Mineral Resource Policy Issues for Sustainable Development: Corporate and National Imperatives

Constraints on the mineral industry are best treated as issues that have to be understood and managed in partnership rather than in conflict with communities. TheZapopan development at Mt Todd in Australia and the Martha Hill development at Waihi in New Zealand are but two of many recent successful examples at the local level.   However, at the national level, the issues are more complex and more difficult to resolve because the most influential stakeholders are now the urban electorates and governments defer to their perceptions when making decisions and policy. In the developed countries, government policies for the development of mineral resources have been progressively eroded since the early 1970s. At the same time policies for the environment and for native land rights have generally been carried out in a way that has reduced access to minerals and increased the cost and risks for prospectors and developers (Hancock, 1995). Since the end of the Cold War, the lesser developed countries (LDCs) have introduced policies to attract investment in their mineral resources that remained undeveloped under previous unstable or hostile regimes. The increased attraction of these LDCs and the decreased attraction of the developed countries has caused many Australian and North American companies to outlay increasing proportions of their budgets and capital investment in the LDCs.   Significantly, LDC policies for environment protection do not discourage exploration and mine development, Surveys of the relative appeal of the LDCs and the traditional mining countries of the developed world, rate Chile, Argentina and Indonesia ahead of Australia and Canada in terms of risk, delays and ease of doing business (Australian Mining Monthly, February 1994).