Paper short abstract:

The Australian state has traditionally shown limited interest in local level interactions between extractive industries and local communities. Several high profile mine closures have begun to shift this paradigm, compelling alternate interactions with industry and community groups.

Paper long abstract:

"The excitement and fanfare that surrounds the opening of a new mine is never present when it finally closes" (Laurence). This pragmatic statement frames the challenge for industry, governments and locally affected peoples to shift this dominant 'front-end' approach in order to actively account for the collateral social, political, and economic impacts that almost inevitably occur when a mine closes. The need to reimagine the practice of mining in order to positively re-frame the legacies that are left because "it's not over when it's over", to borrow the title of a World Bank Mining Report (2002), is a pressing one. The impacts and negative legacies of mining are increasingly under scrutiny by a growing civil society and an active local citizenry who are not always 'excited' when a mine opens and where effective closure may be more important to them than effective operations.

While the rise of the mining industry has become central to modernity, there has been a growing recognition by many within industry, by government and notably by civil society, that business as usual is not viable. Yet, currently, mine closure experts typically focus on bio-physical issues, there is no equivalent in the social arena which includes: town normalisation, post-mining economies, stakeholder engagement, heritage management, and agreements with local and Indigenous communities. How mining companies approach the social aspects of mine closure, or 'social closure' as it is becoming known, will shape the way the industry is perceived, which will in turn affect the ability of companies to develop mines of the future.