IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/minecn/v35y2022i3d10.1007_s13563-022-00343-1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The global mining industry: corporate profile, complexity, and change

Author

Listed:
  • R. Anthony Hodge

    (Queen’s University
    The University of Queensland)

  • Magnus Ericsson

    (Luleå University of Technology
    RMG Consulting)

  • Olof Löf

    (RMG Consulting)

  • Anton Löf

    (RMG Consulting)

  • Paul Semkowich

    (Queen’s University)

Abstract

The continuation and increasing importance of mining is inevitable as society embraces both the transition to a low-carbon economy and application of circular economy concepts. However, across many parts of society, there is an ongoing sense that those who are carrying many of the costs and risks related to mining particularly over the long term (often host communities and countries) are not seeing a level of benefit that seems fair. In contrast, there is frustration within the industry that mining is not being given due credit for the importance of its role in contemporary society by those who would criticize industry practices. Over the past several decades, dozens of initiatives aimed at strengthening mining’s social and environmental performance have been mounted from both within and outside the industry. These generally depend on a “leadership-trickle-down” change model. While progress has been achieved, the society-industry trust deficit continues. The global mining community comprises a corporate core and a complex range of other surrounding interests. We suggest that some key questions regarding the nature of this community and its appetite and capacity for change have not been explored thus impeding the effectiveness of change management. We offer (1) an estimate of the number of companies that lie at the core of the global mining community: some 25,000 operating in about 140 countries (using data from the mid-2010s); (2) a profile of these companies as an initial step towards understanding the “culture” of the global mining community; and (3) a listing of additional complexities and observations important to bringing global-wide improvement to mining’s social and environmental performance. We argue that building on work to date, a fresh approach is required. We are calling for a dialog to reflect on the ideas presented here, refine them as appropriate, and develop the needed strategies and action plans. Such a process must build from a comprehensive understanding of the global mining community and its culture. It must be collaborative in nature and involve not only the range of mining companies but also with surrounding interests and governments. If this is not done, the change that is needed to align actions of all mining actors with social values will not occur and the trust deficit will remain.

Suggested Citation

  • R. Anthony Hodge & Magnus Ericsson & Olof Löf & Anton Löf & Paul Semkowich, 2022. "The global mining industry: corporate profile, complexity, and change," Mineral Economics, Springer;Raw Materials Group (RMG);Luleå University of Technology, vol. 35(3), pages 587-606, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:minecn:v:35:y:2022:i:3:d:10.1007_s13563-022-00343-1
    DOI: 10.1007/s13563-022-00343-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s13563-022-00343-1
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s13563-022-00343-1?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.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Paulo De Sa, 2019. "Mining and sustainable development: territorializing the mining industry," Mineral Economics, Springer;Raw Materials Group (RMG);Luleå University of Technology, vol. 32(2), pages 131-143, July.
    2. Lena Abrahamsson & Jan Johansson, 2021. "Can new technology challenge macho-masculinities? The case of the mining industry," Mineral Economics, Springer;Raw Materials Group (RMG);Luleå University of Technology, vol. 34(2), pages 263-275, July.
    3. Tiess, Guenter, 2010. "Minerals policy in Europe: Some recent developments," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(3), pages 190-198, September.
    4. Filippou, Dimitrios & King, Michael G., 2011. "R&D prospects in the mining and metals industry," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 276-284, September.
    5. Olga Janikowska & Joanna Kulczycka, 2021. "Impact of minerals policy on sustainable development of mining sector – a comparative assessment of selected EU countries," Mineral Economics, Springer;Raw Materials Group (RMG);Luleå University of Technology, vol. 34(2), pages 305-314, July.
    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. Uz Zaman, Qamar & Zhao, Yuhuan & Zaman, Shah & Batool, Kiran & Nasir, Rabiya, 2024. "Reviewing energy efficiency and environmental consciousness in the minerals industry Amidst digital transition: A comprehensive review," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    2. Magnus Ericsson & Olof Löf & Anton Löf, 2024. "Locus of control over global mine production– developments between 1985 and 2018 against a historical background," Mineral Economics, Springer;Raw Materials Group (RMG);Luleå University of Technology, vol. 37(3), pages 633-643, September.

    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. Henrieta Pavolová & Katarína Čulková & Zuzana Šimková & Andrea Seňová & Dušan Kudelas, 2022. "Contribution of Mining Industry in Chosen EU Countries to the Sustainability Issues," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-13, March.
    2. Guo, Tianjiao & Geng, Yong & Song, Xiaoqian & Rui, Xue & Ge, Zewen, 2023. "Tracing magnesium flows in China: A dynamic material flow analysis," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 83(C).
    3. Pauli Lappi & Markku Ollikainen, 2019. "Optimal Environmental Policy for a Mine Under Polluting Waste Rocks and Stock Pollution," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 73(1), pages 133-158, May.
    4. Jiang, Meihui & An, Haizhong & Guan, Qing & Sun, Xiaoqi, 2018. "Global embodied mineral flow between industrial sectors: A network perspective," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 192-201.
    5. Jessica Alzamora-Ruiz & María Fuentes-Fuentes & Myriam Martinez-Fiestas, 2021. "Together or separately? Direct and synergistic effects of Effectuation and Causation on innovation in technology-based SMEs," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 17(4), pages 1917-1943, December.
    6. Radwanek-Bąk, Barbara & Nieć, Marek, 2015. "Valorization of undeveloped industrial rock deposits in Poland," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 290-298.
    7. Daniel Constantin Diaconu & Paschalis D. Koutalakis & Georgios T. Gkiatas & Gabriel Vasile Dascalu & George N. Zaimes, 2023. "River Sand and Gravel Mining Monitoring Using Remote Sensing and UAVs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-17, January.
    8. Hullova, Dusana & Trott, Paul & Simms, Christopher Don, 2016. "Uncovering the reciprocal complementarity between product and process innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(5), pages 929-940.
    9. Shi, Junguo & Liu, Yang & Sadowski, Bert M. & Alemzero, David & Dou, Shanshan & Sun, Huaping & Naseem, Sobia, 2023. "The role of economic growth and governance on mineral rents in main critical minerals countries," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 83(C).
    10. Yıldız, Taşkın Deniz, 2020. "The impacts of EIA procedure on the mining sector in the permit process of mining operating activities & Turkey analysis," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    11. MahdaviMazdeh, Hossein & Saunders, Chad & Hawkins, Richard William & Dewald, Jim, 2021. "Reconsidering the dynamics of innovation in the natural resource industries," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    12. 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).
    13. Ewa Lewicka & Katarzyna Guzik & Krzysztof Galos, 2021. "On the Possibilities of Critical Raw Materials Production from the EU’s Primary Sources," Resources, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-21, May.
    14. Henrik Florén & Johan Frishammar & Anton Löf & Magnus Ericsson, 2019. "Raw materials management in iron and steelmaking firms," Mineral Economics, Springer;Raw Materials Group (RMG);Luleå University of Technology, vol. 32(1), pages 39-47, April.
    15. Zauresh Atakhanova, 2021. "Support services in the extractive industries and the role of innovation," Mineral Economics, Springer;Raw Materials Group (RMG);Luleå University of Technology, vol. 34(1), pages 141-150, April.
    16. Yufeng Chen & Biao Zheng, 2019. "What Happens after the Rare Earth Crisis: A Systematic Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-26, March.
    17. H. C. S. Subasinghe & Amila Sandaruwan Ratnayake & K. A. G. Sameera, 2021. "State-of-the-art and perspectives in the heavy mineral industry of Sri Lanka," Mineral Economics, Springer;Raw Materials Group (RMG);Luleå University of Technology, vol. 34(3), pages 427-439, October.
    18. Kristina Johansson & Elias Andersson & Maria Johansson, 2022. "Restructuring masculinities and reshaping inequalities: Negotiations of (gendered) sales work and relations in an industrial organization," Gender, Work and Organization, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(4), pages 1008-1024, July.
    19. Garcia-del-Real, Jose & Alcaráz, Manuel, 2024. "Unlocking the future of space resource management through satellite remote sensing and AI integration," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    20. Glöser, Simon & Tercero Espinoza, Luis & Gandenberger, Carsten & Faulstich, Martin, 2015. "Raw material criticality in the context of classical risk assessment," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 35-46.

    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:spr:minecn:v:35:y:2022:i:3:d:10.1007_s13563-022-00343-1. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.