Abstract
Northern Canada has a long history of poorly remediated and outright abandoned mines. These sites have caused long-term environmental hazards, socio-economic disruptions, and threats to Indigenous communities across the North. Given the potential legacy effects of improper mine closure, best practice guidelines now suggest that mine closures address not only environmental remediation, but also include robust plans for mitigating social and economic impacts, and that companies engage early and consistently with impacted communities. This research seeks to understand how social and economic planning and community engagement for closure are governed in Nunavik, Quebec. Through semi-structured interviews with government and industry actors and an analysis of regional and provincial mining policy, this research demonstrates that mine closure regulations remain vague when describing how companies should involve impacted communities in mine closure planning, and governments largely neglect to regulate the social aspects of mine closure. This article discusses why an overreliance on impact assessment and overconfidence in closure regulations are creating risks for Nunavimmiut. Without regulatory change, future closures may continue to result in unemployment, social dislocation, costly abandoned sites, and continued distrust in the industry.
Highlights
Mine closure is a distinct and inevitable phase of the “mining cycle” (Laurence, 2006)
Multi-Level Closure Governance Mine closure planning in Nunavik occurs within a landscape of multi-level and evolving governance systems
The Kativik Environmental Quality Commission (KEQC) has a de ned role in closure planning through the impact assessment process and their regular review of closure plans
Summary
Mine closure is a distinct and inevitable phase of the “mining cycle” (Laurence, 2006). Mine closure planning encompasses more than just the nal phase of a mine’s life and involves a range of complex and interrelated issues that impact both the environment and adjacent communities. Across northern Canada, mineral development and mine closure have left problematic social and environmental legacies for northern and Indigenous communities. Mine operators in northern Canada suffered minimal repercussions for not complying with already-lax closure requirements, resulting in a plethora of abandoned sites and legacy impacts (Dance, 2015; Mackasey, 2000; Office of the Auditor General of Canada, 2002). Indigenous peoples were largely excluded from conversations about resource policy and mineral development on their lands, leaving them with little say in matters related to mine closure (Buell, 2006; Hipwell et al, 2002; Horowitz et al, 2018)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 
Published Version (
Free)
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call