Tash Wilson: You've been listening to Transform by GHD. Big ideas, real impact. Welcome to Transform, tomorrow's thinking today. Real conversations on the innovation shaping businesses and our society.
Dave Clark: Welcome back Transform. ⁓ I'm Dave Clark, I'm GHD's Mining Sector for the Americas, which covers Canada, US, and Chile. We've got the pleasure today of being joined by GHD's Mary Kelly, our social performance and Indigenous partnerships leader. Today, Mary and I will be reflecting on the really important topic of Beyond Mine Closure, as well as site and asset transition. We were both fortunate to be involved only recently in the Water and Mining ⁓ Global Summit in Vancouver, which also included
Tash Wilson: Thanks for listening to part one of our two part Beyond Mind Closure conversation. ⁓ Join us next time as we look at how closure is being embedded into decision making and what it takes to create lasting outcomes for communities. ⁓
Dave Clark: site transition and asset transition related content throughout those various presentations, panels, discussions and round tables that we're involved with. nexus ⁓ water and mine closure is a really critical one so it'd be good to tease that out throughout the course of today. Mary, ⁓ great to see you as always ⁓ and thanks for joining discussion.
Mary Kelly: Well, thanks for the invite, Dave. I mean, this is such an important topic where we as a society are going and the need for minerals. many communities are there. They the burden of ⁓ having mines on their lands and they need to have a voice in helping shape them. so what's left behind after the mines done is an important conversation as part of that. So I'm looking forward to this.
Dave Clark: Excellent, said Mary. to just help set the scene and provide a little upfront context on my enclosure, I just wanted to ⁓ cover a few things that will lead into our conversation. ⁓ It really is a significant challenge within industry when consider timeframes and costs involved, but ⁓ if you flip it it's also a really good opportunity. I think increasingly there's a... ⁓ real appreciation of the need to start our mine closure projects that are much earlier and the earlier stages of the entire life cycle and really with that end point in mind. Our closure plans and execution really need to be regularly reviewed and updated to reflect those evolving site conditions, ⁓ economic shifts ⁓ and to effectively address ⁓ community and stakeholder priorities. legacy and abandoned minds have really reflected poorly on the industry as a whole and hence the opportunity to be better and to do better. ⁓ we're seeing some signs of, believe, more meaningful involvement and earlier stakeholder which is insight-related decision-making processes as well. ⁓ I'd like to there's been a bit more maturity in terms of we're effectively managing ⁓ those processes as well. Industry and associations are really driving some better standards and expectations and there's really good coordinated research and I think a greater level of transparency in our experiences within the sector in mind closure whether they be good bad or indifferent towards continuous improvement in what we do and ⁓ we go about achieving ⁓ outcomes ultimately. So In framing this conversation, Mary, mine closure really is to be seen the last chapter, I guess. However, increasingly it's becoming ⁓ the that does run through the entire mining life What's ⁓ in your what's driving that shift, Mary?
Mary Kelly: it's an important because there like you were saying, there's not a lot of good examples of successful mind closure where you have that support of the community ⁓ and that recognition that legacy is they're going to be holding. And so I think the ⁓ shift is coming not because ⁓ the is wrong. I don't think ever hear communities say that, ⁓ but it's because decisions feel irreversible. So when a community is to accept decisions by a mining company and they're going to live with that legacy, it really puts the onus on how are we involving communities ⁓ that conversation in meaningful ways, ⁓ at that last chapter, but throughout the life of a mine so that we're co-creating what that end looks like together.
Dave Clark: Mary. what that shift then mean from a community and rights holder perspective?
Mary Kelly: I think it means that, we do a lot of effort at the onset of establishing a mine, whether that's the engagement to get the permitting into place and to get to that leave to construct. ⁓ And then be instances throughout the life of a mine that, you know, you engage on permits or things like that. But that governance level, that co-decision making, are we really involving communities in defining what metrics are used to make a decision. And that's where you're starting to see that shift from communities is they want to be at that table in making those decisions. Because if they're being asked to hold that legacy in perpetuity, they should have a voice in it. And I think that's that's an important shift in in that this life cycle of a mind is making sure that those voices are captured.
Dave Clark: some really good there.
Mary Kelly: from your perspective, Dave, have you seen a shift in way organizations are treating closure, like, that not an event that they're going through, but something that is more of a long-term commitment?
Dave Clark: I have pleasingly seen that shift. I think on occasion that hasn't necessarily occurred and I think in that case there's a lack of stakeholder endorsed of closure vision, ⁓ if you like. ⁓ Some organisations can unfortunately tend to be little more transactional rather than thinking strategically and aligning with their own sort of values but that is changing without a doubt. We're seeing different company structures in how closure related planning activities and execution is better integrated ⁓ within businesses. And for that's more around sort of operationalizing closure. It's BAU, it's what we do, and we've got to do it in an integrated ⁓ sort of So... where there has been a disconnect historically, I think some of those things are changing and have been corrected between more integrated mind planning functions especially. I think there's a really important people side to that Mary, where there's ⁓ individual ownership from key who can have influence and take the right approaches. ⁓ And I guess what's important the mining life cycle is that, There's continuity in personnel who follow it through beyond the operation and production and have a sense of ⁓ and pride and what those outcomes are as well. So I those sorts of things as that longer term commitment as The opportunity is around rigor in those holistic to ⁓ planning at the earliest that'll guide decision making and the... sure as you touched on earlier you've got that right stakeholder engagement involvement to consider feasible post mining land use options and what makes sense and where there's going to be considered sort of benefits and opportunities into the long term
Mary Kelly: Hmm. And I think you brought up something in that that I think is really important is you talked about the people side of it and that continuity of people and I think that goes back to trust. And if you're seeing companies, organizations developing that vision ⁓ of what they to do, how is ⁓ is closure approach, actually approach then if have a vision that seems to ⁓ be aligning with ⁓ we're talking about, but we're not necessarily seeing it ⁓ the downstream end of that. ⁓ that gap that you're seeing?
Dave Clark: Yeah, it's a good question. I think in certain instances, managing ⁓ some of those ⁓ internal external stakeholders and is a tricky one in terms of what's created it's great to be innovative and be ⁓ and aspirational, but we've to be realistic as well terms of what makes sense with a whole suite of criteria in mind. And so I think there is a risk of misalignment around of the solutions and decisions that are made and importantly around the implementation or the execution as well. again, ⁓ comes down to people, comes down to the point that you've rightly raised a couple of times around that ⁓ piece ⁓ alignment. And I think though, ⁓ What's made it difficult in many instances that I'm aware of is ⁓ we don't have have 100 % information around some of the technical decisions that we make, but there's gotta be ⁓ sufficient information to confidence ⁓ in ⁓ the ultimate and of a site and a solution that might be sort of put in mind as well. So I ⁓ think that's ⁓ the there around ⁓ misalignment piece, to be Given the topic and the discussion we've just had, do you have any thoughts around sort of social side and how that plays out around these topics and around the gaps and what organisations are doing and their commitments?
Mary Kelly: Yeah, I think it's a combination of things. mean, that trust piece, I think is really important. And I think it's on both sides. Mining companies ⁓ communities, you start from a trust deficit. ⁓ I think there's a lack of trust within the mining companies as well. And I think that comes back to why it's so important to foster really strong relationships and that ⁓ relationships aren't just a one and done. you have to continually invest in them. And because people change, new people come in, people leave, have change in leadership in a community, ⁓ have change in ownership of a mining company. ⁓ so it's trying to continually build that relationship ⁓ that you have that to fall back on to talk about things. And ⁓ all know in our personal lives, and we have a really strong relationship, it's really easy to talk through the hard things with people. And we avoid talking through the hard things with people we don't have that deep of a relationship with. So I think, you know, that trust piece comes into play. And when we're talking about communities having to accept the outcomes, we're talking about communities accepting outcomes that will last generations. And when they're not part of those decisions, there's no trust. And so I think that's where we're starting to see that real need for that social inclusion, because we do a lot of really good environmental data gathering and technical data gathering, but we aren't so good about gathering information about the social piece and really documenting well so we understand how it's changed and how community priorities have changed. Because we can imagine that if a community host to a mine site, If that ⁓ is operating for over a decade or so, ⁓ are going to be changes that occur in that community as a result of that mine. They could be good and they could be bad. ⁓ if we're not looking, if we're not recognizing what that change is, ⁓ could perpetuate the bad and we could ⁓ the positive. And I think that's where data social data becomes really valuable.
Dave Clark: Excellent, well said, thanks Mary. there is a trust deficit within the industry. I'd like to think, ever the optimist, that is changing and heading in the right direction, but it only takes a couple situations, if you like, or circumstances that can quickly erode trust at an individual or organisational or at broader sort of industry level as well. And we've seen that play out. But for me, I think we're heading in the right direction. And we've got to be prepared to have those brave and tough conversations and be really open and transparent to your point. Thank you, Mary. Thanks for joining the session today. Thanks everyone for listening ⁓ and we look forward to seeing you next time.
Mary Kelly: Awesome. Thanks Dave.
Dave Clark: Welcome back Transform. ⁓ I'm Dave Clark, I'm GHD's Mining Sector for the Americas, which covers Canada, US, and Chile. We've got the pleasure today of being joined by GHD's Mary Kelly, our social performance and Indigenous partnerships leader. Today, Mary and I will be reflecting on the really important topic of Beyond Mine Closure, as well as site and asset transition. We were both fortunate to be involved only recently in the Water and Mining ⁓ Global Summit in Vancouver, which also included
Tash Wilson: Thanks for listening to part one of our two part Beyond Mind Closure conversation. ⁓ Join us next time as we look at how closure is being embedded into decision making and what it takes to create lasting outcomes for communities. ⁓
Dave Clark: site transition and asset transition related content throughout those various presentations, panels, discussions and round tables that we're involved with. nexus ⁓ water and mine closure is a really critical one so it'd be good to tease that out throughout the course of today. Mary, ⁓ great to see you as always ⁓ and thanks for joining discussion.
Mary Kelly: Well, thanks for the invite, Dave. I mean, this is such an important topic where we as a society are going and the need for minerals. many communities are there. They the burden of ⁓ having mines on their lands and they need to have a voice in helping shape them. so what's left behind after the mines done is an important conversation as part of that. So I'm looking forward to this.
Dave Clark: Excellent, said Mary. to just help set the scene and provide a little upfront context on my enclosure, I just wanted to ⁓ cover a few things that will lead into our conversation. ⁓ It really is a significant challenge within industry when consider timeframes and costs involved, but ⁓ if you flip it it's also a really good opportunity. I think increasingly there's a... ⁓ real appreciation of the need to start our mine closure projects that are much earlier and the earlier stages of the entire life cycle and really with that end point in mind. Our closure plans and execution really need to be regularly reviewed and updated to reflect those evolving site conditions, ⁓ economic shifts ⁓ and to effectively address ⁓ community and stakeholder priorities. legacy and abandoned minds have really reflected poorly on the industry as a whole and hence the opportunity to be better and to do better. ⁓ we're seeing some signs of, believe, more meaningful involvement and earlier stakeholder which is insight-related decision-making processes as well. ⁓ I'd like to there's been a bit more maturity in terms of we're effectively managing ⁓ those processes as well. Industry and associations are really driving some better standards and expectations and there's really good coordinated research and I think a greater level of transparency in our experiences within the sector in mind closure whether they be good bad or indifferent towards continuous improvement in what we do and ⁓ we go about achieving ⁓ outcomes ultimately. So In framing this conversation, Mary, mine closure really is to be seen the last chapter, I guess. However, increasingly it's becoming ⁓ the that does run through the entire mining life What's ⁓ in your what's driving that shift, Mary?
Mary Kelly: it's an important because there like you were saying, there's not a lot of good examples of successful mind closure where you have that support of the community ⁓ and that recognition that legacy is they're going to be holding. And so I think the ⁓ shift is coming not because ⁓ the is wrong. I don't think ever hear communities say that, ⁓ but it's because decisions feel irreversible. So when a community is to accept decisions by a mining company and they're going to live with that legacy, it really puts the onus on how are we involving communities ⁓ that conversation in meaningful ways, ⁓ at that last chapter, but throughout the life of a mine so that we're co-creating what that end looks like together.
Dave Clark: Mary. what that shift then mean from a community and rights holder perspective?
Mary Kelly: I think it means that, we do a lot of effort at the onset of establishing a mine, whether that's the engagement to get the permitting into place and to get to that leave to construct. ⁓ And then be instances throughout the life of a mine that, you know, you engage on permits or things like that. But that governance level, that co-decision making, are we really involving communities in defining what metrics are used to make a decision. And that's where you're starting to see that shift from communities is they want to be at that table in making those decisions. Because if they're being asked to hold that legacy in perpetuity, they should have a voice in it. And I think that's that's an important shift in in that this life cycle of a mind is making sure that those voices are captured.
Dave Clark: some really good there.
Mary Kelly: from your perspective, Dave, have you seen a shift in way organizations are treating closure, like, that not an event that they're going through, but something that is more of a long-term commitment?
Dave Clark: I have pleasingly seen that shift. I think on occasion that hasn't necessarily occurred and I think in that case there's a lack of stakeholder endorsed of closure vision, ⁓ if you like. ⁓ Some organisations can unfortunately tend to be little more transactional rather than thinking strategically and aligning with their own sort of values but that is changing without a doubt. We're seeing different company structures in how closure related planning activities and execution is better integrated ⁓ within businesses. And for that's more around sort of operationalizing closure. It's BAU, it's what we do, and we've got to do it in an integrated ⁓ sort of So... where there has been a disconnect historically, I think some of those things are changing and have been corrected between more integrated mind planning functions especially. I think there's a really important people side to that Mary, where there's ⁓ individual ownership from key who can have influence and take the right approaches. ⁓ And I guess what's important the mining life cycle is that, There's continuity in personnel who follow it through beyond the operation and production and have a sense of ⁓ and pride and what those outcomes are as well. So I those sorts of things as that longer term commitment as The opportunity is around rigor in those holistic to ⁓ planning at the earliest that'll guide decision making and the... sure as you touched on earlier you've got that right stakeholder engagement involvement to consider feasible post mining land use options and what makes sense and where there's going to be considered sort of benefits and opportunities into the long term
Mary Kelly: Hmm. And I think you brought up something in that that I think is really important is you talked about the people side of it and that continuity of people and I think that goes back to trust. And if you're seeing companies, organizations developing that vision ⁓ of what they to do, how is ⁓ is closure approach, actually approach then if have a vision that seems to ⁓ be aligning with ⁓ we're talking about, but we're not necessarily seeing it ⁓ the downstream end of that. ⁓ that gap that you're seeing?
Dave Clark: Yeah, it's a good question. I think in certain instances, managing ⁓ some of those ⁓ internal external stakeholders and is a tricky one in terms of what's created it's great to be innovative and be ⁓ and aspirational, but we've to be realistic as well terms of what makes sense with a whole suite of criteria in mind. And so I think there is a risk of misalignment around of the solutions and decisions that are made and importantly around the implementation or the execution as well. again, ⁓ comes down to people, comes down to the point that you've rightly raised a couple of times around that ⁓ piece ⁓ alignment. And I think though, ⁓ What's made it difficult in many instances that I'm aware of is ⁓ we don't have have 100 % information around some of the technical decisions that we make, but there's gotta be ⁓ sufficient information to confidence ⁓ in ⁓ the ultimate and of a site and a solution that might be sort of put in mind as well. So I ⁓ think that's ⁓ the there around ⁓ misalignment piece, to be Given the topic and the discussion we've just had, do you have any thoughts around sort of social side and how that plays out around these topics and around the gaps and what organisations are doing and their commitments?
Mary Kelly: Yeah, I think it's a combination of things. mean, that trust piece, I think is really important. And I think it's on both sides. Mining companies ⁓ communities, you start from a trust deficit. ⁓ I think there's a lack of trust within the mining companies as well. And I think that comes back to why it's so important to foster really strong relationships and that ⁓ relationships aren't just a one and done. you have to continually invest in them. And because people change, new people come in, people leave, have change in leadership in a community, ⁓ have change in ownership of a mining company. ⁓ so it's trying to continually build that relationship ⁓ that you have that to fall back on to talk about things. And ⁓ all know in our personal lives, and we have a really strong relationship, it's really easy to talk through the hard things with people. And we avoid talking through the hard things with people we don't have that deep of a relationship with. So I think, you know, that trust piece comes into play. And when we're talking about communities having to accept the outcomes, we're talking about communities accepting outcomes that will last generations. And when they're not part of those decisions, there's no trust. And so I think that's where we're starting to see that real need for that social inclusion, because we do a lot of really good environmental data gathering and technical data gathering, but we aren't so good about gathering information about the social piece and really documenting well so we understand how it's changed and how community priorities have changed. Because we can imagine that if a community host to a mine site, If that ⁓ is operating for over a decade or so, ⁓ are going to be changes that occur in that community as a result of that mine. They could be good and they could be bad. ⁓ if we're not looking, if we're not recognizing what that change is, ⁓ could perpetuate the bad and we could ⁓ the positive. And I think that's where data social data becomes really valuable.
Dave Clark: Excellent, well said, thanks Mary. there is a trust deficit within the industry. I'd like to think, ever the optimist, that is changing and heading in the right direction, but it only takes a couple situations, if you like, or circumstances that can quickly erode trust at an individual or organisational or at broader sort of industry level as well. And we've seen that play out. But for me, I think we're heading in the right direction. And we've got to be prepared to have those brave and tough conversations and be really open and transparent to your point. Thank you, Mary. Thanks for joining the session today. Thanks everyone for listening ⁓ and we look forward to seeing you next time.
Mary Kelly: Awesome. Thanks Dave.
