The irreversible impacts caused by mineral extraction and the financial liabilities imposed by legal systems in the advanced economies have forced companies to embrace environmental management as a core component of their business models. Cadres of employees work diligently to show that their employers are dedicated to preserving the environment and improving the welfare of local communities. They are supported by consultants, non-governmental organizations and government functionaries who are all committed to improving the practices of the extractive sector. Some companies define their development projects and operations as ‘environmentally and socially responsible’, while promoting the ‘wise use’ of non-renewable resources. Increasingly, the term ‘sustainability’ is being used to describe these corporate policies – despite the obvious cognitive dissonance inherent when the word is used to describe the extractive industries The regulatory process that governs the environmental and social impacts caused by the exploration and exploitation of minerals is organized via a technical study known as an environmental impact analysis (EIA). The objective of an EIA is to identify, describe and quantify all the potential impacts. The environmental impacts of the mining industry are well known and are the probable origin of the mitigation hierarchy, summarized as: (1) avoid, (2) minimize, (3) remediate and (4) offset. Occasionally, an EIA can lead to the cancellation of a project, but more often it motivates the developer to modify some particularly noxious aspect of a project, or to provide more generous compensation to impacted communities. There are two broad classes of impacts: (1) Direct…This article was originally published on Mongabay
The post Sustainability in the extractive industries is a paradox first appeared on EnviroLink Network.