DOI https://doi.org/10.36487/ACG_repo/2615_119
Cite As:
Erasmus, J & Coetzer, N 2026, 'SMART closure objectives and criteria: a benchmark recipe for success', in AB Fourie, G Boggs, J Heyes & M Tibbett (eds),
Mine Closure 2026: Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Mine Closure, Australian Centre for Geomechanics, Perth, pp. 1-9,
https://doi.org/10.36487/ACG_repo/2615_119
Abstract:
Mine closure planning and execution should follow a cradle-to-cradle approach, with closure considerations embedded in mine planning processes from the outset. This integration must address physical, biophysical and social dimensions to ensure defensible closure outcomes and sustainable post-mining land uses. Industry frameworks such as the International Council on Mining and Metals (ICMM) Good Practice Guideline and International Finance Corporation (IFC) Standards provide the foundation for integrated mine closure planning and support the development of site-specific closure objectives and criteria.
Well‑defined closure objectives and criteria – guided by SMART principles (specific, measurable, achievable, relevant and timely) and informed by operational experience, technical studies and field trials – are central to estimating closure liabilities accurately and ensuring appropriate financial provisioning. These elements form the basis of a dynamic integrated mine closure plan that enables responsible relinquishment and supports long‑term environmental and socio‑economic resilience. Establishing these elements provides a robust basis for a dynamic integrated mine closure plan that enables responsible relinquishment and supports a sustainable environmental and socio‑economic legacy at the life of mine and beyond.
Building on industry best practices and real-world application, this paper highlights the pathway to successful closure through the development of risk-based success and closure criteria aligned with clearly defined closure objectives. Results from various African mining operations’ case studies demonstrate how multidisciplinary teams refine these criteria over time using tools such as benchmarking, closure risk assessments, rehabilitation trials, closure criteria effectiveness reviews and gap analyses. This iterative, evidence-based approach ensures that closure strategies (physical, biophysical and social) remain realistic, feasible and responsive to evolving site conditions throughout the operational mining life cycle, which ultimately ensures the most realistic closure liabilities.
References:
African Union 2009, African Mining Vision, Addis Ababa.
African Union Commission, African Development Bank, and United Nations Economic Commission for Africa 2012, Building a sustainable future for Africa's extractive industry: from vision to action. Action Plan for implementing the AMV, Addis Ababa.
Anglo American 2019, Anglo American Mine Closure Toolbox: Version 3, Anglo American.
Erasmus, J & Coetzer, N 2024, ‘Integrated closure planning and closure criteria: the road to success … criteria’, in AB Fourie, M Tibbett & G Boggs (eds), Mine Closure 2024: Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Mine Closure, Australian Centre for Geomechanics, Perth, pp. 131–140,
F Fleury, A & Parsons, AS 2006, ‘Integrated Mine Closure Planning’, in AB Fourie & M Tibbett (eds), Mine Closure 2006: Proceedings of the First International Seminar on Mine Closure, Australian Centre for Geomechanics, Perth, pp. 221–226,
Grant, CD & Lacy, HWB 2016, ‘Developing Anglo American’s integrated closure planning system requires people, process and technology working together’, in AB Fourie & M Tibbett (eds), Mine Closure 2016: Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Mine Closure, Australian Centre for Geomechanics, Perth, pp. 581–594,
International Council on Mining and Metals 2025, Integrated Mine Closure: Good Practice Guide, 3rd Edition, International Council on Mining and Metals.
International Finance Corporation 2007, Environmental, Health and Safety Guidelines for Mining, International Finance Corporation.
Krause, R & Snyman, L 2014, ‘Rehabilitation and mine closure liability: an assessment of the accountability of the system to communities’, in Mine Closure Conference 2014, Australian Centre for Geomechanics, Perth.
Morrison-Saunders, A, Pope, J, Bond, A, Retief, F & Hoppe-Desbois, M 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. 117–127,
Santos, C, Leite, M & de Lima, H 2025, ‘Integrating mine closure planning with environmental impact assessment: challenges and opportunities drawn from African and Australian practice’, Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, pp. 117–128.
Slingerland, N & Wilson, G 2015, ‘End land use as a guide for integrated mine planning and closure design’, Mine Closure 2015: Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Mine Closure, InfoMine, Vancouver
Ministry of Minerals 2019, The Mining (Mineral and Gem Houses) Regulations, Government Notice No. 418, Tanzania.
van Zyl, H, Bond-Smith, M, Minter, T, Botha, M & Leiman, A 2012, ‘Financial provision for Rehabilitation and Closure in South African mining. Cape Town, South Africa’, paper presented at World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF), Cape Town.
World Bank Group 2021, Mine Closure: A Toolbox for Governments.