in an environmentally responsible manner and in improving the quality of the decisions being made? (p. 35) Furthermore, community engagement is not equivalent to stakeholder consultation (Chaloping-March, 2008). Community engagement, in the context of the mining industry, involves the process of building a collaborative relationship with local people and organizations that will be/are affected by the company?s operations and which engage a wide range of community members, focusing on long-term outcomes (Community Engagement and Development, 2006). It involves the creation of a welcoming environment where community members feel comfortable in participating and sharing ideas and where they are convinced that their contribution matters. As such, it does not simply involve physical presence at LEVEL OF COMMUNITY INFLUENCING DECISIONS  	 ? 32 community meetings. Contrarily, it relates to real involvement in community issues, understanding their complexity and being willing to do his/her part to contribute to the enhancement of the community?s overall quality of life. A proper community engagement needs to ensure that minority groups within the communities (ex. aboriginals, the elderly and women) are properly engaged and active participants. One of the groups, whose voice is often not heard, especially in male oriented societies, is that of women.  In a 2003 conference on Women in Mining held in Papua New Guinea, a survey asking about the negative and positive impacts of mining on women was distributed amongst the conference delegates, and ?over 67% of the respondents identified violence alcoholism, prostitution, sexual abuse and social /family disruption as the most harmful negative impacts? (Strongman, 2003 p.1). About 40% identified cultural/tradition degradation, health deterioration and lack of women?s representatives in decision making. The social-economic consequences of a mine closure are also strongly felt by women and their families, and any closure strategy must ensure that women participate at every stage of the closure plan. To reiterate, engaging with the community involves more than simply consulting or eliciting feedback on certain matters. In the community engagement process, people are seen as active participants and are educated and knowledgeable enough to influence the directions and the future of their communities. 2.6.3.5 Partnerships In addition to fostering community and stakeholder engagement, partnerships can function as a mechanism where companies and other stakeholders can maximize development of local communities. For instance ?Participatory capacity-building activities can make communities to make informed choices and to learn to take control of their development needs, and are therefore an effective way of reducing dependence on mining operations? (Esteves & Barclay, 2011, p.189; Labonne, 2002) Esteves and Barclay (2011) point out that partnerships can provide guidance to mining company managers on ?how to maximise development opportunities for communities surrounding mine operations by successful delivery of social projects, appropriate distribution of funds and the establishment of partnerships/alliances with outside agencies? (p. 192). Considering this, partnerships can be seen as an important mechanism for building constructive relationships between mining companies and local communities; furthermore it can foster community development (Esteves & Barclay, 2011). Considering a more pragmatic perspective ?Partnering enables companies to gain access to not-for-profit competencies, such as legitimacy, awareness of social forces, distinct networks, and specialized technical expertise? (Esteves & Barclay, 2011 p. 192).    	 ? 33 2.6.4. Planning Planning for a mine closure is an ongoing process that starts with the exploration phase and becomes increasingly more concrete and detailed as the project advances towards development (ICMM, 2008). Planning for Social Mine Closure goes beyond adequate financing, concrete targets, sound evaluation and monitoring (Chaloping-March, 2008 p. 312). Since technology, the community?s expectations, and legal and political frameworks can change, planning for closure should also incorporate the elements of flexibility and dynamism into its process.  Amey (1986) defines planning as the conscious design of a desired future and the subsequent creation of effective ways of bringing it about. Similarly, a plan is defined by the Oxford Dictionary as a ?detailed proposal for doing or achieving something? (Oxford, 2011). In the context of business administration, planning involves the process of assessing a current situation and defining actions to be undertaken in order to maintain or change that which was assessed. Planning also takes into consideration previous experiences as parameters to assist in reaching the pre-established goals (Chiavenato, 2001). Within the context of community development, planning exists as a means of assessing the current situation of a community, and defining strategies and implementing actions that will contribute to the improvement in the quality of life for all community members. 2.6.4.1 Asset Mapping Mapping assets involves a learning process for communities (Fuller et al., 2001) as well as companies. Assets mapping has been adopted by some companies in the extractive sector as a technique to assist in decision-making and community development.  Fuller et al. (2001) point out that a community?s assets are divided into 5 categories: natural, built, social, economic and service. Additionally, after mapping each category, the community will rank their assets and will justify their reasons for the chosen ranking.  In this context, assets may be persons, physical structures, natural resources, institutions, businesses, or informal organizations (Berkowitz and Wadud, 2003). One of the basics steps in the community planning process involves inventorying and assessing the social and cultural, natural, physical, economic assets as well as the services available in a community. This is an iterative process that opens up opportunity for engagement and meaningful participation. It is also a learning process that will provide mining companies with a better understanding of what and why both physical and immaterial elements are seen by the community as assets. At the end of the asset mapping process, a clear picture of the community situation emerges as well as community?s natural ability or inclination, providing valuable information for building the 2.6.4.3 Vision and the 2.6.4.4 Projects, the two last sub-elements of the planning process of the SEMC Framework.  	 ? 34 2.6.4.2 Socio Economic Impact Assessment ? SEIA Despite similarities, each mine community is unique and presents different needs and desires. Socio-Economic Impact Assessment (SEIA) tools can provide a clearer understanding of these needs and desires. It also allows for an improved understanding of the social and economic implications of mining activities, allowing for superior implementation of planning, decision-making and management (Joyce and MacFarlane, 2001; Kemp et al., 2008).  SEIA also functions as an engagement mechanism since, through the process, a very close interaction with the community is established. Warhust et al. (2000) point out that  without conducting such assessment from the outset, the potential impacts of closure prior to operation will not be understood by relevant stakeholders. This could dramatically affect whether construction proceeds, how it proceeds, and the mitigation and compensation mechanisms to be adopted when production is achieved (p.92).  Social impact assessment can also provide information that could be used in community development and which could contribute to the sustainability (Joyce and MacFarlane, 2001) of communities after closure. In this regard Lima (2002) notes: ?Closure planning must integrate all aspects of sustainable development? (p. 44), which includes environmental, economic and social dimensions. 2.6.4.3 Vision Vision, a key element in the design phase refers to the process of envisioning the ideal community. This involves a collaborative process that takes into consideration all the knowledge gathered in the asset mapping process. Vision results from the articulation of the dreams and hopes of the community, and will become a guiding framework for the overall planning. An organization?s vision sets out future aspirations (Kotter, 1996). A clear vision can help people understand their role in the process of change. It also serves as a motivational tool since people know where they are going and which steps needs to be implemented / pursued in order to get closer to reaching the vision (Kotter, 1996). The vision should be clear, simple, and inspiring. It should also be something that the majority of people in the community aspire to and believe in. Thus, designing the vision must involve a collective process for which community members feel ownership and which they will strive to make happen (Kotter and Cohen, 2002).  2.6.4.4 Projects Subsequent to documenting the community?s (4.1) assets (built, natural, social, economic and services), ranking them in importance, and collectively establishing the community?s vision (4.3), the next natural step is to conceptualize projects that will be in alignment with the vision and the community?s natural ability or inclination.  	 ? 35 A key task involves finding the balance between short and long-term projects. Kotter (1996; Kotter and Cohen, 2002) highlight the importance of having ?short-term wins.?  Short-term wins are projects that produce immediate results. They are key to establishing a sense of accomplishment and strengthening t