Transcription
We've got a great lineup, as you've just introduced, and it's a fascinating topic talking about the future of the mining industry and best practices for the mining industry. We're going to cover everything from ESG to what the mine of the future looks like, to tailings dam, and what are the rules and developments around, um, storage of mining waste, as well as some of the commodities needed for, for the future world and the transition to a low-carbon economy. So, I'd like to, um, start off with the first question, which is a broad question, um, and I think it's good to ask the question: What does the mine of the future look like? Um, you know, when people picture a mine now, they think of diesel trucks and big holes in the ground, um, and a lot of noise and a lot of, um, pollution. Um, but Robert, maybe I could start with you. You've had a long experience in, in the mining industry. What's your vision of, um, you know, what the mine of the future will look like?
Well, first of all, thank you, Henry, for inviting me to speak with you today, and thank you to the entire forum. I'm very honored to be here. I guess I'd start off by saying the mine of the future certainly will be moving towards electrification and so on. But I think it goes beyond just the mine. I think you're looking at a fully integrated community and, uh, business environment, if you will, in which planning goes on just not just about the, the beginning, the operational stage of the mine, but also beyond closure as well. So that the society itself becomes and the community becomes sustainable beyond the life of the mine itself. So with that, I would believe supply chains will be much shorter. You'll be deriving your materials that move the mine forward, as well as the rest of the community, from within the immediate area of the mine. So that we don't have, have disruptions, for instance, as we have now during this pandemic timeframe, in which, uh, communications and transport have been, have been supported, as well as it promotes better business, long-standing business within the community itself, so that it sustains itself beyond just mine activity to have a fully integrated, uh, community and business environment. I think with that, I'll let other others have a chance to say something.
Yeah, Israel, but bring you in here, if I may. Um, I mean, Robert mentioned the community aspects of, of the mine of the future. Um, I just wanted to get your thoughts because obviously mines, like other industries, are moving more towards automation, using technology, AI, which is going to mean less employment for local communities, less people working in the mine. I mean, how are they going to still win the trust of, of communities if they can't provide jobs?
Yes, thank you very much, and thanks for the opportunity. Good morning, good afternoon, everyone. I think when we think about the mine of the future and what we will look like, it's important, as, as Robert said, and as you said yourself, to put that in the context of the global trends that we see in terms of the way, um, uh, we will our lives will change, we will the consumption, purchase, and production will change. And for this, I think Robert mentioned the energy transition, and I'll focus more on one aspect, which is the technological innovation for the Fourth Industrial Revolution. And indeed, um, to add to a smarter mine, the greener mine, I would mention the leaner mine, which means fewer people will be needed at the mine phase. And, um, of course, work will be conducted remotely. That would have, uh, definitely implications for local communities, both positive and negative, because, um, automation doesn't necessarily mean that all the jobs will disappear. You will still need people to operate, you to maintain, um, the automated machines, and you will need maybe higher-skilled people. So definitely there will be impacts, uh, both in terms of opportunities for higher-paid jobs, lower-paid jobs will probably be the ones that will be displaced. And then the implications for the local community is that you need to manage that transition, because the least, the biggest risk for, for a company is when people don't know what's going to happen, and that makes tension and, uh, disrupt, whatever, uh, business is happening. So the money, the manage, the managing the transition away from the redundancy will be important, helping them to find, um, solutions outside the mine, because obviously the more capital intensive, uh, the activities become, the less opportunities there will be. But that's also an opportunity to diversify away from just the mining sector. So I think these are the broader headlines that I just wanted to mention here in terms of technology and, uh, communities. Thanks very much.
That's interesting. Aidan, I just want to bring you in, um, because you're obviously in regular contact with some of the largest mining companies in the world. Um, I mean, when, when they talk about the mine of the future, is there an attempt to come to ideas about best practices on, on, you know, how to deal with the communities, um, as we talked about when there are fewer jobs?
Yeah, I think that, I think there is, Henry, and I, and I think part of the, the challenge lies in, and Isabella's touched upon it, is that as you move towards the mine of the future, that that Robert started to kind of paint a picture of, uh, where you have ultimately far fewer people really being being employed in the direct mining activity, that then does begin to change the nature of the relationship between companies and communities. And in some respects, I think it's going to need almost a renegotiation of the social contract between companies and communities. But, but just to maybe take it back a little bit to some of the, the characteristics of what the mine of the future might look like. So if we accept the proposition, it's going to be much less labor-intensive, it's going to be much more energy-efficient, it's going to produce considerably less waste than today. That is going to rely on advances in, in a number of areas, and the reality is, we don't have the answers to those challenging questions yet, but, but we are working towards them. And so some of those areas are, you're going to have to have a, I think, a much more precise understanding of geology and where the minerals of interest are, and, and that's going to require advances in current spatial mapping techniques and in other, in other areas as well. We're going to have to get greater precision around what we mine, uh, which is linked to that first point. And then this, there's got to be a much greater focus on being much more efficient in terms of segregation, which is going to determine what you ultimately end up processing. And that, in turn, influences energy consumption, volumes of waste, potential impacts on, on the receiving environment. Uh, and so similarly, you know, I think you've got to look at improvements in, in recovery methods, whether we're talking about in-situ recovery methods or within the processing facility. But all of that does point to hopefully a minor future that has a much lower environmental footprint, but where it has much lower requirements for labor in terms of the immediate operating environment. And that, I think, takes us into a conversation about the essential need to, to re-skill and engage with communities around future resilience, but also around a more creative way of employing communities and a more broader, uh, I guess definition almost of what the employment opportunities for future mining communities will look like. And that is something that we've given a great deal of attention to at ICMM.
Just, just, as you mentioned, you mentioned rewriting the social contract, the need to, to rewrite the social contract. Could you expand on that? Um, what do you, what do you mean by that? That's an interesting point.
Yeah, and I guess, you, the, the traditional concept of, of a contract, going right back to, you know, Rousseau, is this notion that in some respects, you give up something in return for something else. Um, and, you know, when we talk about the, the social contract of mining, to some extent, the contract today is one whereby both countries seed the ability to companies to develop resources which they own, but in the interest of the wider population. At the more local community level, communities, uh, enable or support the development of that activity at that very local level, on the, in the hope and expectation of receiving some form of direct benefit in the form of jobs and economic advancement, etc. But as that equation shifts in terms of where the locus of benefit lies, then I think you have to think again about what does that more traditional social contract look like in terms of company, host community, uh, and mining company, and, and, and the host government.
That's very interesting. Dolores, I just wondered if, um, you could, uh, you know, add, add to that, and perhaps give us, um, a taste of, you know, of the Mexican context. Um, I mean, in Mexico, is there, is there a sense of what the mine of the future looks like? Are people pushing for, pushing for that?
Thank you. Good morning, everyone. As a matter of fact, our work in the mining industry and extractive industries is really new in UNEP, and we have been setting some, uh, some areas of work in that sense. And the mining of future for us could be the one with good environmental governance and the compliance with international environmental agreements. On the other hand, we would like to work as well in preventing disasters and conflicts relevant in these industries as well. The concept of the pollution and detoxifying the sector, you know, like lowering the impacts of the pollution in water, in soil, in, in air, and as well, the carbonized concept, as well, that some of the panelists already mentioned it. And as well, the concept that we are promoting is the circular economy, which is related with approaches like eco-design or, uh, recycling or reuse in the process of the mining. So that is, that is the, the areas of work that we are promoting globally. And, uh, in Mexico, we are starting, you know, the first approaches with industry because in the past, we haven't been working in, in this important sector.
Thanks. That's interesting. You mentioned the circular economy and recycling, um, because I understand in Mexico, um, there's going to be a lithium project, and perhaps they will also recycle batteries, um, you know, near, near to the lithium mine. So, is that, so is that something you think miners can get involved with in terms of recycling and reuse?
Yeah, for sure. I think the, the more efficient use of materials is one of our goals in, in the environmental agenda globally. And as you know, all these climate change emergency that we are facing, uh, demands a, you know, higher amount of, of quantity of sun minerals. And you mentioned lithium is one of the main components of solar panels. And in that extent, only we expect that around 50% of the new energy produced on renewal energy in the following five years will come from solar panels. So lithium is, is an important component of these zero carbon commitments for almost 126 countries, representing more than 50% of the total carbon emissions. So imagine how important is the mining sector for this transition to a lower carbon economies.
Interesting. Aidan, I just wanted to bring you in here, um, you know, as Dolores mentioned, mining is needed for a transition to a low-carbon economy. So it's got to decarbonize. Um, I mean, is it possible for, for miners to, to use renewable energy in their operations? Because obviously renewables are intermittent, but on the other hand, mines are often in places where there's great solar potential, right, or great potential for renewable energy. I mean, what's the sort of difficulties of integrating renewables into a mining site?
And I think some of this is, is near context and geography dependent, Henry. And as you, as you rightly acknowledge, you know, some geographies are far better suited to this than others. And so we see extraordinary progress in, you know, parts of sub-Saharan Africa and in parts of Chile and Peru in terms of the ability to bring on stream renewables in a way that can satisfy significant, uh, uh, components of demand for, for miners. And, and I think, you know, again, when we, when we think about, um, the flip side of the equation, that, you know, mining is essential to the supply of the essential materials that will support the transition to the low-carbon economy, doesn't give miners a free pass in terms of doing their, their bit to decarbonize. And I think for the most part, you know, they certainly, the conversation amongst our member companies is, is one where they feel this obligation and responsibility quite acutely. Excuse me. But I think, you know, some of the decarbonization levers that are accessible to them are more accessible than others. And so, you know, many of them have found it quite possible, I think, to switch to lower carbon electricity sources, and sometimes that's available through the grid. And, you know, we have very, very significant, uh, amount of hydro capacity in places like Chile, in parts of Canada, and in Northern Europe, uh, or, you know, in areas where you've got solar-based renewables. Again, I think that's provided a significant component of, of the base demand that the companies have. Others have, have looked to electrify appliances such as pumps and heaters that might previously have run on gas, so you get that lower carbon dividend as a result of that. And I think there is a huge amount of focus on improving the energy efficiency of, of the, the core processing activities of, of miners. But as you know, very well, this is this is hugely challenging in situations where all grades are declining. But just as a last small point, though, I do think that mobile equipment offers a real opportunity space, and it's, it's an area that we've been focusing on at ICMM because mobile equipment can account for, you know, 30, 40 percent, in some instances, almost 80 percent of a mine's scope 1 and scope 2 emissions. And, you know, we, we've launched an initiative called the ICSV, the Innovation for Cleaner Safer Vehicles Initiative, which is a collaborative endeavor between 18 of the world's biggest original equipment manufacturers and all of our members to try and stimulate and, you know, promote a new generation of cleaner, safer mining vehicles. And that's been up and running now for a couple of years and is really starting to bear fruit. So, you know, the objective there is about making greenhouse gas emission-free service mining vehicles available by 2040, and we're really encouraged by the pace of progress so far. So there's a lot happening in this space.
Robert, I wonder if I, I could ask you this. I mean, miners don't want to be renewable energy companies, right? So they, they're dependent on national grids, right? So, I mean, is it hard for them to, to, you know, to get their own renewables if a country doesn't shift its, you know, power supply?
You're on mute, actually. It's hard to remember to unmute yourself when you've been listening. In any event, it, again, referring back to a comment that Aidan made early on was that a lot of this is geography dependent, in that if a mine happens to be in a, in a well-infrastructured location, access to grid power is, is probably very possible. Obviously, if you're in a high sunshine area, solar is possible, and if you've got someplace near running water, be it rivers or be it currents in the oceans, you've got alternatives for hydroelectric power. And geothermal power is almost always a possibility because, just the, just the normal thermal gradient in the Earth's crust has a possibility. But having said all of that, a hybrid sourcing of power for the overall mine operation is probably going to be the likely direction that the industry will have to take. Yes, we've made tremendous progress in, uh, electrifying our, our vehicles, both at all scales. We're doing this. We're minimizing utilization of power and water in our processing activities. But the mining industry will have to take advantage of whatever sources of renewable power or sustainable power that are in its geographic location. So you may have fields of solar power combined with some windmill farms, but then those don't always work, and you'll have to look at perhaps flow batteries that can, that can store tremendous amounts of long-lasting power to, to provide the electricity for the buildings and so on and so forth. In addition, they're moving towards a more hydrogen-based energy system, and technology is now developing in which on-site manufacture of ammonia is very possible, which has much more higher carbon component or carbon hydrogen component to than than water or anything else. And transition breaking apart an ammonia molecule to create access to hydrogen may be part and parcel to every, as part of our, of every mine energy generation source, replacing the idea of diesel-powered energy.
That's fascinating. Isabel, I just want to ask you, I mean, what are, what are the ways that, um, you know, miners can decarbonize their, their operations? Um, you know, what, what does best practice look like?
Yeah, thank you. I think Aidan and Robert mentioned, um, the different options that you have for direct, um, uh, reduction on-site. I think I just wanted to mention that, uh, there, we're really focusing on operations here, but I think the entire lifecycle of life project of the mine is important because you do have a lot of, um, in the, uh, uh, before operations and also after, quite a few, um, uh, things that can be done there as well. But, uh, I, I think that, um, besides on-site, there's also, um, the entire value chain that, um, has to be looked at, um, because, you know, if you look at the GHG emissions of operations globally, it's one, one percent, I think, of GHG, uh, emissions for, um, on-site operations globally, and the bulk of it actually lies in direct, so the, the, um, scope two and three. And there, as well, there's quite a lot of, of work to do. I think in terms of upstream, even if both upstream and downstream processing, the miners don't have control of it. On the upstream side, as a buyer, you are able to put standards, to come up with requirements, to, to see to what extent your suppliers can clean their supply chains, because you're importing their pollution. And downstream, working with smelting, etc., to make sure that this can be done to, you know, tracking off, but you don't have really control of that. So to me, there's a whole of industry approach to this. And, um, yeah, you know, as Robert Knighton says, you know, green energy, uh, efficiency vehicles, etc., are, are probably, I mean, are different options for this. And I think ultimately, two things will matter: one is the cost of all this, and secondly, is technological readiness, because we're talking about electric vehicles, as, uh, green energy, etc., but, uh, not all of that is being deployed at the same pace, in the same location, in the same type of mines. Uh, I think there are some types of technology that are more fit to certain types of operations than others. So I think it's, it will, it is related to the complex, and therefore, um, uh, the solutions will certainly rely in a mix of different, um, actions that companies can take. But I do think that we, companies have also need also to include in their, um, actions, working with their supply chains, because the bulk of the emission actually, if you want to be meaningful, you cannot look at only what's happening on the site. You really have to take a whole industry approach.
That's fascinating. And you mentioned the cost of, of, of this. I mean, obviously, it is expensive if you're buying a new fleet of vehicles or, etc. I mean, are we reaching a state where, um, miners will be able to charge a premium for, for greener products? I mean, there's been some indication in aluminum, for instance, people will pay more per ton for it, for greener metal, lower carbon metal. I mean, is this something that you see happening at all?
I think it should. I think it should, because, uh, there is no free, no, I mean, that's not going to happen for free, and it's, it is indeed expensive, even if the cost of technology will, will renewables, etc., will go down as the investments and, uh, in, in the technology increase. But I think, uh, you know, um, there is a market for that.
Interesting. Aidan, I just want if you had any thoughts on that, because it is a fascinating topic, right? Um, you know, if there's a premium for, for being greener, you know, what's, what's the incentive, right? But, I guess, at the same time, there's pressure from, from miners' customers, right? And as Israel mentioned, the whole supply chain, going down to, you know, the consumer product, there's, there's growing pressure. Yeah, what do you think?
So, you know, I guess much as I, I would love to see there being a premium for product that can be demonstrably, you know, shown as, as having been produced through more responsible means, uh, I think it's, you know, it's unlikely. And I think we've seen that that same dynamic play out with the cost of capital, where rather than, um, miners finding themselves in a position of attract, you know, having more favorable terms when it comes to the cost of capital, by virtue of, of being able to demonstrate that they're producing responsibly, instead, what, what I think it helps, or what has helped, both in terms of cost of capital and I suspect both in terms of, uh, price premium, is that it's not going to get you either of those things. But what it will get you is the ability either to continue to attract investment, or the ability to, to be a supplier of choice. And so if we look, for example, at some of the initiatives in the mining space which are directed at ensuring more responsible production and supply of materials, and, and some of that is membership-based, such as ICMM's own mining principles, some of it is commodity-specific, such as the Aluminium Stewardship Initiative or Copper Mark, in, in those instances, I think what, what it probably confers is the ability to continue to be able to supply more discerning customers, rather than the ability to attract a premium from those customers. Now, at some point, you, you may get to, or some stage you may get to a tipping point, where if there is sufficient convergence amongst all consumer-facing companies that all materials must be responsibly supplied, then ultimately that, that, you know, one little drive, I think, broad-based improvements across the industry, and it may also drive the ability to, to, uh, apply some, if not a price premium, then price recognition of the associated costs. But I think with some way off getting to that, that nirvana of a, of a cost premium for metals, other than in very, very selective instances where we've seen it play out, and that's particularly, I think, in the, in the jewelry sector, where, uh, there is that huge ability to pass on a premium to customers.
Yeah, essentially, you mentioned, uh, some of the initiatives, such as the Aluminium Stewardship Initiative. I mean, there's, there's all these different initiatives, you know, in cobalt and copper. Um, I mean, do you think there needs to be more alignment? You know, I mean, could people, are people getting confused by all these initiatives? Do you think there needs to be more, fewer, and more alignment?
I think, uh, in, you know, ideally, that you would see convergence, you would see alignment. Um, but I think in some respects, we, we have these different initiatives because they have different points of honor origin and different drivers that, that sort of brought them into being. But equally, I think we are starting to see, um, real convergence across these initiatives, whether they're commodity-specific or whether they're membership-based. We are starting to see convergence around what, you know, almost a core set of normative expectations about what good looks like in terms of ESG. And, you know, as I see man, we are quite concerned about the risk of almost fatigue and the risk of confusion coming through from, from the multiplication of these various initiatives. So one of the pieces of work we did fairly recently was to look at the equivalency between, in this case, our own mining principles, but, but against initially five of the other schemes that are out there or standards for responsible mining. And this is an attempt, firstly, to kind of simplify for, uh, external stakeholders who may be just getting confused about how do these things relate to one another? Are they similar? Are they different? And to what extent are they similar or different? But it's also about, I think, you know, providing absolute transparency to interested stakeholders, and that would include investors and, you know, customers, NGOs, and media, arguably, about exactly what you're getting with these different, uh, standards. And, and I think in, in some respects, again, that's a first step, almost towards, uh, the pursuit of convergence by, by laying there and by making it extremely clear, uh, where the similarities and differences are. I think it's, it's easier to get to a conversation around actually, you know, we're seeing a normative core at the heart of all of these, which we could probably align around for the sector as a whole.
Got it. That's very interesting. I'd like to, um, move on a bit now to talk about, um, biodiversity and, you know, the problems and perhaps solutions of, you know, how mining companies operate in areas of high level of biodiversity, because obviously, you know, loss of biodiversity is one of the huge challenges we're facing, and we don't want the mining industry to contribute to that. Dolores, I'd like to bring you in here, um, because there's a, sort of, very interesting example in, um, in Mexico, um, with, you know, the mercury for, for gold mining, and, you know, this is, this is mined by artisanal communities. I just wondered what, what have been some of the solutions, um, you know, to this problem, and, you know, how is that an example for the rest of the world?
Thank you, Henry. Yes, uh, talking about the active demanding activities into natural protected areas is, is something really, really frequent around the globe, you know. If you see a map where the natural protected areas are and the mining activities, they normally overlap. And you see, for instance, that overlapping in Mexico, South America, Asia, constantly. As a matter of fact, in Mexico, and we, the Mexican territory, about 11% is, is under these conservation status, and in that extent, as you mentioned, the mining activities are, in some extent, impacting negatively regarding the forest and jungle laws, regarding loss of species as well, loss of soil, which is important for agricultural activities, water pollution. So, and, and you mentioned the case of Mexico, and in the case of Mexico, we can see that the legislation gives a preference of land use to mining activities, and even though, for instance, the environmental laws say that maybe mining activities cannot be a part of this center of natural protected areas, the core area of, of this conservative territory, the mining law allows openly the activities. So in that extent, to have this coherence on, on, you know, between environmental and mining laws is really, really important. In Mexico, we have a really important case in Sierra Gorda of Querétaro, which is in the center of the country. Sierra Gorda represents about 25% of the mercury emission globally. We have there almost 200 mercury mining working, and about 1,500 families work on mercury mining. But, you know, that mercury has a negative impact on health and environment. So in that extent, UNEP is developing a five-year program, starting this year, with international resources and mainly local and national resources, to give these families, this community, some alternative economic possibilities. We are, we are starting working with the community, the, the artisanal mining families, 80% of them says that they would like to change activity if they, if they get some support. No? And that's why UNEP and the Minister of Environment and the government of Querétaro, we are working so hard in designing these alternative livelihoods like ecotourism or some specific agricultural activities. So we will see in the following five years, but this, this project is an example of how different levels of government can give the, the communities in that situation some options for having a healthy and more productive lives. Thank you.
That's a fascinating example to look at. Robert, I just, um, wanted to bring you in here. Um, well, when we look at exploration now, um, is it the case that areas that, you know, of high biodiversity or protected areas, are they totally off limits, or is there a way for the mining industry to convince governments that, you know, they can operate in these areas?
Exploration is obviously the pioneers moving into an area that may be inhabited by not just small communities that are living in a subsistence style of fashion, but also, as I say, the, the, uh, the biota, the plants, the animals, and so on, are also in a, I won't say challenged area because they're well adapted to it, but they're, they could, they can be at risk. So the keys to, for exploration is to start early with the communication and involvement with the local people, with the local governments, and moving upwards to determine what is acceptable and what is not acceptable. And yes, a lot of areas, by their very nature of their uniqueness, set themselves off as being not open to exploration, and therefore not, no mine or other styles of economic development should be allowed there. Other areas, we can't, we can't change geology, unfortunately. The minerals are where the minerals are found. And as a result, they're, how should I say, there will be, there are some trade-offs, compromises, whatever term you like to use. And some of those will be addressed as we decarbonize as well, because the, the amount of mineral reliance that, uh, society will have as we decarbonize is going to increase dramatically. So yes, we have to be exceptionally cautious and careful about the way we move into areas that are sensitive to impacts that are crazed by mining. Fortunately, mining in general has a smallish footprint as compared to say, a city development or, or even a major industrial complex. A mine may be a few square kilometers in its impact, assuming that we're, we're able to internalize the waste production and find ways to recycle and re, and replace it in terms of remediation. But if we develop a town around that, it, it changes the entire prospect of what the footprint of mining would be.
I want to ask you, I mean, you know, the US America talks a lot about bringing back mining now, but we've seen the examples where because of biodiversity, because of, um, you know, natural beauty spots, that a lot of these new big mining projects have been, you know, halted. You know, I'm thinking of Pebble Mine or, or the one in Minnesota. I mean, do you think it is possible for a country like the US or other developed countries to, to revive their mining industries given these issues?
I think it's going to be a necessity, to be honest. A country like the US cannot rely solely on its importing of its mineral needs, and should not as well. We, the, the, the morals of doing something like that would go off kilter as well. So the US does need to be, come more self-sufficient in areas, maybe not a hundred percent in all commodities, but there's going to have to be a, I'm calling it the great compromise, as, uh, we look at the need for the dramatically increased need for mineral for new mineral activities as we decarbonize and transition become the economies of the world with the need for additional new materials to allow that to happen. And there's, yes, rules will be established, and you'll, uh, know where you can and cannot work, but the, there's going to have to be some level of balance. Creating new areas that are, that are removed for consideration of mine at the scale of say, Yellowstone Park or the Grand Canyon, may be challenging. You may have to get more specific about how you protect certain areas so that there, there can be compatible mineral development. And as we're talking all the way along, technology is changing in a fashion that the amount of waste, the amount of derived from mining, the amount of disruption of an economic ecosystem because of exhaust from mechanized vehicles and so on and and generators and so on, is going to be minimized as well. So that as the footprint diminishes, uh, the area in which, uh, mining can become acceptable, we'll trade off in a fashion as well.
That's very interesting. Actually, and, um, I just wanted to move on before I open up to Q&A to talk about ESG, and we've talked about the E, the environmental, um, sleeve, the G, out for now, but the S has really become, I think, big news in the mining industry over, you know, the past year or two. You know, we've seen issues with, with Rio Tinto and, you know, Aboriginal communities, we've seen, uh, Norilsk and Russia and some Aboriginal communities there. Um, I mean, Aidan, maybe I'll see you, um, what's going wrong, um, in the mining industry in terms of the, the S part of the ESG?
Yeah, I guess, um, and this is not to kind of downplay the seriousness of either of the incidents you mentioned, but, but it is to say that they are, they are not isolated examples. Um, and so I think we, we have seen, uh, a significant number of disputes between, you know, local communities, uh, with mining companies over the years. And, you know, I guess the origins of this really come down to, I think, competing perspectives over, over two things. One, it's around that the locus of decision-making on whether or not mining should take place, and who gets to decide that. And the second thing is around the ownership of the resources, you know, whose minerals, whose metals are, you know, really are there, in any case? And, you know, most countries declare ownership of the subsurface resources in the interest of the wider population, uh, and seek to develop them for the, for the interest of the wider citizenry. Um, not surprisingly, companies that have paid a, uh, you know, for, for a license to, to mine feel some degree of ownership. But equally unsurprisingly, communities whose land overlies those resources also feel a degree of ownership. And so when you, when you couple that with, uh, increasing challenges to the legitimacy of those that get to make the decisions around whether and how mining should proceed, that almost creates a perfect storm where there is almost an inevitability around around disputes. And that's not to say that that we should just accept it, uh, and say, look, it's terrible, it's too bad, but, but, you know, it's gonna always be with us, and we've just got to learn to live with it. I think what we, what we need to recognize is, um, how do we, how do we better reconcile those two competing kind of tensions around ownership of resources, around locus of decision-making, to try and bring about a means of decision-making that is that is more inclusive of local communities. And already, I think there are provisions in place, quite rightly, that recognize the historical disadvantage, particularly of indigenous communities, and put them in a position of, of greater decision-making autonomy and authority when it comes to how resources, you know, Canada should be developed. That's not to say that we still don't get issues in those operating contexts, but I do think it starts to begin to offer the beginnings of a, of a blueprint when we look at the agreement-making processes that are in place in co, you know, in countries like Canada, in countries like, um, Australia, where, despite the fact we've seen some projects go, go slightly awry, we've also seen examples of where you get harmonious development that is recognized as being in the mutual interest and to the mutual benefit of, of the company, the host community, and indeed for the broader government. And I think we need to learn more from the dynamics of interaction where it's worked really well, and where all three of those parties feel both an appropriate degree of ownership and an appropriate degree of say in the decision-making process, such that we get mining mineral developments taking place that are less conflictual. So, sorry if there's a slightly roundabout answer, but I think that's, that's really what's driving a lot of this, Henry. We've got to get to the fundamentals of how decisions are made and who makes them.
Very interesting. Well, I'd just like to open up for Q&A, and I, I've got some, some questions here already, which I'll ask to the panelists. Um, actually, Dolores, one question for you actually. Um, what are some of the main complaints regarding mining's impact on biodiversity in Mexico?
Yeah, uh, I think the main complaint from the environmental point of view is the, the loss of forest and, uh, and forest coverage. And Mexico, last year, it was in the, in the 10 top countries who lost this cover of forests, mainly, of course, by agricultural sector, but also by mining. And it's the same story in Brazil, in Ecuador, in Colombia. And as well, the pollution, you know, the water pollution and all these ecosystem services that are affected. But these activities of the mining are really, really important as well.
Um, just looking at another question, perhaps, uh, as well, I'll ask you this. It's a good question, which is, how can mining companies use being greener or using more renewable energy to benefit their relationship with communities? Is there a way that they can help their relationship with communities by using more renewable energy or being in?
Yeah, definitely. I think there are two issues there. One is, um, you know, reducing the carbon, the, the environmental footprint and being cleaner. So that's definitely, uh, one area where a more sustainable mining operations will have less impact locally. Uh, the second one is, I mean, this has been discussed earlier, so I'm not gonna, you know, go, uh, into detail here, but the second one that I wanted to mention, which is more as to what, how can, um, you know, those be used as opportunities to create alternative livelihoods in the mining communities? For example, sharing some of those, um, renewable energy upgrades. Very often, in remote communities, access to energy, either is very expensive or limited. We've seen it in many African countries, for example, access to electricity, you have power cuts, it's very unreliable, etc. And this is an opportunity to give power to people. And we know very well that there is no industrial development, and there is no economic development if you don't have access to energy and affordable energy and reliable energy. So definitely sharing this, and it is something that can help, um, you know, if you want, uh, a swift, uh, shift away from the negative implications that like things like, um, automation can have on employment, to creative alternative livelihoods, so people can generate their own jobs or can create, yeah, well, work in other industries that can give them jobs. So there is also that that opportunity to leapfrog development that you would not have had if the, the industry was not, you know, adopting it at that pace, because you would have had to wait for the grid to reach the remote communities, etc. So I think there are two dimensions on it. One is the cleaner one, which is the environmental dimension, and the other one is the economic damage. Thanks very much. That's very interesting.
And actually, another question came on that topic. Um, perhaps, Aidan, I'll ask you, following on from that, you know, how, how can mining companies play a part in helping find communities alternative economic activity, after mines close? I mean, what's their responsibility once the mine has closed?
So, so this is an area that, that, um, and I know, you know, Isabelle at IGF, I know they're doing a lot of work in this space as well, but we put out the latest kind of generation of our Integrated Mine Closure Toolkit at the beginning of last year, and a significant area of focus throughout that, that guidance document, and it's freely available, is on the whole issue of social transitioning, and you're preparing, uh, communities for not just the, the inevitability of closure, as it is inevitable, but also, uh, engaging them in a deliberative process to understand what might post-closure land use, economic opportunities looked like, and how can communities be an active part in, in, in shaping that future. And, and again, as so often the case in life, there is, there is a tension between, there is often a short-term need driven by regulators for companies to come up with closure plans that are, sort of, if you like, neatly cut and dried, that have a high degree of predictability and stability, and, you know, it, it serves a regulatory kind of need and imperative. But that is, you know, almost runs contrary to, I guess, the, the approach that we're advocating in, in the Integrated Mine Closure Toolkit, whereby you engage your host communities early on in what, what their vision of a post-mining future would look like economically, what are the opportunities that we see, either that are already in existence or that could be stimulated by some of the infrastructure that's been brought in associated with the mining activity, and then who are the other actors that we need to engage in a conversation about post-closure economic opportunities? So is it government agencies who may have an interest in a responsibility in economic progress? Is it other economic actors in, for example, in the agribusiness sector, particularly if you're operating in an area that's got a great opportunity for, for agribusiness, perhaps not so well connected to markets historically, but by virtue of the mine being there, you've got this brilliant endowment of, of, of infrastructure? So that's the kind of thinking and logic that I think we're increasingly encouraging, and that's kind of laid out in that guidance document that I mentioned. So I think it's an exciting space, and lots of companies are doing really innovative work in this area right now.