Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
EO-MINERSEarth Observation for Monitoring and Observing Environmental and Societal Impacts of Mineral
Resources Exploration and Exploitation
The EO-MINERS project:
Stakeholders’ needs and
gaps in EO information
Stéphane CHEVREL
Project [email protected]
www.eo-miners.eu
“Copernicus for Raw Materials”
Workshop
Brussels, Sept. 5th, 2016
W. Eberhard [email protected]
MinPol GmbH, Austria
Mining vs Society
EO-MINERS overall objective
to bring into play EO-
based methods and tools
– to facilitate and improve
interaction between
the mineral extractive
industry and the society
– for its sustainable
development
– while improving its
societal acceptability.
After Solar and Shields, 2011
www.eo-miners.eu
Mine
Local
populations
Shareholders
Rating agencies
Commercial banks
Development banks
Insurance Co.
Others(equipment,
engineering …)
Industry
NGOs
Politicalparties
Media
MiningCompanies
Professionalorganisations
Development
organisations
Academia &research
MineMine
Employees
Suppliers Buyers
Sectoralauthorities
Unions
Governement
Consumers
Stakeholders in the mining
sector
After P. Christmann and B. Martel-Jantin, SDMI, Milos 2003)
www.eo-miners.eu
The EO-MINERS general
approach
Stakeholder interviews
On-site investigations
Indicators
Expert knowledge
Trialogue workshopsStakeholder feedback
EO-basedProducts
EO methods
and tools
www.eo-miners.eu
Local stakeholder interviews
Interview of the Chet Bulak village authorities, Kyrgyzstan
www.eo-miners.eu
Stakeholder derived
indicators
Czech Republic
South Africa0
10
20
30
Land useRemediation /Status after
mining
EnvironmentMaterials
Transport /Energy /
Infrastructure
Themes covered by information requirements of local/regional stakeholders
www.eo-miners.eu
Local stakeholders most
important issues (KG)
• Only indicators that could be measured using EO techniques have been
retained for product development
• The priority indicators vary from study site to study site
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
A B C D E F G H I J K
Fre
qu
en
cy
Classes of indicators
Frequency of thematic areas (groups of indicators)
Government
Civil Society
Industry
A: land use
B: Mass and energy flows
C: Soil quality
D: Air quality
E: water quality
F: transport
G: geotech hazards
H: Industrial accidents
I: social impact
J: regional dvpt
K: economical vulnerability
www.eo-miners.eu
Did our EO-based products
adress stakeholders needs?
• with regard to comprehension:– Do the EO products present the mapped information in a clear and
understandable way?
– Which EO products are (most) useful / interesting for you (“top three”)?
– Which EO products tell you something new? Would you consider using one or more of the EO products presented?
• with regard to their technical implementation:– Do the EO products support the concerns you initially raised (i.e. do
they support the indicators?
– Are there any concerns with regard to the parameters that were selected to provide information about your concerns? Should or could we have used different parameters?
– Is the detail (i.e. spatial resolution) of the EO products sufficient to satisfy your needs? Otherwise, what level of detail would be more appropriate?
– For one of the EO products, could you suggest a different way of showing the information/data that would be more useful or understandable?
www.eo-miners.eu
• Attractive tools that provide the information in an easy-to-
use form
• Benefit of spatially continuous and repeated measurements
• Beyond the posters, the 3D presentation of EO Products
was much appreciated
• The maps and data are able to help develop a common
language and base of communication between
otherwise separate stakeholders
Stakeholder Feedback:
A summary
Air quality products were of
interest in South Africa, in
particular the press distributed the
results with enthusiasm (several
local press articles)
could this product be
extended to include medical
recommendations?
www.eo-miners.eu
Societal gaps: A major challenge
Need for a neutral attitude
• Stakeholders with very different concerns vs. environmental and societal issues– Establishing confident relations with mining
companies• Reluctance to deal with environmental and societal impacts
• Reluctance to put data in the public domain
• Do not like we work with other stakeholders
• Working constraints (security, …)
Need for a better engagement of the mining industry
– Get acquainted with local communities concerns and demands
• Lack of information, rumours
• Economical dependence (jobs, contribution to the community, infrastructure development, …)
• Looking for compensations…
www.eo-miners.eu
Technical gaps: need for dedicated
sensors and institutional support
• The “mineral community” strongly advocates for operational hyperspectral spaceborne missions ensuring a global systematic coverage at no (or marginal) costs and at “decent” spatial resolution– Operational, freely available, global coverage
• Multispectral : Sentinel 2 and Landsat TM
• Superspectral : ASTER (failure of SWIR sensors)
– Operational, commercial, local coverage on request, high acquisition costs
• Supeprspectral : WV-3
• hyperspectral : VNIR-SWIR, few operational TIR sensors
• EO in mineral industry lacks institutionnal support– Mostly deals with private companies
– => EO-based monitoring of illegal mining
www.eo-miners.eu
longitude
λ
latitude
Stakeholder engagement
process
• Responsible mining initiatives– A concept not strictly
defined
– Sometimes considered as a declination of CSR
– Either a voluntary and ethical approach from mining operators, or imposed (or encouraged) by authorities
– Participatory approach to tackle environmental, societal and human rights issues
www.eo-miners.eu
http://socialicense.com/definition.html
• Social License to Operatei.e. free, prior and informed
consent of local communities and
stakeholders
Group on Earth Observations
GEO CA-06
• New GEO ”Energy and Mineral Resource management”
SBA in 2016 – 2025 WP
– Includes a GEO Community Activity “Earth Observations for
Managing Mineral and Non-renewable Energy Resources”
(CA-06)
www.eo-miners.eu
Global mineral map of the
Earth’s surface
• Australia Geoscience
mineral map
• Global spectral libraries
of soils in view of future
IS spaceborne missions
EO-based integrated
products for monitoring
environmental and societal
impacts:
• National to regional
(e.g. illegal mining)
• Local : mine site,
SLO...
Conclusions
• A growing demand for stakeholder participation
– Community involvement
– equitable share of industry benefits
• EO as facilitator for stakeholder engagement
– Provide updated, objective, reliable, undisputable and opposable documents, mutually trusted
• Lack of dedicated spaceborne instruments and institutional support
• Global community under “construction”
www.eo-miners.eu
Acknowledgments
• The results presented here would not have been possible without
the collaboration of all the project partners:
• AngloCoal, South Africa
• BGS - British Geological Survey, UK
• BRGM - Bureau de Recherches Géologique et Minières, France
• CGS - Council for Geoscience, South Africa
• CzechGS - Czech Geological Survey
• DLR - Deutsche Gesellschaft für Luft- und Raumfahrt, Germany
• GeoZS - Slovenian Geological Survey
• MIRO - Minerals Research Organisation, UK
• SU - Sokolovská uhelná, a.s, Czech Republic
• TAU - Tel Aviv University, Israel
• UVSQ - Université de Versailles Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines, France
• WI - Wuppertal Institut, Germany
• The support by the European Commission is also gratefully acknowledged.
www.eo-miners.eu
