IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i3p1101-d484574.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Sustainable Open Pit Mining and Technical Systems: Concept, Principles, and Indicators

Author

Listed:
  • Aleksandr Rakhmangulov

    (Mining Engineering and Transport Institute, Nosov Magnitogorsk State Technical University, 455000 Magnitogorsk, Russia)

  • Konstantin Burmistrov

    (Mining Engineering and Transport Institute, Nosov Magnitogorsk State Technical University, 455000 Magnitogorsk, Russia)

  • Nikita Osintsev

    (Mining Engineering and Transport Institute, Nosov Magnitogorsk State Technical University, 455000 Magnitogorsk, Russia)

Abstract

Sustainability of the open pit mining and technical system (MTS) is one of its key goals in the changing conditions of the external and internal environment. All MTS’s subsystems must function in concert to achieve this goal. The structure of the MTS is formed by many subsystems and elements, which are evaluated by a significant number of indicators. A comprehensive assessment of the MTS for all possible indicators is a complex and time-consuming task. However, each subsystem and element of the MTS has a different effect on the sustainability of this system. The MTS’s parameters change significantly during transition periods, for example, at a new stage of open-pit mining or when switching to an open-underground method of developing mineral deposits. The MTS’s sustainability declines during the transition periods. Changes in the parameters of technological processes during these periods can have a negative impact on the state of the economic and social subsystems of mining enterprises, as well as on the environment. Ensuring the sustainability of an MTS during transition periods requires the development of new approaches and principles for managing the work of mining enterprises, based on the alignment of economic goals, with goals in the field of ecology and social development. The study substantiates the key role of one of the MTS subsystems—the opening-up of an opencast system (OOS). It is shown that this system has a decisive influence on sustainable functioning and development. The systematization of the principles of sustainable functioning and development of mining enterprises and its systems has been carried out. Four groups of principles are distinguished: system-wide principles of management, principles of development of mining enterprises, principles of MTS development, and principles of the MTS’s subsystem development. The proposed system of principles is based on the idea of a sequential transformation of the subsystems at all stages of design and operation. A feature of the proposal system of principles is the consideration of economic, social, and environmental aspects to ensure the specified parameters for the sustainable functioning and development of mining enterprises. The results of the analysis of the factors of the external and internal environment of the MTS are presented. The parameters and indicators for assessing the sustainability of OOS and MTSs were selected and substantiated. The justified parameters and indicators were ranked using the fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). The results of the assessment showed a high convergence of expert opinions on a group of economic parameters, which were rather high in technical and technological parameters. However, there is a divergence of expert opinions on social and environmental parameters. As a result of the study, it was concluded that the current management decisions are aimed at ensuring the economic and technological sustainability of MTS functioning, while achieving the goals of sustainable development of this system is not ensured. The methodology developed and presented in the study can be used to assess the sustainability of the functioning and development of MTSs.

Suggested Citation

  • Aleksandr Rakhmangulov & Konstantin Burmistrov & Nikita Osintsev, 2021. "Sustainable Open Pit Mining and Technical Systems: Concept, Principles, and Indicators," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-24, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:3:p:1101-:d:484574
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/3/1101/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/3/1101/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mancini, Lucia & Sala, Serenella, 2018. "Social impact assessment in the mining sector: Review and comparison of indicators frameworks," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 98-111.
    2. Dariush Khezrimotlagh & Yao Chen, 2018. "Data Envelopment Analysis," International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, in: Decision Making and Performance Evaluation Using Data Envelopment Analysis, chapter 0, pages 217-234, Springer.
    3. Joaquín Jara, J. & Pérez, Patricio & Villalobos, Pablo, 2010. "Good deposits are not enough: Mining labor productivity analysis in the copper industry in Chile and Peru 1992-2009," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 247-256, December.
    4. Yoram Wind & Thomas L. Saaty, 1980. "Marketing Applications of the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(7), pages 641-658, July.
    5. Shen, Lixin & Muduli, Kamalakanta & Barve, Akhilesh, 2015. "Developing a sustainable development framework in the context of mining industries: AHP approach," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(P1), pages 15-26.
    6. Chang, Da-Yong, 1996. "Applications of the extent analysis method on fuzzy AHP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 95(3), pages 649-655, December.
    7. Zhu, Xuehong & Chen, Ying & Feng, Chao, 2018. "Green total factor productivity of China's mining and quarrying industry: A global data envelopment analysis," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 1-9.
    8. Sinan Erzurumlu, S. & Erzurumlu, Yaman O., 2015. "Sustainable mining development with community using design thinking and multi-criteria decision analysis," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(P1), pages 6-14.
    9. Chen Wang & Shihao Tu, 2015. "Selection of an Appropriate Mechanized Mining Technical Process for Thin Coal Seam Mining," Mathematical Problems in Engineering, Hindawi, vol. 2015, pages 1-10, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Devendra Joshi & Hamed Gholami & Hitesh Mohapatra & Anis Ali & Dalia Streimikiene & Susanta Kumar Satpathy & Arvind Yadav, 2022. "The Application of Stochastic Mine Production Scheduling in the Presence of Geological Uncertainty," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-19, August.
    2. Yan Hong & Han Du & Mingxi Chen, 2023. "Bearing Capacity Analysis of the Weak Basement, Progressive Destruction Analysis, and Evaluation of the Dump on an Inclined Strip Section Using the Upper-Limit Method: A Case Study in an Anonymous Ope," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-17, June.
    3. Michał Patyk & Przemysław Bodziony, 2022. "Application of the Analytical Hierarchy Process to Select the Most Appropriate Mining Equipment for the Exploitation of Secondary Deposits," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(16), pages 1-16, August.
    4. Aleksandr Rakhmangulov & Konstantin Burmistrov & Nikita Osintsev, 2022. "Selection of Open-Pit Mining and Technical System’s Sustainable Development Strategies Based on MCDM," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-31, June.
    5. Mohammed Hefni & Hussin A. M. Ahmed & Ebaa Shaikh Omar & Maaz A. Ali, 2021. "The Potential Re-Use of Saudi Mine Tailings in Mine Backfill: A Path towards Sustainable Mining in Saudi Arabia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-18, May.
    6. Philip-Mark Spanidis & Christos Roumpos & Francis Pavloudakis, 2023. "Evaluation of Strategies for the Sustainable Transformation of Surface Coal Mines Using a Combined SWOT–AHP Methodology," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-23, May.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Rahimdel, Mohammad Javad & Noferesti, Hossein, 2020. "Investment preferences of Iran's mineral extraction sector with a focus on the productivity of the energy consumption, water and labor force," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    2. Bui, Nuong Thi & Kawamura, Akira & Kim, Kyoung Woong & Prathumratana, Lunchakorn & Kim, Tae-Heok & Yoon, Suk-Ho & Jang, Min & Amaguchi, Hideo & Bui, Duong Du & Truong, Ngoc Tu, 2017. "Proposal of an indicator-based sustainability assessment framework for the mining sector of APEC economies," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 405-417.
    3. Sajid Ali & Sang-Moon Lee & Choon-Man Jang, 2017. "Determination of the Most Optimal On-Shore Wind Farm Site Location Using a GIS-MCDM Methodology: Evaluating the Case of South Korea," Energies, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-22, December.
    4. Ziyan Zheng & Fangdao Qiu & Xinlin Zhang, 2020. "Heterogeneity of correlation between the locational condition and industrial transformation of regenerative resource‐based cities in China," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(2), pages 771-791, June.
    5. Choudhary, Devendra & Shankar, Ravi, 2012. "An STEEP-fuzzy AHP-TOPSIS framework for evaluation and selection of thermal power plant location: A case study from India," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 510-521.
    6. Yaozu Xue, 2022. "Evaluation analysis on industrial green total factor productivity and energy transition policy in resource-based region," Energy & Environment, , vol. 33(3), pages 419-434, May.
    7. Yujian Jin & Lihong Yu & Yan Wang, 2022. "Green Total Factor Productivity and Its Saving Effect on the Green Factor in China’s Strategic Minerals Industry from 1998–2017," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(22), pages 1-20, November.
    8. Zhang, Yijun & Li, Xiaoping & Song, Yi & Jiang, Feitao, 2021. "Can green industrial policy improve total factor productivity? Firm-level evidence from China," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 51-62.
    9. Shuying Wang & Yifei Gao & Hongchang Zhou, 2022. "Research on Green Total Factor Productivity Enhancement Path from the Configurational Perspective—Based on the TOE Theoretical Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-20, October.
    10. Xiangqian Wang & Shudong Wang & Yongqiu Xia, 2022. "Evaluation and Dynamic Evolution of the Total Factor Environmental Efficiency in China’s Mining Industry," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-19, February.
    11. Bojan Srdjevic & Yvonilde Medeiros, 2008. "Fuzzy AHP Assessment of Water Management Plans," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 22(7), pages 877-894, July.
    12. Deng, Yanfei & Xu, Jiuping & Liu, Ying & Mancl, Karen, 2014. "Biogas as a sustainable energy source in China: Regional development strategy application and decision making," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 294-303.
    13. Grošelj, Petra & Hodges, Donald G. & Zadnik Stirn, Lidija, 2016. "Participatory and multi-criteria analysis for forest (ecosystem) management: A case study of Pohorje, Slovenia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 80-86.
    14. Mohamed Hanine & Omar Boutkhoum & Tarik Agouti & Abdessadek Tikniouine, 2017. "A new integrated methodology using modified Delphi-fuzzy AHP-PROMETHEE for Geospatial Business Intelligence selection," Information Systems and e-Business Management, Springer, vol. 15(4), pages 897-925, November.
    15. Mohamed Hanine & Omar Boutkhoum & Abderrafie El Maknissi & Abdessadek Tikniouine & Tarik Agouti, 2016. "Decision making under uncertainty using PEES–fuzzy AHP–fuzzy TOPSIS methodology for landfill location selection," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 36(4), pages 351-367, December.
    16. Yıldız, Taşkın Deniz & Kural, Orhan, 2020. "The effects of the mining operation activities permit process on the mining sector in Turkey," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    17. V. L. Morgan & E. S. McLamore & M. Correll & G. A. Kiker, 2021. "Emerging mercury mitigation solutions for artisanal small-scale gold mining communities evaluated through a multicriteria decision analysis approach," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 41(3), pages 413-424, September.
    18. Ping-Lung Huang & Bruce C.Y. Lee & Chen-Song Wang & Chi-Te Sun, 2017. "Relative Importance of the Factors under the ISO-10015 Quality Management Guidelines that Influence the Service Quality of Certification Bodies," Journal of Economics and Management, College of Business, Feng Chia University, Taiwan, vol. 13(1), pages 105-137, February.
    19. Heydari, Mehrnoosh & Osanloo, Morteza & Başçetin, Ataç, 2023. "Developing a new social impact assessment model for deep open-pit mines," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
    20. María Carmen Carnero & Andrés Gómez, 2019. "Optimization of Decision Making in the Supply of Medicinal Gases Used in Health Care," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-31, May.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:3:p:1101-:d:484574. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.