Authors: Rosa, JCS; Morrison-Saunders, A; Sanchez, LE; Hughes, M; Geneletti, D

Open access courtesy of:

Cite As:
Rosa, JCS, Morrison-Saunders, A, Sanchez, LE, Hughes, M & Geneletti, D 2019, 'Applying ecosystem services assessment in closure planning to enhance post-mining land-use outcomes: learning from bauxite mining in Brazil and Australia', in AB Fourie & M Tibbett (eds), Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Mine Closure, Australian Centre for Geomechanics, Perth, pp. 923-936.

Download citation as:   ris   bibtex   endnote   text   Zotero


Abstract:
Ecosystem services assessments help us understand the benefits that society obtains from ecosystems, and they are increasingly being used to understand the human–nature relationship in many applications. This paper presents the results of two ecosystem services assessments applied as part of mine closure planning and rehabilitation activities for two bauxite mining operations operated by the same company, one located in Brazil, the other in Australia. The focus was on the value of the postmining land use that was being realised for local community users. For the Juruti mine site, located in Amazon rainforest, the research examined the return of culturally and economically important forest products—such as Brazil nuts, natural fruits and timber—to local communities living in the vicinity of the mining operations. For the Australian operation, located in the jarrah forest of Western Australia, the research focused on recreationists’ perceptions of the value of rehabilitated bauxite mine areas for bushwalking and mountain biking. Interviews were the principal method employed to understand community stakeholder interactions with pre-mining and post-rehabilitation areas. Workshops were conducted with regulators responsible for mine closure planning and rehabilitation activity.In the Brazil case, taking an ecosystem services approach to explain and explore the mine closure planning process with both the community and the mining company alike provided a pathway for getting to an agreed post-mining land use as the approach’s inherent anthropic focus provides a way to include community perspectives. In the Australian case, the recreation values sought by forest users had not been returned in rehabilitated mined areas, although it was clear that forest users’ perspectives were strongly influenced by historical rehabilitation efforts, which have been transcended by recent practices. Regulators saw value in using ecosystem services assessment methods to both plan the mine closure and monitor the progress of rehabilitation as a way to demonstrate social benefits rather than solely ecological results. In both countries, regulators agreed that results analysis of rehabilitation practices was poorly done. While Brazilian regulators saw ecosystem services as an opportunity to fill some current gaps in rehabilitation practices, such as stakeholder engagement, the Australian regulators believed that the planning process already made implicit use of ecosystem services. In both cases, the actual biophysical basis of rehabilitation practices was found to be robust, but taking an ecosystem services approach to mine closure planning enhanced the process and generated valuable insights for guiding post-mining land-use determinations. Overall, the study demonstrates that meeting regulatory requirements for rehabilitation, as measured by ecological indicators, does not automatically correlate with acceptable social outcomes.

Keywords: ecosystem service assessment, rehabilitation, stakeholder engagement, mine closure planning

References:
Alcoa of Australia 2015, Alcoa’s Bauxite Mine Rehabilitation Program: Completion Criteria and Overview of Area Certification Process, 2015 Revision, viewed 29 May 2019,
Alcoa of Australia 2017, Annual Environmental Review 2016: Alcoa WA Mining Operations, Alcoa of Australia, Booragoon.
Baker, J, Sheate, W, Phillips, P & Eales R 2013, ‘Ecosystem services in environmental assessment: help or hindrance?’, Environmental Impact Assessment Review, vol. 40, pp. 3–13.
Baral, H, Guariguata, MR & Keenan, R 2016, ‘A proposed framework for assessing ecosystem goods and services from planted forests’, Ecosystem Services, vol. 22, pp. 260–268.
Consórcio Nacional de Engenheiros Construtores 2005, Estudo de Impacto Ambiental do Projeto Mina Juruti [Environmental Impact Study of Juruti Mine Project], Consórcio Nacional de Engenheiros Construtores, São Paulo.
Conservation Commission of Western Australia 2013, Forest Management Plan 2014–2023, State of Western Australia, Perth, viewed 2 April 2019,
de Groot, RS, Alkemade, R, Braat, L, Hein, L & Willemen, L 2010, ‘Challenges in integrating the concept of ecosystem services and values in landscape planning, management and decision making’, Ecological Complexity, vol. 7, pp. 260–272.
Department of Mines and Petroleum & Environmental Protection Authority 2015, Guidelines for Preparing Mine Closure Plans (Revision of the Guidelines for Preparing Mine Closure Plans, June 2011), viewed 12 April 2017,
Fish, R, Saratsi, E, Reed, M & Keune, H 2016, ‘Stakeholder participation in ecosystem service decision-making’, in M Potschin, R Haines-Youg, R Fish & K Turner (eds), Routledge Handbook of Ecosystem Services, Routledge, London, pp. 256–270.
Gardner, JG & Bell, TD 2007, ‘Bauxite mining restoration by Alcoa World Alumina Australia in Western Australia: social, political historical and environmental contexts’, Restoration Ecology, vol. 15, no. 4, pp. S3–S10.
Gavidia, MC & Kemp, D 2017, ‘Company–community relations in the mining context: a relational justice perspective’, in
A Lukasiewicz, S Dovers, L Robin, J Mckay, S Schilizzi & S Graham (eds), Natural Resources and Environmental Justice: Australian Perspectives, CSIRO Publishing, Clayton, pp. 79–89.
Geneletti, D 2016, Handbook on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services in Impact Assessment, 1st edn, Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham.
Government of Western Australia 1986, Environmental Protection Act 1986, Australia.
Grant, CD, Ward, SC & Morley, SC 2007, ‘Return of ecosystem function to restored bauxite mines in Western Australia’, Ecology Restoration, vol. 15, no.4, pp. S94–S103.
Harris, JA & Diggelen, R 2006, ‘Ecological restoration as a project for global society’, in J Van Andel & J Aronson (eds), Restoration Ecology, Blackwell Science, Massachusetts, pp. 3–15.
International Council on Mining & Metals 2008, Planning for Integrated Mine Closure: Toolkit, ICMM, London, viewed 29 May 2019,
International Council on Mining & Metals 2019, Integrated Mine Closure: Good Practice Guide, 2nd edn, ICMM, viewed 27 March 2019,
International Panel on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services 2019, What is IPBES?, viewed 29 May 2019,
Landsberg, F, Treweek, J, Mercedes, SM, Henninger, N & Venn, O 2013, Weaving Ecosystem Services into Impact Assessment:
A Step-by-Step Method, Abbreviated Version 1.0., World Resources Institute, Washington DC, viewed 29 May 2019,
Marca Consultant 2015, Relatório técnico científico: monitoramento da flora nas áreas de mineração da Alcoa, Município de Juruti [Flora Monitoring Report from Alcoa Operation in Juruti Municipality], Belém, in Portuguese.
Mascarenhas, A, Ramos, TB, Hasse, D & Santos, R 2016, ‘Participatory selection of ecosystem services from spatial planning: insights from the Lisbon Metropolitan Area, Portugal’, Ecosystem Services, vol. 18, pp. 87–99.
Mining Minerals and Sustainable Development 2002, Mining for the Future, Appendix C: Abandoned Mines Working Paper, International Institute for Environment and Development and the World Business Council for Sustainable Development, London, viewed 29 May 2019,
Morrison-Saunders, A, McHenry, MP, Sequeira, AR, Gorey, P, Mtegha, H & Doepel, D 2016, ‘Integrating mine closure planning with environmental impact assessment: challenges and opportunities drawn from African and Australian practice’, Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, vol. 34 no. 2, pp. 117–128.
Neugarten, RA, Langhammer, PF, Osipova, E, Bagstad, KJ, Bhagabati, N, Butchart, SHM, … Willcock, S 2018, Tools for Measuring, Modelling, and Valuing Ecosystem Services: Guidance for Key Biodiversity Areas, Natural World Heritage Sites, and Protected Areas, International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources, Gland, viewed 29 May 2019,
Paudyal, K, Baral, H, Burkhard, B, Bhandaria, S & Keenan, RJ 2015, ‘Participatory assessment and mapping of ecosystem services in a data-poor region: case study of community-managed forests in central Nepal’, Ecosystem Services, vol. 13, pp. 81–92.
Preston, SM & Raudsepp-Hearne, C 2017, Completing and Using Ecosystem Service Assessment for Decision-Making: An Interdisciplinary Toolkit for Managers and Analysts, Value of Nature to Canadians Study Taskforce, Federal, Provincial and Territorial Governments of Canada, Ottawa, viewed 29 May 2019,
Rosa, JCS & Sánchez, LE 2015, ‘Is the ecosystem service concept improving impact assessment? Evidence from recent international practice’, Environmental Impact Assessment Review, vol. 50, pp. 134–142.
Rosa, JCS & Sánchez, LE 2016, ‘Advances and challenges of incorporating ecosystem services into impact assessment’, Journal of Environmental Management, vol. 180, pp. 485–492.
Rosa, JCS, Sánchez, LE & Morrison-Saunders, A 2018a ‘Getting to “agreed” post-mining land use: an ecosystem approach’, Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, vol. 36, no. 3, pp. 220–229.
Rosa, JCS, Morrison-Saunders, A & Sánchez, L 2018b, ‘Improving stakeholder engagement in closure planning through an ecosystem services approach’, paper presented at Planning for Closure 2018: the Second International Congress on Planning for Closure of Mining Operations, Chile, 7–9 November 2018.
Rosenthal, A, Verutes, G, Mckenzie, E, Arkema, KK, Bhagabati, N, Bremer, LL, … Vogl, AL 2015, ‘Process matters: a framework for conducting decision-relevant assessments of ecosystem services’, International Journal of Biodiversity Science, Ecosystem Services & Management, vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 190–204.
Sánchez, LE, Silva-Sánchez, SS & Neri, AC 2014, Guide for Mine Closure Planning, Lago Sul: Instituto Brasileiro de Mineração (IBRAM), Brasília, viewed 30 March 2019,
Scholte, SLS, Maya, T, van Teeffelen, AJA & Veburg, PH 2016, ‘Public support for wetland restoration: what is the link with ecosystem services values?’, Wetlands, vol. 36, pp. 467–481.
Scoles, R, Gribell, R & Klein, GN 2011, ‘Crescimento e sobrevivência de castanheira (Bertholletia excelsa Bonpl.) em diferentes condições ambientais na região do rio Trombetas, Oriximiná, Pará, Boletim do Museu Paraense Emilio Goeldi’, Ciências Naturais, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 273–293.
Slootweg, R, Rajvanshi, A, Mathur, VB & Kolhoff, A 2010 Biodiversity in Environmental Assessment: Enhancing Ecosystem Services for Human Well-Being, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Sweeting, A & Clark, A 2000, Lightening the Lode: A Guide to Responsible Large-Scale Mining, Conservation International, Washington DC, viewed 29 May 2019,
van der Plank, S, Walsh, B & Behrens, P 2016, ‘The expected impacts of mining: stakeholder perceptions of proposed mineral sands mine in rural Australia’, Resources Policy, vol. 58, pp.129–136.




© Copyright 2019, Australian Centre for Geomechanics (ACG), The University of Western Australia. All rights reserved.
Please direct any queries or error reports to repository-acg@uwa.edu.au