Mining compatibility with other projects in Spain: Solutions and benefits
Mining activities are compatible with other activities in space and time if they are developed together and adapted to each other. If permits are required for two projects that are not considered to be compatible, the authorities will be forced to decide which one has prevalence. In the event of conflict or dispute, it is always preferable to attempt to seek compatibility between projects rather than waste time, effort and money on contesting the prevalence decision, as costly and lengthy lawsuits will only delay the development of both projects, with the resulting loss of business opportunities. In this article, technical solutions designed to achieve mining compatibility with other projects are described in terms of benefits and synergies for the projects and benefits for the government that avoid complex decisions and proceedings and optimize revenues.
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Gifford, Blair & Kestler, Andrew & Anand, Sharmila, 2010. "Building local legitimacy into corporate social responsibility: Gold mining firms in developing nations," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 304-311, July.
- Solomon, Fiona & Katz, Evie & Lovel, Roy, 2008. "Social dimensions of mining: Research, policy and practice challenges for the minerals industry in Australia," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 142-149, September.
- Humphreys, D., 2001. "Sustainable development: can the mining industry afford it?," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 1-7, March.
- McLeod, Helena, 2000. "Compensation for landowners affected by mineral development: the Fijian experience," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 115-125, June.
- Hilson, Gavin & Murck, Barbara, 2000. "Sustainable development in the mining industry: clarifying the corporate perspective," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(4), pages 227-238, December.
- Mrinal K. Ghose & Surendra Roy, 2007. "Contribution of small-scale mining to employment, development and sustainability – an Indian scenario," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 9(3), pages 283-303, August.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jrpoli:v:36:y:2011:i:1:p:22-29. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu)
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.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.