IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jrpoli/v104y2025ics0301420725001357.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Rehabilitation costs paid by mining enterprises in Turkey: Comparison of rehabilitation costs with their shares in mining operation costs and other environmental costs

Author

Listed:
  • Yıldız, Taşkın Deniz

Abstract

Environmentally sustainable mining operations are becoming more and more important today. In this respect, the shares of different environmental costs paid by mining enterprises in mine operating costs are of interest. In Turkey, mining administrations collect environmental costs such as forestry costs and environmental compliance fees from mining enterprises using different calculation methods. Mining waste management costs and rehabilitation costs, on the other hand, are the costs that mining enterprises spend independently from mining administrations during the mining operating period to ensure compliance with the legislation. Among these, rehabilitation activities, which are considered at the center of the study, are evidence that mining enterprises are mining in harmony with the environment in a sustainable framework with their specific activity stages. Rehabilitation costs spent for rehabilitation activities are costs made at different stages of mining operations. In Turkey, rehabilitation costs are spent by mining enterprises on their initiative, but ignored by the administrations and the public. Because these costs are not paid to the administrations, the public can't have information about how much money is spent. The calculation of the ratio of this cost to the operating cost by considering the duration of mining operations may help the administrations to determine the optimum calculation methods of environmental costs in the presence of other environmental costs and to consider these costs in total. In this study, it is aimed to see environmental costs as a whole by emphasizing the rehabilitation costs of mining enterprises. It is also aimed to contribute to the post-mining sustainable land use process and forestland use. Accordingly, the ratio of rehabilitation costs contributing to used and returned forest areas to operating costs was considered and compared to each other in order for the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry to reconsider the calculation methods of different types of forest costs charged from mining enterprises. In this way, this study also aims to raise awareness about the costs charged by the administrations from the enterprises and how much these costs constitute a total cost in the eyes of different ministries & administrations in terms of the annual costs of the enterprises. To this end, rehabilitation costs, waste management costs, environmental compliance fees, and forestry fees were compared together with their ratios to operating costs, and their changes according to mineral groups were analyzed. This study provides recommendations to policymakers on the nature and management of different environmental costs of mining enterprises that spend on environmentally compatible mining. This study also calculates rehabilitation costs per 1 ha of mining permit area and ton of mineral production. The study also analyzed whether rehabilitation costs are related to the area of forest used and returned, forest quality, and the level of importance of recreational forest use in cities. Additionally, an assessment was made as to whether rehabilitation costs also increase as these areas increase in total.

Suggested Citation

  • Yıldız, Taşkın Deniz, 2025. "Rehabilitation costs paid by mining enterprises in Turkey: Comparison of rehabilitation costs with their shares in mining operation costs and other environmental costs," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:jrpoli:v:104:y:2025:i:c:s0301420725001357
    DOI: 10.1016/j.resourpol.2025.105593
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301420725001357
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.resourpol.2025.105593?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jrpoli:v:104:y:2025:i:c:s0301420725001357. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/30467 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.