Mining and Sustainable Development II - DTIE

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Mining merits of existing and proposed projects. Any standardized metric would include both qualitative and quantitative “indicators” that could be monitored over time to determine cumulative impacts and changes. A full understanding of such changes requires accurate baseline data on the condition of the ecosystem before the project activity began. The most straightforward ecological indicator for measuring project impact is land-take. By comparing the number of hectares severely disturbed or converted – directly or indirectly – by the operation to the number of hectares under some form of conservation supported by the project, enables a company to determine whether the net impact on land is positive or negative. (The land in conservation should always be of the same or greater biodiversity value as the land being converted.) Such a calculation can be done at a project, regional, national or company-wide level. But conservation is more than just counting hectares. The health of ecosystem functions that depend on complex water, air, soil and animal movements and interactions cannot be measured just by land-take. Other measurements, such as the level of impact on particular species or changes in water, soil or air pollution, are also necessary to get a complete picture of the impact of a project. Finally, in addition to tangible indicators of ecosystem health, such as species counts and numbers of hectares, other contributions will benefit conservation on a broader level. For example, financial or in-kind support for training in conservation practices or park management can have an important impact on the security of protected areas that can’t always be readily measured in hectares. Support for infrastructure and monitoring of access to an area can help prevent unauthorized incursions and indirect impacts from land-clearing and colonization. Funding or support for biological research and data collection can contribute to general knowledge of biodiversity in an area and improve the quality of impact assessment and monitoring programs. None of these impacts are easily quantifiable, but all are equally important. ◆ ◆ ◆ ◆ ◆ Conclusion The large-scale mining industry has already made great strides towards understanding and addressing the potential impacts of their operations in sensitive ecosystems. Environmental impact statements and management plans are standard practice at most major projects around the world, and advanced technologies and practices are routinely used by progressive companies to minimize and mitigate environmental impacts. As a result, the potential negative effects of a large mine’s presence in a sensitive environment can be greatly reduced. Nevertheless, as these operations advance into the world’s last remaining undeveloped and biodiversity-rich ecosystems, simply reducing negative impacts is not enough. Companies operating in these areas also have an ethical responsibility to make a positive contribution to conservation, to ensure that their presence has a net benefit to the ecosystem and that the area is in better condition when they leave than when they arrived. ◆ Mining and metals processing: the commitment to sustainable development Gary Nash, Secretary General of the International Council on Metals and the Environment (ICME), 294 Albert Street, Suite 506, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada KIP 6E6 Many companies in the global mining and metals processing sector have made notable progress in the past 10 years in embracing the elements of sustainable development. Companies can provide sustainable economic, environmental and social benefits to the communities and regions in which they operate. Towards this end, many companies have now put in place environmental and, in some cases, community policies, together with management systems that require regular audits and public reporting. A committee of the Board of Directors overseeing corporate environmental performance is also common in most major companies. Further, more and more companies have adopted sustainable development as a context for their corporate objectives. The benefits of integrating environmental, social and economic aspects into the decision-making process are being increasingly recognized. Stakeholder consultations and participation are now seen as integral to this process and to achieving common objectives. From the perspective of ICME, society’s pursuit of sustainable development is a dynamic process that will continue to evolve over time in response to changing social values and priorities. Sustainable development involves values and principles that guide corporate policies and practices. Recently, commitments to sustainable development by ICME members took the form of decisions by the Board of Directors to sign the United Nations Declaration on Cleaner Production and to amend the ICME Sustainable Development Charter. The new Charter outlines members’ commitments to sustainable development, which will guide them into the new millennium. The new ICME Charter contains management principles in four key areas: Environmental Stewardship; Product Stewardship; Community Responsibility; and General Corporate Responsibilities. ICME members acknowledge through the Charter that sustainable development is a corporate priority, which expresses a commitment to high quality in their economic, environmental and social performance. In the early years of this new millennium, significant challenges must be addressed by members and regions where these activities take place. ICME seeks to work in partnership with international organizations, governments and other stakeholder groups on behalf of the industry to promote the implementation of sustainable development policies and practices. With respect to specific sustainable development challenges currently facing the global mining and metals processing industry, ICME is currently addressing a number of important issues, for example: ◆ Tailings management: Golder Associates, with funding from ICME, finalized a study in October 2000 assessing the need for an International Guide for Tailings Management. ICME presented the results at a workshop co-hosted by UNEP and the Government of Australia on Mining held in Perth, Australia in October 2000; ◆ World heritage and mining: A workshop organized by IUCN, in partnership with ICME, was held in Gland, Switzerland in September 2000 to develop a set of principles regarding mining in areas adjacent to World Heritage Sites; and ◆ Cyanide management in gold mining: ICME and UNEP convened a multi-stakeholder workshop in Paris in May 2000 to consider the development of an international voluntary Code of Practice for the management of cyanide in the industry as a result of the Baia Mare incident in Romania. By working together with international and domestic partners, and with a clear commitment of the industry to the principles of sustainable development, a positive legacy of economic, environmental and social benefits can be realized from global mining and metal processing activities in the coming decades of the 21st century. ◆ 94 ◆ UNEP Industry and Environment – Special issue 2000
THE UNEP DIVISION OF TECHNOLOGY, INDUSTRY AND ECONOMICS Current uses and development of natural resources, technologies and production processes, as well as urbanization patterns, have negative effects on human health and the environment. This is illustrated by unsustainable use of water, land and energy, air and water pollution, persistent and toxic bio-accumulative chemicals in the food chain, and other industry-related problems. To have a healthy environment, we need to change how we produce and consume goods and services. This change involves revising and developing economic policies and trade practices so as to integrate environmental issues in the planning and assessment processes. UNEP’s Division of Technology, Industry and Economics (UNEP DTIE) was created in 1998 to help decision-makers in governments, local authorities and industry develop and adopt policies and practices that: • are cleaner and safer; • use natural resources efficiently; • ensure adequate management of chemicals; • incorporate environmental costs; • reduce pollution and risks for humans and the environment. UNEP DTIE, whose main office is in Paris, is composed of: ◆ The International Environmental Technology Centre (Osaka), which promotes the adoption and use of environmentally sound technologies, with a focus on the environmental management of cities and freshwater basins, in developing countries and countries in transition. ◆ The Production and Consumption Unit (Paris), which fosters the development of cleaner and safer production and consumption patterns that lead to increased efficiency in the use of natural resources and reductions in pollution. ◆ The Chemicals Unit (Geneva), which promotes sustainable development by catalyzing global actions and building national capacities for the sound management of chemicals and the improvement of chemical safety world-wide, with a priority on Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) and Prior Informed Consent (PIC, jointly with FAO). ◆ The Energy and OzonAction Unit (Paris), which supports the phase-out of ozone depleting substances in developing countries and countries with economies in transition, and promotes good management practices and use of energy, with a focus on atmospheric impacts. The UNEP/RISØ Collaborating Centre on Energy and Environment supports the work of this Unit. ◆ The Economics and Trade Unit (Geneva), which promotes the use and application of assessment and incentive tools for environmental policy, and helps improve the understanding of linkages between trade and environment and the role of financial institutions in promoting sustainable development. UNITED NATIONS ENVIRONMENT PROGRAMME DIVISION OF TECHNOLOGY, INDUSTRY AND ECONOMICS 39-43, QUAI ANDRE-CITROEN 75739 PARIS CEDEX 15, FRANCE TEL: (33) 1 44 37 14 50 FAX: (33) 1 44 37 14 74 E-MAIL: unep.tie@unep.fr http://www.uneptie.org/home.html FEEDBACK If you would like to respond to something you’ve read here – to agree or disagree with a point of view, clarify a fact, or provide additional information – write to us. If you would like to air your views on any other subject relevant to Industry and Environment, we would also like to hear from you. As space is limited, we cannot guarantee to publish all letters, or to publish long ones in full. Send your Feedback letters to: Feedback Industry and Environment review UNEP DTIE Tour Mirabeau 39-43, quai André-Citroën 75739 Paris Cedex 15, France Fax: +33 (1) 44 37 14 74 E-mail: unep.tie@unep.fr UNEP Industry and Environment – Special issue 2000 ◆ 95
Page 1 and 2:
UNEP ISSN 0378-9993 Industry and En
Page 3 and 4:
E d i t o r i a l Editorial Mining
Page 5 and 6:
Mining Figure 2 Major metal product
Page 7 and 8:
Mining Table 2 The world’s 50 lar
Page 9 and 10:
Mining Activities Programme in the
Page 11 and 12:
Mining Mined Output (% of total val
Page 13 and 14:
Mining the Western economies (prima
Page 15 and 16:
Mining centration levels between me
Page 17 and 18:
Mining resources), human-made capit
Page 19 and 20:
Mining does not easily incorporate
Page 21 and 22:
Mining address these issues where g
Page 23 and 24:
Mining 2. Profile of Reporting Orga
Page 25 and 26:
Mining Mining Industry Report Compa
Page 27 and 28:
Mining • assist members in meetin
Page 29 and 30:
Mining time-scales required to judg
Page 31 and 32:
Mining 2. Evaluate the hazards and
Page 33 and 34:
Mining States 1 ; the World Conserv
Page 35 and 36:
Mining (AMEEF) Environmental Manage
Page 37 and 38:
Mining mercury levels from the cont
Page 39 and 40:
Mining Rehabilitation measures: wat
Page 41 and 42:
Mining liques inorganiques en phase
Page 43 and 44: Mining in the context of mining as
Page 45 and 46: Mining most countries, but often on
Page 47 and 48: Mining Environmental impacts of tra
Page 49 and 50: Mining competing interests and need
Page 51 and 52: Mining ronment? Third, what lessons
Page 53 and 54: Mining miners are already at work.
Page 55 and 56: Mining funding life cycle of a mini
Page 57 and 58: Mining Social issues Mining and the
Page 59 and 60: Mining indigenous traditions and cu
Page 61 and 62: Mining ticipants in that workshop r
Page 63 and 64: Mining Mining and indigenous people
Page 65 and 66: Mining Key Recommendations from the
Page 67 and 68: Mining despite great improvements,
Page 69 and 70: Mining between NGOs and the public
Page 71 and 72: Mining The case for auditing and ce
Page 73 and 74: Mining of local relevant mining leg
Page 75 and 76: Mining Tailings dams In order to re
Page 77 and 78: Mining structures that are specific
Page 79 and 80: Mining Il est difficile de ne pas f
Page 81 and 82: Mining Cas où le coût de l’extr
Page 83 and 84: Mining Voluntary non-regulatory and
Page 85 and 86: Mining stances by the year 2000. Re
Page 87 and 88: Mining Viewpoints on future challen
Page 89 and 90: Mining Selection of World Heritage
Page 91 and 92: Mining area agencies and managers h
Page 93: Mining ◆ Aprovechar racionalmente
show all

Mining and Sustainable Development II - DTIE

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?