The extraction of natural resources is inevitable in a globalised and modern society. The mining sector has significantly contributed to the advancement of people’s lives and boosted the economies of many countries. The life cycle of a mine starts with exploration and prospecting, followed by the approval process, mine development and production, and eventually, mine closure and rehabilitation. However, with improper enactment of policies and guidelines, especially in low-income and developing countries, improper reclamation programs, or a lack thereof, mining companies may leave their sites without rehabilitation, creating legacy mines. “Thousands of mines sit in an idle state of ‘care and maintenance’ partly because of the difficulties involved in closing a mine and concerns about transfer of residual liability for sites” (Measham et al., 2024, p.1). Legacy mines are also known as derelict or abandoned mines whose rehabilitation strategies or management are typically implemented by the government (Tabelin et al., 2021).
The abandonment of mines exacerbates people’s negative views and perceptions about mining (Alonzo et al., 2023; Promentilla et al., 2021). Even if they have ceased operations, some legacy mine sites continue to cause environmental and human health hazards (Coelho et al., 2011). Aside from environmental and social risks (Bank of Ghana, 2003; Boon et al., 2013), health and safety issues (Brenner and Pruent, 2006), the closure of mines may significantly impact local and national economies, especially if workers lose their jobs, creating immense psychological effects on individuals and entire communities (Pini et al., 2010). In other words, legacy mines come with many issues that, when not resolved, may continue to pose risks. Also, given that the demand for ores will continue to increase in the next decades to achieve a clean energy transition (WBC, 2021), issues on mine closure rehabilitation are critical.
With these issues related to legacy mines, government agencies around the world are pushing for their rehabilitation to return them to safe and stable conditions. Rehabilitation initiatives aim to sustainably make the mined-out land productive to support the economic activity of the host community and their future generations. In the context of this paper, we used the word sustainability to mean minimising the negative environmental and social impacts while increasing the economic and natural capital of the site (Adam et al., 2021; Deveci et al., 2022). One of the key approaches to legacy mine rehabilitation, particularly in economic and environmental development, is working with the host community, the local community made up of people living in the mining area. There are competing conceptualisations on how to work with them. For example, community engagement is an attempt to develop good relations through genuine conversations, developing mutual respect and trust by including all those who are key players of a broad section of the community in the discussion (Australian Government, 2016). Meanwhile, community participation occurs when the community mobilises its resources, takes responsibility for its own development activities, and shares in decision-making for and implementation of all other developmental programs for the overall improvement of the community’s status (Boon et al., 2013; Hasan, 2022). Finally, community involvement happens when community members actively participate in the planning, implementation, management, monitoring, and evaluation (Palanisami et al., 2007; Hasan, 2022).
These different ways of working with host communities are all encompassed by the term community development. Community development promotes self-reliance, critical awareness, and problem-solving skills among community members. The community, likewise, becomes empowered to begin recommended programs or programs they have conceptualised as they see them as essential for their development. Community development, which should be the goal of mining companies, scientists, and engineers, is about contributing to the host community by building their capacity and agency to meet their needs and aspirations themselves, both now and into the future, and not do the development for them (Isacowitz et al., 2022).
Although the concepts of community engagement, participation, involvement, and empowerment have been widely used, there are multiple knowledge bases regarding their conceptualisation, implementation, and evaluation of impacts within mince closure and rehabilitation. There are also diverse approaches used with conflicting evidence for their effectiveness. This paper investigates how community engagement, participation, involvement, and empowerment are studied, viewed, and reported in the literature.